With The Advent Of Chat 2.0 In U19 I Feel Accountability Is Important So Here Is A Request

[Jigoogly]

As it stands we have seen the "kick" go through a few iterations. So here's a brief history to catch some of you up to speed:

 

At first we saw a very simplistic kick method depending on the channel certain things were typed into. For example, if one were to post in Region Chat "WTS Paris Prime 950p" they would be kicked and the stream of text for them would halt and they would need to renew their session to re-enter the chat. All while their message remain in the chat they had inappropriately put it in leaving people to see it as the poster had intended.

 

Second iteration, not much of a real change but instead of just a kick from kick bot they would also receiver an automated private message telling them why they were kicked.

 

Third iteration, the offending message now gets removed from the chat leaving no trace.... Except it not only removes the offending message but all messages the offender put into the chat up to and including the message that caused the kick. If it was generic kick from the bot the user would get a message but everyone else in chat would be left wondering why xXx420R3ap3rSW4GxX got kicked.

 

Fourth iteration, this is not so much an iteration but rather the advent of easily recognizable chat moderates. They were now here to preform the job the bot could not. If players were being lewd, crude and in need of a boot they could dish it out. With utter impunity and without accountability..... I'm not pointing fingers as of me typing this up as I have yet to see anyone who needs to have fingers pointed at. In fact I would say I have seen an exemplary job by those put in place to moderate the community (and some really sick burns)https://i.imgur.com/0hB3RC0.png ((being apart of the community means being able to joke with them))

 

Back to the grit,

 

I mean I'm not so sure about my other Tenno but if I was to setup an absolutely tyrannical system I'd make sure my secret police could eliminate trouble people with ease.... or as it satisfied their whim. I'm not saying I've seen anything like that but I sure know it casts a rather ominous shadow over things that should not be seen as so ominous.

 

My Proposal:

 

A simple message system. If a bot kicks a user have it paste message into the chat the user was kicked from informing people the name of the user who was kicked and of the infraction that resulted in their removal from the chat so that others can be assured it was not "random" or deliberately malicious. Of course it would send its usual message to the offender telling them the reasoning and if necessary the duration of time they are removed from that chat

 

For mods, REQUIRE them to provide an explanation for their reasoning for the removal of a user from the chat. The message would then show to everyone in the chat as Purple Text: (moderator name) Kicked (offenders name) for: (explanation) they will be removed from the chat for (duration of time decided by mod) its that simple. This message would of course ALSO be sent in the same fashion as a private message to the person being kicked. That way they are made aware of their offense as well as the resulting punishment. it would be nice to also include a disclaimer in the message that goes to the individual that if they wish they may appeal the decision or reasoning.

 

This system provides accountability over those in power who may have a lapse in judgement. More importantly this shows a public deceleration credibility with their actions in that they really are in the best interest of the community as they are intended to be. It is my hope that when these players are kicked that their chat messages for the past I don't know 45 seconds are logged for a duration of time in case they need to be reviewed or if the player who received the kick or kicks wishes to appeal the "judgement" of the mod who kicked them...... I would hope something like this is already in place but if it is not, now would be a fantastic time to start.

 

The need to kick people will always exist - be it by bot or by human- but there is a right way and a wrong way to maintain a level of credibility within the community. You as developers don't owe us anything, but continued respect and openness would be much appreciated and would most certainly help in developing a more robust relationship with the community as a whole. These community mods are here to represent us as a whole and act in our best interest when circumstances deem necessary, but at present when they take action it makes them look more like SS officers than the upstanding members of the community that they really are. These moderators are quickly becoming demonized within many circles I'm aware of and I'm fairly certain that my observation of my local microcosm is not merely a singularity in this sentiment.

 

My personal hope is that if people may not be universally in favor of my specific recommendations that we may at least be unified in our request for clarity when it comes to the kicking and banning that mods are able to preform in chat. 

let the S#&$ posting begin.

[Letter13]

The chat moderators are already accountable for their moderating of the in game chat. We take a screenshot of the infraction before we kick or suspend users from chat--that way if they submit a support ticket and a member of the DE Support Staff wishes to verify the reasons for the kick/chat ban, we have the screenshot of the rule violating behavior on hand. If a kick is suspected as malicious or random, contact support to ask for a customer support representative to investigate. In the event of an accidental kick, we contact the user to let them know that they've been accidentally kicked, as well as contacting support in case it was an accidental chat ban.

