Since when do people get banned based on the above opinion ? No facts, zero evidence. It's wrong. And I believe I have evidence to suggest and prove why.
Minecraft PC IP: play.cubecraft.net
"NOT A GOOD FIT FOR OUR COMMUNITY"
- Thread starter emptypandora
- Start date
Nex3us
Novice Member
I'm not sure there is real evidence to support this. I believe no one in our community will ever get banned for this.
Getting banned for this reason just comes from an observation of your overall behaviour. Although it's pretty straightforward (you are deemed as unfit for this community), you'll still question why you are considered unfit. The best solution is contacting the staff who issued the ban and have a discussion/appeal about it.
edit - and this is posted in the wrong category. It should be under Lobby as it's not discussing bedrock or eggwars.
edit - and this is posted in the wrong category. It should be under Lobby as it's not discussing bedrock or eggwars.
Well similar to a network ban, you need to screw up really badly to get banned for that. Every case is carefully reviewed, so i dont see anything wrong with that.
So I'll give an example. A player gets reported 15 times and 14 times out of 15 the exact same Mod team agree that they were not cheating in any way. Then they get banned for not being a good fit. How is that correct ?
If it is because of somebody you reported (which is what I'm guessing) I'm afraid we cannot discuss what happened with said person for them to receive the "unfit for our community" ban.
As Nathie and Nightmare already said, people who received the "Unfit for our community" ban misbehaved really badly and thus were punished as they represented a risk to our community's safety.
Nex3us
Novice Member
@emptypandora Based on your post i find it problematic that someone can be banned without concrete evidence. if 14 out of 15 times the moderators determined that a player wasnt cheating why was the decision made to ban him? i think bans should be based on clear rules and evidence, not a subjective opinion on whether or not someone fits into the community. total covert discrimination. jajajaja
Perhaps it would be helpful if the server had more transparency in these cases. if someone is banned for 'not fitting in with the community', definitely there should be more clarity on what that means and what the decision was based on.
Perhaps it would be helpful if the server had more transparency in these cases. if someone is banned for 'not fitting in with the community', definitely there should be more clarity on what that means and what the decision was based on.
With respect, I feel it's more "when it suits". You can't have a subjective punishment like this without clear guidance on how a decision would be arrived at and what the criteria is. Otherwise it's simply an opinion that somebody shouldn't be allowed to play. In this example, if 14 times the Team agreed with an appeal, then this player was effectively banned permanently for only 1 indiscretion. And as this doesn't happen regularly, it's not consistently being applied. As I've said before in this server, sadly, popularity wins.
I will proceed to explain when a “not a good fit for our community” ban applies so that no wrong conclusions are drawn.
This type of ban is usually a permanent ban, and is applied by the moderation team in cases where a player's behavior indicates that it is not appropriate to participate in the community.
Some examples (of the many situations that may arise) are:
-On discord. Sending a lot of hate speech, threatening, wishing death, inciting suicide, and other messages that indicate that it is a troll account.
-In Minecraft. Submitting an appeal threatening the moderator or wishing them death; leaking private information of a team member.
-Having many cheating bans with appeals denied or not appealed (abusing the system that expires bans to use cheats in the game many times).
-Having multiple alt accounts banned (bypassers)
-Creating a report with falsified evidence.
We do not punish for this if someone is banned for cheating once, nor if they were banned many times but their appeals were always accepted.
I don't know the specific case you emptypandora referring to, but I can think of a case where it might be found 14 previous appeals were accepted incorrectly because a player lied or falsified evidence.
Since the last update of the rules some time ago, we trust the decision of the moderators regarding their punishments, and players can always create a Team Feedback thread to have the situation evaluated.
This type of ban is usually a permanent ban, and is applied by the moderation team in cases where a player's behavior indicates that it is not appropriate to participate in the community.
Some examples (of the many situations that may arise) are:
-On discord. Sending a lot of hate speech, threatening, wishing death, inciting suicide, and other messages that indicate that it is a troll account.
-In Minecraft. Submitting an appeal threatening the moderator or wishing them death; leaking private information of a team member.
-Having many cheating bans with appeals denied or not appealed (abusing the system that expires bans to use cheats in the game many times).
-Having multiple alt accounts banned (bypassers)
-Creating a report with falsified evidence.
We do not punish for this if someone is banned for cheating once, nor if they were banned many times but their appeals were always accepted.
I don't know the specific case you emptypandora referring to, but I can think of a case where it might be found 14 previous appeals were accepted incorrectly because a player lied or falsified evidence.
Since the last update of the rules some time ago, we trust the decision of the moderators regarding their punishments, and players can always create a Team Feedback thread to have the situation evaluated.
Nex3us
Novice Member
Similar threads
Latest profile posts
Daily Question 26.
What myths/cryptids/mythical creatures do you believe in?
What myths/cryptids/mythical creatures do you believe in?
suedivy4011773333 wrote on HoppyFrog's profile.
Idk how, but I haven't followed you yet, so here is a follow 
.
.
