Denied Burnout no more. Simple solution to relapses.

[Dusk]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove?
This adds a self-ban command that lets users voluntarily ban themselves from the game, forums, and/or Discord for a set time. It’s not appealable and doesn’t show up in ban records, keeping it separate from punishment-based bans.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
There have been standard ban systems, but none that allow a user-controlled self-ban without admin intervention.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):

• Gives users control over their break, letting them step away on their own terms.
• Prevents abuse by limiting ban reasons to a preset list.
• Encourages healthy time management for players who may need a temporary break.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:

• Some users may regret the ban and want to return early but will be unable to appeal it.
• Could require some technical setup to ensure bans are properly applied across all platforms
• Possible minor changes made to staff handbook and punishment policies in the event people somehow abuse this system.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
This feature supports player well being without adding extra work for staff. It provides a structured way for users to step away without relying on admins or trusting their own intentions and ensures that self-bans remain fair by preventing misuse. The ability to select where the ban applies adds flexibility, making it a useful addition for those who need a temporary or long-term

 

[Change Z. "Somebody"]

It's either this or screaming slurs while MRDMing (same result)

+Support

 

[Tryolas_1919]

+support my kind of suggestion

 

[Kito]

-Support
The inability of an immature player to not "crash out" and MRDM or do something stupid to get them banned because they're facing an addiction (which 9 times out of 10 is boredom, annoyance over how they used to enjoy the server and can't anymore due to changes or just overall being stupid), is not the responsibility of the staff and content team to solve.
I do not deny it is legit possible for someone to become addicted to GMod, but it is not the staff's responsibility to solve that, more the player taking conscious steps to solve the root of the problem instead of seeking elsewhere to go repeat the cycle.

Most intelligence O5 ever hollllyyyy.

Instead of telling staff "I want to self ban for X time pls" you're saying players with a problem should instead ruin the server by MRDMing or doing something to get banned for their specific time frame.

You make a -Support but give good points as to why this SHOULD be implemented.

It's either this or screaming slurs while MRDMing (same result)

+Support

Change makes an excellent point.

 

[Ace Linguini "Spades"]

Massive +Support​

Should’ve been added in March 2024.

 

[Joris Kilotoviz/London]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addictive_behavior
+Support

"This doesn't affect me personally!!!!!!!!!!! -support x100000000000000000"

 

[Aleem Abdul]

 

[Cade Valentine]

You - supported it yet your reasoning actually shows the benefits of a self-ban system

Most intelligence O5 ever hollllyyyy.

Making this about me being O5 is certainly a moment of all time, pop off Kito, very mature.

The point I'm making is that 1) this system adds to the workload of staff unnecessarily 2) it isn't their responsibility in the first place to manage this problem and 3) I unironically think that the self-reflection required for someone to realise they're in such a behavioral spiral that they know they are imminently going to commit a mass rulebreak does not exist in 99% of the target of this suggestion.

I stand by my points and do not see the practicality of the suggestion. I also acknowledge that addiction is a very real thing. Can you please not be rude about it?

 

[Dusk]

Making this about me being O5 is certainly a moment of all time, pop off Kito, very mature.

The point I'm making is that 1) this system adds to the workload of staff unnecessarily 2) it isn't their responsibility in the first place to manage this problem and 3) I unironically think that the self-reflection required for someone to realise they're in such a behavioral spiral that they know they are imminently going to commit a mass rulebreak does not exist in 99% of the target of this suggestion.

I stand by my points and do not see the practicality of the suggestion. I also acknowledge that addiction is a very real thing. Can you please not be rude about it?

I'm having a hard time understanding the exact point you're trying to make here.

1. Are you suggesting that there is currently no unnecessary workload placed on the staff team behind the scenes?
   
   
2. At what point does it become their responsibility? Before or after the individual applies it to themselves? I feel I laid out some good rebuttals for abuse prevention
   
   
3. I still feel like this is an extreme stance on what is simply a quality of life update. The fact that you are so strongly against a change designed not only to support individuals but also to demonstrate that the community cares is honestly disappointing. It’s disheartening to see how little value is placed on positive reinforcement and basic compassion for others, especially from individuals who have, or are currently holding positions of power where this is a key characteristic to have.

