[jackavsfan]

\
well it seems people don't want this, I would guess that 1 in 10 people could maybe be innocent, unwilling to post on the forum as they think they would loose the appeal or feel un valued and switch server, is not paid advertisement was used to attract people to mine realm would it not be better to try to keep these lost players if there is any and have a stronger community ?

Well for starters, bans on innocent players happen very rarely, much less often than 1 in 10. And if a player can't swallow his pride enough to post on the forums and apologize, he shouldn't have broken the rules in the first place. Making a public apology in a ban appeal is part of the process of being unbanned.

[zoomer]

If there's evidence of rulebreaking (e.g. block logs, chest logs, chat logs, screenshots), then the rules need to be enforced. Doesn't matter who the rulebreaker in question is.

Even if this suggestion were accepted on the grounds that it's somehow a good idea for enforcement of the rules to vary from one player to the next, how exactly would "talking with them" change the outcome if it's their word against objective evidence?

One player to the next treated differently would introduce unfairness however players who have managed to not get banned for months are they not worth more then a 5 minute player who griefs maliciously ?

If the player is spoke to at least they know they are valued and also would know why then they got banned and not after playing for months get a message you are banned for breaking rules and have to appeal with hard-core griefers

[zoomer]

Well for starters, bans on innocent players happen very rarely, much less often than 1 in 10. And if a player can't swallow his pride enough to post on the forums and apologize, he shouldn't have broken the rules in the first place. Making a public apology in a ban appeal is part of the process of being unbanned.

it is degrading for a player to apologise if they are innocent

[Ratta237]

Well for starters, bans on innocent players happen very rarely, much less often than 1 in 10. And if a player can't swallow his pride enough to post on the forums and apologize, he shouldn't have broken the rules in the first place. Making a public apology in a ban appeal is part of the process of being unbanned.

it is degrading for a player to apologise if they are innocent

It is SO unlikely that the player is innocent, and if they think they've done nothing wrong they can just ask.
The member of staff that banned them can tell them why they were banned, FULL STOP.
Degrading? I was banned a few times when I was a nub, and look at me now. I have moved on, half the community probably don't even know that I was banned.

[eah]

If there's evidence of rulebreaking (e.g. block logs, chest logs, chat logs, screenshots), then the rules need to be enforced. Doesn't matter who the rulebreaker in question is.

Even if this suggestion were accepted on the grounds that it's somehow a good idea for enforcement of the rules to vary from one player to the next, how exactly would "talking with them" change the outcome if it's their word against objective evidence?

One player to the next treated differently would introduce unfairness however players who have managed to not get banned for months are they not worth more then a 5 minute player who griefs maliciously ?

If the player is spoke to at least they know they are valued and also would know why then they got banned and not after playing for months get a message you are banned for breaking rules and have to appeal with hard-core griefers

In any case, if a player is online while a staff member finds griefing block logs with their name on it, they are talked to. But if they're not online, they are often banned. There's no use in keeping a griefer on the server regardless of who they are.

Of course, if a player is well-known, they are sometimes given a break - for example, if I took down a nether portal and someone reported it, I might be let go because it's assumed a misunderstanding and putting me through the process of appealing would arouse the community.

If this whole scenario pertains to YOU, then you're out of luck. 3 to 4 months doesn't say enough. I've never seen you on the forums or in-game.

Finally, in this scenario you describe, if a player is indeed an MVP, then they WILL appeal their ban as MVPs are dedicated to staying and playing. Therefore, forcing the staff to leave rule breakers alone which are long-time players is pointless as they would otherwise appeal their ban and their true guilt/innocence will come to surface.

[zoomer]

It is SO unlikely that the player is innocent, and if they think they've done nothing wrong they can just ask.
The member of staff that banned them can tell them why they were banned, FULL STOP.
Degrading? I was banned a few times when I was a nub, and look at me now. I have moved on, half the community probably don't even know that I was banned.

Adding "active player" tag would be something for a new player to attain and might keep them from griefing by the time they got active player they would know the server and would less likely to grief currently you get a + for new player

In any case, if a player is online while a staff member finds griefing block logs with their name on it, they are talked to. But if they're not online, they are often banned. There's no use in keeping a griefer on the server regardless of who they are.

Of course, if a player is well-known, they are sometimes given a break - for example, if I took down a nether portal and someone reported it, I might be let go because it's assumed a misunderstanding and putting me through the process of appealing would arouse the community.

If this whole scenario pertains to YOU, then you're out of luck. 3 to 4 months doesn't say enough. I've never seen you on the forums or in-game.

Finally, in this scenario you describe, if a player is indeed an MVP, then they WILL appeal their ban as MVPs are dedicated to staying and playing. Therefore, forcing the staff to leave rule breakers alone which are long-time players is pointless as they would otherwise appeal their ban and their true guilt/innocence will come to surface.

Thanks for your time, all I proposed is adding "active player" for people who have played for 3-4 months so that they have a better chance to appeal over someone set on breaking the rules from when they first play, like you said you don't know me what if I was "active player" then it shows commitment to server perhaps 3-4 is to short 7 months might be a better number, currently there is 12 month achievement, new player and donor as you probably know

[Wxclm]

All I proposed is adding "active player" for people who have played for 3-4 months so that they have a better chance to appeal over someone set on breaking the rules from when they first play.

The point is that no one is more important than anyone else no matter how long they have played. Everyone here is equal, whether they are a 2 year vet or a 2 hour player, the penalties and sanctions apply to all.

[zoomer]

The point is that no one is more important than anyone else no matter how long they have played. Everyone here is equal, whether they are a 2 year vet or a 2 hour player, the penalties and sanctions apply to all.]

I agree 100% with what you said,

If it was more obvious a player was on the server long time then in theory they will understand how the server works the rules more clearly and wont want to loose there hard work where as a new player will been keen to play have nothing to loose and be more likely to grief and a higher frequently grief

the quote below was worded poorly, "better chance" implies more important

All I proposed is adding "active player" for people who have played for 3-4 months so that they have a better chance to appeal over someone set on breaking the rules from when they first play.

[zoomer]

A= +bob

A newb what does it matter to them yet no connection to the server might even be from planet minecraft

B = bob

Player has not griefed otherwise they would have been banned, someone who has obeyed the rules but might do something stupid but is less likely as they have gotten to know things better and have probably realised they wont get op

C= "Active player" bob

Player has not griefed otherwise they would have been banned, Player on minerealm who has built a lot played along time worked with others would probably have some sort of reason to suddenly destroy something they might not think it was against the rules or there might be a valid reason or a misunderstanding

D= 12 month or donator bob

Player has not griefed otherwise they would have been banned, farily safe bet they are innocent

[zoomer]

it is easy for A to become B however BC and D are not the same as A really ?