Amnesty of active members with banned accounts

[Mentor]

This stems from a point raised in the "old fogeys thread". Like nvrspk says i do, like a number of others, want my original account to be merged with my current one.

Along with the posts, postcount, rep and other things connected to it which will otherwise be lost. Unlike what the previous topic mentions though, i am uninterested in the free rep, as my own motives is primarily to have control of my account in one place and make it easier to dig up my old posts when i need them.

So what is member amnesty? Amnesty itself can mean "Pardon: a warrant granting release from punishment for an offense" and "the formal act of liberating someone"

So to grant amnesty to members who have had accounts ban's i think the issues that need to be proven are:
A) The punishment given did not fit the misdeed, was unfair and essentially unjust.
B) The punishment itself has no value. Punishing people just to punish them is just somewhat sadistic. A punishment only holds value IF it works as both a deterrent to other members and stops members who have received it from breaking rules again.

The above are my two points on "punishment and its effectiveness" as nvrspk puts it

Nvrspk4: In the case of proving how long they've been a member, that is essentially a part of the punishment. They've lost the benefits of the old account, established name, old join date, high post count.

So yes, that is a punishment that will act as a deterrent and maybe make other members think twice about breaking rules again (Although this second point i'm not sure is ever true)

With the group i refer to though, i think nether point still holds up.

First off, loosing your account for a year on a forum like habbox, or most members who will likely never stay on that long is probably about as effective as a deterrent can get, 3-4-5 years? I think for a forum at least, that is the longest sentence people should ever really get and is far longer than the average lifespan of many users forum user's. In essence a perm ban is much the say as 3 year would be to most members, and when looked at is somewhat a jump. Theres a very big difference between a week ban, and all of entirety. Maybe a few more punishment levels should get added in the middle as the perm idea is kind of ridiculous.

This long ago, many of the rules were different, you could get permed for giving out an email or msn address for example. So the reasons for ban's then although correct in there own time, are things that have changed as the forum has progressed, why should we maintain a ban on doing something, that now, we think they should have every right to do?

On to my main point of why bans like these do not stop members re offending, i think can be shown best from your own description of punishment. Once a user has lost there post count, rep, posts and everything else. They have nothing to loose, no reason to worry about getting banned again.
Some will come back and spam, break the rules even more etc, before just getting banned again a few more times. Others though, come back and continue to use the forum.. why?

Because those ones, even when they have no reason to fear a ban as they have nothing they can loose, enjoy the forum are a positive influence. They were not out there to break rules, else they would be doing so even more afterwards. Most were just in the wrong place at the wrong time, or disagreed with someone who was on a power trip.

The type that were banned for the unjust reasons, and dont have a history of malicious rule breaking (were not breaking rules on purpose), they are the type of members, than 3-4 years later are still on this forum, often not having been banned again. Its only after 3-4 years they even have anything to loose. If they got there accounts merge, what they have to loose would almost double meaning some may even be more careful about obaying rules due to the threat of looseing so much.

I can imagine no way in which, by giving someone there old account back, you would encourage any additional rule breaking at all.
If someone got there account back, after a number of years, merged with the current. The threat of loosing it all a gain grows massively. It also means members who were recently permed have hope, so dont need to just randomly attack and **** off the forum.

How is any of that a bad thing?


In my own case, i am not a gold star member, i have a good amount of usernotes attached to me in my past - and in some cases present - despite this i have still had the role of manager twice as well as a good amount of other forum positions. People in high up positions in habbox will still trust me even now.
If i was such a bad member, who deserved a permanent ban, why would staff in many cases still trust me - possibly even like me?
My ban was for "being rude to staff members" - this translates to disagreeing with and auguring against they were saying. Not the first ban i've got for simply proving someone with banning powers wrong ether.

I'm happy for any detail of my ban's user notes, etc to be discussed publicly by habboxforum staff and others if they like. If hxf's privacy policy still prevents this even with my permission though, i dont know.

Thanks to anyone who bothered reading my sub rant, for those who didn't my main points.
1)many perms are for rules that were removed(for a reason)
2) a perm is no different to a few years in terms of a deterrent
3) a perm tells members they lost everything for good so have nothing to loose. This encourages rule breaking, not deters it.
4) getting a permed account back, means members will be more likely to abide by rules for fear of loosing it again.
5) Changing perm to 4 years for example, means even with such a long ban, members who are planning to be around for a while, still have a reason to be good. The idea good behaviors may get them unbanned sooner would also likely increase there likelihood of rule abiding in further even more.
6) Perm bans as shown from the prior points, are a lot less effective at getting members to reform than non permanent ones. Encourage permed members to break more rules as opposed to being good in the hopes of regaining there account and generally as far as i can see have no upside.

