FayezTMP

Using the number of reports as the main factor to decide on a ban just seems a bit unfair. Every case should be looked at individually, not just based on the number of reports.

Greetings everyone , I agree with the general idea behind this suggestion. I think it’d be much more practical if a notification could be marked as “read” once it’s been seen in the list, not only after it’s been clicked. This would make it easier to manage notifications without having to open each one individually. It would also be quite useful if notifications that have already been read could be automatically cleared out after they’ve been sitting there for a certain amount of time. Once they’ve been seen and read, they’ve served their purpose so there’s no need for them to be hanging around and cluttering up the interface.

Alright but just to be clear, Saying "like talking to a brick wall" doesn't exactly help your point. I’ve been responding in good faith, explaining my reasoning and backing it up. Just because we haven’t been agreeing doesn’t mean I haven’t been listening, it’s just that we’ve been seeing things differently and that’s alright. That being said, comparing TruckersMP to something like Counter Strike 2 just doesn’t really work. CS2 has built-in systems for things like cooldowns and match-based punishments, and most of it is handled automatically within the game’s own specific mechanics. TruckersMP, on the other hand, has always been a community-run project layered on top of two different simulators ETS2 and ATS. Everything from moderation to bans is done manually by real people reviewing context. So it’s not just a case of "competitive vs casual" it’s two completely different ecosystems. If you’ve been feeling like this chat’s run its course, fair enough, but there’s not been any need to throw shade just because I’ve not been agreeing with you.

Games like Counter Strike 2 have been known to split things between casual and competitive modes, however, it’s never really been a like-for-like comparison. In CS2, most cooldowns have been handled automatically or have been tied directly to specific mechanics, like abandoning matches or excessive team damage. TruckersMP, on the other hand, has always been a community-run project, where bans have been enforced manually and each case has been reviewed on its own merits. Trying to bring in server-specific punishments would mean bans have to be tracked per server, and the whole ban system would need to be reworked. What you’re proposing is a structural change to the backbone of the moderation system, and one that, frankly, opens the door to people gaming the system by bouncing between enforcement zones, which undermines the very consistency the rules are built to uphold. That alone makes implementing server-specific enforcement a much bigger structural change than it may seem. This isn’t quite accurate. Warnings and kicks are absolutely part of the moderation process but they’re used at the staff’s discretion based on the severity and context of the rule break. If someone’s just making a minor mistake, they often do get warned or kicked instead of banned. But if someone causes a major crash, drives recklessly through busy areas, or clearly shows intent to disrupt others especially in well-known problem zones like Calais-Duisburg, moderators may not issue a soft warning first. That’s not about being harsh, however, it’s about protecting the community and responding proportionally to the behavior. Moderation’s never been about favoring players - it’s always been about keeping the community safe and fair for everyone. There’ve been players who’ve been given chance after chance, but when someone’s been breaking the rules repeatedly, it can’t just be brushed aside. TruckersMP’s never been the sort of place to let that slide. That’s why the ban system’s been designed to scale based on a player’s history (§2.8) - not where they’ve been playing from. My point’s really been about how this sort of system would’ve likely been playing out in practice. Even if it’s been set up to handle with one-off rule breaches at first, it’s hard to imagine it not gradually being shifted more towards targeting repeat behaviour. Say a player’s been causing a serious issue and ends up being moved straight onto Arcade or maybe it’s been happening a few times already. Either way, the mod team’s still got to judge the intent behind it, how often it’s been happening, and what kind of impact it’s actually been having. So yeah, the point’s still been the same all along: once punishments have been tied to specific servers, things end up being far more complicated both for the staff who’ve been managing it, and for the players trying to make sense of it. And lastly, saying that proper rule enforcement’s somehow ‘disingenuous’ just because the rules have been a bit long to read doesn’t quite sit right. Players need to know what’s expected of them. It’s not about overregulating, however, it’s about creating a fair and predictable environment. At the end of the day, players have been choosing to use the mod, and with that comes the responsibility to follow the rules. These rules haven’t been written as suggestions, they’ve been set in place to keep things fair. TruckersMP isn’t just a collection of servers. It’s one community. Rules only work when they apply to everyone the same way, regardless of where they’re standing at the time.

Technically speaking, ETS2 and ATS are two separate games, however, when it comes to TruckersMP, they’re both part of the same mod, the same community, and run under one account with one set of rules across the board. Players don't have separate TMP profiles/accounts or punishment histories across games. You can’t for example, abuse chat in ETS2 and expect not to be held accountable if you jump into ATS the next day, both games are run together under the TruckersMP community. The Terms of Service 1.1 are clear on this: “We create and manage a gaming platform… to let you interact with other members in a massively multiplayer online (MMO) fashion.” So whether someone is playing ETS2 or ATS, Simulation 1 or Arcade, it’s all part of the same MMO community and rules are enforced service-wide, not game-specific. That’s how consistency and fairness are maintained. You said “hate speech isn’t what we’re talking about” but it is absolutely relevant. Behavior that breaks the rules, whether through driving, communication, or other has platform-wide impact. Just because a server doesn’t have collisions doesn’t mean it's a lawless environment. That’s why rule §1 covers service-wide behavior, not just driving conduct. For example, imagine letting someone back onto Arcade who’s been causing trouble by harassing others in chat, you wouldn’t just let them stroll back onto Arcade like nothing happened - Collisions or not, it’s about how they behave, not just how they drive. You’ve mentioned that moving repeat offenders to Arcade “isn’t complicated or controversial,” but I’d say it’s not been nearly as simple as that. Trying to make that work fairly would’ve been a right mess. You’d have to start tracking what rules have been broken on which server, decide who’s been banned from where. Permissions would have been changing all the time and that’s just been asking for confusion - not just for the players, but for the staff trying to keep it all straight, as well as fair. Everyone’s been held to the same expectations, no matter what server they’ve been on - and that’s been key in keeping the community safe and enjoyable for all.

