Ff abuse discussion

Processed complaints will be moved here.

Moderator: Oversight Staff

Yarragon
Treant
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2014 1:49 pm
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Ff abuse discussion

Postby Yarragon » Sat Aug 25, 2018 5:18 pm

EdgeOfChaos wrote:Can I ask why this was copied to complaints? I don't want to make a huge deal of this and I don't think it warrants an official complaint, I just wanted to talk about it.


On that same note, I don't think anyone disagreed with Amnon's call. It was more about the priority of things, that sparked the discussion. The fact that with minimal effort you could see the player that posted the original ban request could be seen to have been associated with another player who's had a request up on him for nearly 2 weeks, and was (at the time of me typing this, not 100% confirmed) had been assumed to be dodging. Yes I understand you all don't ban the OP of a ban request unless the rule violation was serious, but it was still a concern.
"Sura is a God dude, like for real."
-Burn/Timmy/Avion

Sylvanas
Treant Protector
Posts: 974
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2014 4:56 am
Been thanked: 159 times

Re: Ff abuse discussion

Postby Sylvanas » Sat Aug 25, 2018 7:37 pm

Yarragon wrote:On that same note, I don't think anyone disagreed with Amnon's call. It was more about the priority of things, that sparked the discussion. The fact that with minimal effort you could see the player that posted the original ban request could be seen to have been associated with another player who's had a request up on him for nearly 2 weeks, and was (at the time of me typing this, not 100% confirmed) had been assumed to be dodging. Yes I understand you all don't ban the OP of a ban request unless the rule violation was serious, but it was still a concern.

Pay attention to the title of zawada's brq. This, combined with the fact it was a very quick ban to process (just check chat log and done), is the real reason they were banned so fast. Honestly, mods are like everyone else, they'd rather pick the easy unusual request than just wallow through the same boring crap all day.

I do disagree with them being banned entirely, by the way. I think context is everything. Not going to beat that dead horse again today though, my opinion isn't wanted.

EdgeOfChaos

Re: Ff abuse discussion

Postby EdgeOfChaos » Sun Aug 26, 2018 7:55 pm

Seems that they are approving your posts here. Why do you think your opinion isn't wanted? I am not sure whether they should have been banned or not. True, they did technically violate a rule. But it's also true that context is everything, as you say. It's one of those gray area cases that some moderators would ban for, some not, but I think at the very least what I am going to say is that the duration was too long. The priority was also an issue, but not the only thing.

Sylvanas
Treant Protector
Posts: 974
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2014 4:56 am
Been thanked: 159 times

Re: Ff abuse discussion

Postby Sylvanas » Sun Aug 26, 2018 11:19 pm

EdgeOfChaos wrote:Seems that they are approving your posts here. Why do you think your opinion isn't wanted?

Well, like I said in this thread's twin, mine was approved in approximately 27 hours, what about yours?

All I'm saying is I think any amount of ban is wrong considering a report against an entire team agreeing to hand over a win by forfeiting is dependent on the input of game throwers. Now, my opinion on throwers is that they go to hell along with their input on any situation, which leaves no one to legitimately report those people, because no one cares about what they've done. If no one that matters is harmed or bothered, why make it a bannable offense at all?

I think people should simply be allowed to forfeit a game for any reason they see fit as long as it doesn't qualify as elo boosting (a single game involving a bunch of unrelated players isn't elo boosting). This is a very uncommon situation that will never become a problem unless ENT decides to make a problem out of it.

As an example, I played this game yesterday. We were doing very well, with about 2-3 kdr globally as a team and one rax down. We would have ended soon after, but at 28:15 most of the players dropped (thanks 1.30), leaving cent alone vs 3 players. Eventually there was another drop, making it 2v1, and cent won in the end, apparently by using me as a meat shield and making me die a bunch of times. Let's say the other team just said "you would have won if that didn't happen, we'll just forfeit". I think most people would view it as a good gesture. On the other hand, ENT currently views it as a major game throw/ff abuse offense. I think this is absurd as hell. Just let people forfeit a game if they feel like it.

So as I said, I'm just beating the same dead horse as before. I just wanted to reformulate my thoughts a little.

Zeratul

Re: Ff abuse discussion

Postby Zeratul » Mon Aug 27, 2018 10:50 am

We can keep on beating up every possible point of view, but i doubt you'll reach a middle term on this one: They broke the rules, intentionally, believing that the other player was trolling/ruining games: There's no 2nd intention, or any other context here - they broke them, and knew exactly what they were doing & what they were trying to achieve by doing so.

