All Networks Ban overrides - sentinel/reports

[Ben5124]

Ban Lengths​

At the minute, the punishment track for cheating is: 7 days (Sentinel only) -> 30 days -> permanent. However there is an issue with it when Sentinel and a player reports someone. If Sentinel bans the player first (presuming no previous offenses), the ban will last 7 days. If a player see's the rulebreaker and gets evidence of them before Sentinel bans them, and then reports them; the report will be marked as already punished, and the rule breaker will have received a 7 days ban.
However, if the player reports them and a mod reviews it and handles it, the rule breaker will be punished for 30 days.

Here we have a bit of a problem, the same punishment may receive different ban lengths. It seems to me that the 7 day Sentinel ban starts off lower, because Sentinel probably has a much higher chance of falsely banning people, so a double positive (which probably isn't false) would seem right to have a 30 day ban. My suggestion is, that if a player is already banned by Sentinel, the report with with evidence should override the Sentinel ban. e.g. for a first time players offense, if banned by Sentinel and a player report, the thread should be marked as handled and they should be given a 30 day ban instead of 7.

This would also fix lying in sentinel appeals, since if the appeal would have gone through against the Sentinel ban, there is solid evidence that they were cheating, thus they won't be unbanned and the cheater will be gone!


Let me know what you think of this!

 

[Pyups🎄]

I agree 100%

 

[Maaarijn]

Great idea! The only reason that sentinel bans take 7 days the first time is because you can get falsely banned by Sentinel (I think). It would be fair to extend this punishment in case it's clarified by a moderator that the ban was indeed correct.

I can only think of one problem however; I'm not sure how the reportsite works for mods exactly, but I guess it's currently not possible to ban a player who's already banned. Also a player can only be unbanned by the mod that banned them, meaning that unbanning them and banning them again for a longer period won't be possible either. This means a system should be developed which makes it possible for mods to extend a ban length and upon that is migrated with the report site. This would be hard, also keeping in mind that there is no web developer currently.

So if this would be possible I'd love to see this added, but I'm not sure if it's possible in an easy way.

 

[Marieke2001]

I’m actually kinda in the middle for this. It has its pros and it has its cons. But in the end if it would change, I wouldn’t mind it, but if it wouldn’t it’s also fine

 

[_EliteRaspberry]

From my perspective (I have been banned by sentinel falsely like one week ago), the system should work following imo:
- if there is clear evidence (not sentinel) --> 30 day ban
- if only sentinel ban --> 30 days + ( review option)

I know that sentinel has alot of false positives sometimes, and as someone who went throught the process of getting unbanned again (took 4 days), and this is just my experience. but the review didnt take alot of time at the part of the moderators handling it.. The mod who was responsible for my ban was really nice and explain too and generally really fast. The long times came from the devs reviewing it and denying it without evidence nor without any discussions. I am not hating on the devs, i am sure they are doing their best, but if the false positives get sorted out quicker and better then if you are falsely banned it doesnt change between 7 and 30 days.

 

[Ben5124]

From my perspective (I have been banned by sentinel falsely like one week ago), the system should work following imo:
- if there is clear evidence (not sentinel) --> 30 day ban
- if only sentinel ban --> 30 days + ( review option)

I know that sentinel has alot of false positives sometimes, and as someone who went throught the process of getting unbanned again (took 4 days), and this is just my experience. but the review didnt take alot of time at the part of the moderators handling it.. The mod who was responsible for my ban was really nice and explain too and generally really fast. The long times came from the devs reviewing it and denying it without evidence nor without any discussions. I am not hating on the devs, i am sure they are doing their best, but if the false positives get sorted out quicker and better then if you are falsely banned it doesnt change between 7 and 30 days.

Yeah that sounds good. The main reason I wrote the thread was because it bugs me how the same offense can receive different ban lengths.

 

[[Deleted Member 14534]]

Yeah they NEED this

 

[Siftenly]

Yeah they NEED this

Hey, please do not reply to threads that have been inactive for over 3 weeks.