Can we PLEASE be able to check our inbox for messages that explain why we were banned, BEFORE THE BAN EXPIRES? This way if we ever need to contest it, we can actually know if we should or not because we can actually see why we were banned in the first place.
Please address this flaw in the system. If it isn’t a flaw, then please explain why this feature was deemed a good thing.
> Please address this flaw in the system. If it isn’t a flaw, then please explain why this feature was deemed a good thing.
In my experience, people are usually pretty pissed off when they get banned, but tend to have calmed down at least slightly by the time the ban expires.
If they got to read their ban PM immediately after being banned – while in the worst possible state of mind – then some of them would be very likely to form grudges. Forcing them to wait ensures that they read the PM while in a better state of mind, which lowers the probability of them making further trouble in an attempt to vindicate themselves.
That reasoning probably sounds pretty flimsy, but as someone who was once on the receiving end of our ban system, I can tell you that when the idea works, it works very, very well.
Oh, let’s not start this “What’s better” argument. Let’s just state the facts.
They way the forums are set up, you can’t access your inbox and it’s not a high priority for the team to change since there are a lot of other features still offline from the E3 surge.
If you want to know why you were banned, learn the rules, and don’t break them. If you have any questions, take it to Twitter, most mods are willing to reply there, BUT ONLY IF YOU ARE RESPECTFUL.
So basically, know the rules, and there wont be a problem.
It’s personally seems like a poor design choice. Learning the rules is something we can all do, but it’s not going to negate a mistake through moderator enforcement that very rarely (but might) occur. Let’s face it, the monitors aren’t monitors, so if someone has the chance to appeal something or inquire about something with what they’ve been given, they should do.
Which brings me to the point of questioning a ban. While there is a way to possibly check the reasoning, the means of which it’s done are…odd. I’m not a real Twitter nut, but problems which occur on-site should remain on-site – to take an appeal on an external site seems redundant when they be better off doing it here. Firstly, it’s private, and any form of abuse which may be received could be meet with the same consequence by the Monitors who take appeals through Twitter, with them being ignored. It just seems like more of an effort to discuss publicly with a 100 character limit on Twitter reasoning with someone about if a punishment is necessary.
Meh, $0.02.
> Oh, let’s not start this “What’s better” argument. Let’s just state the facts.
>
> They way the forums are set up, you can’t access your inbox and it’s not a high priority for the team to change since there are a lot of other features still offline from the E3 surge.
>
> If you want to know why you were banned, learn the rules, and don’t break them. If you have any questions, take it to Twitter, most mods are willing to reply there, BUT ONLY IF YOU ARE RESPECTFUL.
>
> So basically, know the rules, and there wont be a problem.
Yea. Better to be safe than sorry.
What if the ban is for a week, and it really was from something that was simply taken the wrong way (which happens far too often on this site)? That person cannot know why he was banned until next week, and there’s no way to appeal it if he doesn’t know why.
And honestly, mostly everybody I know that has been banned from this site wasn’t pissed, but instead they laughed at how silly the reason was that got them banned.
> What if the ban is for a week, and it really was from something that was simply taken the wrong way (which happens far too often on this site)? That person cannot know why he was banned until next week, and there’s no way to appeal it if he doesn’t know why.
>
> And honestly, mostly everybody I know that has been banned from this site wasn’t pissed, but instead they laughed at how silly the reason was that got them banned.
If you are banned for a week for something you thought was misunderstood, then you’ll be able to explain that to the moderator who banned you and likely, have the ban removed from your record.
There has been at least a few cases on the forums of false bans which have been removed, one was very recently.
> > What if the ban is for a week, and it really was from something that was simply taken the wrong way (which happens far too often on this site)? That person cannot know why he was banned until next week, and there’s no way to appeal it if he doesn’t know why.
> >
> > And honestly, mostly everybody I know that has been banned from this site wasn’t pissed, but instead they laughed at how silly the reason was that got them banned.
>
> If you are banned for a week for something you thought was misunderstood, then you’ll be able to explain that to the moderator who banned you and likely, have the ban removed from your record.
>
> There has been at least a few cases on the forums of false bans which have been removed, one was very recently.
Very interesting thoughts, mistakes do happen. There’s no reason to get to emotionally unstable over a halo forum discussion. At least if your a mature adult, that is.
> Which brings me to the point of questioning a ban. While there is a way to possibly check the reasoning, the means of which it’s done are…odd. I’m not a real Twitter nut, but problems which occur on-site should remain on-site – to take an appeal on an external site seems redundant when they be better off doing it here. Firstly, it’s private, and any form of abuse which may be received could be meet with the same consequence by the Monitors who take appeals through Twitter, with them being ignored. It just seems like more of an effort to discuss publicly with a 100 character limit on Twitter reasoning with someone about if a punishment is necessary.
>
> Meh, $0.02.
Because our usernames are our gamertags, you could also contact us by sending Xbox LIVE messages through Xbox.com. Waypoint is considered part of Xbox.com, so I guess that’d qualify as “on-site”.
> > Please address this flaw in the system. If it isn’t a flaw, then please explain why this feature was deemed a good thing.
>
> In my experience, people are usually pretty pissed off when they get banned, but tend to have calmed down at least slightly by the time the ban expires.
