Community Discussion: What should the policy be for deleting evidence?

[mr_pendle]

If you'd like to continue it in a PM, I'd be happy to, but if I were Dave I wouldn't be very excited to see that somebody said that. Also, Dave has a lot of influence on the community, and it's much easier to be punished for saying something negative towards an administrator than it is just a regular player.

Going to pm now c:

 

[cscoop]

The tough thing about the situation is that the ordeal does not end once the player is banned. Lots of people dispute their bans. Everyone is entitled to see the evidence for their ban. It's just common sense. However, when we go to fetch their evidence for them, and there's absolutely nothing there anymore, there's nothing to suggest that they broke the rules. Therefore, we have no solid reason to tell them that they should be banned, as we technically can't.

Due to this, we must unban them. Then we look at the person who deleted it. It is because of their decision that another convicted player can come back to the network. We are always aware of the fact that they could still re-upload the video. Therefore, we at least try to contact them about it.

There have been arguments that failure to read the TOS is a valuable excuse for getting unbanned. The major thing to understand is that when logging in, you agree to those, and you need to understand how those affect you. It is not our job to hold your hand through the process. There needs to be a level of initiative. I'm sorry if that sounds a bit harsh, and I really don't mean it to be. It's just the fact of the matter that we can't let you off the hook for not knowing how we work, especially when everything that you need to know is very retrievable information.

I understand that people have the right to dispute their ban.. but honestly if you want people to be able to post a dispute no matter how much time has passed you should really have mods download the video and re-upload it to a private channel. This may seem intensive considering there are so many reports a day... but there are 100's of mods, and they all definitely have the ability to upload videos, as that's a requirement for all mods. It's the least they can do for the community member that took their time to catch the hacker, upload it, and submit it to the forums. They are doing the mod's jobs for them.

 

[Scott]

I understand that people have the right to dispute their ban.. but honestly if you want people to be able to post a dispute no matter how much time has passed you should really have mods download the video and re-upload it to a private channel. This may seem intensive considering there are so many reports a day... but there are 100's of mods, and they all definitely have the ability to upload videos, as that's a requirement for all mods. It's the least they can do for the community member that took their time to catch the hacker, upload it, and submit it to the forums. They are doing the mod's jobs for them.

If the user wants to remove the video, just message a moderator and they should reupload it so you can delete it. I would do so, anyways.

 

[NotCanziano]

Unrealated: But I like how you use murder as an example, cause if you murder someone you get life in prison not one week...


That's ofcourse if being a murderer is a metaphor for being a hacker.

 

[cscoop]

If the user wants to remove the video, just message a moderator and they should reupload it so you can delete it. I would do so, anyways.

It should be automatic. Before the rule was publicized more, people may not have known it was against the rules to do in the first place. If the evidence warrants something permanently on the players record, it should be downloaded immediately. There could be communication issues or some sort of issue to where the video is deleted before they can get into contact with a staff member.

 

[ChrisComedies]

Honestly all the staff says evidence is a major thing and is very important. Well if it was so important then why do you rely on SOMEONE elses youtube channel for it? If it was so important to you then why cant you download it or even put it on cloud storage or reupload it? #Fite4Cooper Cscoop

 

[Cubes]

I understand that people have the right to dispute their ban.. but honestly if you want people to be able to post a dispute no matter how much time has passed you should really have mods download the video and re-upload it to a private channel. This may seem intensive considering there are so many reports a day... but there are 100's of mods, and they all definitely have the ability to upload videos, as that's a requirement for all mods. It's the least they can do for the community member that took their time to catch the hacker, upload it, and submit it to the forums. They are doing the mod's jobs for them.

That would be an ideal situation, but there are challenges in the way of that. We've deliberated on that option among the upper staff, but requiring every mod to re-upload every report abuse they do is quite taxing on people's download caps. Because of this, many mods don't have the ability to do this for all cases. We decided overall that it is impractical to do it this way. However, the idea of re-uploading hasn't left our agenda.

 

[Groot]

TL DR, but there should be no punishment for videos because it is their channel, their property, their choice if they want to delete it.

 

[GeckoGoggals]

Well the only problem is that a celebrity has more status and can do "worse" to you, i.e making you famous for "that guy" that insulted them. Yes, it's equally bad to insult anybody, but the people with more "power" can do more about it. Insulting the administration has always been a serious offense because we should be respectful towards the higher ups here, they do a lot to keep the servers running and people who insult their work ignorantly or on purpose will be dealt with. The staff here takes way more heat than they deserve compared to how staff are treated on other servers.