 

[conspiracycarl]

+support nl gonna deny it to keep us addicted smh

 

[Cade Valentine]

It’s disheartening to see how little value is placed on positive reinforcement and basic compassion for others, especially from individuals who have, or are currently holding positions of power where this is a key characteristic to have.

Y'know one of these days I'm going to figure out the obsession US players have with making reasonings/answers about matters related to the server about the individual outside of the server. This is the third time in a row I've given an opinion on something and to date I've been told that I'm "probably the most unfun person in a room", "someone that no-one wants to speak with", a "general asshole" and now I apparently lack positive reinforcement and basic compassion. Please grow and change as people, I literally do not know who you are and am giving a subjective opinion about your proposal because I found it interesting enough to read and critique.

In regards to your actual points;

1) Are you suggesting that just because a problem already exists, it then justifies adding more to that existing problem?

2) It doesn't. The point is staff should never be in this position to begin with, I'm not even talking about the responsibility of managing the system because I don't want the system added. When you sign up to be staff on a gmod server, you're signing up to moderate rule-breaks and the quality of RP, not be the minder of those experiencing a significant affliction and detriment in addiction. They need help elsewhere and unfortunately you can't insulate a problem like this in tissue and bubble wrap. Sometimes a person must make mistakes to learn from them.

3) Personal comments aside; This isn't simply a quality of life update. It's new dev work and code, a new staff responsibility in-game to observe and process the unbans etc, a general staff responsibility of forum oversight if needs be whenever someone may want to appeal or change their mind on this, and is overall a significant reputation and attitude shift in how the community would view the problem. At the end of the day this is a roleplay server on a video game. Personal user health is not to be moderated by people who ARE NOT QUALIFIED (And I would like to add as well, as someone currently obtaining a psychology degree, you should never try to moderate or help this sort of problem unqualified, merely try to guide them away from the problem source to a professional) because that rips open the user-staff dynamic and shreds it.

Regardless, based on the inability to hold an objective opinion based conversation without making it personal in some capacity, please stop replying to me, or at the very least, stop expecting a response out of me if you do. I'm just gonna see if this gets accepted or denied.

 

[Zen]

Y'know one of these days I'm going to figure out the obsession US players have with making reasonings/answers about matters related to the server about the individual outside of the server. This is the third time in a row I've given an opinion on something and to date I've been told that I'm "probably the most unfun person in a room", "someone that no-one wants to speak with", a "general asshole" and now I apparently lack positive reinforcement and basic compassion. Please grow and change as people, I literally do not know who you are and am giving a subjective opinion about your proposal because I found it interesting enough to read and critique.

In regards to your actual points;

1) Are you suggesting that just because a problem already exists, it then justifies adding more to that existing problem?

2) It doesn't. The point is staff should never be in this position to begin with, I'm not even talking about the responsibility of managing the system because I don't want the system added. When you sign up to be staff on a gmod server, you're signing up to moderate rule-breaks and the quality of RP, not be the minder of those experiencing a significant affliction and detriment in addiction. They need help elsewhere and unfortunately you can't insulate a problem like this in tissue and bubble wrap. Sometimes a person must make mistakes to learn from them.

3) Personal comments aside; This isn't simply a quality of life update. It's new dev work and code, a new staff responsibility in-game to observe and process the unbans etc, a general staff responsibility of forum oversight if needs be whenever someone may want to appeal or change their mind on this, and is overall a significant reputation and attitude shift in how the community would view the problem. At the end of the day this is a roleplay server on a video game. Personal user health is not to be moderated by people who ARE NOT QUALIFIED (And I would like to add as well, as someone currently obtaining a psychology degree, you should never try to moderate or help this sort of problem unqualified, merely try to guide them away from the problem source to a professional) because that rips open the user-staff dynamic and shreds it.

Regardless, based on the inability to hold an objective opinion based conversation without making it personal in some capacity, please stop replying to me, or at the very least, stop expecting a response out of me if you do. I'm just gonna see if this gets accepted or denied.

You make a good point about CN staff not being qualified to handle addiction. This feels like things like this might be considered to be sensitive situations, in which case only Senior Admin+ are even allowed to do anything regarding them, and they already have enough on their plate without having to manage a significant increase in sensitive situations to handle.

