Post any ban appeals or ban requests within this forum.
  • User avatar
User avatar
By cerevox
#20933
Its late so i will make it short, but on the letter/latter thing...

I was referring to the difference between the spirit of the law and the letter of the law. Although replacing it with latter does actually work in that context, i did use the correct word.

Also, picture is nice. I don't mind being represented as a hideous toxic plant that murders fish that approaches it and uses their rotting corpses that drift near after murdering them as fertilizer.
By Suikadesu
#20942
Nice, i always enjoy looking up and reading the rules for things before actions are taken for anything.
By Suikadesu
#20962
Kress_91 wrote:Too bad action is only taken when they seem to be in a really bad mood.
I ment my own actions, as per building, making things etc. ^.^
By kerovon
#21447
Due to recent events, I feel the need to institute a new anti-slandering rule. It is primarily intended to effect how stores behave towards competitors, but if necessary I am perfectly willing to extend it to include one player's comments towards another without giving prior warning. So, the details:

Slander is saying something about another store (or person) that is not demonstrably true. Basically, if you say something about another store that is bad, or allude to negative things about another store, than it will be considered slander. Because this is somewhat broad (see: easy to find a loophole in and slander someone with, and then protest innocence), I'm going to be giving some examples.

If store A says "We are the best store on Minerealm", this is not slander, because they are not insulting a competitor.

If Store A says "Store B cheats their customers" this is slander, unless they have concrete proof of this, in which case Store B is probably banned anyway.

If Store A says "Store B kills their customers out back for their items" this is slander.

If Store A says "Unlike some stores, we don't kill our customers" I'm probably going to consider this slander, because they are alluding to their opposing store in a obvious manner. Basically, if I can tell that you are referencing someone in your comments, I will consider it slander.

If Store A says "Our prices are cheaper than store B", then this may or may not be considered slander. For this, I would recommend not saying it, because it is overly broad. However, if Store A says "Store B charges 1000 credits for gravel, and we only charge 900", then it is not slander provided that these prices are publicly posted and that it was a provable statement of fact. If Store A says "Store B charges 10000 credits for gravel, and we charge 900" and they can't prove that store B does this, then it is slander.

Note: these rules will also apply to libel (For those less brushed up on legal terms that would be statements in a permanent form, like signs/forum posts).

If you have questions about this, ask a mod/admin, or post them here. If you are unsure if your statement is slander, then it is probably smarter not to say it.

One final note: if your advertisements become overly obnoxious due to their frequency, or having signs placed to deliberately block another group's signs, or in manners meant to attack/harass another store, I'll probably ban for that too.

Edit: If I think you are trying to circumvent this rule by exploiting a loophole, I will start waving the ban hammer around rather indiscriminately, smiting you, and any suspected accomplices. So don't do that, because I don't want to type that many ban reasons.
By ramien123
#21459
Banning for slandering another store in Minecraft kind of seems like an over the top solution. I mean, if I want to get rid of a molehill I get a shovel, not a thermonuclear warhead(unless those bastards really, really were asking for it). Wouldn't a kick work just as well? If not, will you kick/warn people before the hammer falls? Will the bans be permanant or just for a day or two? Would statements that are completely and obviously untrue fall under slander(such as "store X devours the souls of the unborn to fuel their low, low prices(like Walmart))?

In all honesty, I just don't want to see the forums spammed with ban appeals... more then it usually is, anyway.

Edit: Thanks Kero, as always you responded quickly and answered all my questions. =)
Last edited by ramien123 on Thu Jul 21, 2011 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
By kerovon
#21488
ramien123 wrote:Banning for slandering another store in Minecraft kind of seems like an over the top solution. I mean, if I want to get rid of a molehill I get a shovel, not a thermonuclear warhead(unless those bastards really, really were asking for it). Wouldn't a kick work just as well? If not, will you kick/warn people before the hammer falls? Will the bans be permanant or just for a day or two? Would statements that are completely and obviously untrue fall under slander(such as "store X devours the souls of the unborn to fuel their low, low prices(like Walmart))?

In all honesty, I just don't want to see the forums spammed with ban appeals... more then it usually is, anyway.
It does seem slightly like overkill, but when I tried warning people to stop, they stopped for as long as I was online. However, when I had to log off, I saw them start up again 5 minutes later through webchat. Also, if I don't provide in here a statement saying it is a bannable offence, the first moron I ban for it will have people rushing to his defense claiming "ITS NOT IN THE RULES! YOU CAN'T PROVE YOU WARNED HIM! ADMIN ABUSE! ADMIN ABUSE!".

It will most likely be temp bans, unless it occurs repeatedly, in which case it may be a perma ban. However, as always, sentencing is on a case by case basis.

