Is Wynncraft Punishment Too Harsh?

Let's be honest, Wynncraft is an excellent server. I wouldn't be writing about how much I despise my ban time if I wasn't longing to be welcomed back into the wynncraft journey, and you wouldn't be answering forums questions or searching for answers to your own queries if you weren't interested in wynncraft or trying to develop the community. Pretty much everyone who joins wynncraft loves it and would hope better for it, and this doesn't get more true when you look at the staff team. They, obviously, provide more for wynncraft than almost all of us, and I am grateful for them because I am grateful for wynncraft. Despite this, I still have a problem.



I think Wynncraft's punishment is way too harsh. For those of you who don’t know how it works (This is just for server bans, not mutes or forum's punishment):

1. You may or may not get a warning (up to the staff's discretion)
2. You get a permanent ban
3. You must appeal to ever be allowed back on
4. For glitch abuse or exploits, even if your appeal is accepted, you must wait for it to be patched before you are unbanned, even if your appeal is accepted. (otherwise, you are unbanned after your appeal is accepted)
5. If you are banned again, you cannot appeal

Let's go down the line. The first step is fair. I know that some might argue on either side; however, a duper doesn't need a warning, do they? But does someone who is being toxic in chat (yes, I know someone who was banned, not muted, for toxicity)? I would say that someone could see something as toxic that another person wouldn't, so I would say that toxicity deserves a warning. You could then argue, "It shouldn't be up to the staff's discretion; there should be rules for what gets a warning and what doesn't." This was my immediate reaction; however, you can only be so specific in a rule book before you start leaving things out, and some generalizations are just too vague. For example, "exploits and glitches" includes duping but also a "Survive" stage skip in the Corrupt Underworld Crypt dungeon (I have been told that it was patched, I wouldn't publicly share it in the case that it still existed, so new people didn’t learn about it.)



The second step is a massive punishment. Keep in mind; this is for a first offense (at least in the 4 cases of bans that I fully understand). This is extraordinarily harsh. As I said, I have a strong understanding of four (kinda’ 5) different cases of punishment on wynn, all of which I have been in close contact with the person who was banned, and ALL of them were a perm ban. A perm ban is brutal, and in the case that your appeal is denied, you are gone from wynn indefinitely. Most high-profile servers in Minecraft wouldn't dare to give a perm ban before the third offense. For example, Hypixel. I had a severe account security issue that spanned from the start of the summer of 2020 until around December of 2020. Throughout my attempts to stop these continuous infiltrations, I was banned, I believe, three times. The current ban was a one-year ban. The punishment should vary from case to case. A toxicity ban should not be the same as a C.U.C section skip ban, and that shouldn't be the same as a duping ban, and a duping ban shouldn't be permanent.



The third step is normal in servers for a good reason. A large server must allow former rule breakers to have a second chance, especially in the case of your first offense. I don't have much to say about this, considering that I don't think many people will disagree with me.



The fourth is where I find the most issues. My issue isn't with the ban appeal, but rather the fact that in the case that you were banned for glitch abuse, you don't get unbanned until said glitch or bug is patched. At first glance, it makes sense, but this is the most flawed part of this whole system, more flawed than the fact that you get unappealable bans on the second offense. If your appeal is accepted, this should mean that the staff understands that you wish to make amends and understand your punishment and mistake. I would say that it is relatively simple to tell if this is true when reading an appeal. All that makes sense, right? If the staff still believes you would try the glitch again, they would decline your appeal, right? If this is the case, why should you have to wait over a year to be unbanned after your an accepted appeal? Arguably, this should be the first offense ban time rather than the result of an accepted appeal. If player ABC were banned for abusing bug XYZ and then removed a month later, they wouldn't be able to abuse this bug anymore, and I would be unbanned: no appeal needed. If player ABC had multiple offenses, then yes, the staff could see them as a malicious player and assume that they would continue to break the rules if they were unbanned. That is why this would work well as a first offense punishment. If that makes complete sense and seems fairer than a perm ban for a first offense, then why would it make sense for an accepted appeal to leave you with a regular ban anyways? If they think they need to remove the bug before trusting you to rejoin the server, then they should decline your appeal. The ban appeal system feels more like an excuse to have perm bans for your first offense instead of a genuine attempt at finding a fair middle ground for punishment. While this may sound harsh, it's not as harsh as a double-layered ban.



