Jump to content

Ban appeal system


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Kupokun said:

RMT is straight up banned, end of story. 
Better safe then sorry because %90 of them will make a ban appeal so they can review it further regardless.
 

Quoting this once again. Ban appeal is useless and is not to prove u are inocent like Desu said above. For what I saw today is not straight up banneable or at least not for all players. 

Link to comment

As for the main subject, the user was not left unbanned because of some friendship, nepotism, pity, or any other reason.

 

To better understand, here is some context. We have had an internal amnesty policy where users can voluntarily admit to attempting to or successfully purchasing items via RMT. If a user reports their purchase in a reasonable time frame, before it is noticed, we will simply confiscate the item and let them off with a warning. Sellers do not get any leniency.

 

As a slight extension to this policy, this also extends to RMT scammers. If you attempt to buy an item via RMT never receive the item, you can report it to us and the scammer will still be punished. Extending this policy this way prevents an abusable situation where a user is able to scam other users with impunity. If we have an environment where we ban the victim, then nobody will ever come out to report the scam.

 

As you may have guessed by now, the user in question attempted to make an RMT purchase an item and was scammed. They never received the item they attempted to purchase. Admittedly we did not do the best at explaining this reasoning to the user.

 

This is (as far as I know) the first time we've applied this specific policy to a scam, but we've often applied it users who learn the rules after committing RMT. This was not a decision made at the behest of a single SGM, but something that was discussed.

Link to comment

from being an always bannable RMT to "defending the buyer" because they were scammed.

Honestly, I don't see any logic in this, if a person does RMT, whatever it is, it must be banned by the rules.

 

is as an example:
Hello Mr. SGM, I have been scammed a kyu hat that I wanted to buy for 5000 dollars, can you ban this person as a scammer? thanks.

 

I honestly do not enter my head this...

Link to comment

Honestly, even though I play within the rules, being randomly perma-banned is one of my biggest fears. From the players perspective, its very terrifying to know that we might get banned at any time, and never really know why, what "proof" there was, or even what players are expected to appeal on (if innocent) to get unbanned - since its already been stated in this tread that ban appeals aren't to prove innocence (what exactly are they for then??).

 

I've heard literally countless stories of people getting banned (who claimed to be innocent) who just gave up hope and quit forever, either because their questions were being ignored,  because they don't even know exactly what they did wrong, or sometimes just because of a language barrier. How does someone appeal against a ban if they don't even know what exactly they're being accused of? Of course, nearly everyone who breaks the rules will claim innocence to try to get their account back, so every ban appeal story has to be taken with a HUGE grain of salt.

I'm sure staff here are plenty professional, but I have seen the exact same copy/pasted response from the same SGM saying "You ban appeal has been denied. You broke the rules. You're welcome to start a new character but please do not submit another appeal" for 5+ different players' appeals. It does come off as if the appeal is not even being read, despite that not being the case. I work in an industry where we have to respond to "tickets" aka appeals/reports and I know that (at least in my industry) a copy/pasted response is not a healthy sign, and usually means the employees are overwhelmed, and are trying to just get the numbers down by any means possible. From a player's perspective, this is a little concerning.

 

Although I see it from the staff's perspective regarding why they can't disclose the evidence they have, or how they caught the player (it would teach players how they catch rule breakers, and sub-sequentially how to abuse their methods), the flip side of that is an entire semi-informed player base who is constantly worried/uneasy about getting banned by accident or from simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time - like me. For example, an innocent player who trades with someone who just finished RMT'ing (which is a ban as soon as the actual RMT player gets banned).

 

I know that nearly every banned player has a chip on their shoulder, either justified or not. Even taking that into account, its not very comforting as a normal, rule abiding player to hear about the system that's currently in place. I've never had to use a ban appeal (and hopefully I never have to), so I could be completely wrong, but to me it seem like it could use a few minor tweaks.

 

Some suggestions would potentially be:

-More staff working on ban appeals, so they can spend more time reviewing and communicating on each case individually.

-A little more communication on each case, so when staff is justified in denying a case, the banned player isn't tempted to complain so much to the current player-base, feigning innocence.

 

Either of these could potentially make all the difference, and all parties could be more satisfied with the current processes. Maybe PokeMMO can't accomidate these suggestions for one reason or another, but I still think the suggestions should be made.
 

Spoiler

PS: Please do NOT be a trash player who submits a ban appeal if you KNOW that you're guilty.That is not the point of my post AT ALL.

