Hi there, folks.

As most of you know, we’re working very hard behind the scenes to hammer out a new & better set of rules, as seen in this Help article. Our most recent update was a more neatly organized rules article on the Knowledge Base. This is the current set of rules, and it represents one of the initial efforts of the Mod Team. You can expect to see more public changes & additions as time goes on, once we’ve made certain decisions and CZ has given it their official blessing. For updates as to when this occurs, be sure to check MC Banhammer’s Rule Update Thread regularly.

For now, however, instead of having a dozen different threads discussing the general public’s opinions & reaction to the current & future rules, let’s keep it all in this one thread. If you like or dislike a particular current rule, that’s fine, and you’re welcome to share your opinion. However, what would be even better is if you could also share some reasons about why you feel the way that you do. Your input is important to us, because in the end, we’re doing this for the community, not for ourselves.

I’d also like to remind everyone that this is Civil Discussion, so please remain constructive & respectful. And if you aren’t comfortable posting your opinion publicly, you can always contact us either via TM or the Contact Us function.

Please remember: this is not a thread to dispute any current bans or engage in anything except constructive dialogue.

You may refer to a specific ban-situation, if it is part of a discussion on the rules, but any ‘Unban XXXX’ posts will be ignored, deleted and/or edited, as needed.

So… what’s on your mind?

I would like a detailed report from each mod on what they do and don’t like, so I can post my shock accordingly as to who is online or offline.

Chawin Posted:

I would like a detailed report from each mod on what they do and don’t like, so I can post my shock accordingly as to who is online or offline.

Sorry, but that’s just not going to happen.

Or you know, make a ****ing FFA forum where you can post everything sans scripting and personal info, make it with a flashy warning, and ban every rulebreaking stuff not in that forum.

That way we won’t need to be ever engaged with your most-of-the-time faulty judgement calls and it would be a win/win situation for everyone.

Fran Posted:

Or you know, make a ****ing FFA forum where you can post everything sans scripting and personal info, make it with a flashy warning, and ban every rulebreaking stuff not in that forum.

That way we won’t need to be ever engaged with your most-of-the-time faulty judgement calls and it would be a win/win situation for everyone.

Signed

Fran Posted:

I support Chawin’s post, and I request that we have a detailed information of every moderator’s ins and outs along with a detailed info from psychological traits from every moderator.

This is ridiculous, for a number of reasons. First off, the decision on what will and will not be considered a ‘shock image’ will be a collaborative effort (and will have to be approved by CZ in any event), and once a consensus has been reached, there will be less need for an individual Mod to make specific judgment call on a new image.

Note that I said less need; there will always be borderline images and activities, and anyone that chooses to dance on that line, does so at their own risk. The guidelines will be more understandable, but no set of guidelines will ever be able to delineate, to the pixel, what is and is not ‘shock’.

Second, you have no requirement to have any sort of ‘psychological profile’ on each Moderator, and the suggestion of such is an obvious and intentional trolling attempt. In the interest of open communication, let’s move past that, but again, I will remind you that this is intended to be a serious discussion. If you are unable or unwilling to participate under those guidelines, please refrain from posting anything further.

It’s been more and more obvious that the mod team got little to no communication, and because of that I’d feel more safe if I know what would offend one or other mod, so I can post freely without getting a ban. You know, there’s too many close calls to risk my account again.

If you are seriously concerned about stepping over the line and risking your account, then it would be in your best interest to contact one or more Moderators to get feedback on any new ideas that might ‘dance on the line’. This is the safest way to make sure that you don’t get in trouble for ‘honest mistakes’. That has been an option for a very long time, and the posters that use that option seem to have very rare and infrequent bans. Those that don’t, do so at their own risk, and seem to have more frequent bans.

First off, I predict this thread will quickly be ignored unless a mod checks it constantly.

Secondly,I support Chawin. I’m tired of people getting banned by “the luck of the draw” because each mod has a different set of rules. As an example Nicco thinks IDC is no-mans land where no-rules apply, while spacekadt doesn’t. One mod may warn a user for a insta-ban rule such as posting goatse, while another would simply warn them. You guys need to follow the SAME rule set so the users stop getting so damn confused about the rules of this site.

Sergeant Cid Posted:

1. A specific ban structure (or rather, a modification to the existing one) is one of the primary points of discussion. And it seems to actually be erring on the side of leniency.

2. The rules actually have seen some relaxation. We’ve actually removed one permaban offense.

We know that fairness of enforcement is an important issue. And we’ve factored that heavily into our discussions. When there were only 1 or 2 Mods, it was not as obvious when those two Mods had slightly different applications of enforcement. And it did happen, more than we might think, based upon the account histories I’ve seen. But with only 2 cooks in the kitchen, it never ‘boiled over’.

