Discussion Index


1999 Topic Index

Posted by Azash on 04/02

I can't use chat now. Everything what I heard from imms about it. Calm down. I was calming 2 hours ago and still I can't use it. I will say it. I don't like Sandra!!! And hope, gag is working for everyone. Mortals and immortals.

From: Sandra Wednesday, March 31, 07:49PM

You swore on chat then began spamming it and were warned for both then limited. Obviously you hadn't calmed down or the limit would have been removed. When trying to talk with you, all I heard about was a mob not having a quest item. Next time you have a problem with a warning you're given use the appeal process instead of posting on a board with half the story. Sandra

From: Adolfus Wednesday, March 31, 07:50PM

Hhehe Azash, thats not very constructive. You gotta say what it is she does that you don't like and not express a personal dislike for her. And um something other than because she, oh heck whats the term for muting someone. Anyway, oh yah the post earlier, 1. neat idea 2. I just wish they hadn't changed who so we couldn't tell who they were and go kill them sometimes, hehe 3. neat idea, which specifically are screwed? 4. Sometimes they be in another window, or maybe you annoyed them? 5. I don't think anyone should ever blindly trust someone in power. hrm, thats all

From: Woe Wednesday, March 31, 08:39PM

Since you bring up the question of warnings, I would like to add my view on the shortcomings of the warnings system. I personally think the system is far too lenient. I'm getting sick of idiots gloating on chat about their long history of warnings and how nothing is ever going to happen unless they get 6 points or more within a 6 month period. There are some people who have had so many warnings, and continue to make the game less pleasant for others, particularly when they are aggressive and have warnings for offences like harassment. It seems to me that the problem lies with the fact that only warnings in the last 6 months are counted, regardless of whether somebody actually stopped offending or not. As I understand it, if I got a warning in Jan, another in April, and a 3rd in July, I would technically have only 2 because the Jan one is more than 6 months old. This despite the fact that I would never have gone for more than 3-4 months without getting one. While I agree with people being able to wipe the slate clean after a certain amount of time, I think they should have to go 6 month without getting any further warnings at all before the older warnings get wiped. In the case above, all the warnings would remain because I would never have gone for 6 months without getting one. That might improve the situation over the current one where people can afford to re-offend again as soon as one of their warnings becomes 6 months old. Assuming I understood it correctly. I also don't think the slate should be wiped clean when people are punishe if that happens, if somebody gets 6 points and gets punishment they should not be allowed to start going out and re-offending again immeditately and build up another 6 points. The current points should remain until they have gone 6 months without a warning and if they offend again within 6 months they should get a more severe punishment than the previous one. Perhaps an immort could explain whether this already happens.

From: Sandra Wednesday, March 31, 09:16PM

Help violations explains it. While in the past we were lenient with the warnings system, we're not any longer. Once someone reaches 6 points and gets punished, each warning after that gets a punishment along with it, most likely increasing over the previous one depending on the circumstances.

From: Brede Thursday, April 01, 12:41AM

Well its about time, I just hope that the staff can stick to it. I'm pretty sick about hearing about people with 5, 6, 7, 8, etc warnings and not being zapped over it. I'd just like to see some consistancy. Brede

From: Woe Thursday, April 01, 07:24AM

I am glad to hear it, but that leaves me feeling a bit confused about certain people who seem to have had multiple warnings forever (across several alts) and continue to get more and more, and yet are still around. When you hear of somebody having 8 warnings (because they show off about it on chat), and then they get another, and then they get archive locked, and return and get another, then get deleted, then archive locked again, then get another, and it seems to go on and on...I find it a bit disheartening. I suppose it is none of my business, yet in a way I feel it is because I have friends suffering from the behaviour of people like this. Seeing people who have no respect for the rules and for the rights of others going on and on like this, and continuing to have fun at the expense of others, behaving like jerks (including in pkill) and reducing the fun of the game for people who do respect both formal rules and etiquette, starts to cause a loss of confidence in the rules and their enforcement. People who have multiple warnings also tend to behave obnoxiously in ways that are not technically illegal. Of course I realise that site-ban is not a good option when others play at the site, and I'd hate to be site-banned because of somebody else. But if somebody is due for site-ban, surely they should at least have ALL their characters deleted and be banned from ever having a clanned character (as I believe there is a precedent for this). How could anybody complain about that if they were due for site-ban anyway?

From: LadyAce Friday, April 02, 09:10AM

For what it's worth, percentagewise, we do not hand out very many harassment warnings. We don't get all that many reports, and we investigate all of them, but in general this kind of warning is simply not very common. People who talk about having 6 or 8 warnings are by and large talking about language warnings. With the new warning system, we should be able to deal with all kinds of warnings, of all descriptions, in a more efficient and fair manner. Your suggestions are welcome! -LA


1999 Topic Index