Ban appeals

[Lil' Pudin' Taters]

This only applies to Ban appeals pertaining to Titsrp itself and not the forums, discord, and warn appeals as well as permabans of any kind:

I feel the appeal system is somewhat abused too often by people who are clearly guilty but choose to make an appeal anyways as it might help get the ban reduced. I suggest there be a possibility that if an appeal clearly still shows the banned person is still guilty that there should be a possible extension added to the ban based on how well the appeal was written and how much counter evidence was presented that was viable. I strongly believe that if someone truly believes they should be unbanned or that same person feels like they were unjustly punished, only then they should write an appeal. However, the current system I feel caters to people who constantly enact minge behavior and can't ever accept responsibility for their own actions. Players who get banned and then make enough fuss about the ban are the players who get catered to in the current system, NOT the actual people who believe they are not guilty or unjustly punished.
 

Above player's ban was extended heavily as new evidence against the banned person was presented that clearly showed more guilt than the initial ban was given for. For the reason I'm making this isn't an accurate example as more evidence was presented that wasn't there in the initial ban, but great example of how an appeal can backfire. I don't think bans should be extended as heavily as this man's did for just making an appeal, assuming no more evidence is presented against the banned person, but rather a 1 or 2 day extension.

Above appeal shows piss poor presentation, little to no effort given, no counter evidence to support the appeal, almost badgering behavior to just get a response out of the staff; prime example of a ban that should have been extended 1 or 2 days for wasting staff time.

Another prime example of an appeal that should been given an extension just for making a piss poor appeal and wasting staff time.

Above appeal shows some effort and an attempt at some supporting evidence to revoke the ban. Given, the evidence wasn't great and the player was still guilty, there was still a show of effort in the appeal and the player did think they truly did not deserve the ban. No ban extension should be warranted as the banned person made an effort at the appeal and showed true belief that he/she did not deserve this.

TL;DR I feel people who make poor efforts at ban appeals and are still clearly guilty should be given ban extensions just for wasting staff time as they are just not able to accept responsibility for their actions. 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Lil' Pudin' Taters
added 4th evidence.

[Zesty]

I'd personally not like to see this added, not because I don't want bans extended, but because it means I'd have less entertainment from the absolute retards that sometimes post on there trying to get their mrdm ban revoked.

 

in all seriousness though, +1

[The Herbalist]

we aren't nazi's and if staff aren't arsed dealing with appeals they can resign

-1

[Kilobyte]

1 hour ago, The Herbalist said:

we aren't nazi's and if staff aren't arsed dealing with appeals they can resign

-1

biggest fact of the year 2k20

[Lil' Pudin' Taters]

1 hour ago, The Herbalist said:

we aren't nazi's and if staff aren't arsed dealing with appeals they can resign

-1

I don't think you see the point I'm trying to make. I'm not pointing out the fact of less appeals so easier for staff, I'm pointing out that the current system allows laziness on the appealer's part as some appeals can get accepted with little effort on the appealer's part. If a person is making an appeal, then they must truly believed they are not guilty or their punishment was unfair for the offense they committed instead of "Let's make an appeal for something I am completely guilty for and was punished fairly for, just to see if I can get it reduced or removed for the hell of it".
 

Above is an example of lazy appeal that was accepted even though no actual helpful evidence was submitted and the question of guilt is still not clear as there's no damning evidence to support either argument other than word-of-mouth.

The current system is almost like a banned person is handed a scratch off ticket when they are banned called "Ban appeal" and they can scratch the ticket for very little effort to see if they won an unban or ban reduced. I'm vouching for a system where there needs to be an effort shown on the appealer's part otherwise risk more punishment.

Edited November 15, 2020 by Lil' Pudin' Taters

[Shoebill]

2 hours ago, mcdonalds wifi said:

These guys need to learn to leave the shitposting up to the professionals.

 

+1

"professionals" 

[Walter the Assaulter]

Maybe if they lie sure, but generally if the banning staff thinks a reduction would be ok then it's within their power to grant or deny that. I don't think someone should just be punished for making an appeal. I know some people are doing it in bad faith but I do think it's dangerous territory of something we can't make an exact guideline for and serves to be abusable with little benefit. If they shouldn't be unbanned we just deny the appeal.

[Danutercisd]

In my opinion, I agree with what Walter said, but I think if new evidence does come up that we have overlooked that shows proof that specific users in an appeal should have a more fitting punishment, I believe that should happen. We aren't perfect, and we have to adapt to any situation. 

[Blue.]

1 hour ago, Dan Mcstubbins said:

We aren't perfect, and we have to adapt to any situation. 

We're only human yo

[Nipple Farm]

22 minutes ago, Blue. said:

We're only human yo

Maybe you are