Create a priority ticket system for responding to bans

[Brian9824]

Right now if you get a ban that is applied incorrectly it normally takes 3-4 days to get a response back and to have the incorrect ban removed, making users unable to use the forums during that time.

There needs to be a faster method to have those bans reviewed, as it punishes a user who is improperly banned and prevents them from using the forum incorrectly for days. The goal should be to respond to those type of tickets within say 6-8 hours.

[Brian9824]

Messaggio originale di KalCuey:

Messaggio originale di brian9824:

Yeah I can agree with that, or even having just 1 person who focuses on the moderation related tickets for consistency.

it wouldn't hurt, but they could never tell anyone they are doing it

i would think with "us" knowing they are there, that person would just get flooded with appeals

Well when you create a ticket you have to say what the reason is, so they just queue all those for appeals automatically. So its not something you can abuse. It would also tie into my other thread and have moderation be more consistent that way - https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/10/3790380404156391199/

Messaggio originale di Kiddiec͕̤̱͋̿͑͠at 🃏:

But david... we're all "bad ones". Don't you know that's how it works? If it posts, then it's bad.

Other than that, I actually agree with the points you're making in this topic, which seems to be a bit rare; people should not be gullible nor use quantity of fallacies as justification for the fallacies.

I'm quite confused why anyone would be against giving all users on Steam the ability to promptly have mistakes addressed. As Crazy Tiger pointed out the only potential issue would be if in doing so it made other people wait longer on their tickets.

[KalGimpa]

Messaggio originale di brian9824:

Messaggio originale di KalCuey:

it wouldn't hurt, but they could never tell anyone they are doing it

i would think with "us" knowing they are there, that person would just get flooded with appeals

Well when you create a ticket you have to say what the reason is, so they just queue all those for appeals automatically. So its not something you can abuse. It would also tie into my other thread and have moderation be more consistent that way - https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/10/3790380404156391199/

Messaggio originale di Kiddiec͕̤̱͋̿͑͠at 🃏:

But david... we're all "bad ones". Don't you know that's how it works? If it posts, then it's bad.

Other than that, I actually agree with the points you're making in this topic, which seems to be a bit rare; people should not be gullible nor use quantity of fallacies as justification for the fallacies.

I'm quite confused why anyone would be against giving all users on Steam the ability to promptly have mistakes addressed. As Crazy Tiger pointed out the only potential issue would be if in doing so it made other people wait longer on their tickets.

it would have to be more than one person if they are going to make them look at all of the bans, even excluding the game hub mods (unless it would include steam mods that do mod the hub)

not against it, just do not see steam spending the money on it

[Brian9824]

Messaggio originale di KalCuey:

Messaggio originale di brian9824:

Well when you create a ticket you have to say what the reason is, so they just queue all those for appeals automatically. So its not something you can abuse. It would also tie into my other thread and have moderation be more consistent that way - https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/10/3790380404156391199/





I'm quite confused why anyone would be against giving all users on Steam the ability to promptly have mistakes addressed. As Crazy Tiger pointed out the only potential issue would be if in doing so it made other people wait longer on their tickets.

it would have to be more than one person if they are going to make them look at all of the bans, even excluding the game hub mods (unless it would include steam mods that do mod the hub)

not against it, just do not see steam spending the money on it

Well not all the bans, only ones that are appealed. It can be as simple as 1 person looking at the tickets in a specific queue first and then looking at other tickets when its empty. Quite possibly no need for them to spend a dime more on it.

[[?]legit]

Messaggio originale di brian9824:

Messaggio originale di legit:

Follow the rules then, you don't get a ban out of nowhere. Or are you saying that there is some type of report abuse?

I do follow the rules, hence why i do not have a ban history. I have experienced mistakes in the past as have many others, when you have as many users as steam you will find mistakes being made as no one is perfect, hence why steam has instructions for reporting those mistakes so they can be addressed

Messaggio originale di steam:

If you believe this ban was issued by mistake, please contact Steam Support.

You claim that you are following the rules, but you keep getting banned "by mistake". Okay. In that case, it would make more sense to fix the ban system, and not the appeals. When incorrectly applied bans occur repeatedly, then that's not just "mistakes", it's a tendency. That should be fixed.

[The Commendatore]

Messaggio originale di legit:

Messaggio originale di brian9824:

I do follow the rules, hence why i do not have a ban history. I have experienced mistakes in the past as have many others, when you have as many users as steam you will find mistakes being made as no one is perfect, hence why steam has instructions for reporting those mistakes so they can be addressed

You claim that you are following the rules, but you keep getting banned "by mistake". Okay. In that case, it would make more sense to fix the ban system, and not the appeals. When incorrectly applied bans occur repeatedly, then that's not just "mistakes", it's a tendency. That should be fixed.

How's that even relevant. We get it. You don't like another user.

[Jamebonds1]

As a guy work for big company, it is not possible due to limited resources. Banned by mistake is very rare too.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Messaggio originale di Jamebonds1:

As a guy work for big company, it is not possible due to limited resources. Banned by mistake is very rare too.

Creating a priority system is possible it just needs to be done correctly. I've worked a ticket system before, there usually is a priority system in place. While this system was not available for the average user to use, it was available for those that handled tickets.

The issue comes when certain departments are wearing a lot of hats. At that point, the department either needs to be kinda broken up for a more specialized focus or you need to determine what type of ticket will take priority.

[The Presence]

A system like that wouldn't hurt.

