Look, I'm going to be honest. If you're smart enough to hack, you're smart enough to know the consequences. Otherwise I can see that being a fair situation.
Really more of a decision on how firm you want to be with consequences.
Permabans for cheating should 100% stay regardless of how sad someone is that they got banned from their favorite server for going out of their way to make it less fun for everybody else.
Bans for toxicity or other "interpretive" rules have the other problem, which is that they're made off of a definition that changes with who is responsible for those bans and appeals. I'm in favor of favoring the opinion of the people who made the ban, as breaking the rules THEN was still breaking the rules, even if the rules are handled differently now.
(I also do know that there have been players who have gotten banned and then spent an extraordinary amount of time and energy getting back onto the server just to break the same rules, and I don't want to encourage those people by removing permabans)
As someone who has been present within the community and staff for a VERY long time I can say this with certainty, though I will admit there are some areas where I have consired something else in its place.
Currently, about half of the rule-break classifications have permabans as an incremental punishment in our staff guidelines.
Only one classification has a permaban as default, which is hacking, DDoS threats and actions, attempting to crash the server; We see these as the same thing.
1. Hackers should not get any second chances whatsoever, they are a blight on a community that prides itself on maintaining the experience of a player. This doesn't just apply to DEFN, but any credible community values this as well.
2. This is the only area where management wouldn't normally consider a second chance. You are more likely to be unbanned for an exploiting permaban, but this would imply you're a repeating offender, which is the main problem.
3. We have done reduced sentences before, as well as second chances; They don't usually end with the player not getting banned again. So to say "appeals are for unjust bans, not apologies" isn't exactly incorrect, but what one finds unjust is entirely subjective to begin with. Apologizing isn't explaining why you would see a punishment as unjust. An appeal that has the sole focus of just appealing to emotion is less likely to be accepted than one that challenges the validity of a rule and its punishment.
That being said, I do think some categories in punishment would benefit from changing it up a bit, but I gotta ask... If you actually get banned for a year for repeat offenses, do you actually care about CvR just because you're returning? I don't know if you could say that about repeat offenders.
Signature:
“You stole my sister’s horn and stole my reason to live but that wasn’t enough? Now you have come here, and stole my reason to die, too?” – Rem sigi made by guppi.
Permabans for cheating should 100% stay regardless of how sad someone is that they got banned from their favorite server for going out of their way to make it less fun for everybody else.
Bans for toxicity or other "interpretive" rules have the other problem, which is that they're made off of a definition that changes with who is responsible for those bans and appeals. I'm in favor of favoring the opinion of the people who made the ban, as breaking the rules THEN was still breaking the rules, even if the rules are handled differently now.
(I also do know that there have been players who have gotten banned and then spent an extraordinary amount of time and energy getting back onto the server just to break the same rules, and I don't want to encourage those people by removing permabans)
Ancient GRID CmD, prior SU Major/GB COL.
Credit to SEVIN.
Current Jury 9110
Current MP Major Octo
Current RU Octo
Mp gang will find you.
Currently, about half of the rule-break classifications have permabans as an incremental punishment in our staff guidelines.
Only one classification has a permaban as default, which is hacking, DDoS threats and actions, attempting to crash the server; We see these as the same thing.
1. Hackers should not get any second chances whatsoever, they are a blight on a community that prides itself on maintaining the experience of a player. This doesn't just apply to DEFN, but any credible community values this as well.
2. This is the only area where management wouldn't normally consider a second chance. You are more likely to be unbanned for an exploiting permaban, but this would imply you're a repeating offender, which is the main problem.
3. We have done reduced sentences before, as well as second chances; They don't usually end with the player not getting banned again. So to say "appeals are for unjust bans, not apologies" isn't exactly incorrect, but what one finds unjust is entirely subjective to begin with. Apologizing isn't explaining why you would see a punishment as unjust. An appeal that has the sole focus of just appealing to emotion is less likely to be accepted than one that challenges the validity of a rule and its punishment.
That being said, I do think some categories in punishment would benefit from changing it up a bit, but I gotta ask... If you actually get banned for a year for repeat offenses, do you actually care about CvR just because you're returning? I don't know if you could say that about repeat offenders.