Jump to content

Photo

Three Strikes You're Out

Chat ban criticism

  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1
SunnyGroves

SunnyGroves
  • 15 posts

I can understand why you blocked that chat thread from replies, but, in any case...

 

Con, I can appreciate that you have concerns other than my own, and I can also appreciate that you're making positive efforts to  'clean up' chat in your various arenas, but I have the following criticisms and advice to share:

 

1.  I see no reason for a simple three-tier system.  This reminds me of 'mandatory sentencing' in the US - or the 'three strikes' rule of law in Texas. 

 

I was once called to serve on a jury that was considering a life sentence for a man who'd stolen a lawn mower.

 

See my point?

 

 

2.  Three strikes over the life of a player is precious few.  People we like and respect have bad days; we forgive them and move on.  They add much more over history than they detract on a single misguided rant, or a poorly chosen post.

 

I would suggest, at a minimum, that 'strikes' have a shelf life of thirty, or sixty, or ninety days.  A batter only gets three strikes, but they only take 90 seconds and he gets another 'at-bat.'  You have people who've played for years, and sometimes they get cranky.

 

3.  Your advancement from 24 hours to four weeks seems ludicrous to me.

 

4.  If you're actually concerned about who is offending players - how about factoring in how many of us mute or block a player?  Is there any actual interest here in serving the community?  Or is it only in creating a draconian 'rule of law' that gags everyone?

 

5.  I can't speak for all of the servers, but Yahoo has a much better than average atmosphere/ethos for a war game.  (Yes, I've played a few.)  We have hotheads whom we actually love, and we love them being hotheads.  There needs to be a review procedure to check this system.  It's a war game.  It's fueled by Cheetoes, Red Bull, Jack Daniels and testosterone.  (Not guilty on all counts, by the way.)  Most of US are pretty tolerant, and we'd like to think that what we think about our companions has weight.  I would hope that my voice would have a little more significance than that of a grandmother who wandered in looking for Farmville too, by the way.  I'm here every day, and I've never forwarded a single complaint to you about anyone - though I've blocked a few that might interest you, if your goal is to improve the quality of life on your game.

 

Those are my thoughts at first blush...

 

 


  • 8

#2
Reddy5

Reddy5
  • 103 posts

I agree on the 'how often someone may get muted/blocked' thing. If one person is consistently being muted or getting blocked often then something should be done, but of course people can use alts for this :/

 

I also agree on the 24 hours to four weeks. Why not like 1 day, 2 days, 4 days, 8 days, etc. Maybe when they get to 32 (a whole month), the next one is a ban?

 

Speaking of which why should a player be restricted from the whole game when they just said something in chat? Why not instead of making it a ban, make it a mute? I think being able to play but not being able to say anything/post on alliance wall for days will be really frustrating. And how about a perma-mute instead of a perma-ban?


  • 1

#3
Con

Con
  • 4,186 posts

And how about a perma-mute instead of a perma-ban?

 

They are bans from chat, not account bans. I should make that clearer.



#4
Reddy5

Reddy5
  • 103 posts

Oh sorry :( my bad


  • 0

#5
Ghost Recon

Ghost Recon
  • 556 posts

They are bans from chat, not account bans. I should make that clearer.

interesting now I know that there are bans from chat.


  • 0

#6
Harpago

Harpago
  • 1,733 posts

I can understand why you blocked that chat thread from replies, but, in any case...

 

Con, I can appreciate that you have concerns other than my own, and I can also appreciate that you're making positive efforts to  'clean up' chat in your various arenas, but I have the following criticisms and advice to share:

 

1.  I see no reason for a simple three-tier system.  This reminds me of 'mandatory sentencing' in the US - or the 'three strikes' rule of law in Texas. 

 

I was once called to serve on a jury that was considering a life sentence for a man who'd stolen a lawn mower.

 

See my point?

