Amnesti

[Nipple Nibbler]

Omega Red I was never asking for any major ban of Amnesti, a simple short term silence would have been sufficient.

[Steadman]

Happy to join this discussion about my penis.

All jokes aside I'd like to weigh in and discuss what I think is a working solution that everyone (aside from the offenders) would like. First and foremost, I'm against banning anyone for speech. We're a small community and I'd hate to see that get smaller even though Amnesti has spammed and harassed me on numerous occasions despite asking him to stop. With that being said, something has to be done because the problem of evading ignore must be addressed without limiting freedom of speech.

The main problem is that players who are ignored can switch aliases and go about doing the same thing because it's not technically considered evading ignore unless they go after the person directly. The main offenders who come to mind here are Amnesti, Tiger the Crab, Manco, Tower, and Pinky (whoever that is). The simplest solution here is to 'NameLock' repeat offenders so that they cannot evade ignore, whether intentionally or not. This way, they can keep spewing their nonsense but players who have them ignored will never have to listen to it again, should they so choose. After being NameLocked, anyone who switches names for any reason at any time should be silenced with heavy restrictions. I would propose a silence duration of 3 days, 7 days, 14 days, 31 days, and permanent silence, in that order to NameLocked players who decide to switch names.

In my opinion, this is the most optimal working solution for the issue without going to the extent of banning players who harass others. I would even volunteer to handle this aspect of moderation if needed. The only thing that this working solution doesn't address is cross-zone spamming, which Amnesti has done numerous times in the past and very recently to Turban, I believe. I believe a solution will be needed for that as well, if it is even possible. I just don't know the details well enough to propose a solution for this.

Please let me know your thoughts on the matter.

[Vehicle]

rothe There's like a half-dozen players I talk to on a regular basis who started playing this game in the past two months. We get help calls whenever new people log in, I chat with those people all the time. We all help in our ways.

@omega red

I personally don't agree with punishing Amensti extensively besides periodic silences or normal bans.

That's all I'm asking for as well. But apparently as long as you use a different adjective for your cock in each message it doesn't count as spam. That's all I think should be addressed.

[Nipple Nibbler]

First off, I would like to thank voth for entertaining the idea of having this discussion, and for those being a part of it without trolling or letting it get too heated. You're right complaining does not solves any problems, but it does open the door to some if we let it.

Could we not just expand on rule 13 at A1, and added into the rulebook in a way that allows staff to deal with disruptive players by simply having x amount of staffers on staff chat agree with your ruling before you give it. I understand why one player should not be able to just ban anyone they want for anything, and having other staff members agree or disagree first would help with this.

example
I log on and start being a giant twat in pub
someone does a help call about it
if first offence you simply tell person to ?ignore me
staff member talks to me to attempt to reason with me
if I am a repeat offender and clearly not able to be reasoned with, but I am not technically breaking other rules, you put the question to staff chat
if 2 staff members agree you go forth with the punishment
if 1 staff member says no then you don't

I remember reading somewhere in this thread Amnesti was recently banned, so clearly he is a disruptive player that staff know about. I think I.D. banned or got him banned awhile ago as well, at least according to one of Amnesti's err....videos. (might've been public assassin parody of it). Unless this was the same ban.

[Omega Red]

I personally don't agree with punishing Amensti extensively besides periodic silences or normal bans. The game has tools to avoid situations like this (staff, ?obscene, ignore.txt). Granted there is some extra work to be done by the user or staff to enforce this.

This is the greatest game ever because of the gameplay and social aspect of it (good and bad).

Moving in a direction to netban/silence someone with a mental illness on the pretext of offending some women that play this game is the wrong step in my opinion. It will start with Amnesti then stop where? Who is willing or even qualified to determine which speech is okay and which is not? I do not get offended by Amnesti, I think it's funny sometimes. He obviously needs help and I really do hope he gets it soon.

I do not mind the discourse in public chat. There are a lot of instances where I believe people are wrong or dumb (on both sides of the spectrum) but it is probably better to have a conversation than move to silence these people as sick (or wrong, in your opinion) as they may be. Who knows, maybe one day someone will break through to them and allow them to see things from a different perspective?

Staff could do a better job educating new players how to set up ingore,txt or ?ignore players through a periodic green message in pub just as they do with the community policing message.

[rothe]

Voth I think you're choosing to not look at the content of the messages.

This isn't black and white, there is definitely gray area. And it's absolutely not "all in or all out" as you said. There is a difference between spamming your love for Trump or a %kill macro and spamming descriptions of people's genitals.

When a dozen players come to you with a complaint and your response is "Well zidane and Commodo disagree with you," it's not exactly heartening. Our job as staff (I'm a lowly <ZH> at the moment) moderators should be to, first and foremost, create a semi-welcome environment (within reason) for players. The stubbornness and lack of flexibility on display here are not a good look.

Also, can we all please try to remain civil in this thread?

Well what also is not a good look is lack of presence in the zone if your going to complain about other staff members I dont see any ZH ever in pub breaking up roofers or trying to change the course of a discussion when it is getting out of hand like I used to do when I was on staff and always hanging out in pub. Now adays I see most of staff hanging out in league areas. Rather than the common room of pub where all the "NEW" players come. If everyone is so worried about all the "NEW" players and not their own hurt feelings take heed there are many things to do. Keeping pub active and not just league. Sure if its your friend and you just got them in the game they completely understand what ?WBDUEL STARTING means someone new has no clue to hit esc a then look for wbduel lmao.. and where is the zh to explain that no where to be found which is the entire reason that a zone helper was made and required to answer at least 10 calls a week or be gone back when i was staff.
People used to start trivia or Zone Hosts were not the only ones allowed to host events hell I did when things were dead or when things started to spice up. What I hear right now is a lot of. "I dont like what he said so i'ma complain" and not something along the lines of hey i'm staff I didnt like that what can I do within the guidelines to try to make sure that doesnt happen again. Nah lets change up the whole thing lol..
TLDR your job was entirely PUB and nothing else. Ya got to know people their quirks so when they acted out ya would tell em to stfu and ya know what normally? They would.
None of this is new. Lets make that clear. The reactions to this are new.