As much as I respect Dave, I have to disagree with your opinion. Thousands disrespect administrative people in the real world every day, Obama has done several great things, but he gets disrespected for other things, yet those people aren't thrown in jail... Some could go as far as to say that that that rule is unconstitutional (USA) and therefore illegal in the United States. I do respect Dave and what he does, but forcing people to respect him won't solve your problems. I think that mass disrespect of Sr Staff would be a perm ban, but disrespecting a single administrator is just like disrespecting your average Joe, and with the 'power' thing, the only difference in power between average Joe and Dave is that average Joe needs to go through the reporting process before the user gets punished. Just because a Sr Staff member is higher on the totem pole than average Joe, doesn't mean that they're different. I think that even though Dave may have more power and influence than your average Joe, they should still be considered just 'a user' when it comes to the disrespect rule, just because Dave is an admin, doesn't mean that whoever disrespects him gets a perm ban. Yeah, disrespecting staff would look worse than disrespecting an average Joe, but it always happens, it's part of a society! Right now, people in the real world are more concerned about bullying than people saying 'Obama sucks' because they know that Obama isn't just going to quit because of it. The same goes for MCSG, if someone disrespects another player, that player could quit the servers, or even go as far as doing something bad for their health in the real world because of it, but we know Dave well enough to know that it's not going to change how he thinks about himself, and that he won't quit because of it. However, if it is bad enough, like saying personal things in a mass amount to a Sr Staff member, then it would deserve a perm ban because it COULD effect how he/she feels about themselves. I think that this rule deserves to be revised as well.

On the real topic, I think that the solution that MCGamer has come to is fair, and if people get notified before the ban is given, then it's fair to get a ban if there is refusal. However, I do think that if evidence was deleted and it was an honest mistake, but cannot get the evidence back, then maybe a temp-ban should be put in place. I think that all players that delete evidence should be contacted by multiple people so that it's not just a Sr Mod's word against a players, because that could cause some suspicion in the community.

 

[Pixelatorx2]

- Warning may contain harsh opinions -

While I believe this rule is bunk, and should be completely rethought, comparing it to a real life murder is literally taking it too far. Someone being removed from a game for a week is nothing, absolutely nothing like losing a real person. When someone is murdered, what comes of it? Human distress for years, if not forever. When someone is banned, you say "eh" and suck it up and move onto one of the other thousand servers. Unless you can compare both, do not compare it. You have no idea the pain that people go through. If you can, don't make that analogy anyway - you clearly don't get it.

Is the rule unfair to the reported player?
No, not really. Unless the ban is recent, and only happened a couple of weeks ago, then I believe the player who deleted the evidence deserves some sort of punishment. Is it 7 month old evidence, and the banned player has made no login-attempts, then no, the player who deleted the evidence is completely within the rules to do so. The banned player should then not be able to dispute their ban.

What I wonder, is why that both sides of this argument cannot agree on something. Setting a time limit, say 3 months, for the banned player to dispute their ban is reasonable. Why you ask? After three months of unsuccessful ban disputes, and or, no ban disputes whatsoever and have made no login attempts (this can be recorded) then they clearly aren't interested in coming back. Its like parole in a prison/jail (You insisted on comparing the two..)

EDIT: Gotta sleep, will edit this tomorrow

Pixelatorx2 tagging myself to remind myself.

 

[Mooclan]

So, allow me to get this straight.

Even if the evidence was for a 24-hour ban, the person who deleted the evidence could get permanently removed from MCG?
Okay, yeah. Sounds completely fair. Woohoo.

First off, this is my take on the rule:
No. No. No.

Obviously, there's been a few dozen good arguments against this rule already, both on and off this thread, so I won't go over those again in detail, but just to recap:

• What about accidental deletions? ex: say there was a Google+ account that was linked to a YouTube account, and the Google+ account got deleted, thus indirectly deleting the YT account and all videos on it... including the hacker report(s).
• The option where people have the chance to re-upload the evidence is completely absurd, and even staff members know it. Do you really think that we're going to save all of the hacker reports we've ever made on our own storage space? Personally, my laptop has less than 300 GBs of storage, and it already has 50 GBs of software and other miscellaneous files, and a good 100 GBs of business files. For an international company. Worth real money. Do you really think I'm going to move aside and delete those files just so that I can have a few dozen videos that take up the rest of my storage, and then not even be able to download a 10GB Steam game? No thank you.
• Rather than comparing it to murder, let's say... bullying or general abuse. It's not as extreme, but still a comparison. A bystander takes a video and gets the bully suspended for 7 days. Half a year later, after the evidence was deleted to save storage, the bully wants the suspension off of his school record, so he appeals to the school administration. There's no evidence any more, but the suspension was still there. Does he get the suspension lifted? No. Does the bystander get expelled? Of course NOT!

However, there are still potential cases in which the person deletes the evidence on purpose. Very few, but they're there.
So rather than just raising my hand and shouting "REMOVE THE RULE!!1!!!!!!!1", I'd like to propose something else.

