• 412 Players on Java
  • us.mineplex.com
  • 2991 Players Online
  • 2579 Players on Bedrock
  • us.mineplex.com
!
Attention Internet Explorer Users
To have the best user experience on our site please consider upgrading to Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox

Warnings and their small problem.

Discussion in 'Forum Discussion' started by Cardyceps, Jan 22, 2020.

?

Is it a good idea that has some potential of making Mineplex a better place?

  1. Yes, it is a good idea.

    9.5%
  2. Yes,but it needs more details

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Not sure.

    14.3%
  4. No, I don't think that this is needed

    47.6%
  5. NO, Mineplex shouldn't even bother to change the expiration time!

    28.6%
  1. Mineplex forums, I like the rules and I know that without them this site would be different, but it is really sad to get 1 warning point that will expire only in 1 month!
    Just to be clear, I wanted to make another reapplication, but now I must wait for 1 month!
    My idea is simple. There are many rules and for some of them you will get 1 or 2 warning points and for some you can get 6 or even 7.
    These 30 months are needed for people to think of their crime, but what if they just made a small crime like necro posting or light advertising that was done by accident. I think that it is cruel because we might now the rules, but we can't be sure that we won't get warning points for writing one random word! I suggest adding a difference between expiration time for getting one warning point and getting 8 warning points.

    1 Warning point - 5 days
    2 Warning points - 7 days
    3 Warning points - 10 days
    4 Warning points - 15 days
    5 Warning points - 24 days
    6 Warning points - 1 month
    7 Warning points - 1 month and 5 days
    8 Warning points - eternal suffering
     
    Posted Jan 22, 2020
    TheDiamondKittyGaming and Korben like this.
  2. I understand your frustration, but warning points are designed to allow authority to enforce a massive network of users. In many cases, the personal experience of one user cannot warrant a change in the overall system simply for the benefit of one user. For example, imagine that an administrator could "purchase" a warning point from a store and then apply it to a user. It is not specifically designed for one person, but rather it is designed to be efficiently used in many different situations that a staff member may encounter, making it similar in a way to a "mass produced punishment product." Moreover, you mention that breaking a rule "by accident" is a sufficient excuse. However, this has many faults. Let's use an analogy as an example.

    Imagine you're driving down a highway, and a police officer pulls you over for speeding.
    He exits his car, and taps on your window. At the time, you were confused as to why this officer pulled you over.
    But then, he explains how you were caught going 10 miles over the speed limit.
    You then produce a defensive reaction, stating, "But, I didn't see the speed limit sign!"

    What do you think the officer is going to do? Just let you go?
    Of course not! They're going to thoroughly explain that ignorance of the law is not a sufficient excuse.

    This same analogy can be compared to the rules on Mineplex. They are easily accessible, and explain the situations in which a staff member can rightfully punish you for your actions. Furthermore, they are mentioned multiple times across all of Mineplex's platforms. Across the forums, the rules are very commonly referred to in multiple situations, and many staff members will additionally direct you to them, expecting compliance. Therefore, as a user of Mineplex, you should be diligently aware of the rules which are enforced, and how the apply to the various platforms that Mineplex offers. When you get punished, it is for a logical reason that always stems from the rules which are enforced. Ignorance of the rules is not an excuse to appeal or lighten a punishment under any circumstance.
     
    Posted Jan 22, 2020
  3. Hey!

    It's honestly pretty easy to see where you're coming from but there are a few arguments that can be made toward your case. Firstly, the FM/FN team do not have the time to consider your case alone as the forum is a large platform that has to be monitored constantly and you are only one out of many others receiving a warning point on this particular day. If a user is seen breaking the rules, they have to be warranted the sufficient punishment either way. Unfortunately, there is no room to consider whether or not it is done intentionally and I'm sure the team realise that mostly it is not. However, they have to act accordingly if they notice a violation.