And not every VTC is created with the aim of becoming a major, validated/verified company. Some are simply a group of friends wanting to enjoy the game under a shared name. And that should be absolutely fine. In my view, keeping the door open to all types of VTCs is what helps maintain an inclusive community. Rather than introducing additional, overly strict rules, we should be looking at ways to better support and empower VTCs perhaps through improved tools.

TruckersMP has always been one community with one set of rules that apply across the board. That’s not been done to overcomplicate things, however, it’s been done to make sure everyone’s treated fairly. Take §1.1 for example, that’s part of §1 – Service-wide rules, and it’s been there to make it absolutely clear, players are responsible for their accounts and all of their in-game behaviour, regardless of which server they’ve been on. Whether someone’s been reckless/trolling on Sim 1 or been causing offensive behavior on ProMods, it’s all treated the same because it all affects the same community. All TruckersMP servers have been part of the same multiplayer platform, they’ve not been separate games, just different environments. And so the rules have been put in place to cover the full thing not just bits of it. If bans were only enforced on a server-by-server basis, it would’ve created more confusion than it solved. People would’ve just been hopping between servers to avoid consequences, and that would’ve ended up weakening the whole moderation system. It’s important to keep things joined up so everyone knows where they stand. The way the system’s been set up helps prevent that it’s been about keeping things clear, as well as fair. Here are a few examples to illustrate why consistent enforcement across all servers makes sense: A player uses hate speech on the ProMods server. Should their punishment only apply to that server? The harm they caused is not bound to one location it's a community wide issue and violates §1.5 Inappropriate use of language, which applies everywhere. A player repeatedly causes traffic jams in Calais on Simulation 1 by blocking intersections and refusing to move. They are banned. Should they really be allowed to move to ProMods and/or Simulation 2 and continue the same behavior possibly in a different city or zone? A player tailgates and intentionally overtakes unsafely in convoys on Simulation 2, putting other players at risk. If they’re banned only on that server, they could go to another convoy event server and do the exact same thing.

I understand your perspective on the idea of automatic video evidence upload, but I don’t think it’s been possible to automatically upload evidence the way you’re suggesting at the moment. The evidence is manually recorded by moderators. Implementing something like automatic uploads would require a major overhaul of the system, and it might not capture every detail as well as a moderator manually reviewing it. Even if the evidence has been uploaded quickly, the appeal process might still take time. In most cases, the ban is justified. If a ban has been issued wrongly, it can still take time to sort it out, regardless of how quickly the evidence was uploaded. So, whether it’s been a 3 day ban or longer, the system works the same way/procedure when it comes to appeals.

Greetings everyone , I’ve been thinking about your point, and while I can see your point of view, I don’t quite agree that inactive VTCs should just be cleaned up. There's nothing wrong with a VTC having just a handful of active members. Sometimes, a small group of mates creating a VTC to enjoy the game with. Not every VTC needs to be massive to have value, and not every VTC has been needing to be a big. I get the idea of wanting things to be a bit more organised, however, I believe there’s been a need for more flexibility. Every new VTC has been starting small, and it takes time for them to grow and develop. If smaller VTCs are being restricted or removed just because they haven’t been able to build up a massive roster right away, it could end up limiting those who are just starting out. That being said, instead of just cleaning up inactive VTCs by imposing strict rules, I think there are other ways could encourage growth and activity. Perhaps by offering incentives without having to meet such strict criteria.

Greetings everyone , The way bans are structured in TruckersMP right now is pretty straightforward - If you've been banned, you’ve been banned from the whole network, meaning you can’t access into any servers until your ban has been lifted/expired. If we’ve been thinking about adding restrictions where you'd be locked out of specific servers based on your ban history it’s likely it’d just complicate things more and cause more confusion. The whole point of the ban system has always been to keep it clear and consistent. If rules start limiting access to certain servers because of past bans/history, it might feel a bit too restrictive. I think it's better to keep it simple and stick with the idea that if you're banned, you're banned from the whole network until your ban is over. That way, there’s no grey area.

Yeah, that Hershey’s white chocolate bar with Oreo cookies inside is my favourite.

I’d say white chocolate has definitely been my favourite for a good while now. I’m well into milk chocolate too. And every now and then I’ll go for a bit of dark chocolate, especially if I’ve got a cup of coffee on the go. Proper nice combo, that.