Accepted Forums 'Proof wish not to be shared' option

[Davidva]

Minecraft Username:

Davidva​

What is the suggestion about?

'Proof wish not to be shared' option​

Description:

My suggestion is to remove the button 'proof wish not to be shared'. Especially for bans it's good to know wherefore you're banned. How are you supposed to write a proper appeal without knowing what exactly got you banned.​

​

Not to be disrespectful to any staff member but I believe some really lack knowledge about the workings of hacks, reach and connection. If a staff member makes a wrong decision by accepting proof of a legitimate player some experienced players and ex staff can review it aswell and see a mistake.​

​

We are a community and we should work together to avoid mistakes like banning known players falsely.​

​

​

How can this idea help to improve JartexNetwork?

Less permanent false bans​

 

[Jitterinq]

+1 +1 +1. Hurry up and accept already.

 

[Davidva]

-1. By making a report, you can choose to keep evidence anonymous. By not allowing users anonymity from the user who they're reporting, you're giving off the hint that "Hey, I will be known as a snitch" for making a report.

The point of this suggestion is not to show who is reporting but to show wherefore you're appealing

 

[rLilJesus]

I think that the main reason behind 'proof requested not to be shared' was supposed to be a way to protect the reporter in case the muted/banned player will start sending threat messages to the reporter and/or find a way to revenge and(maybe) harm the reporter in real life, they(the reporters) don't know if the player that got banned/muted has the power to do such stuff, and that's why I think that any reporter who chose not to share the proof is just scared of the consequences

Your suggestion made me think about an idea:

Adding one more section if you choose not to share it, the new section will ask you 'why do you wish to not share the proof?' the new section will be a big text box below the question that will let the player explain why he/she chose not to share the proof
Any staff member that will review the report will decide(based on the reason) if to post the proof on the ban/mute or not


Anyways, if I'm wrong or not about the main reason behind it, I'm still going with +1 because I agree with you, I would like to see them removing it and see how it goes

They can report the guys who will treat them, for example
EXAPLE1:I will dox you
The player who has reported the guy can report him for dox threats
EXAMPLE2: I will kill you
He should be permanently banned on discord for [DM] Death threats (This should be added)
Don't take this personaly they are only EXAMPLES!!!!

 

[Deleted member 43343]

The point of this suggestion is not to show who is reporting but to show wherefore you're appealing

By showing the evidence, you could reveal the identity of a reporting user. Therefore, I am strongly against showing evidence, this should only be shown to staff members. You know god damn well why you got banned if you get banned.

 

[Deleted member 43343]

I think that the main reason behind 'proof requested not to be shared' was supposed to be a way to protect the reporter in case the muted/banned player will start sending threat messages to the reporter and/or find a way to revenge and(maybe) harm the reporter in real life, they(the reporters) don't know if the player that got banned/muted has the power to do such stuff, and that's why I think that any reporter who chose not to share the proof is just scared of the consequences

Your suggestion made me think about an idea:

Adding one more section if you choose not to share it, the new section will ask you 'why do you wish to not share the proof?' the new section will be a big text box below the question that will let the player explain why he/she chose not to share the proof
Any staff member that will review the report will decide(based on the reason) if to post the proof on the ban/mute or not


Anyways, if I'm wrong or not about the main reason behind it, I'm still going with +1 because I agree with you, I would like to see them removing it and see how it goes

Hell no, never. It is YOUR evidence, YOU chose to share it with the staff. If you also choose to NOT show evidence to whoever you're reporting, then staff should have no option to override your decision. Evidence should not be shown if the reporter does not want it shown, period.

 

[ExpertAQ]

What kind of threat the punished person would ever send? Unless they know each other in real life or they are friends in minecraft (who doesn't want to break the friendship)

 

[NotLoLo1818]

Hell no, never. It is YOUR evidence, YOU chose to share it with the staff. If you also choose to NOT show evidence to whoever you're reporting, then staff should have no option to override your decision. Evidence should not be shown if the reporter does not want it shown, period.

Nah that's not how it should work I went through that situation myself I was false banned but luckily I got unbanned the same day as they looked more into the evidence and I haven't even seen the evidence till this day, So some other people might get false banned and never try to prove them wrong because they never saw the evidence.

 

[Almostlikeaboss]

-1. By making a report, you can choose to keep evidence anonymous. By not allowing users anonymity from the user who they're reporting, you're giving off the hint that "Hey, I will be known as a snitch" for making a report.

Just upload on another YouTube channel with a random name. That is the easy solution

 

[ExpertAQ]

Just upload on another YouTube channel with a random name. That is the easy solution

That doesn't remove your name from the video. That was some dumb statement.

 

[llamer]

+1. Please. Just Please.