(09-25-2016, 06:04 PM)John Wildkins Wrote: [ -> ]You've recently stated here that members are indefinitely banned with an appeal timer of six months so that all of their assets are activity wiped, and that all of their personal ships and funds are forfeit once banned. However, as recently as December 12, 2015, you have restored multiple ships belonging to a member who was indefinitely banned in April of 2015, and unbanned somewhere between November and December of the same year. These ships were activity wiped because the member in question was banned for 8+ months, obviously.
So, my question is, when are you going to stop making up rules and precedents that clearly don't exist and start being clear and legitimate with the decisions you're making?
I will try to explain the situation as best as I can.
The problem with using Snak3 as an example, is due to the reason why his ships were
not wiped in the first place. I might be remembering this wrong and if I am, feel free to tell me, but the reason his ships were still
alive was due to the server troubles we were having and how it interfered with the automated deletion process. His characters weren't -restored- as far as I see, he even himself said that he found that they still existed on the server and he asked them to be returned to his possession. Would have I done it if I had processed his post in that thread? I am not sure.
(09-25-2016, 06:59 PM)John Wildkins Wrote: [ -> ]The issue I take is that Kalh was denied the reimbursement of his credits - that he lost due to a technical error with FLHook, not inactivity - because he had been given access to ships that were owned by a banned member of the community. This is not a precedent that exists, as far as I or anyone else is aware. The point I was trying to make by linking to Snak3's posts is that he, after being indefinitely banned, was given access to all of his accounts that were wiped for inactivity. This is directly in contrast with what the admin who posted on Kalh's post stated. Were that statement true, Snak3 would have been told that all of his ships were forfeit, and that he would have to start anew because of his indefinite ban. This didn't happen then. I'm simply asking why this hitherto unknown precedent regarding banned members' assets is suddenly coming into play now, and especially in this specific case (where it really doesn't even seem that relevant).
If the ships and assets of indefinitely banned members are forfeit as the post seems to contend, then I don't understand why there hasn't been any notice about it. "Common sense" can be paraded as much as it wants to be, but most people in this community have friends, and when they leave the community, those friends are usually given their assets. Forcibly leaving doesn't necessarily change that, and I can think of many examples of people with access to ships belonging to currently banned members, or instances of that occurring in the past. If this is the new direction that the admin team is taking in regards to these assets, then it should be clearly and widely known within the rules of the community, so that nobody ends up losing their own assets because "it's a good example of karma".
Going back to Kalh in particular, you must take into account that the ship and the original owner in question from which he got the money in the first place. The ship did not belong to a person who ''left discovery'' or "made themselves leave forcefully" , but to a person who was, should I remind you, removed by a
report process just as much as their own request.
Quote:The issue I take is that Kalh was denied the reimbursement of his credits - that he lost due to a technical error with FLHook, not inactivity - because he had been given access to ships that were owned by a banned member of the community.
He was not refused because he was ''given access to ships that were owned by a banned member of the community''. He was refused because he took the money from a
non-shared personal account that he had no prior access to, and which was the personal bank of a permabanned member, in the first place.
As I said, please remember the reason for Laz's ban. Deletion of other people's ships, stealing credits among other things.
Upon trying to figure out what happened to his money and checking the logs, we ended up going as far back as to some of the earlier transactions - including the full amount of money being sent from Laz's bank by Kalh. The account that Laz's bank was accessed from Kalh's machine (for the first time) and all of the money (read: exact amount) was sent to his own personal ships. This set off a red flag.
While it was conducted in the end that it was indeed a Flhook hickkup that ate Kalh's money in the first place, it was soon questioned whether or not in this case he should have
had that money in the first place. And personally speaking, I am still amazed that you would be questioning this judgement.
Now this is where
's accounts are mentioned. I might as well mention him first, before you do. There is a huge problem in what to do with his assets, because of the mere fact that almost all of his accounts are shared. And I do not mean by one or two people, but by very many. Very. Very. Many.
Personally, I've no idea what to do with them.
This problem stems from one specific point you are not bringing up so far.
Processes like these
cannot be automated if you want them to be as fair to other members as possible. They cannot have a clear cut definition in the rules as they would lead to huge problems for all community members as time goes by. Yes, it would have been easier for me and you if the rule was right there and clear as day - that all accounts belonging to a banned member will be automatically banned or deleted. But due to how ship sharing works, how faction ships work, it would have lead to billions of assets deleted by association depending on who the offending member was.
Do you want that?
/admin on
But fine. I would not be opposed to facing less situations like this in the future. If you would like, I will gladly start up an admin vote regarding the addition of a new rule so that this situation never happens again and that there is no ambiguity on our part.
That any accounts associated with a banned player will be meeting the same fate. If a member is banned for a month - all character accounts the player had access to will be banned for a month. If the player is ''permabanned'' and the six months period before they can post an appeal comes into play along with the ship-wipe, the ships that they ever had access to will be deleted instantly upon his sanction day as not to repeat the issue where Snak3's ships survived due to techincal difficulties earlier that year.
/admin off
If you cannot have faith in us handling these things manually and accept that they have the chance to differ wildly at a case by case basis and would rather have no ambiguity at all, we can do that. From a techincal standpoint it would be literally the most easy thing to do - filter by access, Ctrl A + press the button saying Ban/Delete.
If you have any further questions, feel free to ask.