Computerpro

From what I can gather, I believe they do put them there, however, we do not have permission to see them. My suggestion is to grant us that permission, as it shouldn't do any harm and could be quite useful. If I am wrong in saying the archives are there, my suggestion is to put them there so they can be view-able after the event has taken place.

Suggestion Name: Making the official events archive public Suggestion Description: Currently, the official TMP events archived section does not show the previous events posts. My suggestion is to make the previous event posts public to be viewed again. (https://forum.truckersmp.com/index.php?/forum/441-archived/) Any example images: N/A Why should it be added?: Previous events can be viewed through the news section, however, it would be easier to view previous event posts if the archive section was public as using the news section makes it harder due to other posts being there. It'd also just generally be nice to read through the previous events posts easily.

Thank you for such an awesome event, very well organised, made my evening better

That's not the point at all. Some people can break two rules and be given 1 long ban, whereas some can break the exact same two rules and be given a longer ban. Hence some are pushed closer and sooner to the 1 month, 3 month and permanent bans. Your first point is not always true and it can happen in different ways. However, as I explained in my previous reply, that is a little too complicated to explain, given than my suggestion explains thoroughly enough already how it can be unfair. Second of all, I am not referring to when the same incident is being reported. Again, I am not talking about the same evidence being given. There are some scenarios where the two broken rules will not be in one evidence. It's quite possible that a user could ram a user, and then 20 minutes later insult them. Hence, this would not be in the same evidence. As for your other point, what if they're given a first ban, then ban expires and then the user in question goes ahead and reports the second incident. It's quite possible this could happen and hence, unfair. Last of all, yes it'd be in the perpetrators favour, however they can not determine this and some perpetrators will be given more unfair punishments to others. Once again, thanks for all your thoughts.

First of all, Thank you both very much for giving your thoughts. It shouldn't be up to the reporter to decide whether the user gets a reasonable punishment or a more unfair one. It should be a fixed system so that the reporter cannot do this. That way, it makes it fair for everyone. Otherwise, some people will be treated more unfairly than others, and to me, that shouldn't happen. Regarding your first paragraph, there is a difference. You are correct in saying the ban lengths would be the same (i.e. 2, 3 day bans or , 6 day ban), however this is not the point. If the user is given 2 bans, they are then closer to being given a 1 month due to history ban. There is quite clearly a difference, as I have explained in my overall original suggestion. In regards to your second point, it doesn't always happen in that way. However, that is a little too complicated to explain. My overall suggestion explains how it can be unfair thoroughly enough. Finally, chances are they wont notice it. Again, it doesn't always occur in that way. Nevertheless, thank you for giving your opinion. It is appreciated

Thanks for your thoughts on this What you have said is different to what my suggestion is about. I refer to the fact that when the perpetrator commits two offences that are to be reported. In my example I explained that a user has committed both Insulting and Ramming, both of which are against the rules. The reporter/user who has witnessed and recorded the perpetrator in question committing the two offences as described above could go ahead and report those both in one report, as such would lead to the Game Moderator dealing with the report to apply a slightly longer ban to the perpetrator. Or, the reporter could report the ramming the perpetrator committed in a first report, and a Game Moderator would apply a ban for that offence. The reporter can then wait for the perpetrators ban to expire, and then file a second report for the Insulting the perpetrator committed. The second route the reporter could take that I have explained above shows the perpetrator could possibly receive two bans, whereas the first route I explained they would only receive 1 slightly longer ban. Hence, how they would be pushed closer to the 1 month, 3 month and permanent bans. It is in no way "one situation one ban" since my suggestion explains when there are two "situations" I hope you understand now

Happy new year all! (Even if I'm a bit late)

Suggestion Name: Change the way longer bans are issued. (1 month, 3 month and permanent bans.) Suggestion Description: I have recently discovered the way bans are issued can be unfair for certain players. If a user is reported for more than one offence in one report, this user will be issued with one longer ban. However, the reporter could quite easily file a first report, wait for this to be dealt with, and then go ahead and submit a second report. This would lead to the user being banned twice (Two shorter bans). The issue with this is that, this pushes the user closer to the 1 month, 3 month and permanent bans, which could be unfair, as I will explain in the scenario below. Scenario which would result in an unfair ban system: Say I'm reporting a particular player (let's say Player A) for both insulting and ramming me. I report these both in one report. One longer ban is applied But, another player is reporting a different player (We'll call this Player B ) for the same offences, but creates 2 reports instead of the 1 report option. This player would receive 2 bans, right? Both players broke two rules, but Player A seems to have a better punishment than Player B has, because Player B is being pushed closer to the 1 month, 3 month and permanent bans with the 2 bans he would be given. Player B clearly has it much more unfair than Player A does. Let's say the players both had a clean history before these bans were given. It would then only take 2 more bans for Player B to then be given his 1 month due to history ban. Whereas, Player A would need 3 bans instead. Clearly in this scenario, the ban system is making it much more unfair on Player B. They both broke the same, two rules. In that sense, I feel a change is needed to the bans system to make it fair all around. Possible solutions could include determining the longer bans based on the amount of days a user has been banned previously. Alternatively, a bans point system could be added. The more points, the longer ban you receive. Any example images: N/A. Why should it be added?: It should be changed because clearly the ban system can be unfair currently as I have explained above.

6

From my understanding of your question you say your bans are already expired. Once they are expired, they will not be removed off your history completely. This means that they will stay as expired (with the yellow dot) as opposed to actually being removed, hence, there is no set time as and when they will be removed completely.

It is important to note these areas are very busy, so double trailers would cause chaos unfortunately.