Minecraft Name: @Hackney_Builder Suggestion: That when somebody is permabanned, they aren't allowed to appeal. Reason: This would draw a line between those who deserved their perma *cough* @Obblebobble *cough* and those who just deserve a simple ban with a long tempban on appeal. Any Other Information: This would be useful, as it would stop the "ooh, so-and-so was permabanned, I don't trust him" argument and get the trolls/scammers who deserve their ban off ECC. Link To This Plugin/Is this a custom addition?: No, just a rules change.
Seems like you have a grudge for oobledooble. This suggetion was made to call out another player. This is complete cringe
Most of what I think you might actually be experiencing is that people don't understand the difference between a permanent ban, a ban, and a temp ban. So they're just using the word "perma" because it's basically just become an ECC meme.
Unpopular opinion time! There shouldn't be bans that you cannot appeal. There can be people who it's decided no matter the change, they may not be able to outweigh the damages and so never get let back, but they should still be allowed to appeal. In many cases there's nothing to lose from giving people another shot after an extended period away, either they right their wrongs, or they fuck it up and away they go. EDIT: Apparently not that unpopular
Not like this has not been suggested, and cussed and discussed several times over the years I have been here. I do not foresee this ever being a reality on this server. Times change, things change, people change, and staff change. I still stand by the fact (and also has been suggested many times) that the term "perma" ban should be eliminated from the ECC vocabulary entirely as it has absolutely no meaning.
I feel that permabans should still be permanent, because the people who earn them deserve the ban. Less severe permabans shouldn't be made permabans, they should just be regular bans.
"The people who earn them deserve the ban" "Less severe permabans shouldn't be made permabans" You contradict yourself.
What I mean is that the severe examples of permabans (e.g. obble, istomp) should stay banned, but the people who didnt really deserve the perma shouldnt be banned.
Why? At this point you're just changing the semantics of it all and not implementing any real change.
I will be agreeing with this point. Their is no true problem with giving them a chance to appeal, if the community and staff still show disapproval for what they have done they can stay banned . Times change and time also heals all wounds so why not see if enough time has been given for some of them. Cases like obble (from what I hear) will be recorded in the history books and become a legend that people will relive and retell so the memory and scars will probably never see him come back. Except for cases like obble, I have yet to hear some other ones and only those who experienced it would know what happened and they may pass into obscurity as inactive people do. To rap it up the community changes as people come and go and crimes that committed in the past can be pardoned if the person has truly changed and people forgive them. People who didn't deserve the perma would't be banned in the first place like you stated. In the six months I have been here only 3 people got perma'ed and one appealed (As far as I know since things were kept to the shadow realms of privacy). It is kind of rare for people to get perma'ed and all of them had just reasons behind them (Not to sure about the one that appealed cus that story is all over the place).
Lol? I feel as though this has been made clear before. When someone gets permanently banned it is permanent, yet, until they appeal for their ban privately through Andrew to get back onto the server. I see no real point of this suggestion because... its pointless basically like... I'm not even sure how to put this, its been made clear in the past so their is no need for this. "Make permanent bans permanent" That whole statement makes no sense, Permanent means permanent and they are, for the time that the person serves them because they have no access to ECC at all unless they use an alt. I'll probably just put -1 on this due to the entire point that you pulled another users name out into this suggestion for everyone to see. Sorry.
