Can the chat flooding mute be turned into a 30-60 min mute like spam? It's very peculiar that a rule which is invoked only if a player sends 5+ lines at a time, often being from segmented messages, gets a 5 day mute unconditionally, while spam which is certainly worse as it will be 3 or more of the exact same / very close message (most flood punishes are not for this type of behavior) only has a 30-60 min punishment? I believe this would be a very healthy rules change for the MCC General discord as most flood mutes are unintentional but have a ridiculous punishment while spams are most of the time intentional and have practically no consequences. I also do not believe spam should be modified to 5d because I imagine people will have learned their lesson, and if they have not then they can be easily muted again. If someone is intentionally trying to create trouble then there are a multitude of other more harsh offenses they will likely stumble upon, so what will be (most of the time) innocent messages should not be punished so severely. Discuss!
And if I somehow haven't made it clear by this point, this is talking about the discord rules (which you may view in the rules section to see what I mean), not ingame.
I don't really agree with this, I think that some of the floods are intentional but you will only flood once because after that you learn your lesson. If this is changed then the only lesson that you learn is that I can spam a lot, wait 30 mins, eat some food or something and be right back at spamming for people to buy something or do my IRL deal etc. That's why the punishment is 5 days. Also, if this does happen to you and you did it accidentally 5 days isn't that much time if MCC is really something that you enjoy. So for me, this is a -1. Have a great day! -W5vil
The flood rule has a lot more grey area than ur making it out to have here whereas spam is very obvious / intentional, also the case you bring up here is something that would be a spam punishment and not a flood one?? This still in no way addresses that flood in most cases is much less malicious than spam and the fact that spam is a 30-60 min while it is 5d is pretty ridiculous in light of this, and on the contrary 5d if you are an active member is actually quite a slap in the face & says "because you were unaware of this rule which does not exist in most online forums, we don't want to hear from you". Please respond as I do not see how you have at all addressed the problem w/ this, unless you were saying that spam should be 5d too then your post would make sense to me but as it is disc I cannot agree P.S. you realize the point of a small punishment is to teach them of the rule and lengthy punishments are for more severe consequences right? That's how nearly every punishment structure works and there's a good reason for that, and the scenario you brought up (which is legal if it isn't spammed) not only almost never comes up in disc but would be muted for spam and not chat flood so it in no way goes w/ ur argument?
I see where you come from. The point on the length on chat flooding mutes is that people who keep pinging us would not be able to use that channels for 5 days. It’s also used to prevent spam (https://prnt.sc/qm7a1h). However, I’ve seen people getting muted for sending 5 messages in a row. But those were not repetitive &/or meant to spam. I believe that this can be added, but it’d be up to the staff member: they decide whether they’re going to mute for 5d or 1h.
Hello, In regards to this suggestion, I would definitely disagree with the punishment length being shortened. For starters - the punishment is only given to you if you either: intentionally flood chat or spam @ staff multiple times. Having this punishment reduced (to possibly 3 days) is reasonable, however, not if it's to 1 hour. As Staff, I've witnessed multiple occasions where players have flooded chat for a while and deserved the mute but in some cases, it's not intentional. Of course, there is appealing (which either unmutes you instantly/reduces your mute) and this can your very solution. If it wasn't intentional, your appeal will more than likely be accepted (can't guarantee/depends on the staff member). There are some changes that would happen, and some what wouldn't. In my eyes, this wouldn't be changing for a while, which is why I'll be leaving it at a -1.