 

[Dusk]

Y'know one of these days I'm going to figure out the obsession US players have with making reasonings/answers about matters related to the server about the individual outside of the server. This is the third time in a row I've given an opinion on something and to date I've been told that I'm "probably the most unfun person in a room", "someone that no-one wants to speak with", a "general asshole" and now I apparently lack positive reinforcement and basic compassion. Please grow and change as people, I literally do not know who you are and am giving a subjective opinion about your proposal because I found it interesting enough to read and critique.

This suggestion is specifically about matters outside of the game. It’s frustrating to see discussions turn hostile simply because someone questions another’s viewpoint.

1) Are you suggesting that just because a problem already exists, it then justifies adding more to that existing problem?

I’m not entirely sure what you mean by this. If you're implying that introducing a solution somehow adds to the problem, then that logic would suggest no issue should be addressed at all. Problems typically require thought out solutions, not just avoidance. This suggestion is a tool that allows players to manage themselves if they feel it’s necessary. Anything beyond that is an overcomplication.

2) It doesn't. The point is staff should never be in this position to begin with, I'm not even talking about the responsibility of managing the system because I don't want the system added. When you sign up to be staff on a gmod server, you're signing up to moderate rule-breaks and the quality of RP, not be the minder of those experiencing a significant affliction and detriment in addiction. They need help elsewhere and unfortunately you can't insulate a problem like this in tissue and bubble wrap. Sometimes a person must make mistakes to learn from them.

The server operates as an LLC, meaning Yeke, Ventz, and the Network Leadership Team have an obligation to provide a functional and sustainable community that fosters a positive player experience, both in and out of the game. While staff are not responsible for handling every personal issue, this suggestion requires minimal staff effort while providing a benefit to the players who need it. The impact on staff workload is negligible, yet the upside for player well-being is significant.

3) Personal comments aside; This isn't simply a quality of life update. It's new dev work and code, a new staff responsibility in-game to observe and process the unbans etc, a general staff responsibility of forum oversight if needs be whenever someone may want to appeal or change their mind on this, and is overall a significant reputation and attitude shift in how the community would view the problem. At the end of the day this is a roleplay server on a video game. Personal user health is not to be moderated by people who ARE NOT QUALIFIED (And I would like to add as well, as someone currently obtaining a psychology degree, you should never try to moderate or help this sort of problem unqualified, merely try to guide them away from the problem source to a professional) because that rips open the user-staff dynamic and shreds it.

I don’t see why this point is relevant to the suggestion itself. This is not a psychological intervention, nor is anyone advocating that staff take responsibility for another person’s well being. This is simply a quality of life feature that provides players an optional tool to regulate their playtime if they feel it is necessary. At the end of the day, we’re not institutionalizing players before letting them run a !selfban command. This is a simple system meant to provide flexibility for those who need it. There’s no need to overanalyze it into something it isn’t.

 

[DaveDogs]

Making this about me being O5 is certainly a moment of all time, pop off Kito, very mature.

The point I'm making is that 1) this system adds to the workload of staff unnecessarily 2) it isn't their responsibility in the first place to manage this problem and 3) I unironically think that the self-reflection required for someone to realise they're in such a behavioral spiral that they know they are imminently going to commit a mass rulebreak does not exist in 99% of the target of this suggestion.

I stand by my points and do not see the practicality of the suggestion. I also acknowledge that addiction is a very real thing. Can you please not be rude about it?

The practicality of a self-ban system is that it would literally give the player, not staff the tools to take care of their boredom/impulsiveness without staff involvement. It would quite literally take a load off their shoulders .

And just because you "unironically think" doesn't make it true.

This isn't about staff fixing someone's addiction , that isn't their responsibility. However giving players a tool that can assist in their impulsiveness can prevent someone from crashing out and committing rule breaks that could ruin the experience for players and cause headache for staff sounds in theory, a very practical solution.

Also apologies if I came off as rude

 

[Verlocity]

Suggestion Denied

---

Hi @Dusk ,

Thanks for taking the time to make a server suggestion.
The Content Team has chosen to deny your suggestion due to the following reasons.

Reason for Denial:
We as content feel that this is just not needed. If you would like to request someone to ban you, I'm sure they will if you really want it.

Your suggestion will now be locked and marked as denied.​