 

 

2.  Three strikes over the life of a player is precious few.  People we like and respect have bad days; we forgive them and move on.  They add much more over history than they detract on a single misguided rant, or a poorly chosen post.

 

I would suggest, at a minimum, that 'strikes' have a shelf life of thirty, or sixty, or ninety days.  A batter only gets three strikes, but they only take 90 seconds and he gets another 'at-bat.'  You have people who've played for years, and sometimes they get cranky.

 

3.  Your advancement from 24 hours to four weeks seems ludicrous to me.

 

4.  If you're actually concerned about who is offending players - how about factoring in how many of us mute or block a player?  Is there any actual interest here in serving the community?  Or is it only in creating a draconian 'rule of law' that gags everyone?

 

5.  I can't speak for all of the servers, but Yahoo has a much better than average atmosphere/ethos for a war game.  (Yes, I've played a few.)  We have hotheads whom we actually love, and we love them being hotheads.  There needs to be a review procedure to check this system.  It's a war game.  It's fueled by Cheetoes, Red Bull, Jack Daniels and testosterone.  (Not guilty on all counts, by the way.)  Most of US are pretty tolerant, and we'd like to think that what we think about our companions has weight.  I would hope that my voice would have a little more significance than that of a grandmother who wandered in looking for Farmville too, by the way.  I'm here every day, and I've never forwarded a single complaint to you about anyone - though I've blocked a few that might interest you, if your goal is to improve the quality of life on your game.

 

Those are my thoughts at first blush...

 

What did that guy do the two previous times before he stole a lawnmower? I'm sorry but I have a lot of sympathy with the three strikes law. I don't commit crime, or steal other people's belongings, and I have about zero compassion to people who do. But putting this back on track, you comments about about it at times being a stressful experience are very true, and lets face it who doesn't have bad days that flop over into an internet experience. Practically no one at a hunch. And yes, it being by definition something we do as part of our leisure, many of us might well have a glass of JD or a can of beer on the desk as well. 

 

But people having a bad moment are actually quite easy to spot. And there is a very big difference in someone having a flounce and someone on chat simply to troll, or coming out with racist or extremely vulgar language, sentence after sentence. It's only human to react to someone's stupidity sometimes with a mildly course remark. It's when that course remark becomes sentence after sentence, or taken to another level, that even someone with an ale or two should really instinctively know to give it a rest. And i've never been so pissed i've come out with racist slurs, or 'jokes' about women being raped; I like to think it's because i'm not a twat. And from what I understand most of the chat bans are to people not having a bad moment, but using racist language, discussing rape, hacks, or other subjects that just scrapes the barrel of stupidity. So they have only themselves to blame. 


  • 1

#7
Sam_McLane

Sam_McLane
  • 3 posts

Harpago,  I've seen people get bans for sheer blonde moments when we all protested that there'd been a mistake made.  I know one guy who got banned when his three year old hijacked his keyboard when we went for a juice box for her.

 

Stuff happens.

 

I distrust ironclad rules instinctively; real justice lays in judiciously considering multiple elements.  There's no algorithm for justice; only human concern can create and preserve it.

 

And, sadly, I've never seen anyone banned for sexual remarks or even racial slurs.  I've blocked quite a few of the latter and taken WAY too many of the former (female player) - so I have reason to distrust this 'system.'


  • 0

#8
Hatchford

Hatchford
  • 920 posts

I to have a severe distrust for ironclad punishments for open ended rules.... seriously... read the disclaimer.... some of the rules are very vague and the punishment very strict... there is really no point in debating it tho... over sensitive wimps have flooded cons email box to the point that this is necessary... not that the completely insensitive asshats haven't caused this problem to begin with... just keep your mouth shut as much as possible and try to only talk about the game...


  • 0

#9
Elite_Rider

Elite_Rider
  • 19 posts

this is already implemented, in a way, the mods on this game are really cool and will normally just chat ban you unless you become a serious issue is whne you get account suspensions


  • 0



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Chat, ban, criticism