I am part of a FR Facebook group and sometimes, people post about being banned.
It always intrigues me how they dodge the reason in comments, mostly saying "my brother and sister play but they haven't logged in for days/months/years" with dozens of comments either confirming or denying that is bannable.
Sometimes, rarely, the ban was wrong or unjust and trigger happy staff just blanket banned without investigating properly and very very rarely is the ban overturned.
In some ways I feel a little pity for the genuine mistakes and nothing for those who claim they are not a multi-- then again, we see plenty on here, report them and nothing happens *cough*MiaShuji*cough* and yet these seemingly innocent people are so upset that they got banned and most of the time, after some digging they had done something shady.
I do wonder where staff draws that line and if they even when given evidence which some players have done, simply say..no. But are letting blatent multi's and RTC happen without batting an eyelid. It's just so bizarre to me.
One of the things is, we can't see what is happening behind the scenes.
What a user might think is a blantant RMT or multi, might not be. They might be a group of dedicated 'friends' (basically just a group of people, not necessarily friends) who are all doing things like this. Which isn't against the rules.
Then again, it might also be that some of these cases require more digging, because even if it IS a multi, if the multi is smart, they can make it look like it isn't. (such as not blatantly funneling from one account to the main) Which means more digging is required.
As I have said in the past in regards to 'banxiety', staff of pet sites most often don't want to ban people. They want people using their site, because it ups the metrics and gives them more ad revenue. The more they ban people, the more likely people, whether they were unfairly banned or not, are going to warn people away from the site. If the person was banned unfairly, that is even worse.
So, even if it might seem obvious to players, the staff can't just ban them without making sure that it is. Especially since I have seen many people who jump on a multi-hunt bandwagon because they dislike the person they are accusing.
Look at the other thread on here where people were talking about cross site trading and how it is often a cover for RMT. As someone who does occasionally cross site trade, the vast majority of trades I see are legit. Sure, there are some that aren't, but I would say that those are the minority of trades. It is just that some big name players are involved so they get mentioned more. The majority of people who cross site trade don't get mentioned and thus those trades just happen without anyone even knowing about it (and yes, I have cross site traded with multiple users for CS stuff from FR before)
There is also the tendency to ascribe 'bad motives' to everything a person does if they do one thing wrong, or they are disliked. I have seen it in the past where someone is accused of being a multi, and other people will start throwing around rumors of them being transphobic, or racist, and when asked for evidence, can't provide anything or the evidence they do provide is so weak it is practically non-existant. It is just that that person isn't liked. (I have seen this not just on FR but other sites as well)
So, someone is disliked by a group of people, and they do a cross site trade, it is easy for that group of people to say 'that must be RMT' and report it, without any more evidence than the person they reported is not liked or has done something else against the rules.
Add in how many reports the staff most likely has to wade through, I am sure that there are some that DO slip through the cracks, and some where it might seem like they are getting away with it, but the staff just hasn't completed the investigation yet/gotten to it. Even with evidence, staff still has to investigate, especially as I know some people are fond of sending screenshots, which can easily be faked. Or they want the staff to take action based upon off site activity.
Basically, I feel this is a case of 'damned if you do, damned if you don't.' If staff just start banning quickly, they are going to be accused of being 'trigger happy' and increase banxiety, especially since there will be unfair bans handed out. If they take their time to ban, they are accused of not doing anything and people get upset that blatant rule breakers are allowed to keep playing.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Banning
(Anonymous) 2024-05-04 09:23 am (UTC)(link)It always intrigues me how they dodge the reason in comments, mostly saying "my brother and sister play but they haven't logged in for days/months/years" with dozens of comments either confirming or denying that is bannable.
Sometimes, rarely, the ban was wrong or unjust and trigger happy staff just blanket banned without investigating properly and very very rarely is the ban overturned.
In some ways I feel a little pity for the genuine mistakes and nothing for those who claim they are not a multi-- then again, we see plenty on here, report them and nothing happens *cough*MiaShuji*cough* and yet these seemingly innocent people are so upset that they got banned and most of the time, after some digging they had done something shady.
I do wonder where staff draws that line and if they even when given evidence which some players have done, simply say..no. But are letting blatent multi's and RTC happen without batting an eyelid. It's just so bizarre to me.
Opinions?
Re: Banning
(Anonymous) 2024-05-04 01:40 pm (UTC)(link)What a user might think is a blantant RMT or multi, might not be. They might be a group of dedicated 'friends' (basically just a group of people, not necessarily friends) who are all doing things like this. Which isn't against the rules.
Then again, it might also be that some of these cases require more digging, because even if it IS a multi, if the multi is smart, they can make it look like it isn't. (such as not blatantly funneling from one account to the main) Which means more digging is required.
As I have said in the past in regards to 'banxiety', staff of pet sites most often don't want to ban people. They want people using their site, because it ups the metrics and gives them more ad revenue. The more they ban people, the more likely people, whether they were unfairly banned or not, are going to warn people away from the site. If the person was banned unfairly, that is even worse.
So, even if it might seem obvious to players, the staff can't just ban them without making sure that it is. Especially since I have seen many people who jump on a multi-hunt bandwagon because they dislike the person they are accusing.
Look at the other thread on here where people were talking about cross site trading and how it is often a cover for RMT. As someone who does occasionally cross site trade, the vast majority of trades I see are legit. Sure, there are some that aren't, but I would say that those are the minority of trades. It is just that some big name players are involved so they get mentioned more. The majority of people who cross site trade don't get mentioned and thus those trades just happen without anyone even knowing about it (and yes, I have cross site traded with multiple users for CS stuff from FR before)
There is also the tendency to ascribe 'bad motives' to everything a person does if they do one thing wrong, or they are disliked. I have seen it in the past where someone is accused of being a multi, and other people will start throwing around rumors of them being transphobic, or racist, and when asked for evidence, can't provide anything or the evidence they do provide is so weak it is practically non-existant. It is just that that person isn't liked. (I have seen this not just on FR but other sites as well)
So, someone is disliked by a group of people, and they do a cross site trade, it is easy for that group of people to say 'that must be RMT' and report it, without any more evidence than the person they reported is not liked or has done something else against the rules.
Add in how many reports the staff most likely has to wade through, I am sure that there are some that DO slip through the cracks, and some where it might seem like they are getting away with it, but the staff just hasn't completed the investigation yet/gotten to it. Even with evidence, staff still has to investigate, especially as I know some people are fond of sending screenshots, which can easily be faked. Or they want the staff to take action based upon off site activity.
Basically, I feel this is a case of 'damned if you do, damned if you don't.' If staff just start banning quickly, they are going to be accused of being 'trigger happy' and increase banxiety, especially since there will be unfair bans handed out. If they take their time to ban, they are accused of not doing anything and people get upset that blatant rule breakers are allowed to keep playing.