Minecraft Name: @THCOOL Suggestion: My suggestion is to change the way in which bans are carried out which affects how a user can appeal and also how staff handle it. The idea is basically that rather than simply issuing a /ban and then appeal... why not simply issue tempban (length depends on crime commited) and then force an appeal after. So it would almost be a tempban on the period of time a player can write up an appeal. Perhaps you can call it an "appeal ban." They would be banned in-game during this period of course. The reason for this is stated below, but as an example, the tempban length would go something like this (please note that these are example numbers and will most likely be different): Loan scam 1-50k - 1 weeks Loan scam 51-250k - 2 weeks Loan scam 251-1mil - 3 weeks Ect. So if player A gets a complaint filed on and is found guilty of scamming 500k, then player A will be issued a 3 week temp ban (appeal ban). At the end of 3 weeks, the user is still banned but is now able to create an appeal. I understand that this would mean setting a set tempban period for every rule major rule that ECC has, but it only needs to be created once for it to work. If this would be implemented, then the tempban issued after the appeal has been accepted would just be completely taken away. I guess you could look at it as simply re-ordering the process. Rather than ban, appeal, tempban leading to unban.... It would be tempban (appeal ban), appeal, unban. Reason: Main reason being that ive seen numberous situations where a user was banned, appealed within the hour, and the had it denied over it and over again sinply because it was too soon after the ban. That wasnt the reason that was said in the appeals, but its obvious that the main reason it was initially denied was because it was just way too soon follwing that users ban. Ive seen a player create 3-4 appeal's within just a few days all with the same exact response, only to keep getting denied until one day its randomly accepted because they were "remorseful enough." This makes 0 sense to me and is just pointless on the staff members part. Why not just issue and automatic tempban (appeal ban) and when the time is up, then a true appeal can be written and a staff member can handle it without having to worry "has it been long enough yet?" This also prevents players from constantly spamming in shoutbox "hey when will my appeal be handled?? What else do I need to do?" Any Other Information: N/A Link To This Plugin/Is this a custom addition?: N/A
I somewhat agree, as I am currently banned I have a strong bias to this. When I was banned it seems to me and what I've seen in previous ban appeals, that it take pretty much 1 day after the ban appeal was filed for a SA to take a look at it. I wish this was stated somewhere because literally when looking back, all the appeals I've seen have been handled one day after they were filed. Despite how many staff members are online currently. If there was a temp ban automatically initiated, I wouldn't have spent all day refreshing the page just to see that my appeal had not been completed. If a temp ban was set in place then it would prevent a lot of issues with users complaining that their appeal isn't being handled. This is different from my situation because I had not been banned for scamming, but in tern had the same result, staff saying that I had not thought over my actions. In their minds there is an amount of time I should be banned for committing said crime, and if I appeal before then, with words that do not change their mind, I don't get a response or a "too soon" and it would save time for everyone if I had been banned for that time that they think I should be, from the start, instead of delaying. Lastly, there were no responses from staff in my ban appeal directly saying it was too soon, but that was one of the vibes I had received.
or if it's been too soon after a ban, you just tempban off the appeal? I don't see the difference? this just takes discretion away from staff where they can adjust to make it shorter/longer based on the context of the offence, situation, etc.
This suggestion is for all rules... Scamming was just the specific rule I used for the example Not entirely. The tempban would simply be the minimum mandatory time served. If the staff member feels it should be adjusted, then they can just add more time to it.