Finally, we have a "the second ban is not appealable." Do I need to say much? A second offense is not enough evidence to claim that a player is malicious. This is no more evident than one of the cases I have a strong understanding of. This player was banned (without warning) for toxicity. They appealed their ban, and it was accepted. They later went on a C.U.C. run and skipped the third "survive" section. They were banned again, without warning, and that was it. He later emphasized that he didn't even know he was toxic. He actually thought that the staff had made a mistake and what he said wasn't even remotely toxic. He also said that his skip in the C.U.C. dungeon was not malicious and was an attempt at finishing a dungeon quicker that broke half the time anyway. If this player really wanted to make up for the time lost in a failed C.U.C. run, the only way you could do this is by flying through the dungeon and only doing the last stage and the final boss fight. I’m not joking. The boat ride takes one minute, and the boss fight takes about one as well. The whole dungeon takes just over four minutes, and the glitch where the boss gets stuck in the wall and can't be killed happens about half the time. All he wanted was to find a simple solution in the face of a major problem. Not malicious at all. Certainly not worth being banned from the server forever. This player had Two 106 classes and several mythics. No server should ban a player with no hopes of getting back. This player committed hours to the server comparable to that of the mods that banned him—a true shame.



I propose three amendments to the ban system:



Punishment is based on the nature of the offense and the number of times it has occurred, with a perm ban being as extreme as it gets (considering that nothing is more than forever).



An accepted appeal results in an unban within a set timeframe (24 hrs, 7 days, 30 days, etc.)



No ban is unappealable.

The following is a link to a petition where I have a copy of this post. I ask you to sign it to help amend the wynncraft punishment system:
http://chng.it/42mtq6ZQ

 

The first is already the case; different crimes have different punishments.

So if someone is duping and eventually gets caught, they should give them a second chance to use the same exploit with the chance to not get caught this time?

If you get banned twice, you can still talk to a moderator about it if you think one of your bans was a mistake, but frankly, you shouldn't do things that are against the rules in the first place. As for your example of "being toxic and then abusing a bug to skip a dungeon", that could easily have been averted by, y'know, not abusing a bug.

 

I see where your coming from but either don't abuse bugs or don't get caught (preferably the first). I do agree that a second ban is unappealable is too harsh though.

 

If it is the case that some offenses call for different punishment (in the case of bans, not mutes or forums/discord punishments) then I saw no evidence of this in the four cases I have a very strong understanding of. All of them were a perm ban. Either this is an issue with the mods, in which case we have a much larger problem, or the rules are too vague, and need to be amended.

As for your second statement, that isn't remotely what I said, and this feels like you misunderstood what I had to say or you are purposefully removing context from my argument. I said that if a staff thinks the offender is likely to continue to break rules then they should not accept the appeal. If they think that the offender understands the situation and will stop breaking rules, then they can accept the appeal, in which case there is no need to leave this player banned until this bug is fixed (which in my case is taking over a year). There is no reason that someone who would get unbanned and start to abuse the same bug again wouldn't just do the same with different bugs when they are eventually unbanned later. Same result, more punishment time = net negative.

and finally, my point isn't that he shouldn't see any punishment for his actions in C.U.C. despite them being justified in the circumstance, my point is that despite both of his offenses being very minute and justifiable, he was perm banned for both, and cannot rejoin Wynn. How is that not an issue?

 

That may be the case.

That is exactly what you said, whether or not you realize it. Why would someone not abuse a later exploit? They might, but it may be significantly harder if not impossible to do so, as the exploit will have been removed, meaning that they need to find a new one in order to do so, which may not work the same way and may not be as convenient to do. However it is proven that the current one works and that it is entirely possible for them to do. Some of these exploits in the past have had major long-term effects on the game's economy, so treating these as a serious issue seems appropriate. And as for unbanning if they're sure the person won't exploit a bug again, there is no way for them to know if someone will use an exploit again. If they were to only unban if they were certain that the person would not abuse an exploit again, all bans would be permanent. Instead they give them the benefit of the doubt, once they've made reasonably certain that even if the person is lying about not doing so again, they cannot continue using the same exploit.

It's fair because they knowingly abused a bug which is widely known to be a bannable offense. It is also known that a second ban is unappealable, so they knowingly broke the rules while fully aware of the consequences of being caught. This isn't a randomly targeted victim, this is someone who calculated the risks and chose poorly. Unless there were some extenuating circumstances in one of the bans, I don't see any reason why someone who has broken the rules twice, knowing that to do so meant a ban, should be surprised when they get a ban.

 

I harassed random Detlas citizens multiple times and shouted death threats at people touching my private public looting areas and have been punished harshly this is truly a disgusting system i demand justice