    I predict that a lot of players' responses are going to advise you to check out the rules, which honestly isn't a bad idea. They are there for a reason and that is so you can develop an understanding of the do's and don't 's of the network. Don't forget that there are some plus sides to this situation, no matter how hard they are to see. In the event that you decide to re-apply for Trainee, you will have acquired a deeper knowledge of the rules and this is definitely going to be helpful. You can even write about this and what you learned as a result, as it shows that you were willing to improve.

    I don't think there is any need to adjust the punishment expiry time as it gives you a chance to think and make changes for the next time around. If the rules don't provide you with a detailed enough explanation of your violation of them, you can always PM a FM/FN. They are found on the staff list. Best of luck!
     
    Posted Jan 22, 2020
  4. As a current Forum Moderator, I am going to give my input on this idea.

    I would disagree with this idea. I think the main flaw is due to inconsistency. It just does not make sense to have such a short expiration date mainly because this will promote rule-breaking on the forums and make the job of Forums staff members much more difficult.

    From a personal standpoint, I can say that we are putting a lot of effort into making it harder for people to re-offend and break the rules. This means that we do not want to put practises into place that would basically encourage people to continue breaking lower severity rules as they will expire quicker.

    -1
     
    Posted Jan 22, 2020
  5. Hey,

    I actually personally agree with the concept of this idea. By that, I mean I agree that certain punishments on the forums shouldn't expire as quickly as others. Don't exactly think that it's right that a person who was discriminatory and received 6 warning points should be forgiven as quickly as a person who got a 1 warning point for excessive bumping.

    Although, I think that the expiration times that you suggested are way too short. As stated by Oscaros_ above:

    If this idea was to be implemented, I believe it should be implemented with much longer expiration times. I think starting at the 1 month mark for expiration times would be a better idea than finishing at the 1 month mark.

    So, unfortunately, I'm going to have to give this post a -1. I might change my rating if the expiration times are extended to the point where they don't promote rule-breaking.

    Thanks :)
     
    Posted Jan 22, 2020
  6. I recently got forum moderator, so although I may not be too familiar with warnings just yet, I'm going to be providing my opinion on this from a general staff member point of view. When applying for staff, it's noted in the Becoming a Trainee 2: Try Harder guide the reason as to why you have to wait that certain amount of time per punishment. To explain it briefly, when applying for staff, it's expected for applicants to have a good amount of knowledge of our rules and if you're given a warning point on our forums, it shows your lack of knowledge and care for the rules as well as your aspirations to be staff. While it's very discouraging to receive a warning, you should realize that if you get one, you might’ve not known the rules as much as you thought you did. 5 days to me, personally, isn't enough time to reflect on the actions you've taken that lead to a warning. As a staff member, you are to represent the community and be someone that players should look up to. If you're able to get staff after just receiving a warning not even a week ago, that would represent and portray the staff team in a negative light. If you'd like to see, I'll leave the full reason behind denials regarding punishments/warnings by Islendingurinn.

    Like I said, I can empathize with you on how frustrating it can be to receive a warning and not be able to apply, because it actually even happened to me! I can for sure say though that taking the time off for that month I couldn't apply to focus on reading over the rules again and gaining better knowledge on it was a really good decision. A month's also not that long, so don't lose hope! (':
     
    Posted Jan 22, 2020
  7. Heyo!
    I feel where you are coming from and coming from someone that was once forum banned, it isn’t nice. Warning points are warnings and aren’t meant to be taken lightly. If this was implemented then people would continue doing whatever they want not caring about their warnings.
    I’ll be giving this idea a -1
    Cheers!
    ~Sean
     
    Posted Jan 23, 2020
    KerbalBoy likes this.
  8. Warning points on the website serve as an alternative to a mute or a ban, since we can’t really mute people on the website or anything like that because it isn’t a chat, the forums serves as a place of discussion where people can create and reply to various threads.
    Because of that, I’d say warning points are more strict than a paper warning in-game.

    For instance, the disrespect rule on the website would be equivalent to our abusive behavior rule in-game. If someone was muted for AB, they’d have to wait 3 months to apply for staff. If someone was warned for disrespect on our website based on the system you provided, they would have to wait 15 days. That doesn’t seem fair to me.

