What we have is sufficient enough. Nobody's telling you how to do your job, I would expect that you not tell them how to do theirs.
-1

 

I agree with the sentiment to enforce forum rules more, but I do not think that should be limited to Ban Appeals / Complaints. I see far, far more issues with rules not being enforced on the rest of the forum. In fact, it is almost absurd how much does not get warned for everywhere else on the forum.

However, that brings me to another point. Staff (especially the more experienced ones) are warning a lot more than you see. The forum has a warning system - i.e. the three points leading -> automated temp ban - and Staff can apply a warning to a user without anyone but the warned user knowing (because the warned user gets an automated PM).

Many older Staff will apply a warning to a user['s account] without a verbal warning. As well, they sometimes delete forum posts at the same time, making it even more difficult to know that anyone was warned. The "Warning/Warned For ..." image/icon on a post is optional to show and was only "discovered"/began getting use about six months ago.

tl;dr Staff warn a lot more than most users see, simply because they do not verbally warn / delete a post / choose not to display a warned icon on a post / etc. During my time on Staff, I was one of the people who did this. I warned silent and hidden more than not. However, this actually causes the issue your suggestion is trying to fix.

Because many Staff silently warned and leave no visual indication for other users (and even delete "problem" posts), most of the users think they are not doing their job enough, when they [sometimes/often] are.

If anything, there should be more verbal warnings when posts are deleted AND turning on the post warning icon when there is no verbal warning. (This means that verbal warnings are for threads with deleted posts - not threads that have posts with warning icons.)

 

Upon joining ECC, upon joining the forums, really upon joining anything, you agree to the rules, terms, etc. The rules are not meant to be violated really, they are meant to be followed. If you don't punish the offenders in an extreme way, they will do it over and over, because they know they will only get a quick forum ban.

I'm all for harsh punishment. They deserve it for not following the forum rules.

 

I personally would enjoy seeing the no mini-modding rule being enforced more, especially on ban appeals complaints. From talking about wrong format or whatever, to tagging moderators it just shouldn't happen. The people would much rather have a response from someone whose duty it was to tell them. Instead of warning them for backseat modding, they tend to just say "what _____ said" and repeat what was already stated.

 

Both @MoofinK and @lavajok have made good points. 1) We have been enforcing the forum rules of the ban appeal and complaint section a lot more lately. 2) Most of the senior staff, such as myself, do issue forum warnings a lot more often than newer staff. This is often due to the new staff being timid/unsure of what they should warn for. Considering it is always better to start cautious and learn what is acceptable, I cannot fault them for that. I do not currently think we need to get more harsh overall, because we literally just started cracking down.


My recommendation is that you sit and wait to see if the new system I’ve issued to the staff works or not. If it doesn’t, then a suggestion sounds good.

 

Hmm, as I believe this is still a valid issue and a forum temp doesn't seem to really effect players who like trolling, can we bring this back as a valid suggestion?

 

No.

 

Why?

 

Yes that's fine.

I agree with the suggestio wholeheartedly. While people may see insta-warnings as harsh, think of it like this: receiving 1 or 2 warning points means nothing. The only time that your points will matter is when they get you auto-banned (3, 6 and above I believe the numbers are). If a user likes to post pointlessly on complaints, and then they find that they've been forum warned instantly they are much less likely to do it again, as opposed to them simply receiving a normal warning to not do it again. I also feel as though deleting these posts basically without exception alongside the forum warning, it seems like a more pragmatic option as a lot of the irrelevant posts are basically people trying to get ratings, deleting the posts will lead to no gain in ratings, and therefore the user will be further discouraged to post pointless comments.

 

Agreed.
Warm straight away, says at the top of the section, irrelevant posts will be warned
You don't need to read that, then get verbally warned and then verbally warned a second time and then finally warned xD

I still think the section should be completely private which prevents the whole having to warn people to start with

 

As long as I only post twice per 30 days, I don't get banned. g-G

 

-1 forum warning system too harsh

rib