-----
To end it all, whatever happens with this i will say, i think nvrspk is one of the best GM's habboxforum has ever had. Proof of this is the fact this thread has not been removed and i have not been banned for creating it. Nvrspk unlike many GM's in the past will discuss his view and argue his side fairly, without just abusing his own powers

[Nixt]

1)many perms are for rules that were removed(for a reason)

Unfortunately this point is irrelevant. Indeed we have become increasingly lenient across time however the fact remains the rules were rules at the time, and if you were banned for breaking them that is your own fault. Just because they changed in the future does not mean you are therefore entitled to be unbanned. I haven't worded this very well as I am tired, but I am sure you get the gist of what I am saying.

2) a perm is no different to a few years in terms of a deterrent

That's a fair enough point, but if we wanted to ban you for a year we could. A perm ban is a perm ban at the end of the day.

3) a perm tells members they lost everything for good so have nothing to loose. This encourages rule breaking, not deters it.

I disagree. If the member continues to rule break across several accounts further punishment in the form of auto and IP bans are introduced and recently this has happened very rarely. If a member of the Forum is a regular rule breaker then they are going to stay that way across several accounts. If they are generally a well behaved member who made a few mistakes it is likely they will get a bit pissed off and rebel a bit but ultimately, in my experience, this soon dies down.

4) getting a permed account back, means members will be more likely to abide by rules for fear of loosing it again.

Perhaps, however it would also make members think that they can get away with rule breaking more easily in the future as they will only be given their account back.

5) Changing perm to 4 years for example, means even with such a long ban, members who are planning to be around for a while, still have a reason to be good. The idea good behaviors may get them unbanned sooner would also likely increase there likelihood of rule abiding in further even more.

I don't disagree with the point you're making but I do disagree with reducing perm bans, and that is all I can say in response to that point.

6) Perm bans as shown from the prior points, are a lot less effective at getting members to reform than non permanent ones. Encourage permed members to break more rules as opposed to being good in the hopes of regaining there account and generally as far as i can see have no upside.

Generally rule breakers who lose their account permanently are serial rule breakers anyway OR they have broken a rule / group of rules that are totally not compatible with any type of amnesty.

To conclude, I appreciate the points you are making but overall I disagree in repealing permanent bans. It seems pointless, in my opinion, to reduce permanent bans because, as you say, they are virtually the same as a permanent ban. Permanent bans are not given out lightly and therefore if anyone does receive them they are thoroughly deserved in my opinion.

Forgive me if the points I make are unclear and or / poorly structured. I am knackered.

[GommeInc]

I agree entirely. Perm bans are HabboxForums most pointless creations - it's not a deterrent, just means a new account should and can be created.

A forum account is just a means by which a person can communicate with others, by taking that away you still have the person behind it, and that's what is the main argument here is. The person behind the account may change in time to be more mature towards forum rules or the forum rules change to follow common sense and basic reasoning (or just avoid them *cough*).

So the reason for a banned account may become pointless if the person behind the account has a new one and is acting just the same or a little bit more sensible - so why not give them their old account back, which proves:

-How long that person has been a member.
-How many posts have been contributed to the forum by that person.

Keeping them banned seems to prove nothing, other than a forum likes wasting space and enjoys their lines through names.

Of course, there will need to be a system in place to determine which people deserve which accounts merged with their current accounts (Mentor managed to have his account renamed, which is pointless, may as well give him back the whole account and merge it). From what I can see, a one year/two year margin is enough, preferably the former rather than the latter. In my experience, after someone has created a new account and have followed the rules, they should be given their full account back - you've let them return, they've behaved, the previous "perm ban" is deemed invalid. Period.

And Garion my love, your reply to #6 isn't valid, you're talking to Mentor who has got a perm ban on his old account, yet he's been back for ages and isn't a "serial rule breaker" or "contactly breaking a rule or group of rules" Generalising is the devil's lover

[Robbie]

Heck, even I've got a perm banned account and I can't be classed as a rule-breaker can I

[GommeInc]

Heck, even I've got a perm banned account and I can't be classed as a rule-breaker can I

^ Proof a rule breaker can be loved by society

[Mentor]

Heck, even I've got a perm banned account and I can't be classed as a rule-breaker can I

Can never be sure, if they gave you your old account back merged in to this, you may suddenly start breaking all the rules again :p

Obviously the old banned account is the only thing keeping you in line - at least, that seems to be the logic behind the perm ban idea as far as i can tell :p

[Nixt]

And Garion my love, your reply to #6 isn't valid, you're talking to Mentor who has got a perm ban on his old account, yet he's been back for ages and isn't a "serial rule breaker" or "contactly breaking a rule or group of rules" Generalising is the devil's lover

My reply to six has an OR, not necessarily serial rule breakers but someone has broken a small number of rules that combined are extremely serious or one or two serious offences that justify a ban. Admittedly it wasn't very clear babes!

[FlyingJesus]

I was perm banned once but I tricked everyone into unbanning me was innocent so got unbanned after explaining things

[Robbie]

I could unban my old account now but I'd probably get fired for doing it without permission - plus I wouldn't be an Smod on there. I can't really moan though, looking through the Unacceptable Posts archives, my ban was justified (however some others involved were unbanned) - would just be nice to have it unbanned

[GommeInc]

Have the two merged, simple