[Vehicle]

I still want to hear about his penis, what makes it so damn special

Lucky for you there are excerpts on page 4.

[Voth]

Anyone with the name "Am Nasty" may just be sexually liberated... I still want to hear about his penis, what makes it so damn special

I like this guy.

[Lizzo]

Anyone with the name "Am Nasty" may just be sexually liberated... I still want to hear about his penis, what makes it so damn special

[Voth]

"If moderators through a consensus agree that a player's harassment is effecting not only a single player but all players in an arena, a warning and/or silence can be issued pursuant to this section."

I'm sure it's not perfectly written but I'd be fine with adding that. It doesn't give all the power to one person and leaves wiggle room and allows for you to take action against people who are scourges.

I really don't care what happens to Amnesti. But clearly enough people do that it should be addressed further.

I like the idea of making rulings by a committee. Unfortunately, we are lucky to have ONE active moderator handling the situation, much less three or four. I see you've joined staff and I'm not sure your intended path, but I'm always happy to have intelligent veteran players taking on some of the load with regards to cheater calls and bans in general. Let me know if you'd like to get trained up and contribute in that way.

[Voth]

If that's the full rule, it's massively flawed because the effort required from the player and from the staffer to trigger any enforcement is greater than the punishment. The simplest change you could make to fix it is change the last bit from warning/silence to 1 month ban.

Enforcing rules needs to be something that gets easier over time - because you've banned the offenders so they aren't offending anymore.

I should repeat a point I've made before that the rules as communicated by staff to players are at A1. Whenever I tell staff to enforce A1 they laugh at me, because they're following some secret staff rule book, and often don't even know what A1 says. IMO A1 is pretty good and staff need to throw their secret rule book in the trash and start enforcing A1. All the things listed at A1 are illegal. Players breaking those rules should expect to be banned. The length of the ban escalating as offenses are repeated (e.g. 1 week, 1 month, 1 year).

Silences are game-breaking so should never be used.

When I say an excerpt, I mean it's an excerpt. I didn't write the manual that we operate under and I don't agree with everything in it. It was written by someone who did this job tremendously differently than I do. There are good and bad portions of it. I've been chipping away at adding/removing from it over my time here but it's quite a lengthy, convoluted document. Open to more interpretation than I would like, personally. Perhaps a complete overhaul is in order, but I'll still come up stuck when it comes to this specific issue. And of course, I can't just unilaterally change everything on my own, it would need approval from those above me.

The discrepancy between A1 and the ban manual is an issue that we have noticed on multiple occasions and this is a good reminder that something needs to be done one way or the other. Either A1 is changed or the manual is changed, or both - but they need to be consistent.

[Rab]

If that's the full rule, it's massively flawed because the effort required from the player and from the staffer to trigger any enforcement is greater than the punishment. The simplest change you could make to fix it is change the last bit from warning/silence to 1 month ban.

Enforcing rules needs to be something that gets easier over time - because you've banned the offenders so they aren't offending anymore.

I should repeat a point I've made before that the rules as communicated by staff to players are at A1. Whenever I tell staff to enforce A1 they laugh at me, because they're following some secret staff rule book, and often don't even know what A1 says. IMO A1 is pretty good and staff need to throw their secret rule book in the trash and start enforcing A1. All the things listed at A1 are illegal. Players breaking those rules should expect to be banned. The length of the ban escalating as offenses are repeated (e.g. 1 week, 1 month, 1 year).

Silences are game-breaking so should never be used.

[Vehicle]

"If moderators through a consensus agree that a player's harassment is effecting not only a single player but all players in an arena, a warning and/or silence can be issued pursuant to this section."

I'm sure it's not perfectly written but I'd be fine with adding that. It doesn't give all the power to one person and leaves wiggle room and allows for you to take action against people who are scourges.

I really don't care what happens to Amnesti. But clearly enough people do that it should be addressed further.

[Voth]

So change it then. Tell me what you all think should be happening when I as the Ban Operator personally feel that what a player is doing constitutes enough to act on it on a banning/silencing level.

I'm sensing that there is a lot of bark and little bite with most of you. I've already offered people to moderate the forums for us, I've already offered to help you re-write or create a new rule to combat this issue, but I'm sensing no one wants to put in any of the work to actually do this. Are we just here to complain or are we here to fix it? Because if complaining is your end-game, you've been heard and I think we can move on.

[Voth]

This is a direct excerpt from the rule you reference:

Unwanted excessive sexual/verbal harassment also falls into this category and is not permitted. In such cases, the ?ignore command is the first available option to a player, and moderators should encourage a player to utilize this command to silence any unwanted private messages or content they do not wish to see. If the offending player is avoiding a players ?ignore by changing aliases, then action can be taken provided documented evidence, such as screen shots, are provided to the moderator by the complaining player. If such evidence reveals an offending player is avoiding ?ignore, a warning and/or silence can be issued pursuant to this section.