Who banned me? For how long?

[wineandgolover]

Don't forget about "non-game related" kibitz when an admin tells you to focus on the game.

Trouble maker.

[BigDoug]

KGS policy is not to identify the length of the ban period, so this information is not provided.

I would have to agree with others that the main purpose of a ban is to improve a situation for KGS and it's users. The banned person is also one of the users, and in most cases, one who we expect will return to enjoy the server. It would seem to me that by not informing him or her of the extent of the punishment, KGS is adding an element of cruelty to the already irksome situation of not being allowed to play. By so doing, KGS runs the risk of creating animosity where there may have been none before. What is the advantage to this policy?

To be honest, I don't see anything cruel about a person not being told about the length of a ban period. If a person has broken the rules, then the person isn't allowed to use the server for a period of time. One goal is that the person will realise that misbehaviour is counter-productive and will therefore not repeat the inappropriate behaviour.

[RBerenguel]

Maybe at least a "minimum ban time" should be told the banee: at least from keeping him from checking every 30 minutes if he can log in. It may prevent him from creating new accounts, too...

[leichtloeslich]

To be honest, I don't see anything cruel about a person not being told about the length of a ban period.

Far out.

If a person has broken the rules, then the person isn't allowed to use the server for a period of time. One goal is that the person will realise that misbehaviour is counter-productive and will therefore not repeat the inappropriate behaviour.

I see, so not telling the bannee (is that a word?) the length of his (or her) "sentence" is a means of making the punishment more severe in order to prevent future misbehaviour. Have I understood this correctly?

If so, then I don't see how you have addressed the argument that this practise may cause more resentment than is necessary and thus add to a poisonous social atmosphere in KGS. (Which clearly is something to be avoided, right?)

[hyperpape]

A hypothesis (I don't even know if I believe it): tell a troublemaker* that they have a 2 hour ban, and there's a good chance that they'll log back in right at two hours. They'll have been stewing and they'll have a hot head. They make trouble again.

Give them an indeterminate ban, and they can't just wait it out and log in that second. They go off and do something else, and eventually they log back in. Hopefully they've cooled off.

* Not you, lovely people. You just got banned once because you said something silly and got out of hand. I mean the habitual idiots.

[Boidhre]

A hypothesis (I don't even know if I believe it): tell a troublemaker* that they have a 2 hour ban, and there's a good chance that they'll log back in right at two hours. They'll have been stewing and they'll have a hot head. They make trouble again.

Give them an indeterminate ban, and they can't just wait it out and log in that second. They go off and do something else, and eventually they log back in. Hopefully they've cooled off.

* Not you, lovely people. You just got banned once because you said something silly and got out of hand. I mean the habitual idiots.

You don't give habitual idiots 2 hour bans for this reason. That they're habitual about indicates your 2 hour bans aren't working. You escalate, with the warning that the next ban within X time will be longer until they cop on.

[RBerenguel]

A hypothesis (I don't even know if I believe it): tell a troublemaker* that they have a 2 hour ban, and there's a good chance that they'll log back in right at two hours. They'll have been stewing and they'll have a hot head. They make trouble again.

Give them an indeterminate ban, and they can't just wait it out and log in that second. They go off and do something else, and eventually they log back in. Hopefully they've cooled off.

* Not you, lovely people. You just got banned once because you said something silly and got out of hand. I mean the habitual idiots.

Actually I expected all bans to be at least 24 hours. If someone can stew for 24 hours, then it's a problem

[PaperTiger]

To be honest, I don't see anything cruel about a person not being told about the length of a ban period. If a person has broken the rules, then the person isn't allowed to use the server for a period of time. One goal is that the person will realise that misbehaviour is counter-productive and will therefore not repeat the inappropriate behaviour.

Before the law sits a gatekeeper. To this gatekeeper comes a man from the country who asks to gain entry into the law. But the gatekeeper says that he cannot grant him entry at the moment. The man thinks about it and then asks if he will be allowed to come in sometime later on. “It is possible,” says the gatekeeper, “but not now.”

[Boidhre]

Actually I expected all bans to be at least 24 hours. If someone can stew for 24 hours, then it's a problem

If someone feels wronged they can stew for far longer than 24 hours.

[daal]

KGS policy is not to identify the length of the ban period, so this information is not provided.

I would have to agree with others that the main purpose of a ban is to improve a situation for KGS and it's users. The banned person is also one of the users, and in most cases, one who we expect will return to enjoy the server. It would seem to me that by not informing him or her of the extent of the punishment, KGS is adding an element of cruelty to the already irksome situation of not being allowed to play. By so doing, KGS runs the risk of creating animosity where there may have been none before. What is the advantage to this policy?

