Lol, funny how some people give potatoes when they don't know how to reply to faultless logic

 

First of all, let's try to steer this clear of a flame war please. Minor discourse on a suggestion is great, but personal attacks are simply silly and unjustified, from both points of view.

Secondly, Expip, I feel the main flaw in your logic is the fact you assume the only people who argue about ban reasons are the people who are "that annyoing". If my best friend on ECC turns out to be an alt of Kcon, (or whatever ban reason), I might be angry, or think this player is innocent. I might decide to take this to the higher-ups, or voice my concerns in global. Instead of this player being forgotten after their ban, and the community moving on, this information sits on a database where it can be constantly be brought up again, and again, and again. That's simply not healthy for a community.

It's not even like you can't get this info. already. If you are super duper attached to your ECC friend, but he gets perma'd and you don't trust him to give you the ban reason, then you might not have made the best choice in friends to be honest. Infomation like this spreads easily, and putting on a permanent database will clear very few thing up yet cause a multitude of problems...

...that's why a permanent ban listing could never happen.

-1

 

If someone were to start an endless personal crusade against staff because one of their friends got banned, they would do that regardless of whether there's a public ban list. It's not like "oh, it's passed 5 days since I started the crusade and there's no written reference of the ban in the forum to remind me of it, therefore I will automatically forget this in 5 seconds and my memory will be wiped as if none of this ever happened". If someone is going to bring something back again and again because it became personal, they are going to do that regardless of a public record. So your point is empty.

You're completely missing the point: I'm not concerned that one of my friends is going to be banned, because I'm used to chose my friends wisely. I'm concerned about the risk of dealing with someone with a criminal record without knowing it. Let's make an example: say someone was permabanned (which means a rather big offense) because staff saw him directly (i.e: there's no complaint on the forum) and then appeals directly to andrew: there will be absolutely no written record of the offense on the forum and, not finding anything in the complaints+appeals archive, I would (wrongly) assume that that person has a clean criminal record. Yes, in principle I could ask staff, but in practice it would be ridiculous to ask staff every damn time you do business with someone, and therefore I'll be forced to take risks and on average I'll be less willing to trust people. And this is not healthy for the community.

You listed only one problem, not a multitude, and moreover it was moot, as explained.

 

Meh, I'm not really interested in having discourse with someone who is taking what I say out of context.
No one is starting a "personal crusade" against staff, but if there's a public listing a ban reasons it helps very few and hurts many.
That's all I'll really say, and if you disagree, I respect your opinion completely, I just don't feel this suggestion will benefit the server more than it will help it as others have stated before me.

 

What did I take out of context, exactly? I just replied to what seemed to be the meaning of your words. If you think I misinterpreted your words, why don't you just explain yourself better and clarify the misunderstanding, instead of playing the "out of context" card? Because all I see now is someone avoiding to enter into the merits of the counter-arguments, which is a pretty sad way to leave a discussion.

 

If I may say something here...

The argument concerning a public ban list is slowly going towards a rude discussion instead of the constructive dialogs that should happen here.

Both "faultless logic" and "out of context" are rather subjective opinions that are being used here to emphasize the own and invalidate the other opinion. Would it please be possible to have both sides agree to either return to a dialog of facts or accept each other's - and their own - standpoint as personal opinion?

 

He's chosen to take the higher road out of the two of you. Respect it, as he respected you. Why call him out when he did nothing wrong? Why? It's not his fault if ignorant [Mod Edit], such as yourself, come along and think that their opinion is the only one that can possibly be correct. In no way is he obligated to adhere to what you believe. He doesn't have to answer your demands and I respect him for ignoring your stupidity.