Board Thread:News/@comment-10948389-20160903170709/@comment-24277243-20160903221201

Gojiran103 wrote: Thegoldnguy wrote: Understood. However, I think the span of time in which you get banned should be considered. If the person in question is generally unpleasant to be around and is banned multiple times within a short amount of time, the fourth ban should be the nail in the coffin, so-to-speak.

Based on the logic of this ban rule, someone could get banned three times within two months, but after a year of getting no bans they could suddenly get perma-banned because it's their fourth time. What I'm saying is that there should be a cooldown period.

Well, the span of the time should be considered, obviously. If I didn't point that out, I'll edit it in.

" Based on the logic of this ban rule, someone could get banned three times within two months, but after a year of getting no bans they could suddenly get perma-banned because it's their fourth time.  What I'm saying is that there should be a cooldown period."

And could you expand on this? Do you mean that there should be some sort of a resting period if they have not received their final ban if they have done something banned, and the last time they did that was a long time ago? Yes. If the person in question hasn't been banned within, like, six or so months then that proves they've learned since they were last banned, so that would make a fourth and final ban pointless (therefore "clearing" their last bans). However, if someone is repeatedly banned within a single month, then that proves they aren't learning from their mistakes, and the final ban will be permanent if it's executed within the same month.

Basically, if a repeat offender isn't given a fourth ban within six months, then their other offenses won't be counted anymore and they're in-the-clear, so to speak.