Please implement more group moderation tools, specifically a distinction between a “Group Ban” and “Instance-Only (Group) Ban” to prevent users from joining Group, Group+, and Group Public instances without restricting their membership in the group itself. Or, expand Group Role Permissions to allow member roles with specific restrictions to prevent from joining any Group, Group+, or Group Public instances.

I run a group that represents a fandom, and its my own philosophy that neither I nor my team should dictate who can or can't join the group and represent the fandom - regardless of who they are or how they behave. However, I do believe it is my responsibility to ensure meetups are safe and moderated properly - and to give my team the appropriate tools to do so. This puts me in a difficult position when it comes to group bans. I don’t want to issue bans or handle repeat offenders on a per-instance basis where damage could occur before moderation can respond. Yet, it's currently the only way to prevent problematic users from joining group instances.

-----------

With the tools currently available, I wanted to create a role that prevents assigned members from joining group instances, like a temp ban or shadow ban, without removing them from the group entirely... And I'm struggling to understand why the "Join Group Instances" permission can be toggled off but doesn’t prevent players without the permission from joining Group+ and Group Public instances.

Currently, this permission only applies to "Group-Only" instances. Users without the role can still join "Group+" and "Group Public" instances, and there is no way to prevent this except by kicking them from each instance or banning them from the group entirely.

This issue is compounded by the fact that roles can bypass this restriction in Group-Only instances if permissions are granted when creating the instance. While this could be useful for ban appeals - where restricted players could join a Group-Only instance to discuss their case with moderators - its easy to overlook and allow by default, and also seems inconsequential (from a restricted player's perspective) given the permission's current limitations.

Of course, I would prefer the first option of just banning users from group instances rather than the group entirely, which could also extend to players outside the group.