>
> If they got to read their ban PM immediately after being banned – while in the worst possible state of mind – then some of them would be very likely to form grudges. Forcing them to wait ensures that they read the PM while in a better state of mind, which lowers the probability of them making further trouble in an attempt to vindicate themselves.
>
> That reasoning probably sounds pretty flimsy, but as someone who was once on the receiving end of our ban system, I can tell you that when the idea works, it works very, very well.
i’m pretty sure banning without explanation and providing a reason is ilegal and no right to appeal is unfair.
we should be told what we’ve done wrong not just ban us without an explanation untill after, you can always prevent us people from replying for a few days to allow them to calm down but there should always be right to appeal and be told what you’re being punnished for.
punnishing people without a reason actually enduces more rage causing more problems and puts a very strong negative stigma on this forum, so does banning based on amount of previous offenses and not the severity of the offense.
punnishment should and always be based on severity of offense not amount of offenses, basing punnishment on amount of offenses is preventing people from improving ther attitude and doesn’t reward them for actually getting better and settling in, its really a “we don’t like you so you’re punnished even harder” which isn’t nice and again puts a very negative few on the moderators for banning people for months over the most trivial of things that hardly can be considered against the rules.
really, would a slightly out of hand comment warrent a months ban? no, a day or a few at most, but, because punnishment is based on amount of previous offensives makes it so this is entirely possible.
> > Which brings me to the point of questioning a ban. While there is a way to possibly check the reasoning, the means of which it’s done are…odd. I’m not a real Twitter nut, but problems which occur on-site should remain on-site – to take an appeal on an external site seems redundant when they be better off doing it here. Firstly, it’s private, and any form of abuse which may be received could be meet with the same consequence by the Monitors who take appeals through Twitter, with them being ignored. It just seems like more of an effort to discuss publicly with a 100 character limit on Twitter reasoning with someone about if a punishment is necessary.
> >
> > Meh, $0.02.
>
> Because our usernames are our gamertags, you could also contact us by sending Xbox LIVE messages through Xbox.com. Waypoint is considered part of Xbox.com, so I guess that’d qualify as “on-site”.
Cobb also takes all inquiries through the Twitter machine, or his personal assistant, Enfinit.
> > Which brings me to the point of questioning a ban. While there is a way to possibly check the reasoning, the means of which it’s done are…odd. I’m not a real Twitter nut, but problems which occur on-site should remain on-site – to take an appeal on an external site seems redundant when they be better off doing it here. Firstly, it’s private, and any form of abuse which may be received could be meet with the same consequence by the Monitors who take appeals through Twitter, with them being ignored. It just seems like more of an effort to discuss publicly with a 100 character limit on Twitter reasoning with someone about if a punishment is necessary.
> >
> > Meh, $0.02.
>
> Because our usernames are our gamertags, you could also contact us by sending Xbox LIVE messages through Xbox.com. Waypoint is considered part of Xbox.com, so I guess that’d qualify as “on-site”.
Yeah, but wouldn’t it be a lot more convenient to actually receive appeals here? Even via Xbox.com seems like an inconvenient avenue to discuss bans given on Waypoint, especially if you receive them while on the X-box itself. The last thing you’d want to do is respond while you’re about to play on-line or watch something on Netflix or whatever. And even if you decide to respond via the X-box official website, it still seems like an excessive amount of effort for something which (seemingly) has a more beneficial solution.
> > > Please address this flaw in the system. If it isn’t a flaw, then please explain why this feature was deemed a good thing.
> >
> > In my experience, people are usually pretty pissed off when they get banned, but tend to have calmed down at least slightly by the time the ban expires.
> >
> > If they got to read their ban PM immediately after being banned – while in the worst possible state of mind – then some of them would be very likely to form grudges. Forcing them to wait ensures that they read the PM while in a better state of mind, which lowers the probability of them making further trouble in an attempt to vindicate themselves.
> >
> > That reasoning probably sounds pretty flimsy, but as someone who was once on the receiving end of our ban system, I can tell you that when the idea works, it works very, very well.
>
> i’m pretty sure banning without explanation and providing a reason is ilegal and no right to appeal is unfair.
>
> we should be told what we’ve done wrong not just ban us without an explanation untill after, you can always prevent us people from replying for a few days to allow them to calm down but there should always be right to appeal and be told what you’re being punnished for.
>
> punnishing people without a reason actually enduces more rage causing more problems and puts a very strong negative stigma on this forum, so does banning based on amount of previous offenses and not the severity of the offense.
>
> punnishment should and always be based on severity of offense not amount of offenses, basing punnishment on amount of offenses is preventing people from improving ther attitude and doesn’t reward them for actually getting better and settling in, its really a “we don’t like you so you’re punnished even harder” which isn’t nice and again puts a very negative few on the moderators for banning people for months over the most trivial of things that hardly can be considered against the rules.
>
> really, would a slightly out of hand comment warrent a months ban? no, a day or a few at most, but, because punnishment is based on amount of previous offensives makes it so this is entirely possible.
If you’d like to express your desires/concerns over the banning system you should PM bs angel but saying that the banning system is “illegal and unfair” is simply not true. When you sign up to use the forums, you agree to the TOS and thus also have to deal with the repercussions when the rules are broken.
I’m locking the thread at this point as it is very close to tipping over into becoming about moderation decisions which is definitely off topic and is also against the TOS.