 

Also, publicly announcing the reason for a users's kick/ban from the channel sort of violates the naming and shaming rule. Not only that, but having to type out a reason for every kick before the kick goes into effect is time that the user who's going to be kicked can keep violating the rules. Not only that, but they may log off in the time needed to write up all of the additional information, resulting in the inability to kick them from the chat.

 

When someone is kicked, banned, suspended or has restrictions placed upon their account, it's a private matter between them and Moderators/DE Support Staff. It's not a public affair nor should there be spectacles made of it. Parading around their name and the reason for the kick is naming and shaming, and it's not something we condone.

[Jigoogly]

The chat moderators are already accountable for their moderating of the in game chat. We take a screenshot of the infraction before we kick or suspend users from chat--that way if they submit a support ticket and a member of the DE Support Staff wishes to verify the reasons for the kick/chat ban, we have the screenshot of the rule violating behavior on hand. If a kick is suspected as malicious or random, contact support to ask for a customer support representative to investigate. In the event of an accidental kick, we contact the user to let them know that they've been accidentally kicked, as well as contacting support in case it was an accidental chat ban.

 

This is great to hear. I just find I guess I just don't get how its naming and shaming to show someone was kicked for slurring or spamming. To shame them would be excessively comment on their infraction? But I guess that is just a difference in opinion ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ either which way it is great to hear that there is in fact a recording system mods do!

I still think it might be valuable for there some kind of a system for people to know why they got kicked. At least more than what we have now. so maybe nix the part about it saying something to everyone else but instead just sending a auto message to the offender.

You mentioned the need to type out what they said before they log out - This is something I would hope could be fixed in chat  2.0 as even without the need to type it out I assume they could still speedily logout after putting up their filth before a mod could act on it. But in regards for the needs to type it out I think this could  be circumnavigated with a more robust drop down list so when a mod goes to select kick it would then allow for and elaboration of 'Kick for: spamming, profanity, etc" thus dictating what auto generated message would be sent to the offender.

also gratz on on 10,000 posts!

 

Edited February 10, 2016 by Jigoogly

[Letter13]

This is great to hear. I just find I guess I just don't get how its naming and shaming to show someone was kicked for slurring or spamming. To shame them would be excessively comment on their infraction? But I guess that is just a difference in opinion ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ either which way it is great to hear that there is in fact a recording system mods do!

I still think it might be valuable for there some kind of a system for people to know why they got kicked. At least more than what we have now. so maybe nix the part about it saying something to everyone else but instead just sending a auto message to the offender.

You mentioned the need to type out what they said before they log out - This is something I would hope could be fixed in chat 2.0 as even without the need to type it out I assume they could still speedily logout after putting up their filth before a mod could act on it. But in regards for the needs to type it out I think this could be circumnavigated with a more robust drop down list so when a mod goes to select kick it would then allow for and elaboration of 'Kick for: spamming, profanity, etc" thus dictating what auto generated message would be sent to the offender.

also gratz on on 10,000 posts!

Well, we should be following the protocol of messaging people when we kick them. I'll always message folks I kick to let them know that they've been ejected from chat and what for.

Granted, depending on who it is I might not message them because they message me first, or if its blatantly obvious they know what they did because they were doing it to try and provoke a kick. There are a few region chat regulars who repeatedly test the boundaries to see what will or won't get them kicked. Not going to name any names... But they know who they are.

But for most cases we should be messaging folks to notify them when kicked.

[Jigoogly]

Well, we should be following the protocol of messaging people when we kick them. I'll always message folks I kick to let them know that they've been ejected from chat and what for.

But for most cases we should be messaging folks to notify them when kicked.

 

well I guess that would be nice in terms of taking some of the leg work out of messaging people if there was a function that automatically did it. Thus keeping you from actually having to pm the people who are kicked - also I notice the bot only messages people in very rare instances when it does kick people thus leaving people wondering if it was a bot or not.

I guess the roll this would take is more of removing some of the leg works for the mods when they have a mosh pit going on during event  launch or pre update launch that tends to happen.

 

[Chipputer]

Also, publicly announcing the reason for a users's kick/ban from the channel sort of violates the naming and shaming rule.

I understand why this is, but I feel like this is just... coddling the playerbase a bit too much.

