Banning Bad, Actually?
-
People offer public games because sometimes you get some really cool randos that turn out to be awesome. The tradeoff is that you may have to be firm with some of the bad randos.
I’ve seen folk get kindly shown the door during the CG process, so that is indeed a thing that can work, if the process is long enough for them to display their overall… vibes in public, I guess.
-
@Ominous said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
For those who are on the side of ban early and ban often, might I suggest running private, whitelist server for just your friends? Or maybe have a rigorous review process requiring an interview between staff and an applicant before they can CG?
respectfully, no. The amount of time it would take to “rigorously review” applicants sounds like work, and there are plenty of good people out there that want to play games. If there’s trash in the pile, I’ll just throw it out. But I am upfront about my stance and no one has to play with me if they don’t like it.
Besides, more often than not, the real trash that needs to get shown the door doesn’t show themselves as trash until they’ve wiggled into their skin well enough and ‘established’ themselves so you feel obligated to keep them around.
-
I can’t really get behind this concern that all the people will leave if their friend is banned. Maybe they will, but maybe that’s just the price you pay to save yourself months of headache.
Maybe their friends are also kind of problematic too.
Sometimes games are small. That’s okay. I have a similar banning policy on CC as Ada does. I am one GM. I work more than full time. I parent. Unfortunately, this means I’m not in the position to uplift people who aren’t able to play nicely with others.
But I want to tell stories, so I will.
-
@bear_necessities said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
@Yam we don’t ban enough. Coming off a recent game where I had vibes that another player was a notorious creeper and was doing Weird Shit that maybe wasn’t “bannable” per policy but definitely would’ve gotten them booted if it was my game, I think we should ban liberally and often.
I’m in full agreement that we don’t ban enough and definitely not enough warnings are given. Dealing with problem players takes up unnecessary energy and sanity from staff, energy that can be focused more on the other players that are having fun and enriching the story the game runner is putting together.
To me, playing on a game is a privilege, one that could and should be revoked if a player starts becoming a problem. It can be nice of the staff take extra time to sit that player down and explain to them that they are becoming an issue, but that is definitely optional and up to staff. If that player showed potential to be a fun RPer and being able to change for the better, certainly have that sit down, see how they react. If it seems like it will take too much stress and effort to try, just show them the door. There’s no right or wrong option there.
Some of the problem players seem to have an entitlement attitude, where they feel that they are the main character of the game and they deserve most of the attention, get to make the most decisions, get the most stuff, etc. Instead, players are just playing characters that are working together through their IC actions to build up the story that is being crafted, they are not there to have their character “win the game” at the expense of regardless of others. I know that in the past, before I had gotten a little older and had more MUing experience under my belt, I’ve look back at certain games, I realize, ‘Wow, I was an such an asshole.’
-
Anyone who is rude/a chore/a hassle/a drain/mean/a liar when dealing with staff (and let us leave room for grace and assume this is more than an isolated incident) is doing the same shit to everyone else.
If I’m on staff and it’s persistently unpleasant for me to deal with you, I’m not going to inflict you on anyone else either. “Then your game will just become the type of people you personally don’t find unpleasant.” I know, sounds pretty cool to me.
he/him
this machine kills fascists -
just stating for the record, that the two views ‘we don’t ban enough’ and ‘having a hair trigger and banning the first time someone comes off rude might be bad (in the sense that you might miss good people)’ aren’t fundamentally opposing views.
-
@Meg That’s valid. I don’t think anyone is actually all that hair trigger. Someone mentioned that there’s a lot the playerbase doesn’t actually see, as staff gets clues from the first login of the potential player, the application, the response to the application, etc. They build up a profile.
I’m not sure anyone is like… immediately banning people for brusquely asking questions. I can think of one player that began with a VERY bad impression on a game I helped run and I wanted them to be shown the door immediately. My fellow staffers told me to chill. This person stuck around for a bit and were more or less fine. Not a huge problem, not a huge asset. Just there. I don’t really think I would’ve missed them if they were nudged off. <<;
-
@Ominous said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
I just didn’t think Warma Sheen was being a shit in the text provided.
you’re in the minority there for a reason that I’m not going to spend pages and pages spelling out for you. how much of a shit we’d all probably disagree on but it’s generally just bad form to get upset (“made me feel a certain kind of way” does not translate to anxiety, it translates to frustration, as he explained himself. it’s just a passive aggressive way of saying “it pissed me off”) about tiny delays.
if you don’t get why that’s bothersome, you’re irritating more people than you’re probably aware of.
-
@Wizz said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
@Ominous said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
you’re in the minority there for a reason that I’m not going to spend pages and pages spelling out for you.
A rather sizable minority. It’s not like I am dying on a hill alone here, and a few of those taking similar stances as me are not members of the forum that people would normally tag as “unreasonable” or “a nuisance.”
