[applicationformfield_7] - [applicationformfield_6]

Brutarii · August 21, 2018

Division
Team Fortress 2
Offenders In-Game Name
Ozmeister/Eugene
Offender's Identity
STEAM_0:0:155731364
Ban Type
Server Ban
Explanation and Evidence

they said the n word but they should know the rules because they're a regular

Elcark · August 21, 2018

So Eugene did say it once as shown (https://xenogamers.com/rank/player_histories/chat/94550), and that's it. He has never been punished in anyway for slurs before so jumping to a ban is not something that should be acceptable. The way I see it should be, and similar situations in the past have been, handled is that he should be contacted directly by staff in some manner and given a clear cut warning about it. Then the next time he breaks the rule he should receive a slightly more severe punishment then normal, but since it would still be his first punishment for slurs it should just be a longer mute at most. That is assuming he hasn't been warned by a staff member before for this in which case he should just receive the mute. This would all be much less convoluted had this just been done as a calladmin but not much can be done about that now.

Then there is Brian at the end there. This report isn't directed at him at all, yet he did the much more condemning offense. Looking at his history (https://bans.xenogamers.com/index.php?p=banlist&advSearch=STEAM_0:1:242346823&advType=s)he has been banned before for slurs, though it was tied in with micspam and leaving to avoid punishment. Being itself a single incident that involved a different kind of issue and from some time ago (about 8 months) it's not exactly a good punishment to bridge from, but unlike Eugene he still has had punishment for this before and should probably receive more then just a warning (more so considering the manner in which it was done). At that, I'd say a day mute would be adequate for the situation here.

I also really like home you omitted your own comment relating to Brian from the screenshots, but had you omitted brains entire segment I, and probably anyone else, wouldn't have even noticed what he did.

-1 ban Eugene, warn him at most

+1 punish Brian, day mute

Edited August 21, 2018 by Elcark (see edit history)

Kypari · August 21, 2018

6 hours ago, Elcark said:

Then there is Brian at the end there. This report isn't directed at him at all, yet he did the much more condemning offense. Looking at his history (https://bans.xenogamers.com/index.php?p=banlist&advSearch=STEAM_0:1:242346823&advType=s)he has been banned before for slurs, though it was tied in with micspam and leaving to avoid punishment. Being itself a single incident that involved a different kind of issue and from some time ago (about 8 months) it's not exactly a good punishment to bridge from, but unlike Eugene he still has had punishment for this before and should probably receive more then just a warning (more so considering the manner in which it was done). At that, I'd say a day mute would be adequate for the situation here.

We have ban decay for a reason, and that is so that we can punish people appropriately depending on how long ago since their last ban. In this case, ban decay is not in effect, and since he has been banned for the exact same reason (minus the cherry on top micspam), it would certainly be a week ban. We also don't do extended mutes/gags for minor things like slurs, but rather for things like bad mics. I would not be as opposed to an extended mute had he not been banned before. Because of this and the lack of evidence and history for Eugene:

-1 For Eugene

+1 Week ban for Brian

Edited August 21, 2018 by Kypari (see edit history)

Elcark · August 21, 2018

3 minutes ago, Kypari said:

We have ban decay for a reason, and that is so that we can punish people appropriately depending on how long ago since their last ban. In this case, ban decay is not in effect, and since he has been banned for the exact same reason (minus the cherry on top micspam), it would certainly be a week ban. We also don't do extended mutes/gags for minor things like slurs, but rather for things like bad mics. I would not be as opposed to an extended mute had he not been banned before. Because of this and the lack of evidence and history for Eugene:

-1 For Eugene

+1 Week ban for Brian

For starters he was muted before the ban for screaming, so likelihood is that the slurs were more of the "cherry" of his behavior instead of being the core of it which was much more likely the micspam aspect. The fact that it was a ban for leaving to avoid punishment, meaning it would have merely been a kick instead of even an hour ban beforehand, emphasizes that this isn't such a simple case as him having been day banned for using slurs in the past and so we should extend off of it.

Extended gags as you describe them also don't apply to the same function for this situation. In the common reasoning (poor mics and similar offenses) they act in lieu of a kick, which by itself means that it is a direct second offense and the person had to be given a normal mute beforehand. That isn't the situation here since this is itself the initial mute, simply being longer due to the greater extent the offense was done (the borderline spam of it), but has nothing to do with the more recent fashion of a kick replacement.

The timeframe for ban decay is an entirely arbitrary number, just to give a more direct indicator for when bans should be considered nullified. Taking the concept to the letter is entirely unnecessary and prevents looking at the more detailed aspects of both situations. Looking at the old ban again, this is still not a direct situation of he had been banned for using slurs before and is being banned for them again, since if that had been the majority of the problem before he would have likely just been kicked or at most received an hour ban instead of a day long one, which happened due to extra issues to that situation that don't exist here. Eight months despite not being that golden safety net of twelve is still a very long time for not having a single other punishment. Ignoring these finer details between the two punishments is in my opinion being needlessly rigid and uptight and forgoing a response to the issues that is more appropriate in favor of a longer ban time that doesn't properly reflect the extent to which the user has broken rules.

Before this devolves any further from the actual matter at hand @kypari I will say I definitely see why you came to the conclusion you did for the punishment and respect it, even if I do feel it has too much of a "by the book" attitude to it. This was just to explain why I choose to forgo those concepts you mentioned that I was well aware of in favor of stating what I believe is a more fitting punishment for what has happened.

Caleb956 · August 21, 2018

12 minutes ago, Kypari said:

We have ban decay for a reason, and that is so that we can punish people appropriately depending on how long ago since their last ban. In this case, ban decay is not in effect, and since he has been banned for the exact same reason (minus the cherry on top micspam), it would certainly be a week ban. We also don't do extended mutes/gags for minor things like slurs, but rather for things like bad mics. I would not be as opposed to an extended mute had he not been banned before. Because of this and the lack of evidence and history for Eugene:

-1 For Eugene

+1 Week ban for Brian

-1 on Eugene

-1 on week ban for Brian, I'd rather do a day ban. I for one don't see any point of doing a week ban, considering he was banned for slurs and then LEAVING, which is why he got day banned in the first place.

Arnude · August 21, 2018

-1 for Eugene

13 minutes ago, Caleb956 said:

-1 on week ban for Brian, I'd rather do a day ban.

+1 on day ban for Brian

Kypari · August 21, 2018

18 minutes ago, Caleb956 said:

-1 on Eugene

-1 on week ban for Brian, I'd rather do a day ban. I for one don't see any point of doing a week ban, considering he was banned for slurs and then LEAVING, which is why he got day banned in the first place.

I've been over this again and again and again and again

He got banned for slurs and leaving, not he got banned for slurs and then LEAVING. That would make it a week ban since he was banned for slurs in the past. I'm not arguing with you again because it's pretty clear you are adamant on this, but it's been a while since I disagreed so much.

24 minutes ago, Elcark said:

The timeframe for ban decay is an entirely arbitrary number, just to give a more direct indicator for when bans should be considered nullified

Ban decay is a year, it's in the handbook now