    Although I understand things such as necro posting are minor, and one month may seem like a long time, it is equivalent to a severity 1 offense in-game.

    As a staff member, you should have a relatively clean punishment history and be knowledgeable of the rules. And although the wait may seem like a long time, I believe the current system is fine the way it is. Staff members represent the network on a daily basis, they shouldn’t have any recent punishments on the forums upon being accepted.
     
    Posted Jan 23, 2020
    KerbalBoy and ScarletBlood37 like this.
  9. Alright, I can see that most of you disagree with my idea. First of all I am not asking you to make my warning point expire faster than it should, I just want more justice and it is ok if this idea will be implemented after my warning point will expire. Another thing is that the very first comment gives an example with the policeman so I will give my own example. Imagine that you stole a wallet and that the very day you arrive into jail you meet another guy who arrived at the same day, he is a serial killer and he sells illegal chemicals.After you found this out you must understand that he will stay in the jail for a VERY long time-30 years. You realize that the max amount of time that you will spend in jail is 5 years,but then one of the jail guards tells you that you will actually spend as much time as that guy. Now you can understand that this is a bit unfair, yes 5 days is not enough in some cases so my idea is to make a code that will add a few more days if the person who got a warning repeats the same mistake.
     
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted Jan 23, 2020
  10. Ok, so I think you can understand I find this quite a hard example to follow. I think if you added that code, then there wouldn’t be reason for FMs to actually warn you.
     
    Posted Jan 24, 2020
  11. I have mixed opinions on this. Sure, it can be annoying for just a little minor offence to sit for a whole month in your record, an identical amount of time for much more severe infractions. I do think there should be some correlation between forum punishments and their cooldown time but your input is too lenient, opening the doors for trolls to flood Mineplex.

    Punishments have a very close relation with trainee applications and I believe forum infractions, also being a rejection reason, should somehow correlate to in-game punishments. Currently, it is very illogical to wait one month to apply for both post-boosting and something substantially worse like discrimination. In-game, post-boosting would equate to spam and discrimination is a severity 3 as is. A better way to go about forum punishment cooldowns is one expires every 2 weeks. There is more link between the severity of the infraction and wait time like this. It should take longer to reflect the more critical a mistake is.

    Before I cap this off, there should also be certain levels of advertising on the forums too, the same format of in-game rules of determining which the infractor fits under. Light advertising being 4 warning points is too overboard as just simply talking about another popular server gets you half a forum ban. It should be just 2 warning point, medium with 6, and severe being a forum ban.

    -1

    Report a User | Report a Bug | Rules | My Profile | Applications
     
    Posted Jan 25, 2020
  12. I second this. Light advertisement is stated as "You may not create any threads, posts and any other discussions that are centered around other servers or their contents." which isn't really advertisement at all. Half a forum ban for mentioning another server, even by accident, seems off, especially whenever you type in Mineplex's competitor it becomes -snip-ed and nothing else happens. And Advertisement is too broad, and is basically a forum ban for mentioning a game in the wrong context.


    And as for the original idea, I agree with that more warning points there should be longer cool-downs, but that's about it. Setting any warning to expire in less than a month defeats the purpose of the warning points. If you break a rule, then you should face actual consequences. Putting the timer to less than a month isn't a punishment. Let me explain why:

    Suppose you are 13, mature, and an aspiring Trainee, but your application was denied due to you being Not Ready, a common denial reason. You will have to wait a month to re-apply.

    Now, imagine that exact same scenario, but you are 14. You will only have to wait 2 weeks to re-apply. As an outsider, this doesn't seem especially fair to underage applicants, because it's something they can't control, yet they have to wait double the time.

    And finally, suppose you're 13 and picked up 1-7 warning points, because of a justified punishment. Lowering the time for warning points to expire will, get this, remove any effect of the warning points. You're 13 - you have to wait a month to re-apply anyway. So lowering the expiration time to less than a month in essence removes the purpose of the warning points if you're 13-. Not exactly ideal.

    But even if you're 14+, your system is saying that being younger than an arbitrary number is worse than breaking a rule. This is what your system implies.

