And if I did, is there anything wrong with responding with something like this?

Of course not, but that’s not really what’s being argued. It’s not that anyone is suggesting there was absolutely no alternative to banning, but that banning was a perfectly valid and reasonable choice to make. Some think it was, some think it wasn’t, and some are just here for the hors-d’œuvre.

Seems to boil down to one of those ‘if you have a problem you’re the problem’ exchanges, topped with tone-argument.

“I appreciate you pointing out the inaccuracy. But I don’t appreciate the negativity it was phrased with. Please keep this in mind for the future. Thanks.”

It’s okay for them to expect some kind of service, and when they don’t get it, deride someone’s hard work,

Well, yeah, it’s okay to expect some kind of service when that’s what’s written on the box. The idea that everybody gets a turn is pretty built in.

I’m not even sure I’ve ever won a game of connect four. Especially against my kids, lol.

I can highly recommend the mashed potatoes strategy.

You earnestly think it’s okay for people to address others this way?

What on earth did I say that makes you believe I think it’s okay for people to treat others rudely? I have said repeatedly that it is important for staff to set boundaries. All we disagree on is what form those boundaries take as a default action.

Do you think these people can be coached into acting like a model MUSHer with a gentle warning? A second chance? A strike system? Do you think they won’t cause problems down the line?

I don’t know what you mean by “these people”, because I don’t think it takes a certain kind of person to lose their temper, say something they regret, word something more confrontationally than they should have, etc. Humans are going to human.

But yes, I know with 100% certainty that some people who screw up can mend things and behave properly, because I have literally seen it happen. On many occasions.

I have also banned people! Sometimes that’s the right thing to do. Sometimes there are less drastic alternatives. I’m genuinely baffled why this is such a controversial take.

@Pavel said in Banning Bad, Actually?:

You won a game of connect four in three moves.

I’m not even sure I’ve ever won a game of connect four. Especially against my kids, lol.

Eh I’m all talk.

Tbh most of us are. Our ability to deal with people, good or ill, depends on so many factors (including the alignment of the planets, whether Mars is in the microwave, and whether I’ve had carbs today) that we can’t really say “Oh I’m always super tolerant and amazing” or “I’m always on a hair trigger ready to ban people for mentioning even the thought of Belgium.” But it makes forum chats more engaging.

I probably lack an objective view of this

I’d even go so far as to suggest that nobody has, nor can have, a truly objective view about this (or, perhaps, anything…) but recognising and acknowledging our biases is an important part of the conversation. Your level of bullshit tolerance is low, Faraday’s is high, mine is somewhere between the two, and based on that we’d all be right (not just have the right) to remove players who exceed our specific level.

That said, there is perhaps a conversation to be had about whether people with low tolerance for bullshit should force themselves to interact with the general public, or if they should get a trusted friend/acquaintance/me to be their player relations person instead… but that’s probably beyond the scope of current discussion.

I know you, personally, have a very long fuse. I’ve seen you tolerate a lot of bullshit. I’ve seen people be real assholes towards you and your work. It sucks. I probably lack an objective view of this, as all I have are battle scars from people that were given second, third, fourth chances.

Game runners! You don’t have to tolerate this crap. It’s 2025. It is exceptionally easy to be respectful of other people, not some insurmountable task. We’re a dwindling community. There aren’t a ton of games left where this attitude will fly anymore. These tough calls suck to make, but you either curate your playerbase, or you end up with a very specific type of game.

@Faraday Well yeah, but you’re Faraday. You can speak braille and have counted to infinity twice. You won a game of connect four in three moves.

Oh, the same approach has worked very well for me. And I tried to win connect-four by using tablespoons of mashed potato instead of chips.

This was basically enough to get OnceWas banned. This person was freshly new. This is the most hair trigger case I can think of. He was immediately shown the door, although he was sure to kinda’ buckle down on his stance. Mild, probably, but no one wanted to deal with it.

I didn’t recall them by name, but I searched and all I could find was this post where I basically said that their attitude over a minor documentation issue was “bafflingly aggressive”. I can’t find anywhere where I said they should be banned for it? Or supported them being banned for such a thing? That doesn’t seem like something I would do, but maybe I’m forgetting some important detail.

I’m unclear of what your threshold is, as I recall you were not very approving of this behavior.

Disapproving of someone’s behavior doesn’t equate to thinking they should be banned for it. As staff, you have the authority to set boundaries. Sometimes that can be done with a coaching approach, other times you need something firmer, like:

“If you would like to try again and rework that page into something even remotely approaching a reasonable discussion of issues rather than a full-on attack, feel free. Otherwise leave. It’s that simple.” - actual Fara quote

In that specific case, the player backtracked and we had a constructive conversation. There have been other times where other players full-on apologized and we’ve gone on to have a good relationship.

There have certainly been times where I’ve given someone too many chances, but on the whole this approach has worked out well. YMMV.

Do we ever learn anything? Ever?

Yes. I learned that a few people are actually interested in a ridiculous 3-month server surrounding the antics nobles trying to get chosen as a spouse to a head of state to be.

@Pavel said in Banning Bad, Actually?:

@Ominous I think there was a guy who was quite successfully roleplaying as a… I wanna say washing machine? Something like that.

I will say this of Shang. It may be the Mos Eisley of the MU* world, but I have encountered and heard of some the most creative RP there.

I’ve also encountered some of the worst. The place tends to house the extremes.

@bear_necessities said in Banning Bad, Actually?:

@Pavel said in Banning Bad, Actually?:

So we’ll have this conversation. Forever

I mean you could say that about every conversation we have on this forum, pretty sure we just go around in circles.

Well that’s kind of yet another crux of the matter. What counts as being a dick for you isn’t necessarily going to be the same…for whomever is running Shang, etc, etc.

I suspect that being a dick or any sort of phallic object is celebrated on Shang, as is being one of the various orifices or phallus receptacles.

We’re like this close > < to prescribing general behavioural standards, again.

Is it going to be ‘respect the lawyer cat gavel’?

So we’ll have this conversation. Forever

I mean you could say that about every conversation we have on this forum, pretty sure we just go around in circles.