Breaking the rules and expecting leniency due to X player breaking them first is wrong: There's a reason why you report the games at the end, else just imagine if people started doing the same on all games, and then defend themselves with "Hey, but X player was losing on purpose/trolling/feeding/etc."

The ban duration seems to have been more of a wake up call (to get their attention), than the duration itself: Yes, as a former moderator, I know that you usually don't ban people just for the sake of it (neither do you increase the duration just to get people's attention), but this was one of those exceptions, that required to get player's attention to avoid them doing the same again (and sorry, but we all know how the community works sometimes: Unless you are strict on the decision, they see "Only 1 day? that's fine, ill do it again"). So imo, and given the !ff abuse duration usually varied between 1 up to 5 days, the 5 days seems appropriate to ensure they appealed and realized that breaking the rules themselves, will not be accepted, no matter the context.

And had the players themselves seen the wrong in their actions, i'm 100% sure Amnon would have easily reduced or removed their ban (as he did once they realized it), so you can see his duration was never used to ban them for all that time, but to gain their attention & educate them on how it works.

The only point i can agree with you, is the fact that both brqs should have been handled at the same time (even if delayed for a few hours), to avoid giving the image that 1 person was right, and the other was wrong (He was banned later on, after Amnon spent hours looking through his replays and processing it)

Pay attention to the title of zawada's brq. This, combined with the fact it was a very quick ban to process (just check chat log and done), is the real reason they were banned so fast. Honestly, mods are like everyone else, they'd rather pick the easy unusual request than just wallow through the same boring crap all day.


I've replied to this in the other thread:

It depends on a lot of things: Usually they try to review from oldest to newest (or that's how it used to be), however some ban requests do take more time to review/process than others (and some are just a headache by reading them - Wrong information(s) given, unable to interpret what exactly is being reported, etc.):

When i was a moderator, there were times where i had like 10-20 mins left before heading off, and given the time, i would most likely pick 1-2 quick brqs that i could process during that time (or pick 1 that i would be sure i could finish in the time i had left): Again don't forget what they do is voluntary, they spend their time ensuring you have a platform to play on (and try to maintain the forum in order), however that's not as easy as it sounds, specially during summer time, where moderators take their time off for vacations/holidays, etc. and usually during these times (summer/winter breaks), there's more activity from players (And truth be said, whenever there's more active players, there's more rule violations, thus more ban requests).

User avatar
AmnoN
ENT Staff
Posts: 2154
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:50 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 34 times

Re: Ff abuse discussion

Postby AmnoN » Mon Aug 27, 2018 11:19 pm

To zeratul 's points:
1) It was clear that one of the banned users did not even attempt to understand why the ban was there (another mod denied the appeal after a second opinion was requested) - I denied the original appeal for the same reason

2) The duration was to ensure that the users do not do it again - forces them to come to the forums and appeal, and hopefully understand the rules in the process; similar to the first point

3) If the ones posting all of this nonsense about "you should focus on charnel and not the !ff abusers" had taken a bit of time and put a ban request together, it would have saved me literally 2h+ of reviewing the user's games - hence the delay on the ban versus the !ff abuse one which is rather simple and straightforward.

4) Similar to point 3, some ban requests are so horrendously written that they get pushed and not reviewed right away - they are either poorly written/ are missing information or have time stamps such as, "all game" (we consistently ask the OP to fix that but often, they do not even bother to do it themselves and others end up doing it for them - thank you to all of those people) (those are just a couple of examples). Those take A LOT of time to review. Some are simply delayed because they are complex and are not quick bans (e.g. ones with multiple violators) - I find that in most cases, these are poorly written with multiple violators and offenses mixed together, which takes even more time to review.

5) Either Charnel or Persephone are separate users or one user who goes well out of their way to ensure that they are always using separate IPs. Given that the forum account appears to be used by both in-game accounts, it is not unreasonable to assume that they are the same person, but in this case, it is a rare exception where they most certainly are not - this makes it harder to track them.