To be honest, I don't see anything cruel about a person not being told about the length of a ban period. If a person has broken the rules, then the person isn't allowed to use the server for a period of time. One goal is that the person will realise that misbehaviour is counter-productive and will therefore not repeat the inappropriate behaviour.

What I see as cruel about the policy of not telling a person how long they are banned (is it an hour, a day, a week?) is that it is a form of psychological torture. Of course this is over-dramatizing, but the point is that you are not just keeping someone from the server, but also causing them pain. If you don't recognize this, try imagining the difference of being for example stuck in an elevator when you know that the repairman will be there in half an hour or if you don't know when you will get out. Adding this element to the punishment seems counter-productive, because the reaction to expect is that the person will become more angry at KGS and less likely to view the punishment as just. Who benefits by this? I realize what the purpose of a punishment is, but I don't understand why KGS feels it's not enough to tell a troublemaker that they have lost the privilege of playing on the server for a certain period of time. What extra benefit does KGS gain by this double-punishment?

[Charles Alden]

This discussion has moved from the ridiculous to the absurd. Not telling someone just how many hours he is banned from the server after he says "--- your mother" to his opponent is some form of "psychological torture?" Please.

For those who are adamant about this, I suggest that the next time a bouncer escorts you out of a bar (and I trust this is a frequent experience for you), try standing outside the door and demanding to know from him just how long before they'll let you back in. Let us know how that works out.

[daal]

This discussion has moved from the ridiculous to the absurd. Not telling someone just how many hours he is banned from the server after he says "--- your mother" to his opponent is some form of "psychological torture?" Please.

For those who are adamant about this, I suggest that the next time a bouncer escorts you out of a bar (and I trust this is a frequent experience for you), try standing outside the door and demanding to know from him just how long before they'll let you back in. Let us know how that works out.

Speaking from experience?

A good punishment, as BigDoug implies, is one that reduces the possibility that the inappropriate behavior will be repeated. I am simply suggesting that the policy of leaving the user in the dark as to how long he will be punished might be less effective in this regard than stating the length of the ban.

I used the concept of torture to explain why I felt that there is an element of cruelty to the dual punishment. Do you think a bouncer should beat up the guy they throw out of the bar?

[Kirby]

...

To be honest, I don't see anything cruel about a person not being told about the length of a ban period. ...

Of course you don't, BigDoug. That's because you only see this from one perspective: the person banned was "bad", and they are getting punishment as a result. But this is only one perspective. What constitutes "bad behavior", in many cases, is largely subjective. What is good for the environment depends a lot on personal preference.

I'd be willing to bet that there are individuals on KGS who think that your own behavior is "bad". Maybe they think you're too strict, or they don't like your sense of humor.¹ How would you like it, then, if you were kicked off for an unknown period of time, without knowing who kicked you off? The argument that somebody has "broken the rules" is not very strong since the primary determination of the rules is subject to the opinion of the admin. Yes, there exists a TOS, but as we've discussed before, the TOS is neither comprehensive nor strictly enforced.

You seem to think that, as an admin, you are on a superior level of understanding of what constitutes bad behavior. In reality, it's just a reflection of what you personally feel.



¹Note: My comment here is not about you, personally. I'm sure, given the amount of posts that I have on the forum here, that there are many that despise me even more!

[Boidhre]

This discussion has moved from the ridiculous to the absurd. Not telling someone just how many hours he is banned from the server after he says "--- your mother" to his opponent is some form of "psychological torture?" Please.

For those who are adamant about this, I suggest that the next time a bouncer escorts you out of a bar (and I trust this is a frequent experience for you), try standing outside the door and demanding to know from him just how long before they'll let you back in. Let us know how that works out.

Actually, usually in my country bouncers will tell you how long you're to f off for. If you're too drunk, they'll tell your friend or whoever you were drinking with. Unless you're drinking in some dive of a place.

[Mef]

What I see as cruel about the policy of not telling a person how long they are banned (is it an hour, a day, a week?) is that it is a form of psychological torture.

Realistically though, there are only 2 questions that get answered by this -- "Can I log in later today?" (try to log in in two hours), "Can I log in tomorrow?".


I believe part of the reason that ban lengths aren't discussed is because they are so short the order of operations is this:

1: User is banned
2: User sends email to admin@gokgs.com asking about ban length
3: User receives response from admin@gokgs.com saying "Your ban has already expired"