The One-Strike Policy - Would it help?

[Niall]

Good point, but cant they whitelist/blacklist?

No, we can't.

 

[mcsgbro]

I partly agree, the only thing is, is that some hackers after a ban/kick realize that it is wrong and they stop. I have a couple of friends who used to hack, but they stopped after they got banned and after I talked to them about it. The two strikes and a perm ban should do it. it gives time for those who want to quit hacking, but they know if they continue that they will be perm banned, and that that is their choice.

 

[Miner9823]

I also believe IP bans should be placed depending on what the hacker did. For example : Forcefield + waterwalk + no knockback = permanent ban but can buy a new account, get a new stat reset and keep playing. MCGamer believes the truth system works, but it really doesnt. IP bans should be taken place if the hacker continuously uses alts. A router/New IP is not cheap + if it was, the internet would be crap, wouldnt it?
Enjoy.
-Touchdeath (^:

In my opinion, I would think IP bans are quite effective. However another reason, including iVelocityGaming's reason; is that some people are capable of using VPN, which lets them get relocated elsewhere, hence changing their IP addresses. So they could change their IPs multiple times and continue coming back.

Anyways, considering this thread, I would believe it has been well thought-of and considerably detailed, also clearly explaining the points with a great sense of passion.
However, I would have my reasons towards counterpointing the argument, and as well as a few suggestions on improving the recommendation towards making it seem somewhat a little more rational for other players.

I would first like to begin on the suggestion of the One-Strike Policy in general, as much as I would like to completely remove rule-breakers off the server, because I do know bad people like them do not deserve another chance; I would feel as if it were best to consider what their situation could be like. As uncommon, and rare as it sounds, people's accounts get compromised. As previously mentioned by other community members, people's accounts get compromised and then sold to different parts of the web to which people can access them and could as well do anything they want with them.
You are quite right on being the fact that people with bad passwords have brought themselves to the situations they were in. But considering this, hackers don't necessarily take much time (Although sometimes people still have difficulties, it is possible.) to actually find out your account details, no matter its complexity. Hence having their account being compromised and rights taken from them, illegally.
We should also take to account, what if the individual was a reputable one? And had their account compromised? Although it is next to impossibly rare to having a reputable person's account being compromised, it is still a possibility. And at least we do have ban disputed, however they can sometimes be upheld, and we could never know; what if the person was being honest? And if, hypothetically speaking, had only One-Strike policies, then it would make it seem as if we will not forgive anyone, nor accepting disputes. Yet again, maybe your point could also include giving the freedom for people to making ban disputes.

As awful as in-game hackers can be, and as much as their numbers are increasing, it does not stop the community from thriving, and I've seen more than enough threads claiming the network is dead. But it isn't, and as we speak, the developers are fixing up the anti-cheat system to help make things a little more easy on the legitimate players.

And as I have said before, as much as I want hackers to be taken off our server, I would rather try to make things a little more easy on both sides.
It has also been mentioned that people were cyber-bullied over their potential in Minecraft PvP. Which led to their own delusion towards believing hacking could lead them to becoming stronger, but it doesn't. And I, as an individual, as hateful I can be towards rule-breakers, I always consider this, we are human beings.
I think that people do deserve second chances. And through the Two-Strike policy we have now, we let the rule-breakers to reconsider their actions and choices, also giving them time to take off their modifications that are prohibited in the server. Hence providing a 7 day ban.

Now getting towards your suggestion of Streamlining the ban process.
I would have to admit, the report system does seem somewhat complicated. However, a good majority of the template itself is quite necessary towards filing a successful report. Because it gives the staff members the necessary proof, reason and information to making it a successful ban, and not a ban without reason nor purpose.
Do note that some parts of the report are entirely optional, it is only for adding additional information.
And you're not the only one who has to put up with reporting so many players at such long periods of time, as well as only doing it for one hacker.
However it gives the dignity that you are making a contribution towards the health and safety of the network, and is noted of for your dedication. But I do have doubts that it must take so long to file one report, if so, I do hope in the future, there will alternative choices of reporting, making it easier for videos to be uploaded as well.
The suggestion recommending forum moderators has been brought up before. But as said by other members of the community, the moderator's jobs are to regulate all network activity through social perspective, and sometimes in different aspects as well. Meaning they have to make sure no one is breaking rules in Teamspeak, in-game, and in the forums. I have to admit, specifically adding ranks for forum moderators seems like an excellent idea, however we already have a large variety of people volunteering on helping the server anyways, including the forums.