Ordinarily, the reporter would get permanently banned, and the rule-breaker would get the ban wiped off his or her record due to lack of evidence.
However, what if the reporter got a 7-day tempban, and the ban was kept in place for the rule-breaker.
A permanent ban is extremely severe, and in some cases much too severe, particularly in the cases in which it was an accident.
A 7-day ban is a clear message saying 'Don't do it again', but eventually they will be able to return to the servers that they originally tried to help by reporting the user.

The rule-breaker, however, keeps their ban even if it is disputed.
Yes, this would mean a change in policy, but it's not a particularly bad one.
Think about it - If the ban is temporary, it'll be lifted again and the user will be able to play after a few days/weeks, and even after a year they'll be able to apply for Mod.
If it's permanent, odds are they did something really bad, or a second/third offense. If it's that severe, obviously the evidence was clearly sufficient to warrant a permanent ban, so why not just keep it in place even if the evidence is gone?

A secondary option to the permanent ban side of the suggestion for upholding bans despite a lack of evidence:
Rather than a permanent ban, because there's no evidence, shorten it to a month. They'll be able to come back onto the servers after just over four weeks, which is more severe than a 7-day ban, but still a large compromise to the existing permanent ban despite a lack of evidence.


Whether you accept my suggestions, tweak them, or just say to yourself, "Mooclan, what on Earth were you thinking?!?!?"....
Just please realize that this is something that I really think should be changed. It doesn't even have to be completely removed, just changed to make it less harsh.
Video games are supposed to be fun for players. Being banned off of one of your favorite servers for a crazy reason that more than half of the community doesn't even know about really isn't fun, just sayin'.

 

[Scott]

So, allow me to get this straight.

Even if the evidence was for a 24-hour ban, the person who deleted the evidence could get permanently removed from MCG?
Okay, yeah. Sounds completely fair. Woohoo.

First off, this is my take on the rule:
No. No. No.

Obviously, there's been a few dozen good arguments against this rule already, both on and off this thread, so I won't go over those again in detail, but just to recap:

• What about accidental deletions? ex: say there was a Google+ account that was linked to a YouTube account, and the Google+ account got deleted, thus indirectly deleting the YT account and all videos on it... including the hacker report(s).
• The option where people have the chance to re-upload the evidence is completely absurd, and even staff members know it. Do you really think that we're going to save all of the hacker reports we've ever made on our own storage space? Personally, my laptop has less than 300 GBs of storage, and it already has 50 GBs of software and other miscellaneous files, and a good 100 GBs of business files. For an international company. Worth real money. Do you really think I'm going to move aside and delete those files just so that I can have a few dozen videos that take up the rest of my storage, and then not even be able to download a 10GB Steam game? No thank you.
• Rather than comparing it to murder, let's say... bullying or general abuse. It's not as extreme, but still a comparison. A bystander takes a video and gets the bully suspended for 7 days. Half a year later, after the evidence was deleted to save storage, the bully wants the suspension off of his school record, so he appeals to the school administration. There's no evidence any more, but the suspension was still there. Does he get the suspension lifted? No. Does the bystander get expelled? Of course NOT!

However, there are still potential cases in which the person deletes the evidence on purpose. Very few, but they're there.
So rather than just raising my hand and shouting "REMOVE THE RULE!!1!!!!!!!1", I'd like to propose something else.

Ordinarily, the reporter would get permanently banned, and the rule-breaker would get the ban wiped off his or her record due to lack of evidence.
However, what if the reporter got a 7-day tempban, and the ban was kept in place for the rule-breaker.
A permanent ban is extremely severe, and in some cases much too severe, particularly in the cases in which it was an accident.
A 7-day ban is a clear message saying 'Don't do it again', but eventually they will be able to return to the servers that they originally tried to help by reporting the user.

The rule-breaker, however, keeps their ban even if it is disputed.
Yes, this would mean a change in policy, but it's not a particularly bad one.
Think about it - If the ban is temporary, it'll be lifted again and the user will be able to play after a few days/weeks, and even after a year they'll be able to apply for Mod.
If it's permanent, odds are they did something really bad, or a second/third offense. If it's that severe, obviously the evidence was clearly sufficient to warrant a permanent ban, so why not just keep it in place even if the evidence is gone?

A secondary option to the permanent ban side of the suggestion for upholding bans despite a lack of evidence:
Rather than a permanent ban, because there's no evidence, shorten it to a month. They'll be able to come back onto the servers after just over four weeks, which is more severe than a 7-day ban, but still a large compromise to the existing permanent ban despite a lack of evidence.


Whether you accept my suggestions, tweak them, or just say to yourself, "Mooclan, what on Earth were you thinking?!?!?"....
Just please realize that this is something that I really think should be changed. It doesn't even have to be completely removed, just changed to make it less harsh.
Video games are supposed to be fun for players. Being banned off of one of your favorite servers for a crazy reason that more than half of the community doesn't even know about really isn't fun, just sayin'.

Reserved for a long reply later.