Forum:Regarding the "Next is Perma" list

So right now the "Next is permanent" list on Call of Duty Wiki:Chat/Bans stretches to 16 users. The thing is, some of those users, such as Ryanc165 and User:Soggy Toast haven't been seen, let alone cause trouble, in a fairly long time. Is it safe to say that users who are absent for extended periods of time can be considered non-threats and simply removed from the list? Maybe they could even be archived, but at least something to make the list shorter/neater would be nice. 17:16, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion
Support - although I'd much rather have some sort of archive for future reference. -- 17:31, August 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * An archive would be good if said users ever returned. 17:40, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Support - They should be bundled in with some of the chat archives to prevent the list getting too long. 17:43, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Support- Make a separate archive page for users who haven't been seen in over 45 days. 17:45, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Support - I feel making a separate archive for user is a good idea, but what would the limit of days would it be so they get archived into it?17:49, August 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * I assume 30-50 days, as Pierogi said 45 days above. 22:48, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral - I support the idea, but the convienience of being able to know who has a next perma would be eliminated. I can see it becoming a problem, like forgetting who has a next perma. DarkMetroid567Talk 17:56, August 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Easily solvable through use of an archive, as mentioned by both my original post and Azuris's. 18:21, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Support - I agree with Philly. 18:00, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Weak Support - DM has a point, but I do dislike the way the "Next is Perma" thing is working, so I think we should change it. 18:37, August 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * Easily solvable through use of an archive, as mentioned by both my original post and Azuris's. 18:21, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Support Placing at Bottom - My main issue with the Next is Permanenant section is it's location at the top part of COD:CHAT/B. I would rather not put this section is a seperate page, for it would eliminate the convienence. The top of the page should only be the summary and the main bam chart. The Next is Perm list is also somewhat disorganized. I wouldn't mind incorporating it into the ban chart or making it a chart of it's own. DarkMetroid567Talk 18:24, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Support; per all supporters. 21:25, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Support - Per all, an Archive page seems excellent. 22:48, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Support- - Per all supporters. 15:57, August 20, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - Would the same principle apply for people who have not had an incident several months following their last ban? 03:10, August 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * I've been thinking about that as well, as you're on the list and haven't gotten into any incidents. I think it would be best to just forget about it and not hold it against someone. -- 06:46, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

Support placing at the bottom and a forgive system - I like DM's idea of placing the list at the bottom. However, I also have an idea leading off of Metl's comment - to have a "forgive system" for users who go 1.5 maybe 2 months without incident and are active/semi-active on the chat to get one strike removed (or maybe that's being a little too forgiving). 22:06, August 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * What do you mean in the last phrase of your last sentence? Would we put a user off the hook and make it so that it would require 2 bans from a permanent? DarkMetroid567Talk 22:52, August 19, 2012 (UTC)
 * What we could do, is have a system where every 3 months a person goes without a ban, their closeness to a permaban is dropped by one. The records of previous bans are still kept, but their "x to permaban" fades. 02:47, August 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * A spot on the next is permaban list is not just dependent on how many times a user has been banned; but also the severity of their policy breach(s). 02:54, August 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * @DM and Metl: That is what I'm suggesting. @Red: People can improve (at least that's what I like to believe), so if someone is on the "next is perm" instead of banned, the user could still be given a strike removed. 18:48, August 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * I somewhat agree, but it would have to be long term improvement in my opinion. DarkMetroid567Talk 15:45, August 21, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose - If the government were after a wanted criminal, would they say 'Bleh, let's go do something else' if they fail to find him? No, they don't. What I am trying to say is dropping the perma does nothing. If the perma is dropped, they come back and do something, they are simply back on the list again. It is just pointless.
 * First off, users that get banned are not criminals and chat moderators are not the government - so that comparison does not represent the situation when somebody is banned from chat at all. Good faith says that, if a user were to come back to chat after being banned, they would act like a regular user on chat. A 'forgiveness system' would not be based off of time, but off of good behavior. The odds of somebody staying in chat until they are trusted enough to be taken off the chat list and then continuing to troll is very low - and considering the possibility of that even happening is in bad faith. -- 15:10, August 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * And as for just removing a user off the list to make more space: that's one of the reasons why we'd have an archive, to use for future reference. -- 15:11, August 20, 2012 (UTC)

Support - The Chat Ban page is not that messy, but anything to make it seem even neater and better looking. 16:00, August 20, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - 'Removed/Deleted", No - "Archived" - Yes. Let us just say gone but not forgotten?  Talk 16:09, August 24, 2012 (UTC)

Support - As for the archiving system, and also forgiving system. However, I would rather the forgiving hierarchy be less regulated, by which I mean there shouldn't be just a set amount of time of, say 2 months, but rather after it's noticeable that the user has learned. --MLGisNot4Me talk 16:22, August 24, 2012 (UTC) Support I can say that this is similar to giving a second chance, which I am always up for. -- Plasma ( Talk ) 16:29, August 24, 2012 (UTC)