Coming to your third suggestion, adding rewards for reports, I have seen threads suggesting this feature before, but unfortunately discarding the suggestion shortly after. And I too, agree with providing rewards for those who make a large contribution towards the server, trying to make it safe. It motivates people to letting them know that contributing to something like this is for a good purpose, and it is not left unnoticed.
However, the issues of doing so will result in a lot of reports being false, only for obtaining the rewards. Let's take the Jack the Ripper killings for example, when they asked witnesses about information of the killer, they would be rewarded, however it led to a lot of false, and irrational information being provided, which contributed to a small factor leading towards the killer never being caught.
The same goes with the situation here, people could provide false information, and could potentially spam the forums section, making the job for the staff members beyond difficult, as much of a responsibility it is being a moderator, they do not deserve to have extensive amounts of pressure and stress on them for that reason.
But I would expect this statement being counterpointed with the fact that the One-Strike policy could make the job a lot easier for them.
However, regardless of having the policy or not, it would still unfortunately be difficult for the staff members to do their jobs, regarding on implementing the reward system. Or it would simply give the moderators no true purpose of actually doing their job or even motivating them.

To my personal conclusion, I would believe that the One-Strike policy shouldn't be implemented, it would give the server's standards to be far too strict, and will also potentially cause pressure towards other players, which would lead to them to downing the network's reputation as a whole.
However, what I propose is to make the first offence bans a little longer, because it will let the supposed rule-breakers know that what they have been doing is wrong, and strongly encourage them as well to refrain from using such modifications that are prohibited.
So maybe we can make an extension on first offence bans to at least two to three weeks instead, to reinforce our point on how seriously the community takes on illegitimate members.

Overall, I do admire your thread, it was well made, professional, and I also have recently discovered the roxbot you were mentioning, which is pretty fun! And I do think that instead, there could be minor changes, because we should let everyone enjoy the MCGamer network as a whole.


{{ Holy moly! How much did I write!? }}

 

[Zauron]

I see why you would do this, but then again I also have arguments against it. Some people were born to cheat, always did, and always will. Then again there are some people that learn on their own mistakes, and you could potentially be banning a member of the community that could become 'something.'

To summarise it, I have no clue what to do. Honestly, I highly doubt that MCG will change the way it goes about thing, but again. Ya' never know.

 

[soggypickle]

The only way we could make it one-strike is if we really shoved the "no hacking" rule in peoples' faces. We would have to make it extremely clear to new players that we don't allow hacks, and that it's an immediate permanent ban. I think this could be beneficial if executed correctly. I'll explain what I mean.

I remember a long time ago, I joined a random Minecraft server off of a server list, and the spawn point was in a room. There was a sign in front that said "Is swearing in the chat allowed?", and two lava holes on either side labeled "Yes" or "No". If you jumped through "No", you would fall through the lava into some water to put you out, and continue about your merry way. If you jumped down "Yes"... well, lets just say there wasn't much water down there. Basically, you just went through their rules one by one, and couldn't play until you got them all correct. A common problem we have today is that people simply don't read the rules, and don't know what our stance is on hacks, and I think implementing something like this would be a great way to shove the rules in peoples faces, as I said before, so they absolutely understand, and can't use "I didn't know!" as an excuse.

If something like this were implemented, the way I'd want to see it set up is that it only applies to players who are logging in for the first time. No matter what they connect to, they are automatically redirected to this test upon first login. Perhaps we could only cover hacking, as that seems to be the only rule people have trouble comprehending. Not only that, but we have a ton of rules, and that might be a drag to go over. It could start with "Is using hacked/modded clients allowed?", then "You understand that if you hack, we will catch you no matter what?". Seems intimidating, but like I said, publicity of the rule is key. It would be pretty simple, they just hop down a no, and then a yes, and once they're done with that, they get teleported to a hub and never have to do it again.

If something like this were added, I feel like only then would we truly be able to change this to an immediate permanent ban. At that point, there would be no excuses left. No more "I was just experimenting". No more "I didn't know". The only problem I can see with this is if someone is banned while they're not hacking, but to that I say, go post a ban dispute.

With any course of action taken, it's always important to remember that behind every hacking steve-skin that kills you and makes you want to throw your keyboard against the wall, they're a human being just like you. Human beings make mistakes from time to time, and with the current system we have now, second chances have actually benefited some people who were generous enough to understand our rules, like IronOre12 said. It's difficult to balance how harsh we should punish, and how forgiving we should be to people who have actually learned a lesson.

TL;DR - Shove those rules in peoples faces and make them clear if you want to enforce bigger punishments.

 

[ChrisComedies]

The only way we could make it one-strike is if we really shoved the "no hacking" rule in peoples' faces. We would have to make it extremely clear to new players that we don't allow hacks, and that it's an immediate permanent ban. I think this could be beneficial if executed correctly. I'll explain what I mean.

I remember a long time ago, I joined a random Minecraft server off of a server list, and the spawn point was in a room. There was a sign in front that said "Is swearing in the chat allowed?", and two lava holes on either side labeled "Yes" or "No". If you jumped through "No", you would fall through the lava into some water to put you out, and continue about your merry way. If you jumped down "Yes"... well, lets just say there wasn't much water down there. Basically, you just went through their rules one by one, and couldn't play until you got them all correct. A common problem we have today is that people simply don't read the rules, and don't know what our stance is on hacks, and I think implementing something like this would be a great way to shove the rules in peoples faces, as I said before, so they absolutely understand, and can't use "I didn't know!" as an excuse.

