Re: What's your opinion on laws and punishments?
Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 6:43 pm
In my opinion, laws are way too strict only because you guys fail to understand how offenses are situational. I got a six hour mute for mentioning the male reproductive system as a joke a long time ago, yet flaming over yell is six hours as well? I don't understand how someone yelling something over yell to intentionally hurt someone else's feelings can get you six hours yet someone who is making a joke that is no where near severe can get a six hour mute just because the moderator doesn't see it as fit.
There should be no "minimum" offense, if it's severe you punish them severely. If it's minimal and you need to mute them for thirty minutes just to handle the situation, then mute them for thirty minutes. If these people are repeated offenders, you increase the punishments. But if someone makes a joke and gets six hours, how is it fair to punish someone for flaming for six hours as well? There should be Moderator guidelines as to how severe a punishment should be.
As for the repeated offenders, those are the people who should be punished more. Repeated offenders that cause severe issues are the ones we should worry about. Instead of cracking down on people who just fool around mildly every once in a while, I would focus on what the people who are up to no good are doing.
As for the appeals, everything is situational. I can't tell you that every offence should be appealable because what if someone did something so severe I personally don't see them fit to play PkHonor anymore? I can't generalize everyone's crimes into one guideline so I think that it'd be safe to say SOME offences shouldn't be appealable in case someone has done something so severe it's unforgivable and should not be let back in.
As for the supers, you do whatever you have to do. You don't become a super by brown nosing Mike. You get stuff done. Maurits for example, I personally see him unbanning people instantly and giving them a strong warning. If Maurits decided to accept his appeal and personally go through the troubles of unbanning him, who am I to go against his call? How much experience has Maurits had against mine? I understand there's the possible mistake here and there and that some people just go mad and abuse their power but like I said earlier, you don't become a super by doing nothing. Supers are trusted people who have been personally selected to be trusted with such a power in this game. I wouldn't dismiss their call unless it was at an extreme.
Those are my two cents, do with them as you wish.
There should be no "minimum" offense, if it's severe you punish them severely. If it's minimal and you need to mute them for thirty minutes just to handle the situation, then mute them for thirty minutes. If these people are repeated offenders, you increase the punishments. But if someone makes a joke and gets six hours, how is it fair to punish someone for flaming for six hours as well? There should be Moderator guidelines as to how severe a punishment should be.
As for the repeated offenders, those are the people who should be punished more. Repeated offenders that cause severe issues are the ones we should worry about. Instead of cracking down on people who just fool around mildly every once in a while, I would focus on what the people who are up to no good are doing.
As for the appeals, everything is situational. I can't tell you that every offence should be appealable because what if someone did something so severe I personally don't see them fit to play PkHonor anymore? I can't generalize everyone's crimes into one guideline so I think that it'd be safe to say SOME offences shouldn't be appealable in case someone has done something so severe it's unforgivable and should not be let back in.
As for the supers, you do whatever you have to do. You don't become a super by brown nosing Mike. You get stuff done. Maurits for example, I personally see him unbanning people instantly and giving them a strong warning. If Maurits decided to accept his appeal and personally go through the troubles of unbanning him, who am I to go against his call? How much experience has Maurits had against mine? I understand there's the possible mistake here and there and that some people just go mad and abuse their power but like I said earlier, you don't become a super by doing nothing. Supers are trusted people who have been personally selected to be trusted with such a power in this game. I wouldn't dismiss their call unless it was at an extreme.
Those are my two cents, do with them as you wish.
