This acceptance of that concept would be left entirely up to andrew. That being said, Here is my opinion. I don't think we need to do this. Lets start with the following example:

Player does minor grief. Gets banned with 1 hour temp ban. Does this three times in a month. Tempban gets a little longer each time. You want us to put this kid, who is at best a serial minor griefer, at the same level as some of our worst we've ever had??

Scammers on the other hand, if we remove them completely, may never pay off their debts.

Further, some of the 'nuisances' are donating massive amount of cash to the server. I'm not saying that they should be let off, but a perma is a little excessive. I know dozens of people who would be perma'd by this system who are now law abiding citizens who donate to help the server. I honestly cannot see anything good happening out of this. Yes, we get rid of the problem, but, we make a bigger one.

Less players, less donations, more server issues.

 

I like this. If someone is banned so many times then they shouldn't get another chance. There are some people who have scammed many times and get appealed then scam again.

 

In my opinion, I would rather stray from the permabanned. However, I would like to see temp bans grow. First its an hour, than its like 12 hours, than its a few days. I think from then if they still haven't learned they should get a week+ of tempban. I honestly think increasing them by "a little" really won't solve anything. Serial offenders getting it easy is pretty much the only thing about the current system that annoys me.

 

flip side of that coin is that they don't incur additional debts that they never intend to pay off

 

I honestly feel that the players may want to keep a better eye on the ban appeals section. If someone just got unbanned for loan scamming, you shouldn't give them a loan... Its just logical.

 

Classic party line response
lets not punish the wrong doers, lets put the onus on the innocent to do more fact checking
I seriously hate that

 

Dork, I think you are missing my point. If we 'punish the wrong doers' the way you want them punished then the innocent never get their money back. If we don't punish the wrong doers the way you want them to be punished and instead ask the innocent to be a little more wary, then I'm the bad person for asking the innocent to do a little research.

Example: We put it on the intelligence of the masses irl to not fall from the email scams that are sent saying things like "Hey, I'm from asdasdasda and I need $5,000 to reach my mass amount of money. If you give me that, I'll give you a piece of it."

In real life we always tell people to formulate their own opinions. Do research and come to your own conclusions. There is absolutely no reason not to apply that here. If the loan is only a few grand then w/e. But if you are giving out a $300,000 loan, then do research.

I will be adding this to my builder guide btw. Because I really feel that when giving out a loan or taking one there are a lot of things that need to be considered. It is not a small decision to make. It is not something to be taken lightly by either side. The person taking the loan needs to ask themselves how much they can realistically make in a day. If the amount you want to loan is going to require you to make more than 15k a day to pay off and you can only make 10k, logically you shouldn't take out the loan. Quite like a person in real life needs to prove their daily income. Whenever I give out a loan I ask for their daily income. If its not in my 'ideal range' I refuse to do the loan. Then if they pass my questioning, my income issue and such. I then look into their background. I haven't been loan scammed in 6 months.

 

If you do a large transaction then it's only common sense to do a bit of background checking.

 

You aren't addressing the issue I raise.
I am raising the issue of the lack of a corresponding elevated response by the administers of the server to the individuals that violate the rules.

You (the collective you) keep shoveling the responsibility back on to the individual getting scammed and conveniently escaping the responsibility of elevating the level of punishment of the offending users.

Will that ever change?

 

You are assuming you know what 'the what I want them punished" is. I haven't stated that in this thread. I am merely stating that staff/rules should/could be changed to be more harsh on the offenders rather having the added burden of enforcement fall on the people getting scammed. YES people should be more careful, obviously. But all I am asking for is that the staff research better, more effective forms of punishment after the scam as well as the corresponding enhanced research to be done by users prior to getting scammed.

 

Dork, you and I have discussed this type of thing before, and we both know we can up empty on realistic punishments short of making things harsher in their current state.

 

Ok so are you saying I should give up and not participate in the discussion. Or that my opinion isn't needed.
I'm not sure which...

 

No no no lol. I'm saying that although I agree that something needs to be done. I'm however at a loss as to where to go that doesn't harm the victims further but still punishes the scammers... Its a delicate situation and quite frustrating.

 

and we just discussed this on Skype... so thoughts now box? lol

 

As someone who has 1 ban on file, and that ban being a complete misunderstanding, I have to say no to this.

A user first joins the server, joins a town, and buys a plot in that town. They see a house that looks empty like no one lives there and decides "I'm going to take some of the material from the house" then gets offline and comes back to a ban for grief. (This is a reasonable temp. ban but isn't a serious matter due to being new and not realizing it was wrong at first)

If someone gets banned for a small reason (say for not being able to pay off a loan in time, that they tried to pay off, but could only pay off 90% of it)That is one ban for breach of contract, even though the person isn't actually attempting to "cut" anyone down or scam.

then, they redo their town, and for whatever reason can't get on for a few nights, but didn't realize their town portal would kill anyone going through it if it is up in the air you get a 3rd ban on file then get perma-banned. (A misunderstanding that happened with me).

I know this situation seems unlikely, but with the fact that we have on average of around 600 different people playing the server daily, it is likely to happen atleast once, and it wouldn't be fair to the person it happens to.

For these reasons I have to say -1

 

Each of those situations has tremendously extenuating circumstances.
What about the individual that flagrantly violates the same rule (loan/donation scamming specifically) 3 consecutive times.
What about that circumstance?