    And you might think that lowering the expiration time isn't all that bad, because it only affects Trainee applications negatively. Then you realise that that's essentially everything Warning Points do anyway. Getting 7 Warning Points does nothing other than affect applications. Getting 8 Warning Points permanently bans you from the website. This is an issue I think should be addressed in a separate thread, but for now, the only effect of this idea is that it lessens the effectiveness of punishments.
     
    Posted Jan 25, 2020
    ScarletBlood37 and _Prof_ like this.
  13. Just gonna drop this in here, the forums rules system shouldn't be shaped to cater those who are applying for trainee. If you can't handle following the forums rules, which are super loose, then by no means should you be able to become a staff member. They expire in a month anyway, which isn't even a long time, so I don't see why this is a problem, unless you're being impatient and want to apply for trainee immediately.
     
    Posted Jan 25, 2020
  14. Agreed with Jaek here. Applying for trainee requires an adequate understanding of the rules on the network and receiving a warning point, regardless of whether it was intentional or not, shows that one fails to understand the type of behavior that is not tolerated on the forums. In addition, the times you have mentioned are way too short. I understand your desire to make the wait time somewhat proportional to the point values but wanting to wait a measly five days for your warning also reveals a lack of patience - a quality that one must prove to be capable of handling throughout the trainee recruitment process.
     
    Posted Jan 25, 2020
    Jaek and Dallarth like this.
  15. Exactly my thoughts on this case, well said.
    In my opinion the more harsh the punishments are the less people will break the rules!
     
    Posted Jan 26, 2020
  16. Ok lads, what if each of the rules will expire at a different amount of time? I am not good at it so may be you will tell me the amount of time needed for each warning to expire?
     
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted Jan 26, 2020
  17. There is no way a 13 year old could be "mature". Trainee minimum age needs to be raised to 15 or 16 with no exceptions
     
    Posted Jan 26, 2020
  18. I personally think it's fairly lenient as is. You have to actually have done some bad stuff to get forum banned. To accumulate 8 warning points in a month from low severity punishments (only 1-2 warning points), you actually need to have the intention of getting banned. From a general standpoint, it doesn't need to be more lenient.

    Now from your issue, with becoming Trainee. First of all, if you got a punishment within the past month, Mineplex probably wouldn't accept you anyway, due to the fact that they think that you don't know the rules well and don't know how to follow them. So it wouldn't really make a difference if the time was shortened, applying with a recent punishment is pretty much a guaranteed denial.

    Also, the rules are very lenient. If you manage to get warning points with these stupidly lenient rules, and you can't wait a month for your punishment to expire, then you're probably not mature enough to be Trainee.

    Most importantly, the system shouldn't be designed about becoming Trainee.
     
    Posted Jan 26, 2020
    _Prof_ likes this.
  19. If an underage applicant is as mature as a player who is not underage, why should the person be denied? As long as the person proves that they are mature enough to be a staff member on this server, their age shouldn't have a big say in what they can do.
    ***
    As for warnings, I don't believe that the expiration time needs to be changed. The wait times that you have suggested are way too short for an offence that breaks the rules. Sure, waiting a month to reapply for Trainee can be annoying, but during that month you can reflect on experiences to help improve yourself, and work on your application. The forum rules aren't going to change to allow players who are applying for Trainee have to wait less- if you can't wait a month, that shows a lack of patience- and patience is extremely important for being a staff member.

    -1
     
    Posted Jan 26, 2020
  20. Hello.
    I have to disagree strongly with the warning points idea, as there is no need to shorten the punishment time.If someone is breaking the rules they should be punished with something suitable to what they have done. As @ScarletBlood37 stated, the time you are punished is a time to reflect on what you’ve done, this is why punishment time should not be shorted. Also, if a player really believes what they’ve done isn’t wrong then they should apply for an appeal to get their punishment time shortened. Overall, I don’t think this is a good idea, as the warning is fair enough as it is.
     
    Posted Jan 26, 2020
    ScarletBlood37 likes this.

Share This Page