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Desu said:

If you attempt to buy an item via RMT never receive the item, you can report it to us and the scammer will still be punished.

So the player would have to actively taken screenshots/record themselves breaking the rules as essentially blackmail to the other person not to scam them?

 

Also, this sounds like it could be abused.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Desu said:

As for the main subject, the user was not left unbanned because of some friendship, nepotism, pity, or any other reason.

 

To better understand, here is some context. We have had an internal amnesty policy where users can voluntarily admit to attempting to or successfully purchasing items via RMT. If a user reports their purchase in a reasonable time frame, before it is noticed, we will simply confiscate the item and let them off with a warning. Sellers do not get any leniency.

 

I want to say thank you for your reply and the explanation of all this situation. This is going to be my answer to this situation.

 

I wanna see the rule talking about "amnesty policy" when we talk about RMT 'cause I don't find it in any part of the rules and If it's secret well I think is not a good way to avoid this horrible episode we are facing right now. Talking about the context, I'm thinking about sharing the proofs inside this topic ' due to the decision of making this public. They surely need the context but I prefer to wait for your permission to do that 'cause I don't wanna make big drama here because is not the place for that and thats Why I suggest to discuss this on PM'S

27 minutes ago, Desu said:

As a slight extension to this policy, this also extends to RMT scammers. If you attempt to buy an item via RMT never receive the item, you can report it to us and the scammer will still be punished. Extending this policy this way prevents an abusable situation where a user is able to scam other users with impunity. If we have an environment where we ban the victim, then nobody will ever come out to report the scam.

So in a resume, you are punishing scammers who get the money but You are not punishing the players who seek that deal and make the RMT and give the money. Even IF HE DIDN'T RECEIVE THE ITEM HE ASKED FOR IT AFTER THE TRY OF GETTING IT AND HE REPORTED THE RMT BECAUSE HE NEVER RECEIVED THE ITEM. This is pretty clear If he received the item, He will never report the scam but due to He was scammed so that's why he admitted he asked for the item. ELECTRIC STORM. I agree to make the punishment to the scammer but the punishment against someone who searches for RMT and paid for it must be happening too. He is not a victim and that's something you are not understanding. HE SEARCHES FOR RMT DEAL. There is no victim there. If you make that kind of deal You take the risk of being scammed. We are not talking about someone who trade an item for pokeyens and was scammed. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RMT WHICH IS ILLEGAL IN THE GAME AND THE PLAYER PAID FOR IT IF HE WAS SCAMMED DOESN'T MATTER CAUSE HE ACCEPT THAT DEAL HE IS NOT A VICTIM. You have a lot of staff who suppose to do that kind of investigations and decide if they deserve or not a ban without mattering If there is a victim of scam or not. Why do you give a special treat to this situation?

 

31 minutes ago, Desu said:

As you may have guessed by now, the user in question attempted to make an RMT purchase an item and was scammed. They never received the item they attempted to purchase. Admittedly we did not do the best at explaining this reasoning to the user.

Is not an attempt of RMT, Is a clear RMT deal. Doesn't matter the angle you see this. The payment for an electric storm was there and he was scammed. Part of the risk to do that and I don't know If you the staff have an advertisement about that but I think you have that just like the advertisement about give pokemon to other people or pokeyens. 

 

34 minutes ago, Desu said:

This is (as far as I know) the first time we've applied this specific policy to a scam, but we've often applied it users who learn the rules after committing RMT. This was not a decision made at the behest of a single SGM, but something that was discussed.

This is the first time too where SGM forgives an RMT case and they don't even force the player to do a Ban appeal like the rest of the community. This is the first time The community hears about giving this kind of privilege to a player who clearly admits the RMT and reports that cause he was scammed after paying for that not cause he felt guilty about doing that. 

 

So You are breaking your own rules to just save the credibility of an SGM because that's What I saw. You are running this "amnesty policy" to save some kind of credibility which is already broken for sure. You are admitting that staff allowed an RMT case and not only that, You banned many people for the same situation  and now you come with this explanation. This is pretty clear I think and is clear what is happening here for sure too.

 

I know you guys are trying to do the best but this is unfair for all the other people who were already banned for RMT unfair or not the ban. 

 

You already admit that RMT IS OK IF YOU ARE SCAMMED so You can pay for it and If you are scammed You are a victim and will receive no punishment even If you search for that  deal and paid for that. 

 

I will wait again for your reply. I suggest again to continue with this in PM's to avoid any kind of extra drama. Up to you guys.

 

Greetings and have an excellent night / morning.

