innocent until proven guilty.

Is this a serious post? Because as far as I'm aware, this thread is not a serious suggestion, and I hope that no one truly believes that it would be beneficial before any punishment (slay, ban, etc) is given to have a jury of "peers" (i.e. Non-staff members who have a lesser understanding of the rules than the people currently carrying out their verdicts) who somehow do not know the player being punished (regulars, etc) decide amongst themselves if they deserve a punishment or not, taking up large amounts of everyone's time and effort for an insanely tedious job which can not only can be done entirely by a single staff member in at least half the amount of time, but will further reduce the staff member's entire role to being the guy who listens to what people say and then clicks the slay button if they tell him to. I mean, I really, reaaaaalllyyy hope no one actually thinks this could be a good idea.

 

Wait, shit! So this IS a real suggestion??? The hell is wrong with you!? As a former staff member, you know how insanely ridiculous, unnecessary, ineffective, fault-based, and entirely a waste of everyone's time involved this would be, right?

 

There is a reason this is in "Off Topic Discussion" and not "Suggestions"

 

It was in "suggestions" beforehand, though, right? And moved regardless of the original posters consent to it being moved. That's sort of why I'm treating it like a real suggestion. The fact that it was a suggestion, and seems to be getting an actual amount of real defensive support against it's case.

 

Sooo... Judge, jury, and executioner is a better way to solve all problems? Be sure to tell the cop next time he pulls you over for a BS reason and gives you a outrageous charge because he believes you are up to no good. We do have cases of mods being wrong (thankfully others have noticed that they were wrong and corrected them, however what if they didn't?)

Like I said they would have a chance of "Guilty and Not Guilty."

Moved without my consent.

If they want to follow though with it I believe its a good suggestion. However it is a HUGE undertaking if they do follow though with it.

It was a dumb suggestion, but I knew how to defend it if someone wanted to ask questions about it.


Edit: @Butters also added another vote. Thank you
24 1/2 yay 2 1/2 nay

 

I'll try to make this as easy to understand as possible:

1: Given the amount of time allotted for dealing with reports before the start of the next round, and the tendency for reports to stack, making the report handling process longer by having a random group of people also share their "input", would create an issue with reports taking longer to be settled.

2: Giving random people, who a lot of the time haven't even read the rules/don't understand them/blatantly don't follow them, the right to decide whether someone deserves to be punished or not, is absurdity.

3: One of your arguments was that just like in a real jury, the consensus would have to be 100% before a verdict was given. Do you understand how insanely impossible it is to get a random group of people on the internet to agree about anything? Even if they all agree on something, someone may "troll" and disagree (which is the exact nature of the internet). Essentially making the entire process even longer, if not endless.

4: You seem to be under the impression that players do not have the ability to defend themselves, and try to prove their innocence. This is what the report process is for. They give their point of view, defend themselves, and a verdict is based off of what they said in relation to what the other player said, and of course, the logs (as you already know, as an ex-mod). Not only is this completely fair, but even if they disagree with the punishment put on them after this, they can take the issue to the forums, whether with a ban appeal or by reporting the staff member who gave the punishment.

5: In relation to my fourth point, and your point on "We do have cases of mods being wrong (thankfully others have noticed that they were wrong and corrected them, however what if they didn't?" well, if they didn't, it's quite possible that it was because the player who was punished, did not question their punishment. Likely because they did not read the rules, and did not know the rules, so took their false punishment as a fact. This is not a problem with the staff, this is a problem with the player base's ignorance on the rules, and would not be solved or be made better in any way by having the same players with no knowledge of the rules be the ones to decide who gets punished (as I've stated before).

6: Another difference between a cop pulling me over and giving me an outrageous charge and this (aside from the fact that I would get to defend myself in the reports in-game, in admin chat with the staff member handling the report, and on the forums), is that the cop can't simply pull up a screen that shows me killing someone. The logs, and the player's responses are generally more than enough evidence needed to hand out a punishment. This is entirely different from the situation you described.

7: If staff members are wrong, it's either not that big of a deal (in relation to the magnitude of faults guaranteed to come from the system you're suggesting), or disputed further on the forums, in which the staff member in question will be punished, and will remove the punishment on the player, if it's an option (ban).

8: "Like I said they would have a chance of 'Guilty and Not Guilty.'" ...And? Do they not currently have that chance?

9: As I have stated before, this suggestion turns staff members into useless drones, whose only purpose of being a staff member, is to just type !slaynr when everyone is done casting their votes on whether the player is guilty or not. Which could be easily replaced by a function that autoslays/bans the player based on the consensus of the jury. If you believe that the playerbase can uphold justice on their own accord more fairly and reasonable than staff members, then this may not be the community for you. Everyone, whether the player making the report, the player being reported, the staff member(s) handling it, or anyone witnessing it, can currently have a say in the process, and if they believe the staff member is making a mistake, the option is there for them to dispute it further.

