- Joined
- February 18, 2021
- Messages
- 252
- Points
- 73
Minecraft Username:
What is the suggestion about?
Description:
How can this idea help to improve JartexNetwork?
Extra Information:
RealPlaykoo
What is the suggestion about?
Making the discord punishment limit gradient more reasonable (make rules a bit more subjective)
Description:
You all know where this is going 
jartexnetwork.com
Look at that wonderful, beautiful work of art. They have included every single unacceptable thing with magnitude on the rules. OR HAVE THEY?
The rules are very vague. Saying "nut" once, in a completely normal context and within the natural flow of conversation is quite different from talking about breasts for 4 hours in main chat and flirting with random egirls in donator. Saying the N word once, by mistake, immediately deleted is also quite different from continuously harassing Asian kids in general chat. But still, both of the infractions in each example will get the same amount of punishment, even though one is kind of acceptable and one is not. Isn't it absurd?
This is a suggestion to make a "minimum" and "maximum" punishment limit per rule.
What I mean is that there should be a scale to which mods should rationally and responsibly punish each player on the basis of how acceptable/unacceptable it is.
Lets assume the example I wrote above-
A person said an inappropriate word in a completely relevant context:
2 hour IP mute
A person is stalking other members and talking inappropriately, referencing sexual intercourse with a minor:
2 day IP mute
You may or may not agree with the above example but its just an example lol. I'm not telling you to completely boycott the rules at all, that would be insane and it would lead to so much mod abuse LMAO. I'm just saying that rules should act as a framework on the basis of which discipline should be enforced. I know this system is far from perfect as there might be conflict between the staff and members whether the punishment was reasonable, there may also be a bias to punish some players more than other but still a dynamic execution system is wayyyy better than a fixed one. A balance between the both should be the best of both worlds.
TL;DR: GIVE THE STAFF A CHOICE TO USE THEIR FUCKING BRAIN ON WHAT TO DO WHEN SOMEONE SAYS SOMETHING BAD VS VERY BAD (BUT MAKE SURE STAFF PUNISHES IT REASONABLY)
Network Rules
jartexnetwork.com
The rules are very vague. Saying "nut" once, in a completely normal context and within the natural flow of conversation is quite different from talking about breasts for 4 hours in main chat and flirting with random egirls in donator. Saying the N word once, by mistake, immediately deleted is also quite different from continuously harassing Asian kids in general chat. But still, both of the infractions in each example will get the same amount of punishment, even though one is kind of acceptable and one is not. Isn't it absurd?
This is a suggestion to make a "minimum" and "maximum" punishment limit per rule.
What I mean is that there should be a scale to which mods should rationally and responsibly punish each player on the basis of how acceptable/unacceptable it is.
Lets assume the example I wrote above-
A person said an inappropriate word in a completely relevant context:
2 hour IP mute
A person is stalking other members and talking inappropriately, referencing sexual intercourse with a minor:
2 day IP mute
You may or may not agree with the above example but its just an example lol. I'm not telling you to completely boycott the rules at all, that would be insane and it would lead to so much mod abuse LMAO. I'm just saying that rules should act as a framework on the basis of which discipline should be enforced. I know this system is far from perfect as there might be conflict between the staff and members whether the punishment was reasonable, there may also be a bias to punish some players more than other but still a dynamic execution system is wayyyy better than a fixed one. A balance between the both should be the best of both worlds.
TL;DR: GIVE THE STAFF A CHOICE TO USE THEIR FUCKING BRAIN ON WHAT TO DO WHEN SOMEONE SAYS SOMETHING BAD VS VERY BAD (BUT MAKE SURE STAFF PUNISHES IT REASONABLY)
How can this idea help to improve JartexNetwork?
1) This will make the punishment reasonable
2) This would increase the subjectivity of each rule, so it would apply to every context and situation
3) People will get punished not only based on what they did but also how much they did it (very, very important)
4) Will make staffs get promoted and demoted based on not popularity but rationality (because performance is dependent on it)
2) This would increase the subjectivity of each rule, so it would apply to every context and situation
3) People will get punished not only based on what they did but also how much they did it (very, very important)
4) Will make staffs get promoted and demoted based on not popularity but rationality (because performance is dependent on it)
Extra Information:
Imagine getting muted 1 day for misspelling "walnut" on accident xd
Don't punish me for including those examples, they're merely examples. If I get punished for writing about why I shouldn't be punished for writing that, it would be sooo ironic LOOOL
Downvote it IDC get punished later for saying "nice" because it starts with n
Don't punish me for including those examples, they're merely examples. If I get punished for writing about why I shouldn't be punished for writing that, it would be sooo ironic LOOOL
Downvote it IDC get punished later for saying "nice" because it starts with n
