Before I begin, please understand that this is coming from the perspective of someone who has never been warned or banned for anything before. I encourage discussion about your ideas here. Minecraft Name: @ChargerBoltz5 Suggestion: Change the number of temp-bans, as well as the amount of time per temp-ban, for /warn. I am suggesting 3 /warns on you leads to a 48-hour tempban. Reason: According to andrewkm's recent news post, 5 /warns on you leads to an automatic 24-hour tempban. This is too lax in my opinion. From what I've seen ingame, /warn is used very rarely, and while I have seen it used more often recently (yay) it is often preceded by several verbal warnings in global chat. If you're misbehaving enough to get yourself five /warns on you ingame - that's saying an awful lot, and in my opinion, that warrants more than just a 24-hour ban. If you are warned once, then it shouldn't be that hard to learn your lesson. If you still fail four more times that's saying you need to take more than just 24 hours off of ECC. I am suggesting a change to three /warns and a 48-hour tempban. Two extra chances to make a change is enough - and I know that this can extend over a long period of time, but it's quite easy to disengage from disruptive behavior two more times. If you still can't get it figured out, then fine - 48 hours banned means two nice days for you to consider how you can make a change, and engage in fun things other than ECC. I was, in fact, considering 72 hours when I wrote this suggestion, but you know what, 48 is good enough for now. Any Other Information: I know I may be a bit early writing this, since the new system hasn't been out for long, but I just have a gut feeling it's not going to make a major change in the way players act... five /warns on you is quite difficult to get in this day and age. Link To This Plugin/Is this a custom addition?: Custom addition by andrewkm or jamiesinn
With the new /warn functionality, we will of course be changing how staff use it. Staff had faded away from /warn's as it was taken more as a joke, I believe this will change that. This suggestion is denied for now simply because it really is too soon - if/when we make these changes it would only be after observing how the system works as I'm sure @JamieSinn would prefer not having the extra work anyway. If of course I am proven wrong and the system does not have the effect expected then we may look into changing it.