Appealing Admin Records?

[Harbinger]

37 minutes ago, TheSaintEaon said:

 

While they did not expressly state that, it is implied by their stance. 

If having a record available shows growth, then by that same logic, not having a record shows no growth. I might be wrong in that assumption and if I am, he's free to clarify and I'm happy to clarify my thoughts as well ^.^ 

My thoughts are actually similar to what you posted, with the aside of, the community doesn't get to tell a player what they do and do not accept based upon their OOC records. OOC records at the most should be restricted to Admins for the purposes of decision making or agencies like the PD who do PF Licensing, specifically in regards to said license. 

A player or player run organisation that uses OOC Reports or A-Jails to determine the validity of a roleplayer is metagaming by definition. The fact that they are allowed to still be on the server means they are by definition a valid player, and so using OOC records against them is actually to be in violation yourself. 

Which ultimately brings us back around to the point I was trying to make earlier, what is the point in having a record if it can be so old that its functionally irrelevant? Personally I could see like two ways to resolve this: First no player or player run agency can ask to see your OOC Records. They are sealed and that is between the player and the Administration. The second is that records after a certain amount of time if no further infractions are committed, then the infractions should be removed. 

I think either is acceptable. 

 

 

It was indeed meant in a positive way meaning it shows the growth of people in a positive manner. It will always be relevant if you take someone abusing their PF license and they did so three years ago, and then suddenly three years later they decide to do it again it shows that they have not grown as a person, and they have clearly not learned of their past mistakes.

 

A lot of the team someone's admin record is not a good representation of their roleplay abilities but more of their personality and what they are. You can learn a lot from someone's admin record and what they can bring to your faction. But holding someone's two year old a-jail for DMing against them and not allowing someone to join your faction because of that is ridiculous. And I do know there are plenty of factions that would deny someone for having a very old punishment in your record. These factions are generally ''elitists'' and unpleasant to be a part of in the first place, so you're not missing out on not being able to join those.

 

But like I said earlier it just shows you the growth as a person and what kind of a personality they have or used to have. Which is quite important.

[hotcheetos]

1 hour ago, Harbinger said:

It kinda shows the growth of you as a person or roleplayer, so it's still relevant even after three years or so.

Hmm, I agree with this 😁

[lambchops]

Administrative records are mainly kept as a tool that can show us as staff members whether you grow from past mistakes or not while also allowing us to spot possible behavioral patterns. Having your record wiped just so you can do something you were previously banned over, and thus catching an admin jail instead of a ban, seems really odd.

 

I am sure this would not even be suggested if people just played by the norm, stop obsessing over past punishment and strive to improve.

[SaintBatemanofWallStreet]

37 minutes ago, TheSaintEaon said:

Maybe. I think though that if someone is a known troublemaker, metagamer, and DMer, that's going to be on their record for awhile. Do you think that someone that does an excessive amount of these things is going to be able to be active for 12 to 18 months and not continually rack up more reports? Under my idea, you have to have No new reports in order to get your slate wiped clean and any new report starts the timer for all of the existing reports all over again. Meaning any serial offenders are still going to have records accessible. 

I think the trend of behavior is how you must judge it. And if they continually rack up offenses, they'll be banned permanently eventually. However, on this server a permaban is almost never permanent. People get permabanned and are back 2-4 months later. That's ample time for that memory to be forgotten by members of the community and that's why I think it should stick. So you know what that person is capable of and was actually punished for up to a permaban for their behavior. I'm not saying that it has to be accessible by every person on the server. And I don't think it should be. But as far as faction based? Sure, I don't see an issue with anyone at a faction level wanting your admin history.
 

41 minutes ago, TheSaintEaon said:

OOC Ejections from factions based on OOC Ruling in any case excluding factions such as the PD are not acceptable unless the infraction was committed against the faction that person is in. I don't know if guild banks are like a thing here, but for example: If someone stole from the faction's bank and asset transfered it over to an alt. That faction should be allowed to remove that dick and he deserves the multiple A-jails or temp bans he gets. 

They are. Because like I said before, rule breaks are not in character. They're out of character. And at some point, and faction leaders may or may not agree, the health of their faction overall far supersedes someone's hurt feelings about not being apart of it anymore. Because if they can't function as a member of the server at the base level without breaking a ton of rules, would you as a faction leader want them representing your faction as a whole? Because it only takes one bad experience with one bad member to paint your faction as bad. If you curtail this behavior however by saying "Hey, no. And here's why. Look at your admin record." literally everyone wins. The community wins by not giving these players an avenue to keep up this behavior, or at least restricts it. Factions overall improve because of a higher standard of player allowed. And the people who are getting denied access to these factions are left with the choice. Get better. Or leave. Either way, everyone wins as a whole.

 

49 minutes ago, TheSaintEaon said:

However if a dude is RPing a cop who's been down on his luck or awhile and then in RP he one day snaps and shoots a repeat offender, and that later gets voided by an admin due to poor portrayal or something, I don't think that's a valid reason to remove someone from a faction. IC actions that result in OOC consequences should not affect IC. 