6) I would ask that users put themselves in a mod's shoes:
a) We are volunteers and many of us have full time jobs - we also happen to have lives
b) A poorly written ban request is frankly painful to deal with (leads back to the volunteering point)
c) Our job as moderators is to ensure that ENT is a fair platform to play on, and to limit game ruining behaviour - you cannot make everyone happy when doing this as it involves bans in order to enforce rules; rules were laid out to facilitate this fair environment. To that point, why would I unban someone who clearly does not care that he/she broke the rules? Why would I not ban someone and expect them to appeal in order to force them to learn the rules (or wait a few days)?
d) It is REALLY easy to take pot shots when you are not the one that has to deal with the fallout - please don't do it. Take a minute and think it through, and maybe (this next part is absolutely mind-blowing) try to do something constructive as opposed to whining about it... A HUGE thank you to those who actually do this/ have done it.
These users thanked the author AmnoN for the post (total 5):
legiontdgrrr (Tue Sep 04, 2018 3:34 pm) • Haunt (Sat Sep 01, 2018 9:07 am) • Kappa (Wed Aug 29, 2018 4:38 am) • BeerLord (Mon Aug 27, 2018 11:46 pm) • Merex (Mon Aug 27, 2018 11:37 pm)

Sylvanas
Treant Protector
Posts: 974
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2014 4:56 am
Been thanked: 159 times

Re: Ff abuse discussion

Postby Sylvanas » Tue Aug 28, 2018 12:00 am

Zeratul wrote:Unless you are strict on the decision, they see "Only 1 day? that's fine, ill do it again"

Is this really how you picture their thoughts? Out of control forfeit junkies, already planning their next crime against the poor game throwers? Unless of course a hero sweeps in and bans them for no less than 5 days? This should be treated as the unusual situation it was. They just did what they did because of the rare circumstances.

Like I just said in the other thread, beyond the broad "no ff abuse", this rule is completely informal. I mean sure, mods could go and specify it and say "see, it's a real rule now", but that would achieve absolutely nothing besides giving throwers a way to report the people who make them win games. I get that at first glance, it might look like something you that would fit nicely in a "ff abuse" folder, but I think that's all it is: something that superficially fits, but ultimately has no purpose being there.

Why is this even something to fight over? What are the benefits for doing this?

AmnoN wrote:1) It was clear that one of the banned users did not even attempt to understand why the ban was there (another mod denied the appeal after a second opinion was requested) - I denied the original appeal for the same reason

Amnon, since you're here, I'm not attacking you for doing what you did, since like I said, it was probably the most instinctive thing to do at the time. Yet, I think that after the dust has settled, I think the purpose and justification of a ban like this should seriously be questioned.

AmnoN wrote:3) If the ones posting all of this nonsense about "you should focus on charnel and not the !ff abusers" had taken a bit of time and put a ban request together, it would have saved me literally 2h+ of reviewing the user's games - hence the delay on the ban versus the !ff abuse one which is rather simple and straightforward.

I don't play legion td, I just checked his stats and immediately knew what was going on. Of course, I couldn't prove it, but the rules, the precious rules prevent any of us who aren't directly involved from reporting him. Maybe certain people should have acted sooner (maybe the forfeited game wouldn't even have taken place to begin with), but for those who couldn't, it wasn't a pretty sight. The outrage should be understandable.
Last edited by Sylvanas on Tue Aug 28, 2018 9:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

EdgeOfChaos

Re: Ff abuse discussion

Postby EdgeOfChaos » Tue Aug 28, 2018 8:51 pm

I want to point out an issue with this.
It was clear that one of the banned users did not even attempt to understand why the ban was there

Yes, clearly they did not understand why the ban was there. They thought the ban was incorrect.
Ban appeals is not only used for asking for leniency, it's also there for arguing against bans that the user believes is improper. It literally says that in the forum description: "Believe you were banned unfairly?"

The user believed he was banned unfairly so of course he doesn't understand the ban. It is pretty well established that if you feel a ban is incorrect, you first make an appeal asking for another opinion, and if you are not satisfied with the response, then you move to complaints.

If someone appeals saying your ban is unfair, and you just deny the appeal, it is quite similar to a moderator closing a complaint against them.

I think people should simply be allowed to forfeit a game for any reason they see fit as long as it doesn't qualify as elo boosting

This is also my perspective.

Unitil
Oversight Staff
Posts: 4980
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:56 am
Location: Canada
Been thanked: 105 times

Re: Ff abuse discussion

Postby Unitil » Fri Sep 07, 2018 2:34 am

Rule breaking, no matter the circumstances, is against ENT Gaming rules and can result in a ban. We always encourage users to play out the game, and report the user(s) afterwards. There is no scenario where it is ok to break a rule in an attempt to punish other users who you may deem as a thrower/gameruiner.

In respect to the above, the ban was warranted.