Link to comment

  

On 12/10/2020 at 6:10 AM, SiWall said:

#FreeGaucho

This guy was banned for selling gold on Facebook. So, no.

 

19 hours ago, DrakeHope said:

#FREESUPERMAN #BadSGMOut!!

This guy was banned for selling gold to a reseller. So, no.

 

----

 

16 hours ago, awkways said:

Some suggestions would potentially be:

-More staff working on ban appeals, so they can spend more time reviewing and communicating on each case individually.

-A little more communication on each case, so when staff is justified in denying a case, the banned player isn't tempted to complain so much to the current player-base, feigning innocence.

You see copy/paste responses because our rejection rate for RMT cases is well over 95% and banwaves often encompass thousands of accounts. The only real exceptions are when the GM typos something. Because, as you mentioned:

 

16 hours ago, awkways said:

PS: Please do NOT be a trash player who submits a ban appeal if you KNOW that you're guilty.That is not the point of my post AT ALL.

Most players do exactly that. It's not worth the SGMs' time to link trade logs at every guilty party.

 

----

 

15 hours ago, Xigbar said:

I wanna see the rule talking about "amnesty policy" when we talk about RMT 'cause I don't find it in any part of the rules and If it's secret well I think is not a good way to avoid this horrible episode we are facing right now.

GM policies for how to handle rulebreakers are not rules. We do not list publicly how we handle offenses. Some cases require more nuance than a policy description can provide.

 

Quote

Talking about the context, I'm thinking about sharing the proofs inside this topic ' due to the decision of making this public. They surely need the context but I prefer to wait for your permission to do that 'cause I don't wanna make big drama here because is not the place for that and thats Why I suggest to discuss this on PM'S

Press X to doubt

 

Quote

So in a resume, you are punishing scammers who get the money but You are not punishing the players who seek that deal and make the RMT and give the money. Even IF HE DIDN'T RECEIVE THE ITEM HE ASKED FOR IT AFTER THE TRY OF GETTING IT AND HE REPORTED THE RMT BECAUSE HE NEVER RECEIVED THE ITEM. This is pretty clear If he received the item, He will never report the scam but due to He was scammed so that's why he admitted he asked for the item. ELECTRIC STORM. I agree to make the punishment to the scammer but the punishment against someone who searches for RMT and paid for it must be happening too. He is not a victim and that's something you are not understanding. HE SEARCHES FOR RMT DEAL. There is no victim there. If you make that kind of deal You take the risk of being scammed. We are not talking about someone who trade an item for pokeyens and was scammed. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RMT WHICH IS ILLEGAL IN THE GAME AND THE PLAYER PAID FOR IT IF HE WAS SCAMMED DOESN'T MATTER CAUSE HE ACCEPT THAT DEAL HE IS NOT A VICTIM. You have a lot of staff who suppose to do that kind of investigations and decide if they deserve or not a ban without mattering If there is a victim of scam or not. Why do you give a special treat to this situation?

It is exceedingly rare that someone comes to us and says "Hey, I've broken the rules. I didn't get anything out of it (and I can prove it), and he broke the rules too." Whether or not we want to grant someone an out depends on the consensus of the SGMs. Nobody takes action independently. Sometimes, they will say that the person has lost enough to make them learn their lesson, as-in this case, and they will issue a verbal warning (and a permanent mark against their account for misbehavior).

 

We do not take a hardline approach in odd cases like this because it's not beneficial for the game to do so. We'd rather someone flip on their seller than no action be taken because "everyone knows that if you talk to the GMs you get banned."

 

Quote

This is the first time too where SGM forgives an RMT case and they don't even force the player to do a Ban appeal like the rest of the community. This is the first time The community hears about giving this kind of privilege to a player who clearly admits the RMT and reports that cause he was scammed after paying for that not cause he felt guilty about doing that.

This is the first time you have heard about it, but it's not the first time we've ever extended amnesty to people breaking the rules.

 

Quote

I know you guys are trying to do the best but this is unfair for all the other people who were already banned for RMT unfair or not the ban.

I have a sneaking suspicion you're just looking to argue over someone who was banned for gold buying/selling who was caught after the fact. These are not equivalent offenses.

 

Quote

I will wait again for your reply. I suggest again to continue with this in PM's to avoid any kind of extra drama. Up to you guys.

If you'd like to continue to rant in PMs you may, but the threat of "more drama" is flaccid. We do not believe the SGMs misbehaved in this case and don't see any reason to intervene.

Edited by Kyu
Link to comment
  • Kyu locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.