As it has been said before, it's a nice "idea", but should be no more than that - an idea. The system currently in place is entirely fair, and the best that can be done in order to make the game enjoyable for everyone, as well as fair, logical, and appropriate for the amount of time available to handle reports. Adding a feature which greatly extends the amount of time needed to handle a single report, while at the same time being entirely inconvenient, ineffective, and prone to mistakes (as I've pointed out), is in no way something that needs to be suggested, and I believe you know that.

 

Never said it wasn't complicated. Just fair.

Refer to my answer on question 1.

The mods would act as cops in this case. Expect they are first hand witnesses. If the report was invalid than it would be thrown out on the spot. If the mod saw it as valid than the person would give his statement to the mod, and than taken to "court."

If a ignorant player asked to be slain because he believes he did RDM however if a mod sees that he did not RDM than he WILL not be slain. This has been a issue in the past and will be in the future. A jury will solve this.

Refer to question 4

A staff member being wrong is always a big deal as it makes the server look bad. Innocent until proven guilty, he wouldn't be banned until he was found guilty.

Not all the time. Think of the wrongful bans, harassment (moving this thread), or ab00se (DT being DT <3)

Most of this question is answered in the previous 8 questions. If not please call me out on it.

 

So... Are you actually encouraging this idea as something you believe should be implemented? Or is this just a debate type of thing (i.e. talk about the pros and cons of this for no reason whatsoever)? If the former is true, this should be moved back to suggestions, and you should likely get rid of any sort of text (by yourself) which gives the impression that this suggestion is a joke, or not to be taken seriously (Which of course was the reason for this thread being moved in the first place). At that point, I will write out a better response addressing my concerns for this idea, and hopefully make you see my point of view clearly on this matter; however, of course, if the latter is true, then why are you wasting our time?

Sincerely,

Drunk Dog.

 

Removed the dolphins because they were annoying on mobile taking up a lot of space sorry.

But as for if I support it or not? Sure I would support it if it became a seamless integration/transition.

The debate is healthy for any suggestion not everyone has a perfect suggestion and sometimes has to be altered in some way to make it work with the server. This is one of those suggestions. Mine was more of a idea if it went anywhere or not doesn't matter to me.

If someone wants to point out flaws in it than by all means go ahead and I'll either try to defend them, change my opinion to incorporate their ideas, or shut down my suggestion.

The only issue I see with my suggestion is that it complicates everything. Other than that in a perfect world this is a great suggestion.

 

Before you were counting random things as "yays" and everyone was making joke posts.

If you want to take this seriously now I would contact an admin to clean up any unnecessary posts and move this back to suggestions.

 

Why should they be removed? It shows the general consensus of the suggestion, most people are not for this.

I would appreciate it being moved back to the suggestions section though.

 

Done. All future comments should be made keeping in mind this is an actual suggestion.

 

Will do!

 

too time consuming.

 

That has been stated multiple times.

 

No. Because everyone feels like they are in the right when making a report. The report is, 'I feel like I was unjustly killed'.

We have a report player/staff section for a reason, just incase things are overlooked. We also ask for screenshots/recording for proper situations to be handled. nine out of ten, it is word versus words. The rules are stated that it directly puts you, the player, responsible for YOUR actions and when YOU mess up, we deal with it to the best of our ability.

-1

 

Oh! We can set it up like the LoL Tribunal. Where people can vote on the outcome and if you vote with the majority than you get points! On top of that, the process can then take hours or days and if you happen to not be on when it is decided you need to serve the one slay, you can be banned for RDM and Leave! This sound flawless to me, a good way to increase the ban count, and if it doesn't increase ban count than it will force players to stay on the servers longer, making us more popular. +1

No, I'm not serious

Seriously, it's hard enough to keep people on long enough to deal out the slays. Not to mention having to deal out slays fast enough to where players who are RDM'd can see that you slaying the offending players so they aren't tempted to revenge RDM. Also, would the jury be appointed like staff are? Because the jury would have to have the same level of understanding of the rules as a moderator, but if you want them to be impartial they cannot ever play on the servers, since playing with a player who might be reported would cause bias.

 

I was 100% certain this was a joke suggestion, until I realized it wasn't.
Just wow.

I'm sorry but you obviously did not think about how this kind of system would play out, or you would've realized how utterly, incredibly, undeniably and irrefutably ridiculous this idea is, for more reasons than can fit on one post.

 

The amount of (serious) ratings on the suggestion can now be enough to close the suggestion, as they're mostly -1
Unless there are serious +1's out there, which I doubt

...and? He was giving a reason to -1, as just typing out -1 is unnecessary.

Admin please lock