However, I have to agree with another user that:

Messaggio originale di Crazy Tiger:

No, I think priority should be given to actual billing and financial issues. Forum bans are second rate to that, in my opinion.

Financial issues should take higher priority than ban reviews.

Messaggio originale di brian9824:

Yeah I can agree with that, or even having just 1 person who focuses on the moderation related tickets for consistency.

One person would get overwhelmed within an hour. They would need a decently sized team of people in different time zones who can take care of this.

[Brian9824]

Messaggio originale di Jamebonds1:

As a guy work for big company, it is not possible due to limited resources. Banned by mistake is very rare too.

No additional resources would be needed, simply a re-allocation in the order tickets are being addressed. As someone who has worked in companies that range from 20 people to over 20,000 people and have worked and managed support centers its entirely possible and very simple to implement.

Also support staff to read tickets aren't a limited resource. If its rare then there wouldn't be many tickets on it, thus making it even easier to accomplish. I mean its also rare for people to be falsely convicted compared to the number of convictions that are correct, but you don't make them serve their full sentence before they are allowed to appeal it....

With millions of users rare can still effect lots of people.

[KalGimpa]

Messaggio originale di legit:

Messaggio originale di brian9824:

I do follow the rules, hence why i do not have a ban history. I have experienced mistakes in the past as have many others, when you have as many users as steam you will find mistakes being made as no one is perfect, hence why steam has instructions for reporting those mistakes so they can be addressed

You claim that you are following the rules, but you keep getting banned "by mistake". Okay. In that case, it would make more sense to fix the ban system, and not the appeals. When incorrectly applied bans occur repeatedly, then that's not just "mistakes", it's a tendency. That should be fixed.

the problem is, and always will be, human error is a thing

not in any kind of malicious, pitchforks and torches kinda way, but people can have a bad day or be under trained and overzealous

or any number of normal, everyday things

i can see how it would be nice to get a ban overturned before the actual ban is up, i just do not see steam investing any more into this system then they already have

[Brian9824]

Messaggio originale di The Presence:

A system like that wouldn't hurt.

However, I have to agree with another user that:

Messaggio originale di Crazy Tiger:

No, I think priority should be given to actual billing and financial issues. Forum bans are second rate to that, in my opinion.

Financial issues should take higher priority than ban reviews.

Messaggio originale di brian9824:

Yeah I can agree with that, or even having just 1 person who focuses on the moderation related tickets for consistency.

One person would get overwhelmed within an hour. They would need a decently sized team of people in different time zones who can take care of this.

Well they already have the people doing the tickets, the only thing that changes is the order, so financal related tickets would get sorted to the top priority based on how long they have been opened, then appeals, then everything else.

So your not changing anyone's workload, your only changing the order in which they response. I wasn't suggesting only 1 person deal with appeals, was just suggesting if they had 1 person who focused on appeals it might be enough to keep them to a more manageable time frame. Without knowing the exact amount of tickets they get on appeals its hard to say though.

[Jamebonds1]

Messaggio originale di brian9824:

Messaggio originale di Jamebonds1:

As a guy work for big company, it is not possible due to limited resources. Banned by mistake is very rare too.

No additional resources would be needed, simply a re-allocation in the order tickets are being addressed. As someone who has worked in companies that range from 20 people to over 20,000 people and have worked and managed support centers its entirely possible and very simple to implement.

Also support staff to read tickets aren't a limited resource. If its rare then there wouldn't be many tickets on it, thus making it even easier to accomplish. I mean its also rare for people to be falsely convicted compared to the number of convictions that are correct, but you don't make them serve their full sentence before they are allowed to appeal it....

With millions of users rare can still effect lots of people.

Steam is based in USA, right? It is very difficult to increase customer service due to tax law. So they have limited resources. Even I have to pay higher tax to be able to live in a state and work in med earning career.

[Jamebonds1]

Messaggio originale di SlowMango:

Messaggio originale di Jamebonds1:

As a guy work for big company, it is not possible due to limited resources. Banned by mistake is very rare too.

Creating a priority system is possible it just needs to be done correctly. I've worked a ticket system before, there usually is a priority system in place. While this system was not available for the average user to use, it was available for those that handled tickets.

The issue comes when certain departments are wearing a lot of hats. At that point, the department either needs to be kinda broken up for a more specialized focus or you need to determine what type of ticket will take priority.

It is not possible due to limited resources.

[The Commendatore]

Messaggio originale di Jamebonds1:

It is not possible due to limited resources.

And you know that because...? You've "seen" it?

[The Presence]

Messaggio originale di brian9824:

Messaggio originale di The Presence:

A system like that wouldn't hurt.

However, I have to agree with another user that:

Financial issues should take higher priority than ban reviews.


One person would get overwhelmed within an hour. They would need a decently sized team of people in different time zones who can take care of this.

Well they already have the people doing the tickets, the only thing that changes is the order, so financal related tickets would get sorted to the top priority based on how long they have been opened, then appeals, then everything else.

So your not changing anyone's workload, your only changing the order in which they response. I wasn't suggesting only 1 person deal with appeals, was just suggesting if they had 1 person who focused on appeals it might be enough to keep them to a more manageable time frame. Without knowing the exact amount of tickets they get on appeals its hard to say though.

I understand that, but would they be able to reliably respond within a 6-8 hour frame to appeal tickets? I'm just guessing here but I feel they get more tickets related to payments than ban appeals.

To me, it just feels they'd be able to respond within a couple hours more realistically if it was a different team handling those requests.