try /ignore "player name" - it already exists.

/ignore "player name"
already exist. But as Incarnate has stated, this is not sufficient by itself.
If you offend one, they should /ignore "you".
If you offend many, you will be dealt with, by the game devs, so that you are ignored by default.

One further suggestion. If a player is reported (once/twice/three times?), send them a warning before administrative action is taken. Something along the lines of "A player has reported you for spam/racist language/etc. Please try to tone down your chat or switch to a different channel." Like Whistler said, once people saw he was online, they tended to moderate themselves. Basically, give people a chance to stop being abusive before they get muted.

Along the same lines, if administrative action is taken against a player, put an appeal process in place. This appeal would give the player a chance to see the chat that was designated as against the rules and allow them a chance to explain themselves.

Adding to what Rejected said, diminish the number of reminders for people who get more than a few. First timers get 3 warnings before action, but only 1 warning thereafter.

Basically, if any "Report" were passed as administratively confirmed, the offending user would always receive the example text used to cite the issue. That would be inherent to the system, in the initial Report process, the administrative validation, and the message informing the accused of what had happened.

Tickets would be the process for requesting an appeal.

There would definitely be an automated escalation to the application of administrative force, with successive incidents. I'm not sure how many that would be, right now. But perhaps, a player's record would contain a 6-month rolling history. Having more than X incidents in any given 6-months would create a more rapid escalation.

That seems reasonable and could be dialed in as we learn more.

I like Rejected's suggestion. People do occasionally step over some else's line (which is, at times unknowable in advance) without really meaning to. Some will self regulate when they realize they are Really pissing someone off.

As a further suggestion along those lines, perhaps something like /warn could be added. The use I see for this is for people to have an anonymous way to tell people to please tone it down a bit, when they are only somewhat annoying, but not really doing anything that is ban worthy.

I would like to hear from Whistler on something.

Do you frequently use your white text chat thing to ask people to just 'tone it down a little' without actually taking any administrative action, assuming the subject does in fact behave afterwards?

I'm not sure how useful it would be, but if it wouldn't be hard to implement, and has even a small positive effect, then it strikes me as a worthwhile idea.

LNH: It's quite rare that I mute or chatjail anyone. A private white text message is sufficient for most users. However, some users have received a LOT of warnings.

If a message is anonymized, it should have some identifier (random, sequential, w/e) by which further communications from that player can be ignored.

Roda I think you misunderstood my suggestion. Let me flesh it out so as to make it more clear.

Lets say I go spouting some nonsense on 100. Most of it innocuous, but something there you find particularly objectionable. You then /warn "look ...No Hands". I get a white text message that goes something like "Your chat is becoming offensive. Please keep chat civil."

That's it, no administrative action tied to it. Just a friendly (helpful) warning that I am getting a bit out of hand. Nothing to specifically identify who /warned me, the same way /vote mute is currently anonymous.

I guess upon further thought that /warn should not work unless someone has chatted on a public channel in the past 10 or 15 minutes. I think as well that you should not be able to /warn someone more then once in an hour. Otherwise it becomes a mechanism to harass people. Furthermore if two or three people /warn me there should be some way for me to tell that two or three or 17 people think I am being a dick.

"Anonymous warning #3351: please stop talking in Spanish."

/ignore #3351
/report #3351

All messages should have some form of identity, that can be ignored, and reported.
edit: Do you think the /warn command will not be abused?

Ok I see what you are driving at. I wasn't suggesting any way to convey a specific user-definable message via /warn. Though I do suppose that having a way to opt-out of receiving them would be helpful. Having a way to /report frivolous warning would be a good idea, I hadn't thought of that.

Any means of player to player communication should be subject to /ignore and /report, per player communicating.

How do I know if a /warn is frivolous, if the warning player can not be more specific. If I step on your toes, I might not know which toes I stepped on. What if I swear, think males should have authority over females, and I think it is ok to say in game that I fly a rebel flag, and you disagree with one of these? Which one?
edit: at a minimum, you need to be able to quote the offense.

Why do we need an anonymous way to warn people? Why not just do it non-anonymously with /msg?

I don't think an anonymous /report to the dev team is necessary. Warning people via /msg is probably not the best. I get all sorts of crap for speaking to people who have flagrantly violated the rules and have negatively impacted other players - and I signed up for that. I can't imagine the average player being willing to put up with the abuse.

Why not make the warn thing autonomous?

Ch 1 currently sends out messages reminding people that it's a help channel whenever it gets a higher frequency of messages, maybe something like that could be incorporated into 100? A list of offensive/curse words could be created, and whenever their rate of usage crosses a certain limit, a message such as "This is a game only chat viewable by everyone, please keep it civil" or "This chat is being moderated, please keep it on topic" could be sent out on 100.

I agree Aryko.

Anytime anyone is auto censored, they should get an automated message detailing the intended usage of chat.

Further, the suggested /warn command, could also be a preset a preset message.

I still think that even a /warn message from a player should be subject to /ignore and /report, and

You can not appropriately /warn someone, without the ability to quote them.