For giving obviously untrue statements, I'm going to say that its a bad idea, because no matter how ridiculous it is, someone will take it seriously (See: Poe's Law). Also, what is wrong with fueling your economic engine with the souls of the unborn?
By panthers17nfl
#21605
Minor Update Notes, July 22nd:
  • -Re-worded the second paragraph of (6.9) to hopefully simplify it.
    -Added a small paragraph to the end of (6.9) to summarize our protocol.

    Expect more re-wordings and simplifications (where possible) later on.
Hotfix, July 22nd:
  • -My bad, found a typo in (6.9).
User avatar
By cerevox
#21606
panthers17nfl wrote:-Re-worded the second paragraph of (6.9) to hopefully simplify it.
You still have the "May" in there, and that's the real problem. Tell when it is and isn't harassment. The change really didn't effect it one way or another.
panthers17nfl wrote:Added a small paragraph to the end of (6.9) to summarize our protocol.
The summary actually does help. It implies that if someone just shows up out of the blue and buys the land you were building on, it doesn't count as harassment. Also, you may want to look at the 8.1 again. It actually excludes buying someone else's land since that is a one time event.

On the whole this is a net improvement to the rules. Referring to the ask before doing rule is kind of silly though. Most people don't even consider that something might be against the rules until they have broken them, and if they haven't even considered it, they certainly won't think to ask.
By panthers17nfl
#21611
Release Notes July 22nd:
Any instance where the actual policy has changed, or new content added, has been bolded.

Note that there are very few changes to policy here, and most changes are grammatical.
  • -Changed the wording of (1.1) Proximity of Spawn
    -Wilderness (1.2) renamed to Over-World and the Nether (1.2)
    -Removed Realms (1.3) as it is covered in (1.2)
    -Stalking (1.4) is now Stalking (1.3) [ohhhh, big change!]. Stalking is now allowed.
    -Indirect PvP (1.5) changed to Indirect or Unauthorized PvP (1.4). Definitions are clarified.
    -Added Threatening Indirect PvP (1.5)
    -Clarified definitions for Chests (2.1)
    -Clarified definitions for Dropped Items (2.2)
    -Added a few sentences to Breaking In (2.4), but the policy remains the same. Breaking In (2.4) relocated to Breaking In (6.9)
    -Spawn (3.1) has been removed, is it is redundant and has long since been answered in (2.3)
    -(3.2)-(3.5) have had the listing updated in the table of contents. [A very important change indeed. Groundshaking, even.]
    -Clarified definitions for Swearing & Inappropriateness (4.1)
    -Removed All Caps (4.2), as it is no longer possible
    -Added Advertising (4.3)
    -Swearing & Inappropriateness (5.1) is now defined exactly as (4.1) to show that the same rules apply.
    -Renamed Server Discussion (5.5) to Other Topics (5.5), as it in fact applies to all other topics.
    -Clarified definitions for Hacking (6.2)
    -Clarified definitions for Trespassing (6.3)
    -Clarified definitions for Vulgar Signs (6.4)
    -Clarified definitions for Offensive Skins (6.5). Also fixed some glaring typos.
    -Clarified definitions for Texture Packs (6.6)
    -Clarified definitions for Mods (6.7) and added new examples of acceptable mods.
    -Removed Invisibility (6.8), as the bug is now fixed, and the invisibility hack is covered in (6.2), making (6.8) redundant. (6.9) is now (6.8).
    -Created a new example for Reasonable Cause (7.1)
    -Created a new example for Guilt By Association (7.2)
    -Clarified definitions for Guilt By Majority Verdict (7.3)
    -Clarified definitions for Banning for Idiocy / Intellectual Incompetence (7.4)
    -Clarified defintions for Administrator Discretion (7.5) and removed some unimportant phrases.
    -Chopped off some wordy phrases from Circumvention of Rules (7.6)
    -Clarified definitions for Ask Before You Act (7.7). Also added a new sentence (*magic hands*).
    -Clarified definitions for False Informing of Rules (7.9)
    -Clarified definitions for Harassment (8.1)
    -Reworded the bottom paragraph of Trolling (8.2)

    And as per Cerevox's request, the useage of "may" in (6.8) has been replaced to July. Thank you for that typo catch.
  • 1
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
long long title how many chars? lets see 123 ok more? yes 60

We have created lots of YouTube videos just so you can achieve [...]

Another post test yes yes yes or no, maybe ni? :-/

The best flat phpBB theme around. Period. Fine craftmanship and [...]

Do you need a super MOD? Well here it is. chew on this

All you need is right here. Content tag, SEO, listing, Pizza and spaghetti [...]

Lasagna on me this time ok? I got plenty of cash

this should be fantastic. but what about links,images, bbcodes etc etc? [...]