Forum:IRC: Ban policy improvement: Difference between revisions
(Created page with '{{Forumheader|The World that Never was}} <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with either your talk page template or four tildes ~~~~ --> He…') |
m (Text replacement - "[[Kingdom Hearts Wiki:" to "[[KHWiki:") |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Forumheader|The World that Never was}} | {{Forumheader|The Realm of Sleep|The World that Never was}} | ||
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with either your talk page template or four tildes ~~~~ --> | <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with either your talk page template or four tildes ~~~~ --> | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
<small>Please note that DTN said I should make this a topic. I'm not exactly sure how I should format this, but here you go.</small> 04:45, July 3, 2010 (UTC) --[[User:Sapharus|Sapharus]] | <small>Please note that DTN said I should make this a topic. I'm not exactly sure how I should format this, but here you go.</small> 04:45, July 3, 2010 (UTC) --[[User:Sapharus|Sapharus]] | ||
:I support this, it needs to be now that warnings are going to be reset every two weeks. Five warnings preceding a kick seems fine, but what about afterwards? Anything extra before immediately going into a ban, like we usually do? Also, for socks, I would do multiple warnings ''or'' immediate kick, though what defines a sockpuppet often varies between users. Thanks Sapharus! --{{User:DoorToNothing/Sig}} 04:48, July 3, 2010 (UTC) | |||
If my opinion is valued at all, then I would like to add. I think four (read:4) warnings is more than enough. More than that can lead to irritation. Also, after 4 warnings should lead to a kick, then if the behavior continues, lead to a ban. Major things (sockpuppeting, constant spam), as Saphy said, should give multiple warnings. I still think 5 warnings is a bit too lax; if you can't listen after 4 warnings, then they deserve a kick. --{{SC/Sig}} 04:59, July 3, 2010 (UTC) | |||
::[[KHWiki:IRC/Draft]].[[User:KrytenKoro|<small>Glorious</small>]] [[User_talk:KrytenKoro|<small>CHAOS!</small>]] 05:57, July 3, 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 14:24, 10 February 2021
Hey again, Saph here. After a little thing went on earlier in the channel, I have seen that two warnings before a kick is quite unfair. Since we are resetting warnings every two weeks, that means that people are going to get banned quickly. We don't want that, now do we? I suggest that we amend the policy to four or five warnings to cut these guys some slack. Perhaps also giving multiple warnings for more major things, such as sockpuppeting or constant spam/bot abuse. What do you think?
Please note that DTN said I should make this a topic. I'm not exactly sure how I should format this, but here you go. 04:45, July 3, 2010 (UTC) --Sapharus
- I support this, it needs to be now that warnings are going to be reset every two weeks. Five warnings preceding a kick seems fine, but what about afterwards? Anything extra before immediately going into a ban, like we usually do? Also, for socks, I would do multiple warnings or immediate kick, though what defines a sockpuppet often varies between users. Thanks Sapharus! --DTN
04:48, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
If my opinion is valued at all, then I would like to add. I think four (read:4) warnings is more than enough. More than that can lead to irritation. Also, after 4 warnings should lead to a kick, then if the behavior continues, lead to a ban. Major things (sockpuppeting, constant spam), as Saphy said, should give multiple warnings. I still think 5 warnings is a bit too lax; if you can't listen after 4 warnings, then they deserve a kick. --Ag (Silver) - 47 107.8682 amu ~Crono 
04:59, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
- KHWiki:IRC/Draft.Glorious CHAOS! 05:57, July 3, 2010 (UTC)