 

In a live chat environment, if someone is breaking a rule, those reading the chat can see that they are. They call someone a derogatory term, you kick them for it, the kick reason is, "using a derogatory insult." Everyone saw it. Everyone knows. Everyone can see that they were kicked for doing the very thing they saw and they now know not to do it.

 

It's not really naming and shaming if you're booting them for the obvious thing they were just doing.

 

Quite frankly, I still don't understand why some people get kicked for posting longer messages in the middle of a discussion because there's no reason given. Their message disappears, I don't see what was said, or exactly how much was said, and then they're gone. I'm left scratching my head. A simple, "User was kicked. Reason: spam filter," would solve this issue.

 

But I guess that's naming and shaming, in today's world.

[P0TAT0CANN0N]

The chat moderators are already accountable for their moderating of the in game chat. We take a screenshot of the infraction before we kick or suspend users from chat--that way if they submit a support ticket and a member of the DE Support Staff wishes to verify the reasons for the kick/chat ban, we have the screenshot of the rule violating behavior on hand. If a kick is suspected as malicious or random, contact support to ask for a customer support representative to investigate. In the event of an accidental kick, we contact the user to let them know that they've been accidentally kicked, as well as contacting support in case it was an accidental chat ban.

 

Also, publicly announcing the reason for a users's kick/ban from the channel sort of violates the naming and shaming rule. Not only that, but having to type out a reason for every kick before the kick goes into effect is time that the user who's going to be kicked can keep violating the rules. Not only that, but they may log off in the time needed to write up all of the additional information, resulting in the inability to kick them from the chat.

 

When someone is kicked, banned, suspended or has restrictions placed upon their account, it's a private matter between them and Moderators/DE Support Staff. It's not a public affair nor should there be spectacles made of it. Parading around their name and the reason for the kick is naming and shaming, and it's not something we condone.

Frankly it already says who was kicked. That already names them and I refer to the OP for the shaming part of it: https://i.imgur.com/0hB3RC0.png%C2%A0

 

I don't see the point of arguing against it.

Edited February 11, 2016 by P0TAT0CANN0N

[Jigoogly]

On 2/10/2016 at 0:40 AM, Chipputer said:

I understand why this is, but I feel like this is just... coddling the playerbase a bit too much.

 

In a live chat environment, if someone is breaking a rule, those reading the chat can see that they are. They call someone a derogatory term, you kick them for it, the kick reason is, "using a derogatory insult." Everyone saw it. Everyone knows. Everyone can see that they were kicked for doing the very thing they saw and they now know not to do it.

 

It's not really naming and shaming if you're booting them for the obvious thing they were just doing.

 

Quite frankly, I still don't understand why some people get kicked for posting longer messages in the middle of a discussion because there's no reason given. Their message disappears, I don't see what was said, or exactly how much was said, and then they're gone. I'm left scratching my head. A simple, "User was kicked. Reason: spam filter," would solve this issue.

 

But I guess that's naming and shaming, in today's world.

I guess its the concept that if they list why they were kicked its more of deceleration of a challenge to those who would appose the ruling. I personally do not see it that way but I'm sure someone would find an angle like that to argue it out of existence.

But I'm also worried that in light of the new chat system and its lack of information in regard to why people are kicked/banned only adds fuel to what will never be a fire unless actually addressed.

the concept of why not to announce kicks and bans is very simple (to never have it challenged) as stated "decisions are not up for discussion" and "are between the offender and support if they wish to bring it up"

Talk about cloak and dagger but that's what the current system is. We as users have no ability to appeal decisions made in regards to moderation of the community in terms of our peers. Because of that we will never be able to stand together on issues we feel strongly about in these regards. Whether that be intentional out come of the current system or not, it is what it is.

[(PSN)horridhal]

1 hour ago, Jigoogly said:

I guess its the concept that if they list why they were kicked its more of deceleration of a challenge to those who would appose the ruling. I personally do not see it that way but I'm sure someone would find an angle like that to argue it out of existence.

It wouldn't decelerate challenges and, if anything, would actually make the chats more confrontational.  You'd have more people commenting on why Player X shouldn't have been banned for saying XYZ than is actually needed.  There is no particular reason you need to know why someone else was kicked from the chat as the rules are obvious and easily followed.

1 hour ago, Jigoogly said:

ITalk about cloak and dagger but that's what the current system is. We as users have no ability to appeal decisions made in regards to moderation of the community in terms of our peers. Because of that we will never be able to stand together on issues we feel strongly about in these regards. Whether that be intentional out come of the current system or not, it is what it is.

There is, honestly, nothing cloak and dagger about it in the slightest.  The chat moderators, as was already stated by Letter13, are required to keep a record of why a player is kicked and to provide evidence supporting the action to DE via screen shots.  As you've stated, you can appeal your own personal moderations to DE directly.  You shouldn't have any ability to appeal bans on behalf of your peers because that just turns the games limited moderation into a popularity contest.  You are required to sign an agreement to follow the rules in place prior to starting the game, as is everyone else.  Break those rules at your peril.

Edited March 22, 2016 by (PS4)horridhal

[Jigoogly]

4 minutes ago, (PS4)horridhal said:

You shouldn't have any ability to appeal bans on behalf of your peers because that just turns the games limited moderation into a popularity contest. 

nobody said anything about appealing on behalf of anyone, it's the concept that we cannot in anyway see whats happening to our peers with the same token I argue that is why it would appear cloak and dagger. So long as we are kept purposefully unaware of what is happening we do not protest. It falls in line with the rhetoric that bans, kicks, mutes, are not up for discussion.

Lets get hypothetical here: if you're in region chat and your friend comes along and you guys are just being cordial and helping new players or discussing the latest meta but all of a sudden your friend gets temp banned from region - regardless as to whether he did or did not do anything to warrant the temp ban (at present) you have no right to ask why he was temp banned and if you choose to do so could constitute punishment for yourself. You are requested to sit idly by and hope that your friend is able to resolve the issues. Not to mention you will not be given any warning other than the simple white text message "XXXX was kicked from the channel". 

so lets get extreme here lets assume what he was doing didn't warrant a kick/ban. Your friend actually has no right to discuss publicly anything regarding the /kick/ban so he is left with the option of going through support and hoping a resolution can be found. Let's say it happens, and again, and again, and again. With no reason for the kick/ban but each time he goes through support and it is "dealt with" meaning that before the allotted time for the ban filled the ban is lifted. He cannot discuss this with anyone. Numerous people could be dealing with this exact same problem but nobody is allowed to know because the issue is not up for discussion.

From a more sinister perspective its a simple divide an conqueror tactic. By not allowing people to see and discuss potential issues they are never dealt with. Largely impart because they are never seen but ultimately because discussing them in anyway would result in your own removal. (assuming there are issues in this hypothetical) 

Now this might all seem a tad tinfoil hat-y but I would argue this, when did clarity ever hurt this type of situation, why at all did I have to pose the question about how a kick or ban is dealt with? Why is that information regarding the process not available to anyone who might want to find it? Is it really too hard to put what Letter13 typed here in a stickied post or God forbid a web page somewhere so that people are aware of the process that takes place.

38 minutes ago, (PS4)horridhal said:

You'd have more people commenting on why Player X shouldn't have been banned for saying XYZ than is actually needed.

So I also must ask why is this an issue? When did people voicing their opinion become such a horrific thing? The only reason this is an issue at present is because it is made into one by the very policy that states decisions are not up for discussion.

[(PSN)horridhal]

1 hour ago, Jigoogly said:

nobody said anything about appealing on behalf of anyone, it's the concept that we cannot in anyway see whats happening to our peers with the same token I argue that is why it would appear cloak and dagger. So long as we are kept purposefully unaware of what is happening we do not protest. It falls in line with the rhetoric that bans, kicks, mutes, are not up for discussion.

You did say something to that effect.  If you meant something else, I apologize for the confusion, but I took it as it read.  As for you being kept "purposefully unaware," that isn't what's going on.  If Player A breaks Rule A and is removed from chat you can, generally, just scroll up to see what Player A said.  As for discussion on the subject, if Player A broke Rule A, there is no discussion to be had.  The rule was broken and Player A broke it, thus Player A is subject to the same penalties as everyone else.

1 hour ago, Jigoogly said:

Lets get hypothetical here: if you're in region chat and your friend comes along and you guys are just being cordial and helping new players or discussing the latest meta but all of a sudden your friend gets temp banned from region - regardless as to whether he did or did not do anything to warrant the temp ban (at present) you have no right to ask why he was temp banned and if you choose to do so could constitute punishment for yourself. You are requested to sit idly by and hope that your friend is able to resolve the issues. Not to mention you will not be given any warning other than the simple white text message "XXXX was kicked from the channel". 

so lets get extreme here lets assume what he was doing didn't warrant a kick/ban. Your friend actually has no right to discuss publicly anything regarding the /kick/ban so he is left with the option of going through support and hoping a resolution can be found. Let's say it happens, and again, and again, and again. With no reason for the kick/ban but each time he goes through support and it is "dealt with" meaning that before the allotted time for the ban filled the ban is lifted. He cannot discuss this with anyone. Numerous people could be dealing with this exact same problem but nobody is allowed to know because the issue is not up for discussion.

In the first scenario, that is exactly as it should be.  If your friend broke a rule, or didn't break one, it is his responsibility to take it up via the appropriate channels.  Having his other friends spam the same chat he was just banned from, or the moderator responsible for the ban, with questions regarding his ban is not an appropriate channel.

In the case of the second, it is again up to your friend to go through the appropriate channels,  As has already been said in this thread repeatedly, all moderation penalties have to be accompanied by a screenshot by the moderator who penalizes the player with evidence of the transgression.  If your friend really didn't break the rules, there is documented proof of him not breaking the rules and all he has to do is file a support ticket.  Ditto anyone else who feels unfairly moderated.

1 hour ago, Jigoogly said:

From a more sinister perspective its a simple divide an conqueror tactic. By not allowing people to see and discuss potential issues they are never dealt with. Largely impart because they are never seen but ultimately because discussing them in anyway would result in your own removal. (assuming there are issues in this hypothetical) 

That's completely fabricated by you and your viewpoint on the issue, not the actual issue.  This isn't a sinister thing in the slightest, it is done from an efficiency standpoint.  DE trusts the moderators, but accepts that sometimes moderators mishandle moderations, thus we have a system in place specifically designed for such events.  That's also why they require screenshot evidence of each moddable offense, in order to prevent such issues from happening.

1 hour ago, Jigoogly said:

Now this might all seem a tad tinfoil hat-y but I would argue this, when did clarity ever hurt this type of situation, why at all did I have to pose the question about how a kick or ban is dealt with? Why is that information regarding the process not available to anyone who might want to find it? Is it really too hard to put what Letter13 typed here in a stickied post or God forbid a web page somewhere so that people are aware of the process that takes place.

There actually are several places detailing most of what you've been told in this thread.

Has information in it regarding even how to report moderators if you look through it a bit.  It is all fairly easy information to find.

1 hour ago, Jigoogly said:

So I also must ask why is this an issue? When did people voicing their opinion become such a horrific thing? The only reason this is an issue at present is because it is made into one by the very policy that states decisions are not up for discussion.

That isn't the issue.  Firstly, as I said earlier, your opinion on the subject doesn't matter, if someone broke a rule that warranted being removed from chat, they should be removed from chat.  Your opinion makes no difference to that simple fact.  Secondly, it would clog up the chat further with people talking about why player A shouldn't have been banned and others arguing why he should.  This line would become especially distinct when it came to any form of dev bashing when people were unhappy with something in an update while others were happy with what they got.  It would cause more problems than the non-existent one you think it would solve.

It would also open up any moderator willing to do his or her job to targeting by the person kicked and their supporters.

Edited March 22, 2016 by (PS4)horridhal
Additional line.

[Chipputer]

I don't see where anyone's opinions on if that person deserved a kick/ban is relevant. The problem with not knowing why your peers have been kicked is that we don't know exactly what they did so we have no actual example to follow.

The law in the real world is pretty cut and dry, yeah? Except for times when it isn't and we find out someone was arrested for some obscure thing. If they hadn't have announced that so-and-so was arrested for such-and-such then you wouldn't know that such-and-such was exactly against the law. You would just have had a vague idea that something within it was probably not good, but was sitting in a relative gray area.

The rules in a public chat that are enforced by moderators are no different-- having been an administrator and moderator of many chats and forums, if the rules weren't described with absolute superb detail and with little to no wiggle room, people would go out of their way to try to find loop holes if they wanted to get a message across that would otherwise be breaking a rule. How did we put a stop to this? By directly stating what they did and what their punishment for it was. There was no, "User was banned," and then forcing them to come to us to resolve the issue. There was direct accountability for our actions that we took right then and there.

I can understand sticking up for the moderators and I understand that the rules are pretty simple and we shouldn't have issues following them, but real experience has shown that it's not as cut and dry as that. A simple stating of why the person was kicked solves all of these issues. They already name them, it's not exactly shaming them if they kick them for a legitimate reason and say that they kicked them for that reason.
There is no reason to be against this, except some fringe case where some internet lunatic starts a flame war because they didn't like that their friend was kicked, but we will already get that, and worse, with the current system.

[(PSN)horridhal]

4 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

I don't see where anyone's opinions on if that person deserved a kick/ban is relevant. The problem with not knowing why your peers have been kicked is that we don't know exactly what they did so we have no actual example to follow.

Bullcorn.  If Johnny is sitting and spamming chat with nonsense, you have a pretty go idea of why Johnny got banned.  As long as you follow the simple rules presented to you when you open the chat tab ("No cursing, etc") you aren't going to get kicked from the chat.  You know the rules, as does anyone else who is able to read and type.

5 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

I can understand sticking up for the moderators and I understand that the rules are pretty simple and we shouldn't have issues following them, but real experience has shown that it's not as cut and dry as that. A simple stating of why the person was kicked solves all of these issues. They already name them, it's not exactly shaming them if they kick them for a legitimate reason and say that they kicked them for that reason.

It is exactly as cut and dry as that.  Follow the rules and you won't be kicked.  Break them and you will.  That is as simple and basic as it can get.

6 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

There is no reason to be against this, except some fringe case where some internet lunatic starts a flame war because they didn't like that their friend was kicked, but we will already get that, and worse, with the current system.

That is actually the only reason to be a proponent of a system like the one you want, in order to start flame wars in the chat over kick reasonings.  You say it would only be a few fringe cases but, realistically, it would happen a large portion of the time.  The system we have now works properly and, really, there aren't that many issues with it.  The few people complaining about it are, generally, the same people who wind up getting kicked for breaking rules.

[Chipputer]

On 3/22/2016 at 1:33 PM, (PS4)horridhal said:

Bullcorn.  If Johnny is sitting and spamming chat with nonsense, you have a pretty go idea of why Johnny got banned.  As long as you follow the simple rules presented to you when you open the chat tab ("No cursing, etc") you aren't going to get kicked from the chat.  You know the rules, as does anyone else who is able to read and type.

It is exactly as cut and dry as that.  Follow the rules and you won't be kicked.  Break them and you will.  That is as simple and basic as it can get.

That is actually the only reason to be a proponent of a system like the one you want, in order to start flame wars in the chat over kick reasonings.  You say it would only be a few fringe cases but, realistically, it would happen a large portion of the time.  The system we have now works properly and, really, there aren't that many issues with it.  The few people complaining about it are, generally, the same people who wind up getting kicked for breaking rules.

I'm not responding to individual points because you're clearly not going to say anything except, "too much information causes problems."

It is exactly the opposite of that and recent Warframe drama is all you need to prove that.

Trying to shove some random identity onto the people who don't agree that the current system is proper is probably the dumbest thing you could do and shows that you have a preconceived notion about who you're arguing with and what you're arguing about. Coming at something with a closed mind, like that, is nothing but bad.

[(PSN)horridhal]

31 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

I'm not responding to individual points because you're clearly not going to say anything except, "too much information causes problems."

You posted your opinion onto a web forum.  I'm allowed to do the same.  I never said "too much information causes problems" I said you don't deserve information on why another player was kicked from a chat.  Period.  Your opinion on why that player was kicked has no bearing on the situation whatsoever.

33 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

It is exactly the opposite of that and recent Warframe drama is all you need to prove that.

Which is precisely what I expected was your reasoning.

34 minutes ago, Chipputer said:

Trying to shove some random identity onto the people who don't agree that the current system is proper is probably the dumbest thing you could do and shows that you have a preconceived notion about who you're arguing with and what you're arguing about. Coming at something with a closed mind, like that, is nothing but bad.

I'm not trying to do anything.  I am blatantly stating that there is only one reason for you to want a system like the one you've described.  I'm not wrong, either.  You haven't given an actual legitimate reason as to why such a system is needed beyond, "Well I want to know why this player was banned."  You attempted to say the current system was objectively bad without even having a firm grasp on how that system worked and, now that you know how it works, have been unable to give actual examples of the current system failing.