Now with 7 Mods, the same thing is happening, but it’s more noticeable. Part of that is that a lot more of the bannable offenses were being caught early. Four times as many sets of eyes tends to result in stronger enforcement. Add to that the enforcement structure which allowed a significant degree of individual interpretation, and this is where we are today.

When we’re allowed to go into more details, we will. I think that may be relatively soon.

Some people will be pleased with the changes, others will not. But the ultimate goal is to improve the community, not to degenerate it.

Can you please address the specific situation that Crinkz referred to rather then just giving the same answer over and over again? I’ve tried tubmailing a mod two days ago about it and I got no answer. Can a person post personal information in IDC and get away with it or not? That’s not a minor infraction either. We’re talking PERMABAN here. How can one mod think something is not a permaban offense and another think it is? This isn’t a grey area like shock, this one is black or white. Either it is or it isn’t.

Just the fact that I have to ask this question again is a sign that something ain’t right here. How can we possibly avoid getting banned if the mods don’t even know it’s a bannable offense?.

duca Posted:

Can you please address the specific situation that Crinkz referred to rather then just giving the same answer over and over again? I’ve tried tubmailing a mod two days ago about it and I got no answer. Can a person post personal information in IDC and get away with it or not? That’s not a minor infraction either. We’re talking PERMABAN here. How can one mod think something is not a permaban offense and another think it is? This isn’t a grey area like shock, this one is black or white. Either it is or it isn’t.

Just the fact that I have to ask this question again is a sign that something ain’t right here. How can we possibly avoid getting banned if the mods don’t even know it’s a bannable offense?.

I believe that only things that can get CZ in legal trouble (including posting personal information) are not allowed in IDC.

Unfortunately, IDC got referred to as a “no man’s land” behind the scenes and there were different interpretations.

IDC is one of the many things we’re trying to nail down right now. No, that doesn’t mean we’re looking to ban you for spamming and trolling and the like, we’re just trying to figure out exactly what *does* apply – such as CP and personal info.

duca Posted:

Can you please address the specific situation that Crinkz referred to rather then just giving the same answer over and over again?

I thought I added some new stuff to that. I’ll try to be a little more specific.

I’ve tried tubmailing a mod two days ago about it and I got no answer. Can a person post personal information in IDC and get away with it or not? That’s not a minor infraction either. We’re talking PERMABAN here.

Posting another person’s personal information anywhere on the site, without their permission, is a bannable offense. It’s not an automatic permaban. It’s an ‘Insta-Ban’.

How can one mod think something is not a permaban offense and another think it is? This isn’t a grey area like shock, this one is black or white. Either it is or it isn’t.

Please TM MC Banhammer with the details, so that the Senior Mod has all the relevant information.

I think, however, that there has been some confusion about the difference between Insta-Ban & Perma-Ban. An Insta-Ban offense doesn’t necessarily result in a Perma-Ban. It’s called an Insta-Ban mainly because it’s a core rule. Note the new KB article, and how it refers to ‘Global Rules’. These are rules that apply no matter where on the site you are. And they are prety straight forward.

Just the fact that I have to ask this question again is a sign that something ain’t right here. How can we possibly avoid getting banned if the mods don’t even know it’s a bannable offense?.

If we’re thinking of the same situation, then a mitigating factor could be whether or not the personal information has been volunteered before by that person. If I tell you, in IDC, publicly, regardless of how many people are actively chatting or visible, that I was born in Montana on July 4th, 1984, then if you later on share that information on FlameBate, then is it still ‘protected’ information? What if I regularly mention that I live in Helena, Montana. It’s still ‘personal information’, but is it still protected? Also, the rule refers specifically to ‘Full name, e-mail address, DOB, etc.’ What’s considered ‘etcetera’? State of residence? City of residence? ZIP code?

This is why some Mod discussions need to occur. This is why no set of rules will ever be 100% complete. And this is why there will always be some level of subjectivity.

But the current Mod discussions are taking this into account, both as individual rules & situations, and also how they interact globally. Just to give you an idea, there are over 30 individual topics and over 800 posts in the Mod Forum discussing all of these things, and more. And we’ve been prioritizing them to keep our discussions on track, and have a lot of irons in the forge. The first two ‘irons’ were the centralized rule page (which is actually very streamlined, if you haven’t looked at it, I encourage everyone to do so) and the change to the ‘posing as a perma-banned player’ offense.

And more are coming. In fact, based on this thread’s feedback, we’ve put a little more focus on addressing shock images and ban-length & protocol.

You are being heard. Just give us time to listen, and discuss amongst ourselves, and then make some decisions.

So, other than defining shock imagery more specifically, better regulation regarding ban-protocol and ban-length, what else is on your minds?