Bans are mainly meant as a tool to teach users, in order to help prevent further breaking of ENT Gaming rules. If the user and the staff member cannot come to an agreement in the initial appeal, the staff member can deny the appeal and the user can create a second topic requesting a second opinion on the ban in question. There are instances where the user can request a second opinion in the initial appeal, however, if the appeal is spammed, these requests can be missed by the staff members.

Regarding the appeals, they ranged from the user and staff member disagreeing with regards to the ban, to the user thwarting their own appeal by posting a comment directed at the staff member. This comment came across as disingenuous with regards to their second appeal. The ban was then confirmed by the Staff Department as legitimate on the third appeal.

Observation of the appeals in the spoiler
Spoiler!
First Appeal - User and Staff member did not come to an agreement regarding the ban. Appeal was spammed by a few users, and could have been missed with regards to his second opinion request.

Second Appeal - User noted he would not abuse !ff moving forward, and copy-pasted the rule he had broken. However, user also tagged the banning staff member in a suggestion, specifically noting they should change the wiki, making notes towards the recent ban. This came across as disingenuous, with regards to his recent appeal.
[quote=kasper699]i think @ amnon should change the wiki because he is like the boss of FF abuse and knows the rule backwards when the wiki only said any form of FF abuse so there is not much information[/quote]

Third Appeal - Second opinion was requested, and was confirmed by HazarDous with regards to the legitimacy of the ban placed.

Fourth Appeal - User displayed their frustration regarding the ban, and noted they would repeat the same offense, if presented by the same scenario. This led to the final appeal being denied.


Appeals were handled appropriately, as described/outlined above.

The staff member responsible for banning the individual(s) is given the right to handle the initial appeal. Subsequent appeals, if requested, can be handled by other staff members. If there is a disagreement regarding the verdict, they will talk it out in private; prior to anything happening on the appeal. However, as noted in my appeal overview, the user decided to attach the banning staff member in a suggestion, and it came across as disingenuous with regards to their recent appeal. This led to the second appeal being denied.

Now, with regards to how the ban was handled, and I may sound like a broken record with regards to this statement, however, we are all volunteers. We handle requests when we're able to, and sometimes we cherry pick some of the easier topics to handle when short on time. However, saying all that, AmnoN did note that he'd look into the OP of the request, along with all requests made against him. In the end, the user was banned heavily for dodging/breaking our rules. The rule breaker did not go unpunished.

The duration of the ban is entirely up to the banning staff member. Though there are guidelines with regards to first offences, they usually are ranged and can be on the larger side dependant on the offending player(s) intentions. In this case, the users intentionally used !ff when the game ending had not been determined yet. However, as described above, our bans are simply a tool to help prevent future rule breaks. We simply wish to have the offending player appeal on our forum, and learn our rules. Generally speaking, bans can be lifted once the offending player understands/accepts why they were banned.

The long and short of the above is,
- Initial appeals are generally handled by the banning staff member
- Second opinions can be requested, however, if there is any disagreement between the staff members, it must be discussed in private prior to anything happening on that appeal.
- No matter the circumstance, users are not to break ENT Gaming rules to punish another player they may deem as a gameruiner/thrower. Breaking a rule can and will be enforced by a ban if reported.
- Bans are meant as a tool to help prevent future rule breaks. They can be lifted if the user understands/accepts why they were banned, or if the user goes through the appropriate channels to ensure the matter is discussed between staff members (second opinion requests).

If you believe one of our rules to be too vague or worded poorly, feel free to make a suggestion, while making sure it follows the general idea of the original rule. It is nigh impossible to list all scenarios, and we expect our users to have some common sense when reading our rules. If we were to attempt making such a list, it would cause our rule page to be a couple pages long (if expanding for all rules). We want to make the ENT Gaming rules as short as possible, as to ensure users are more likely to read our rules. Having a long list of rules can be daunting to new/all users.

I do hope this covers all the necessary points, and helps everyone know how we as staff members view this type of situation. No matter the circumstances, rules are rules, and you're not to take them into your own hands. If you disagree with a rule, or wish to have them revised, put together a well thought out suggestion, and post it under the appropriate section. If the staff department finds it to be reasonable, they can approve such changes.

Processing.
These users thanked the author Unitil for the post (total 3):
Haunt (Sat Sep 08, 2018 2:23 am) • Merex (Sat Sep 08, 2018 1:06 am) • Jabba41 (Fri Sep 07, 2018 3:20 pm)


Return to “Processed Cases”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests