[ZOOVILLE RULES]

@dogluver101 I read through the rules again and I did not see any explanation of how warnings work.
In several parts it says that users will be given warnings, but there is no explanation of what it is and how it works.
Is there any thread that explains that you can get warning points, what they are and how many you can get until you get banned automatically and so on?

I suspect that when I warn someone and tell them they got one warning point which expires in 6 months, they actually do not know what it means.
 
Little update:
  • Members caught catfishing, scamming, or any attempt to deceit will be removed without warning.

pes said:
@dogluver101 I read through the rules again and I did not see any explanation of how warnings work.
In several parts it says that users will be given warnings, but there is no explanation of what it is and how it works.
Is there any thread that explains that you can get warning points, what they are and how many you can get until you get banned automatically and so on?

I suspect that when I warn someone and tell them they got one warning point which expires in 6 months, they actually do not know what it means.
Click to expand...
I don't believe there is. May work on a draft post in another section we can put together.
 
pes said:
@dogluver101 I read through the rules again and I did not see any explanation of how warnings work.
In several parts it says that users will be given warnings, but there is no explanation of what it is and how it works.
Is there any thread that explains that you can get warning points, what they are and how many you can get until you get banned automatically and so on?

I suspect that when I warn someone and tell them they got one warning point which expires in 6 months, they actually do not know what it means.
Click to expand...
Doesn't really seem like something that should be public. Though if it's not in your mod accessible areas it probably should be.
 
dogluver101 said:
Little update:
  • Members caught catfishing, scamming, or any attempt to deceit will be removed without warning.


I don't believe there is. May work on a draft post in another section we can put together.
Click to expand...
Good idea.
dartel said:
Doesn't really seem like something that should be public. Though if it's not in your mod accessible areas it probably should be.
Click to expand...
Users should know what it means when they get a warning point.
This is not revealing any secret information.
 
Oldman said:
I thought @FloofyNewfie had made a post about warning points and how many does what action.
Click to expand...
I've made one in the DF about 1 vs. 2 vs. 3 vs. 5 vs. more than that. But for actual working of how many points initiate a ban and ban length, I could post that information. But it in the hidden staff member thread.
 
FloofyNewfie said:
I've made one in the DF about 1 vs. 2 vs. 3 vs. 5 vs. more than that. But for actual working of how many points initiate a ban and ban length, I could post that information. But it in the hidden staff member thread.
Click to expand...
Ok, no need for revealing hidden information. But the rules should simply explain that users can get warning points, warning points can lead to automatic ban and therefore you should strive to have the least of them.
Currently it says that you can be warned, but not what it does in a clear way.
 
FloofyNewfie said:
I've made one in the DF about 1 vs. 2 vs. 3 vs. 5 vs. more than that. But for actual working of how many points initiate a ban and ban length, I could post that information. But it in the hidden staff member thread.
Click to expand...
A simple thread like that should be enough.
This is already known public information, I just think it should be in some official place.
 
Last edited:
Oldman said:
I thought @FloofyNewfie had made a post about warning points and how many does what action.
Click to expand...
pes said:
Ok, no need for revealing hidden information. But the rules should simply explain that users can get warning points, warning points can lead to automatic ban and therefore you should strive to have the least of them.
Currently it says that you can be warned, but not what it does in a clear way.
Click to expand...
I'll add a thread in the ZooVille Announcements page tonight. Basically a break down of the points system for a more comprehensive understanding about how they work.
 
FloofyNewfie said:
I'll add a thread in the ZooVille Announcements page tonight. Basically a break down of the points system for a more comprehensive understanding about how they work.
Click to expand...
Link it into the rules please. Because when I send someone to read the rules, I want them to have all the official information in one place. Otherwise nobody knows where to find all the threads with different names when they need some specific information.
Thanks.
 
I have posted the thread detailing how the points system works:

A Breakdown on the Warning Points System

This thread is to serve as a basic comprehensive breakdown of the warning points system and what warning points/strikes mean. Baring zoo-sadism, pedophilia, being under the age of 18, doxing (as in posting PII of someone else), spamming advertising links, and a handful of other rule infractions...
www.zoovilleforum.net www.zoovilleforum.net

This thread, and the rules thread, link back to one another.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pes
Hi. I have stumbeled upon this wonderful forum. And thank you guys for keeping it so well runing.

I just have a few questions that i didn't find an answer to.

How do you handle the IP logs on this site? I have seen somewhere that you wipe them daily. Is that so?
 
I'm going to post my complaint here and then I'm done with it. I was engaging in this thread: https://www.zoovilleforum.net/threa...nnable-offense-now.60975/page-10#post-1399939

Naturally the first thing I did was to consult the rules... you know the OP of the current thread. It's not there, I pointed out it's not there. People talked about precedent. Now the guy who was banned for a week is fully banned for a call to action, which I have seen other people warned about; for instance in regards to the Zeta Chronicles.

I was going to post that at least he was banned for something in the rules... but he wasn't. "Call to action" or "CTA" is not in the OP or in any of the posts in this thread. I read through the whole thing so I didn't rely just on a search.

Judges in English Common Law systems aren't allowed to write new laws or alter old ones. All they can do is interpret them and their sometimes bizarre interpretations are precedent. Precedent in English common law systems has created the need for lawyers because you can't just read the law and know what it means. The absurd claim goes around that "ignorance is no excuse" but every single person who might say that ignorant because now not even lawyers can know it all. It's a bug not a feature. It isn't something to be trying to reproduce in miniature.

The mods here are not common law judges, when you come to a decision about a definable banned behavior you can put it in the rules. It can't be that hard, and even an imperfect description is better than no description at all.

I shouldn't have to say it, but apparently someone has to: You can't blame people for not following rules that aren't written down.
 
ADreamOfLiberty said:
I'm going to post my complaint here and then I'm done with it. I was engaging in this thread: https://www.zoovilleforum.net/threa...nnable-offense-now.60975/page-10#post-1399939

Naturally the first thing I did was to consult the rules... you know the OP of the current thread. It's not there, I pointed out it's not there. People talked about precedent. Now the guy who was banned for a week is fully banned for a call to action, which I have seen other people warned about; for instance in regards to the Zeta Chronicles.

I was going to post that at least he was banned for something in the rules... but he wasn't. "Call to action" or "CTA" is not in the OP or in any of the posts in this thread. I read through the whole thing so I didn't rely just on a search.

Judges in English Common Law systems aren't allowed to write new laws or alter old ones. All they can do is interpret them and their sometimes bizarre interpretations are precedent. Precedent in English common law systems has created the need for lawyers because you can't just read the law and know what it means. The absurd claim goes around that "ignorance is no excuse" but every single person who might say that ignorant because now not even lawyers can know it all. It's a bug not a feature. It isn't something to be trying to reproduce in miniature.

The mods here are not common law judges, when you come to a decision about a definable banned behavior you can put it in the rules. It can't be that hard, and even an imperfect description is better than no description at all.

I shouldn't have to say it, but apparently someone has to: You can't blame people for not following rules that aren't written down.
Click to expand...
Are we talking about how he was now permma banned because of what he said today? When it was brought to ZT about what he said, he threw him another ban hammer. You're welcome to speak with ZT about it. Also he already made himself look bad by saying he's going to "expose ZV" and talk about in his podcast how he thinks another member is a zoosadist when he most likely never even talked to the guy.
You haven't seen his recent posts in his profile before he was banned today I'm guessing?
 
ADreamOfLiberty said:
I'm going to post my complaint here and then I'm done with it. I was engaging in this thread: https://www.zoovilleforum.net/threa...nnable-offense-now.60975/page-10#post-1399939

Naturally the first thing I did was to consult the rules... you know the OP of the current thread. It's not there, I pointed out it's not there. People talked about precedent. Now the guy who was banned for a week is fully banned for a call to action, which I have seen other people warned about; for instance in regards to the Zeta Chronicles.

I was going to post that at least he was banned for something in the rules... but he wasn't. "Call to action" or "CTA" is not in the OP or in any of the posts in this thread. I read through the whole thing so I didn't rely just on a search.

Judges in English Common Law systems aren't allowed to write new laws or alter old ones. All they can do is interpret them and their sometimes bizarre interpretations are precedent. Precedent in English common law systems has created the need for lawyers because you can't just read the law and know what it means. The absurd claim goes around that "ignorance is no excuse" but every single person who might say that ignorant because now not even lawyers can know it all. It's a bug not a feature. It isn't something to be trying to reproduce in miniature.

The mods here are not common law judges, when you come to a decision about a definable banned behavior you can put it in the rules. It can't be that hard, and even an imperfect description is better than no description at all.

I shouldn't have to say it, but apparently someone has to: You can't blame people for not following rules that aren't written down.
Click to expand...
There are 4 pages after that. Did you not read them? There was plenty of proof. Do we really need to explain to you why we banned someone? Do we need to explain what a call to action is? Yes, we are common law judges. If we find that someone is a danger to us, our members or this forum we will FUCKING ban them instantly, without anyone else's approval, and without second thought. That is what happened, and that is what will continue to happen. If you make yourself a clear and true enemy, you will be shown the door in the most expedient way possible.
 
dogluver101 said:
Are we talking about how he was now permma banned because of what he said today? When it was brought to ZT about what he said, he threw him another ban hammer. You're welcome to speak with ZT about it. Also he already made himself look bad by saying he's going to "expose ZV" and talk about in his podcast how he thinks another member is a zoosadist when he most likely never even talked to the guy.
You haven't seen his recent posts in his profile before he was banned today I'm guessing?
Click to expand...
No, you are talking about the guy. I am talking about the principle.

Oldman said:
There are 4 pages after that. Did you not read them?
Click to expand...
The pages that are relevant to my complaint are in this thread.

I don't understand the problem. If you're all in agreement what is stopping you from updating the rules to reflect the mandate you are acting out?
 
ADreamOfLiberty said:
No, you are talking about the guy. I am talking about the principle.


The pages that are relevant to my complaint are in this thread.

I don't understand the problem. If you're all in agreement what is stopping you from updating the rules to reflect the mandate you are acting out?
Click to expand...
Mandate is pure and simple. If you are deemed a real and credible threat, you will be thrown the fuck out. What rule do you want? If you are deemed a threat you will be thrown out? Is that what you want? We will do and will continue to do what is in the best interest of 1, this website, 2 us, 3 this community in any order you could mathematically imagine. If any of those are breeched or threatened, we will act accordingly. We will NOT waste time explaining things to you or anyone else. If you feel that you need explanation, feel free to contact admin. This problem is solved and done.
 
Oldman said:
We will NOT waste time explaining things to you or anyone else. If you feel that you need explanation, feel free to contact admin.
Click to expand...
In the time you're taking to respond to me you could have put it in the rules. I don't need an explanation, I'm the one explaining what's wrong.

Oldman said:
What rule do you want?
Click to expand...
Simple: Whatever rule you're enforcing that isn't listed in the list of rules.

You ban people for calls to action, write down "calls to action are forbidden and instant ban without warning"
You ban people for threatening to dox, write down "threatening to dox is forbidden, and instant ban without warning"
You ban people for being a "credible threat" to "us/the website/this community", write down "...." yea I can't think of anything for something so obviously Orwellian, maybe you could call that rule the "patriot zoo act".
 
I cant find any info on how to edit or remove my own thread or messages in threads...
There are no edit or delete button, only report and reply. Should there not be an option to do so, in case you published something you later regret??
 
dr.zoo said:
I cant find any info on how to edit or remove my own thread or messages in threads...
There are no edit or delete button, only report and reply. Should there not be an option to do so, in case you published something you later regret??
Click to expand...
Editing posts after five minutes is limited to members with 150 posts and above due to the edit feature being abused by a troll, and only staff members can delete threads so you have to report it and request it be deleted.
 
Oldman said:
Do we really need to explain to you why we banned someone? Do we need to explain what a call to action is? Yes, we are common law judges. If we find that someone is a danger to us, our members or this forum we will FUCKING ban them instantly, without anyone else's approval, and without second thought. That is what happened, and that is what will continue to happen. If you make yourself a clear and true enemy, you will be shown the door in the most expedient way possible.
Click to expand...
Fuck yea, beautifully stated
 
ADreamOfLiberty said:
You ban people for calls to action, write down "calls to action are forbidden and instant ban without warning"
You ban people for threatening to dox, write down "threatening to dox is forbidden, and instant ban without warning"
You ban people for being a "credible threat" to "us/the website/this community", write down "...." yea I can't think of anything for something so obviously Orwellian, maybe you could call that rule the "patriot zoo act".
Click to expand...
Oh, didn't see you arrive on your fucking golden throne.
Why do you think YOU are owed an explanation for any of this situation in which you were not involved? A bit egotistical honestly.
 
Hey here's an idea, when we see something that is obviously detrimental to the safety and privacy of EVERYONE HERE, let's just say "fuck it, who cares"...........oh, unless it is specifically detailed in the rules as a violation in the manner WE think it should...makes sense.
jfc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top