Author Topic: Banning policy and external websites  (Read 750 times)


  • Posts: 861
Banning policy and external websites
« on: June 23, 2017, 09:21:35 PM »
Hi, what is the banning policy these days, especially with regard to involvement with other websites? The general game rules are at and this question was asked previously at,48802.msg867618.html#msg867618. Also, it appears that a ban amnesty happened in 2013 (see,45004.msg735381.html#msg735381 altho I didn't find the original announcement).

My motivation for asking is laid out below. If you're not comfortable with these specifics being public, feel free to delete the below section - I won't be upset - it's your game. But I figure it's better to raise this head-on rather than hold it inside or let it leak out more passive-aggressively:

I posted the story that I found troubling  at,52599.msg989555.html#msg989555 - basically, I made a connection IG and I got his email to coordinate playtimes. A couple months ago, I contacted him to find he'd been banned for a while - according to the message he posted (, by unanimous vote of the producers. I was surprised as he seemed like a solid roleplayer and I got no sense of cheating or revealing IC info OOC from him. When I messaged him we chatted for a bit about software as fellow geeks in the Pacific Northwest software industry.

He was suspected of posting under the account 'hunted' on the 'shadow boards'. As it turned out, he had an account under 'dunebum', and it looks like he didn't post much of anything controversial or nasty. Apparently he was offered the chance to stick around if he deleted his shadow board account, but he declined.

First, what's the policy on having an account at that board? Or reading it? I don't have an account there and don't plan to open one, but I like to know the rules.

Second, how does staff have confidence in the evidence - how you can reliably figure out who is posting to another website? I'm involved with Wikipedia where we do this a lot with suspected sockpuppets (see but at least there we can check the IP address ("checkuser" process). There are of course false positives and false negatives, but it all happens in entirely public discussions, as does nearly everything on Wikipedia.

Also curious about the general rationale. If part of the purpose of banning is deterrence from participating in this website, it should be part of the rules, and probably every ban should be announced.


  • Producer
  • Posts: 2387
Re: Banning policy and external websites
« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2017, 11:19:50 AM »
At one point a small number of people were banned for posting on another website. Their accounts were locked and they were asked to consider not posting on that website, those that agreed had their accounts unbanned.

Moving forward - I don't believe we have any intention of continuing to seek out and ban people who are posting in other forums.  That would involve reading those forums, something which I'm personally not interested in doing.

Anyone that wishes to discuss having their account unbanned can send us a request through the tool. 

Nergal and Oryx were working on a project with the goal of removing the ban from the majority of banned accounts. As of May, when Nergal was gathering information, we had 530 banned players out of 18011 total accounts (about 3% of accounts are banned).  This project is still unfinished but I intend to complete this. Essentially we are confirming our parameters for who should remain banned. At this moment we are looking to unban 466 of the 530 accounts. 

"It doesn't matter what country someone's from, or what they look like, or the color of their skin. It doesn't matter what they smell like, or that they spell words slightly differently, some would say more correctly." - Jemaine Clement. FOTC.