“made me feel a certain kind of way” does not translate to anxiety, it translates to frustration, as he explained himself. it’s just a passive aggressive way of saying “it pissed me off”
I just reread all of Warma Sheen’s posts. I do not see them stating at any point that “made me feel a certain kind of way” was a statement of frustration. In fact, they state it was exactly what I read it as:
@Warma-Sheen said in Empire Discussion Thread:
And I felt weird about having a bunch of open jobs cause I thought maybe I was being too much of a burden, so I closed a bunch of them down.That seems like anxiety not frustration. Maybe I missed something. Can you point to me where Warma Sheen says that was a statement of frustration?
you’re irritating more people than you’re probably aware of.
Probably. I don’t read social situations very well and will ask out of the blue whether I am bothering someone just to make sure that hints aren’t being dropped that I am impervious to.
-
I’m not going to sit here and argue with you about it, like I just said. if you didn’t think he was in the wrong, okay.
-
It may be worth stating that this type of ban doesn’t have to be representative of who the player is as a person. As opposed to like… a sex pest ban or banning one of those people qualified to teach a masterclass on toxicity and manipulation. It’s okay for a place to just… not be right for you.
-
@Trashcan said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
and let us leave room for grace and assume this is more than an isolated incident)
That is the whole crux of the debate from my perspective. Various folks in the thread have made statements that indicate they don’t leave grace to ensure it’s more than an isolated incident. That even a single remark they deemed “rude” was enough to warrant a ban. I’m too tired to go and find the exact quotes, but it was pretty clear to me.
I just think that’s excessive. I also think it’s their right to do so on their games if they see fit.
-
@Faraday said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
I just think that’s excessive. I also think it’s their right to do so on their games if they see fit.
I think this may be another crux (can an argument have more than one crux?) of the argument. The difference between something being right and someone having the right – and in this instance whether there’s a difference at all.
-
@Faraday Do you recall ol’ OnceWas?
Minus one Michelin star for “unclear help file” work.
If a system is supposed to work a specific way, say it is supposed to work that way. If it isn’t, update a file or something, maybe?
This was basically enough to get OnceWas banned. This person was freshly new. This is the most hair trigger case I can think of. He was immediately shown the door, although he was sure to kinda’ buckle down on his stance. Mild, probably, but no one wanted to deal with it.
I’m unclear of what your threshold is, as I recall you were not very approving of this behavior.
-
@Yam said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
@Faraday Do you recall ol’ OnceWas?
Minus one Michelin star for “unclear help file” work.
If a system is supposed to work a specific way, say it is supposed to work that way. If it isn’t, update a file or something, maybe?
This was basically enough to get him banned. This person was freshly new. This is the most hair trigger case I can think of. He was immediately shown the door, although he was sure to kinda’ buckle down on his stance. Mild, probably, but no one wanted to deal with it.
I’m unclear of what your threshold is, as I recall you were not very approving of this behavior.
That is, of course, just half of the story since we do not know Ada’s accounts. We don’t know if Ada has had past interactions with the player before or someone else have already spoken to about this player before. From one telling, it appears to be just be an one-off encounter but it’s only one telling.
Unless I missed Ada’s explanation and not just one log that was provided stating that was it.
-
@Ominous said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
For those who are on the side of ban early and ban often, might I suggest running private, whitelist server for just your friends? Or maybe have a rigorous review process requiring an interview between staff and an applicant before they can CG?
idk i feel like my counterpoint for this is “if you don’t want to get banned early and often from a public game, might i suggest simply being on your best behavior?”
-
@Pavel said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
I think this may be another crux (can an argument have more than one crux?) of the argument. The difference between something being right and someone having the right – and in this instance whether there’s a difference at all.
Civil Law countries have the Prohibition of Chicane which holds that using your rights to inflict harm on another is illegal. So, people have to use their rights right for it to be alright, right?
-
Like I can ask someone to leave my table for any reason and you can choose not to play at my table for any reason. One of the reasons I don’t staff anymore is I spend all my grace for my job and I don’t have a lot to get shit on as a volunteer anymore. So now I don’t even HAVE a table.
-
@Roz said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
idk i feel like my counterpoint for this is “if you don’t want to get banned early and often from a public game, might i suggest simply being on your best behavior?”
I don’t think “best behavior” is a realistic standard for a recreational hobby. How about “decent behavior?”
-
@Yam said in Banning Bad, Actually?:
@Faraday Do you recall ol’ OnceWas?
Minus one Michelin star for “unclear help file” work.
If a system is supposed to work a specific way, say it is supposed to work that way. If it isn’t, update a file or something, maybe?
This was basically enough to get OnceWas banned. This person was freshly new. This is the most hair trigger case I can think of. He was immediately shown the door, although he was sure to kinda’ buckle down on his stance. Mild, probably, but no one wanted to deal with it.
I’m unclear of what your threshold is, as I recall you were not very approving of this behavior.
Wasn’t part of the banning also because they had shown creeper tendencies in the past?