If something like this were implemented, the way I'd want to see it set up is that it only applies to players who are logging in for the first time. No matter what they connect to, they are automatically redirected to this test upon first login. Perhaps we could only cover hacking, as that seems to be the only rule people have trouble comprehending. Not only that, but we have a ton of rules, and that might be a drag to go over. It could start with "Is using hacked/modded clients allowed?", then "You understand that if you hack, we will catch you no matter what?". Seems intimidating, but like I said, publicity of the rule is key. It would be pretty simple, they just hop down a no, and then a yes, and once they're done with that, they get teleported to a hub and never have to do it again.

If something like this were added, I feel like only then would we truly be able to change this to an immediate permanent ban. At that point, there would be no excuses left. No more "I was just experimenting". No more "I didn't know". The only problem I can see with this is if someone is banned while they're not hacking, but to that I say, go post a ban dispute.

With any course of action taken, it's always important to remember that behind every hacking steve-skin that kills you and makes you want to throw your keyboard against the wall, they're a human being just like you. Human beings make mistakes from time to time, and with the current system we have now, second chances have actually benefited some people who were generous enough to understand our rules, like IronOre12 said. It's difficult to balance how harsh we should punish, and how forgiving we should be to people who have actually learned a lesson.

TL;DR - Shove those rules in peoples faces and make them clear if you want to enforce bigger punishments.

™

 

[Flqw]

To be honest it doesn't even matter if it's 1 or 2-strike ban; they'll always come back with alternate accounts.

 

[Xystz]

To be honest it doesn't even matter if it's 1 or 2-strike ban; they'll always come back with alternate accounts.

thats's $25 wasted for them

 

[Kauff]

thats's $25 wasted for them

There are other ways of getting accounts.
I currently have 7 full access accounts; I've only bought one of them.

 

[Xystz]

There are other ways of getting accounts.
I currently have 7 full access accounts; I've only bought one of them.

waste of an account if you get banned

 

[AlgerWaterlow]

The only way we could make it one-strike is if we really shoved the "no hacking" rule in peoples' faces. We would have to make it extremely clear to new players that we don't allow hacks, and that it's an immediate permanent ban. I think this could be beneficial if executed correctly. I'll explain what I mean.

I remember a long time ago, I joined a random Minecraft server off of a server list, and the spawn point was in a room. There was a sign in front that said "Is swearing in the chat allowed?", and two lava holes on either side labeled "Yes" or "No". If you jumped through "No", you would fall through the lava into some water to put you out, and continue about your merry way. If you jumped down "Yes"... well, lets just say there wasn't much water down there. Basically, you just went through their rules one by one, and couldn't play until you got them all correct. A common problem we have today is that people simply don't read the rules, and don't know what our stance is on hacks, and I think implementing something like this would be a great way to shove the rules in peoples faces, as I said before, so they absolutely understand, and can't use "I didn't know!" as an excuse.

If something like this were implemented, the way I'd want to see it set up is that it only applies to players who are logging in for the first time. No matter what they connect to, they are automatically redirected to this test upon first login. Perhaps we could only cover hacking, as that seems to be the only rule people have trouble comprehending. Not only that, but we have a ton of rules, and that might be a drag to go over. It could start with "Is using hacked/modded clients allowed?", then "You understand that if you hack, we will catch you no matter what?". Seems intimidating, but like I said, publicity of the rule is key. It would be pretty simple, they just hop down a no, and then a yes, and once they're done with that, they get teleported to a hub and never have to do it again.

If something like this were added, I feel like only then would we truly be able to change this to an immediate permanent ban. At that point, there would be no excuses left. No more "I was just experimenting". No more "I didn't know". The only problem I can see with this is if someone is banned while they're not hacking, but to that I say, go post a ban dispute.

With any course of action taken, it's always important to remember that behind every hacking steve-skin that kills you and makes you want to throw your keyboard against the wall, they're a human being just like you. Human beings make mistakes from time to time, and with the current system we have now, second chances have actually benefited some people who were generous enough to understand our rules, like IronOre12 said. It's difficult to balance how harsh we should punish, and how forgiving we should be to people who have actually learned a lesson.

TL;DR - Shove those rules in peoples faces and make them clear if you want to enforce bigger punishments.

People really intent on bending rules on the internet will say yes and no to everything (the Smile & Nod hypothesis), even if they don't mean it. The same applies for reading legal Terms of Service documents before installing or purchasing something online. No one gives two chitins about the consequences, only that which is immediate and instant gratification (with a few exceptions of course).

Banning someone for a week for hacking is a more viable method of shoving the rule in peoples' faces for failing to read the rules but there needs to be something between that week-long ban and a second permaban that really takes the piss out of a hacker to make them not hack again. THAT is what should be brainstormed

 

[TylerWieland]

I think it would