Sure, and it's a case by case basis. But if it's not that situation and down on his luck cop, drove into the middle of whatever gang neighborhood and got out with his rifle and just started blasting everyone in sight? Punish him. Has been done before. Person got banned for pulling up to a bar, exiting with his rifle and going and shooting the place up. Bar was full of criminals and he was IC and OOC tired of whatever was happening with them. But we keep this around so the person can explain it. If we erase this from their record, then they've basically been absolved of it. And that's kind of a big deal.

 

53 minutes ago, TheSaintEaon said:

OOC Kicks are legitimately metagaming and if you have Generic Gangbanger #6 hanging around your faction trying to join it and you think he's not a good fit, CK him. I don't think there's a single illegal faction on the board that doesn't include the right to CK people who fuck up ICly. If he's fucking up OOCly, report him to the admins, they'll probably be happy to remove another troll. 

OOC kicks for IC reasoning is metagaming. However, denial and kicking someone for being a server nuisance is not. And you can actually just CK them from the gang and not let them make a new character for it. But this goes back to what I was saying previously. So many factions are full of "buddies" that it doesn't happen that way. And a permaban is almost never permanent.

[Mecovy]

Alright so having waited till more people comment, What I'm seeing is that some people want to get them removed in favour for telling people down the line if confronted again, at least that's what I think. Society is kinda built on wolves and doves. Some will lie, whilst other's won't. And it feels weird to agree with them; but Smilesville is kinda right. It doesn't matter.

 

There's a bit of a weird logic here as well, or at least how I'm understanding it. If staff report, and it turns out to be unfair punishment then it gets removed (A few punishments I've issued in the past have been overturned and I agreed with it.) But for those who don't want to go the report route and just want it removed; you're in essence agreeing that you've done something worthy of it?

 

Ultimately the current system of appealing via staff report is useful, and here's why;

Say admin A decides to ban someone for lying despite evidence pointing to the fact the players telling the truth. Now this scenario can go three routes.

1). The player decides to do nothing, and wait it out. Fair enough, but like with courts etc irl, you always have the right to appeal (staff report)

2). The player doesn't file a staff report, but fills out a theoretical expungement. Some may prefer this option, and I understand it. But like in this situation, the admin was wrong. This option doesn't address that.

3). The player files a staff report, it can be reversed and the admin is called up on their punishments and asked to explain/justify it with all the evidence they used. If they're in the wrong, they get dealt with (either explanation to what they've done wrong and guidance on being fair or removal (Staff are held to an exceptionally high standard). And if it turns out the decision was correct, then it'd be upheld and the punishment stays. The staff report is just logically the better decision overall honestly.

 

Lastly I feel I should mention this, your admin record is exclusive to you. Yes factions will sometimes ask for it on apps etc, but 95% of the time you can dm it to them directly instead of making it public. What's on there won't matter if its really true that you've improved from when the punishment was issued. If you haven't improved from that stage? Well it serves as a useful reminder that certain types of behaviours should be monitored.

 

Obviously, this is just my personal opinion and doesn't represent anything more than that.

Edited May 25, 2021 by Mecovy

[hotcheetos]

10 minutes ago, lambchops said:

Administrative records are mainly kept as a tool that can show us as staff members whether you grow from past mistakes or not while also allowing us to spot possible behavioral patterns. Having your record wiped just so you can do something you were previously banned over, and thus catching an admin jail instead of a ban, seems really odd.

 

I am sure this would not even be suggested if people just played by the norm, stop obsessing over past punishment and strive to improve.

+1

[hotcheetos]

.

Edited May 25, 2021 by hotcheetos

[Spartan]

27 minutes ago, lambchops said:

Administrative records are mainly kept as a tool that can show us as staff members whether you grow from past mistakes or not while also allowing us to spot possible behavioral patterns. Having your record wiped just so you can do something you were previously banned over, and thus catching an admin jail instead of a ban, seems really odd.

 

I am sure this would not even be suggested if people just played by the norm, stop obsessing over past punishment and strive to improve.

What if an admin keeps a grudge against someone just because of their record? 
For example lets say I get banned today for X reason and I am able to appeal that ban in 2 to 3 months. I appeal it and eventually I get unbanned, then after a while I get myself into an admin situation and just for this example lets say I am 100% right on this. Will the admin just ignore my word even if I am right just because I had a ban sometime ago? or will he just try to look just for the facts and stay unbiased? What do you think?

[lambchops]

14 minutes ago, PaNYT said:

What if an admin keeps a grudge against someone just because of their record? 
For example lets say I get banned today for X reason and I am able to appeal that ban in 2 to 3 months. I appeal it and eventually I get unbanned, then after a while I get myself into an admin situation and just for this example lets say I am 100% right on this. Will the admin just ignore my word even if I am right just because I had a ban sometime ago? or will he just try to look just for the facts and stay unbiased? What do you think?

The norm is to remain unbiased and not regard one party as lesser due to their administrative record, although said record could on the flip side surely act as an indicator of pattern behavior. If you believe you've been blatantly discriminated against or are the victim of administrative bias you should try a staff report though.

[Dom.]

I have a single warning on my record for something I did a year ago that I still feel, to this day, was given to me for an absolutely bullshit and biased reason. I want to get it removed.

Edited May 26, 2021 by Dom.