Server Regulate unappealable bans

videogamesm12

Community Manager
Executive
188
IGN
videogamesm12
Unappealable bans were introduced by Ryan in 2021 in response to two predatory players (CurtainPoles and Nathaniel_428). Bans of this type are considered the strongest and most extreme of sanctions on this server due to their very nature. They are intended exclusively for extreme cases such as players who are child predators or active attackers against the server. The concept was grandfathered in when we imported the bans from the original TotalFreedom, and the system itself is pretty much the same as it was back then, but instead of Ryan issuing the orders as for who to consider unappealably banned, Executives are able to issue the bans themselves when they feel like it.

This lack of regulation wasn't much of an issue under Ryan's administration as he was hesitant to issue unappealable bans and was the only one who could do so on a community-wide scale. However, things are a lot more problematic under our current administration, as now executives have the unique ability to forcibly remove players from the community without a way of appealing on a whim. This poses a massive problem for obvious reasons, and thus should be corrected by heavily regulating unappealable bans. This suggestion is a collection of ideas I had for regulating such a system. Each one should be voted on independently.

A heavy sanction should have heavy regulations, even at an executive level.

Require a vote before an unappealable ban can be set in motion​

Most unappealable bans are issued without a vote process involved. While this is great for expediently removing dangerous players from the community, it has the side-effect of giving basically nobody a heads-up, let alone a say on the manner before it is set in stone. For example, if a player was given an unappealable ban due to a complete misunderstanding, the only time the truth can come out about the situation would be after the ban is set in stone, and for many that seems like it's a point of no return.

A voting process similar to the Long-Term Ban Request system would give a window of opportunity for other staff members to evalutate a situation for themselves and possibly clarify or debunk claims before it's too late. Should the vote succeed, the unappealable ban is set in stone. Should the vote fail, the request can either be processed as a standard Long-Term Ban Request or be discarded altogether (depending on what the reason and situation were). Only Executives would be able to start them.

Add a statute of limitations for when it's too late for unappealable bans to be overriden​

The idea is simple: if a certain amount of time has passed since an unappealable ban was handed down, then it is cemented and Executives won't be able to override the unappealable status of bans. While unappealable bans should be able to be overridden in case the person's situation was badly mishandled, a statute of limitations should be introduced to prevent toxic players with such kinds of bans from being able to return by banking on how the situation was handled at the time.

Personally, I believe 3 months is a more than generous amount of time for a statute of limitations, but it can be more or less depending on what you guys think.

Require a public announcement when an unappealable ban is set in motion​

This one is mostly a gesture of transparency. This ensures that when a player is unappealably banned, people don't have to ask why this is the case or read through the spreadsheet of long-term bans. Unless the evidence is literally illegal (think links to child pornographic websites or personal information) to include in the post with absolutely zero doubt, it should be included along with the reasoning that has been given.
 
Sounds good to me, don't got much to say on them that wouldn't be reiterating what you said. Vouch for all three, including the proposed 3-month reconsideration period for the second idea.
 
Vouch for number 1 and 3. I think for 2, once a ban is unappealable, it's unappealable. I think only under extenuating circumstances would it ever be reversed. It shouldn't be a system reversed for players like Savnith because then it devalues the entire system
 
I Vouch for 1 and 3, not for 2. There should be no "window where unappealable bans can be reversed." If a ban is determined to be unappealable, there's usually a good reason why. Unappealable bans can always be re-evaluated by the executive team if there's been suspicion it has been done in bad faith or due to factors such as lack of evidence, evidence that exonerates the player being banned, etc.
 
1 and 3 seem good like the others have said. 2 may be made redundant by an idea of mine.

I'd say yes to permanent bans requests by staff but, regardless of their origin, for them to be unappealable there should be an additional step where it must pass an unanimous vote by the executive team. This would balance power and reinforce the teamwork, which I believe are among the points of having a board instead of a single owner.
 
This suggestion is approved. I will leave it open for discussion