Operation EU Cleansweep Winter 2015, Week 4 Results!

[Scott]

These clean sweeps are a good idea, however there's one aspect I'd like to bring to light. If you get a ton of moderators together ready to ban a lot of hackers/rule breakers, the moderators are going to go looking for such acts. This seems very simple. The bad part is as follows; sometimes if you go looking for something that's not there all the time, you may mis-perceive it as present. Such dissimilarities can cause people who were regular players abiding all rules to be banned. Now, I know there are ban appeals and things of that matter and moderators are supposed to look for hacking/rule breaking to begin with, but I just want to bring to light the possibility of banning on the basis of very controversial evidence simply because a numbers game is being played.

Please do not perceive this as hate or anything likewise. I just want to present my opinion and make aware the slight possibility of such actions being performed in the future as to reduce the chances of the aforementioned.

Honestly, it isn't a numbers game. The only people who even know the numbers until we post this are the ones on the document. Sure, we want more bans, but that is because we want to eliminate as many hackers as possible. If evidence is not sufficient, we aren't going to ban them and if we do it was a rare accident which will be fixed upon dispute.

Not much point banning someone when they can easily go on an alt. If someone's hacking they most likely won't care if they get banned so what's the point banning someone unless you ip ban them?

Currently, we ban people who bypass bans, but not using an IP ban. This is because people could use VPNs and the sort to bypass it.

 

[Tree_TheBigKind]

Honestly, it isn't a numbers game. The only people who even know the numbers until we post this are the ones on the document. Sure, we want more bans, but that is because we want to eliminate as many hackers as possible. If evidence is not sufficient, we aren't going to ban them and if we do it was a rare accident which will be fixed upon dispute.

I'm not entirely sure my opinion was understood properly. I also don't mean to come across as critical of the cleansweeps as they are beneficial to the community. I was just trying to convey that a sort of mob mentality might be created upon putting a large amount of mods together with the sole task of banning rule breakers. The mentality could escalate toward a negative thing; it obviously has not yet, I simply presented the idea that it unfortunately might occur in the future. Again, I don't mean any offense to anyone and I don't want to be critical.

 

[Scott]

I'm not entirely sure my opinion was understood properly. I also don't mean to come across as critical of the cleansweeps as they are beneficial to the community. I was just trying to convey that a sort of mob mentality might be created upon putting a large amount of mods together with the sole task of banning rule breakers. The mentality could escalate toward a negative thing; it obviously has not yet, I simply presented the idea that it unfortunately might occur in the future. Again, I don't mean any offense to anyone and I don't want to be critical.

Gotcha, it's all good. I am just saying I don't foresee it happening with the great moderators I work with.

 

[Tree_TheBigKind]

Gotcha, it's all good. I am just saying I don't foresee it happening with the great moderators I work with.

Ah, okay. Well, continue the good work!

 

[BananaCraft]

Good job.