Quote from: cryptohunter on December 20, 2018, 11:06:57 PM

I wasn't trying to stifle any free speech.
I don't see a point though of turning this thread into pages of people who just say " all plagiarist get insta perm ban" because it makes the conversation for others trying to think up another system much harder.

Understood. I just felt it needed saying as that point of view is important to still have present for this discussion to move forward. To effectively overhaul and implement any major change those opinions serve to show what the new system has to overcome in opposition; or at least appease for support.

Quote

Can you point me to the ones that got banned you would give another chance to? I didn't think I missed any hero or legends out because originally I was thinking of a max 1.1000 ratio .... but the reviews and closer scrutiny especially for those with 1000's of posts is a lot to review. This system is quick and fast and could introduce tomorrow.

I honestly never tracked them or gave it much more than a passing thought. The one that I thought had been brought back was ChibitCTY, I actually thought they had been unbanned that's how little I followed it. It was only recently I went back to review.

After going over it again that case falls outside of where I stood on drawing the line. I have since adjusted my thoughts on that case, only in terms of the punitive measures. The original story is gone, but the recent explanation states it was done specifically to fulfill requirements for a SIG, does lean towards out of duty to the manager, but that's not the point.

In this case I feel enough members came out to vouch and show that at least in a certain segment of the community they were an absolute net positive. For that I would bring them back, with a permanent paid SIG ban.

I may not have been super clear in my monitoring idea. It essentially would be a board like the ModLog, where the list of unbanned users would be displayed. Anyone and everyone could access this list and if they chose can review posts of these users for further infractions. I don't expect this list to be very long, as there are not many users that would win their appeal. I don't know who we would allow to be the jury so to speak, maybe a pool of members chosen at random, much like a possible idea floated by theymos in regards to the trust system.

All in all I would stray entirely away from a monetizing this appeals process, but would be in favor of long term or permanent signature bans, as well as my previously mentioned advertising or [ANN] creation for monetary gain.

Cutting down on appeals isn't really necessary. It's a tool that works out, generally within a few minutes someone has explained to the fake ignorant exactly what they did wrong and someone follows up with 3 more examples immediately after they say it was the first time. This seems to be the trend of most appeals anyways. Then people just have to stop feeding the thread with replies. Instead we could overhaul the ban message that then states "this was plagiarism these are the posts and the source you stole from" then as part of the appeal process have them put the full message in their appeal.

Quote from: suchmoon on December 21, 2018, 04:00:18 PM

Moderators could simply apply their discretion in the handful of cases that deserve that. I know there is the concern of setting a precedent

I learned from the ChiBitCTY thread that there was a precedent set in the past, in regards to LoanShark I beleive. I really don't know anything beyond that not everyone agreed, and that they had been unbanned. Since it came up in a plagiarism thread I assumed the ban was related to this.