NO SUPPORT Ratings are determined on the post itself shouldn't be removed due to a member being banned on the server itself. Example: member1 creates post saying "Mineverse forums is bad" member2 rates the comment negatively but is banned on the server - they are still entitled to their opinion on the forum unless they are ban evading on the forums. - Oturner
I'm neutral. In itz_tuber case, I agree with the actions already taken by the mods. I also would say that if you have a series of negative ratings that can count as abuse, you need to report it to get it taken away. Any automated system is prone to mistakes which is why we have the mods in the first place as well as an appeal system. I can see your argument for cases like tuber but I doubt the majority of bans are like that. Someone could have posted inappropriate content but all of their opinions were totally valid. It would be unfair to a constructive discord to remove their ratings for an unrelated offense. Overall I agree with Arararagi. You shouldn't be concerned with ratings in general. It is a bad habit to get your validation on a website base on other people. There will always be trolls and negative ratings come with popularity. Just ask any YouTuber and you will see just how toxic people can be when they get jealous of what you have accomplished.
Which is why I did add a suggestion in those replies that it could be an addon button on the said account to remove all (negative or all ratings given) so it could be specific to the case. All main social media platforms (with some excluded) are based on a rating system you name it, twitter, facebook, instagram, youtube, snapchat, discord (in some cases even in the form of reactions). Some people care about their like ratios on these platforms and some don't. It's not really that I care what my reputation looks like by the ratings I have just rather that if the user doesn't exist or is unlikely to exist again (or was a troll in general), that at least their negative ratings should be removed. Even if let's say that the person I used as an example in my post appealed and got unbanned and given a who knows how many chances now I don't believe his ratings should've stayed because of how often he was a troll and showed signs of hate speech to other users and the server and gave dislikes and no supports like it was no biggie.
This is why I suggested reporting the issue. Yes, he gave them out wildly but that doesn't mean some of them were not his true opinion. He often rated anything promoting mods as negative but that doesn't mean those were not his true feelings. Everyone has a right to have an opinion even if the majority of people do not like it. In tuber's case, I can see your suggestion being a thing as most of his were rate abuse but I would rather have some abuse go unpunished than to get rid of a genuine dislike.
They mostly are in all honesty. We don't perm ban many people om the forums to start with. In my two years of moderating here Ive seen maybe 10-15 perm bans on forums (not counting alts). Generally when we perm ban a player it is somebody who has been extrenely toxic their entire time here, or extremely toxic in the past year. Most of the people we ban have 20+ offenses. For that reason I support, it seems like everytime we ban somebody they end up being a dunce with their ratings near the end of their time here. If we dont value their contribution to this forum enough that we feel the need to perm ban them then chances are their "contributions" with ratings are just as bad.
Well I had said this similar thing to other people already in this thread it doesn't seem to change the fact that it's their entitled opinion to give those ratings even if they've been toxic for a year+ or the entirety they've been here. but hey maybe coming from a senior-mod it'll sing a different tune. Thanks for the support tho.
You didn't provide details like these. This is very informative as it emphasizes just how bad someone has to be in order to get a perm ban. I would have to say I am now leaning to support but I still believe that it is better that some rate abuse goes unpunished rather than have some genuine opinions get silenced. Even if it is 30 to 1
I did just not in your reply. If you look at my reply to the person you reference like Arararagi you would see that ;-;. I'd just be repeating myself like I did with the suggestion to add a button to do per removal ratings per account.
I feel like you are trying to offer too simple of a solution. I could see there being a button to remove ALL ratings for the past month, year, or lifetime. Tuber also rate abused his buddies when they talked trash about mods to get their positives up so you would need to remove all ratings. The time limits are so if someone was originally decent then became toxic their less toxic votes would still exist.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to prove since all you did was add a time limit to what i've been suggesting to the people who are saying no to the entirety of every banned user getting their ratings (all or negative) removed, according to what tuber said I don't believe anything below a year is nessecary. Tuber did just give you a response to say that out of the 15 perma bans they've done in his time they've all been toxic for at least a year or more (clearly so to gain 20 offenses).
No support. -Not all bans are permanent -Ratings should only be removed if they've rate abused. -If they are removed it should be ALL ratings not just the dislike rating. -If staff think an offender is irredeemable they delete their profile, deleting all their ratings in the process.
