' Wrote:1: A lot of times, it is not clear to the person who got sanctioned, or to anyone else who reads it, why he got sanctioned, when admins simply quote the whole rule.
Persons who have been sanctioned may request evidence of their wrongdoings, and usually are shown these, privately, via PMs. This is not always the case, due to a number of factors.
' Wrote:2: Something I noticed before, but the sanction of Doj made me bring this up. Sometimes, you seem to ban forum accounts without giving the names in sanction threads (in this case the alts of Doj who you say are permanently banned).
Sometimes we do, sometimes we don't. Neither really matters. Usually it comes down to, was he using a lot of different accounts, or did he have one main account which most people will recognize, and the others were troll alts with only a few posts?
With the Sina example, he had used about 5 different accounts, for long periods of time each, and all were fairly well known, but not as well as a single account would have been.
With Doj, his troll alts were not very well known, they didn't have many posts, and his main account was used often enough and long enough that by just stating his main account, the majority of users will know whom we were referring to.
In short; Alt names are put into sanction threads when necessary to establish someone's identity.
' Wrote:3. I think you should hand out more small sanctions fast instead of waiting for "amounts of evidence" being gathered, as Dab put it.
We do.
This was misunderstood. We do hand out small sanctions, usually tempbans, on violations that warrant that response. However, that tempban doesn't mean the case is closed. What caused that tempban to be placed is put into a thread of evidence of a certain person's rule violations, and when that thread gets big enough, a harsher ban is then applied.
This is not always done in cases of trolling, because lone and solitary "minor" troll posts don't warrant a tempban. However, repeated trolling over a length of time does warrant action, and in these cases, it is often decided to use a 7-30 day ban instead of a tempban.
This also protects the member, because the admins are human beings. What we see as trolling may not have been intended as trolling, and simply be a product of misunderstanding or cultural differences. As such, tempbanning for a single troll post is not a fair action to take. However, when this behavior is exhibited multiple times, that doubt goes away, and we can take action without the concern over it just being a cultural or language difference.
"we" - why exactly are forum mods involved in admin work. - if mods are also able to comment in sanction threads ( as i sometimes spotted ) - where exactly is the line drawn?
Moderators are involved in discussions about forum related sanctions and have a voice in forum related discussions. They do not comment or have a voice in server sanction discussions.
Off Topic: Then server administrators should be responsible for in game punishment only. There is no need to overlap your work if you already have competent team to make sure forum is in order.
' Wrote:Off Topic: Then server administrators should be responsible for in game punishment only. There is no need to overlap your work if you already have competent team to make sure forum is in order.
Moderators do not on their own give sanctions. They are allowed to give tempbans in specific situations. But they do have a voice in the discussions because they have a hand in enforcing them. We just don't separate the forum and the server in that way.