The 3 warning rule is a perfect design. It keeps it simple, you mess up 3 times youre outta here.(unless you do something atrocious) Its not our problem that you feel on edge after breaking rules and having strikes to your name. As with a lot of cases, the story goes much deeper than this, next time maybe actually state all your actions, instead if glamourising the story to your benefit. As with all the other banned donators, they sit in the same category as you, you took advantage. You break the rules we’ll break you (metaphorically). Ban is staying put. 3 strikes. Enough said.
The system isn’t completely perfect. Although in Ben’s case? Yeah, it seems the guy keeps impulsively breaking the rules, but the design is not perfect. Why? Well, it doesn’t take into account that people change and after months to years, warnings should be taken off if the player has had good behavior for a long time. In my opinion, if good behavior has been shown (and for a long time, not just for a short duration), then perhaps the warnings should be “taken away”, but still be taken into consideration if the player’s bad behavior starts again.
