innocent until proven guilty.

hi

 

Thank for adding something newish. And not everyone. Eventually it would just become a huge hassle for the players so it would end up being if players really did nothing wrong would fight it and the players who did something wrong they would just accept the slay because why go though the effort of defending yourself if your gonna end up in the slay anyway.

If your not gonna contribute anything just vote, if you put something use less expect a apporiate rating.

Put em

 

no

 

Took me a second to get it.

Yes? Turquoise is a nice lady!

 

I'm assuming this is directed at both me and Python. Honestly I had made the first part of the post, then read we should take this seriously so added in the serious part. But since you're going to call it useless I'll defend as to why it is useful.
To repeat what I said in better font:
"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"

As to what your response is:
"The best way would be to pick random people from the server/world and give them a question air of "do you know either the mod/accused?" And other such questions"

As one can see, your response does not answer all of my concerns. For example, I said "Because the jury would have to have the same level of understanding of the rules as a moderator". How many random people in the world or even on the server can you say have that level of understanding and studying of the rules? If you happen to grab a bunch of people new to the server (because it's random as you said) it can very well be that they all believe that killing on suspicion is okay.

Also, there is still the issue of keeping the person online during the long process it would take for a jury to review the evidence. People are busy or impatient and want to leave or need to leave. The longer it takes to finish a case, the higher the chance of an RDM and Leave ban.

And finally, how can you trust someone who plays on the server to not know the mod/accused? Mods have to moderate every server from time to time, so you would either have a jury of people entirely new to the server, which is a problem for the reasons stated above, or a jury of people who have never played on the server which is a problem even worse.

I would also like to add, if you don't want people bringing up problems you've addressed, you could compile solutions you've come up with and edit them into your original post so no-one has to read this now very long thread to see if you addressed the problems they come up with. And if you have appropriately addressed the problem it won't be brought up again, if you haven't it'll keep being brought up by people who see the same problem.

 

I never said your post was completely useless as I didn't give it a rating. Also I apologize if I didn't answer your concern in full as it was a little hard to read on mobile. I apologize for also answering with quotes.

I'm getting to your last point of editing first post. Give me a moment.

As for the last two paragraphs, finding people who do it know the accused is the hardest part of this equation and I'm working on a solution. And will edit the first post when I get home in a few hours.

 

There are a few things I'd like to suggest for your idea:
1) The players can volunteer for a position on the jury, and upon volunteering are given requirements to be added to the random pool to be pulled.
2) The requirements could be things like hour requirements, ban limits (people with certain bans or excessive bans cannot serve), and/or a quiz over the basic and complicated rules.
3) Everything is as anonymous as possible. Make the logs replace the names of each player with "inno-1, inno-2, traitor-1, detective-1" as well as keeping the moderator anonymous.
4) Have the entire "jury" thing on the forums.
5) Only let players with forum accounts and a minimum number of hours be allowed to submit a report to a jury. This would keep players who are new and those without knowledge of the rules from making an excessive amount of silly reports.
6) Have a disclaimer when someone wants to submit a report to a jury, that they will be notified on the forums when the verdict is submitted and must serve their slay withing 24hrs or risk a ban.
7) Count the reports submitted to the jury as still counted towards a mass RDM ban. This means that someone can't mass RDM and then try and send them all to a jury to avoid the mass RDM ban. If enough cases are found to be in favor of the player then the ban would be lifted.
8) Have a limit on the number of cases a player can take to court in a day. Raise or lower the limit based on the number of invalid or valid court cases the player has submitted over time.
9) Allow admins or higher to review court cases and either comment or overrule them.
10) If you have someone helping the jury with the rules, have it be an anonymous moderator or above who will be a part of the discussion as an adviser to the rules.
11) Have all of the jury be anonymous (i.e. Juror 1, Juror 2, etc.)

Edit: Overall I still think it's a -1. But that doesn't mean I can't toy with the idea and ways to improve it or make it more practical.

 

1) I'm fine with that provided we make everything anonymous. However it could become problematic if the accused starts talking about his case and the jurors find out who it is for. We would have to treat it the same way we treat applications, severe consequences if they talk about(like the case gets thrown out and they must serve the punishment)
2) I see nothing wrong with having a few requirements for the jurors.
3) I agree see 1
4) We could have the fourms as a supplemental to what they wish to work with, maybe a team speak server if they wish to communicate in another fourms but they must post the final verdict and why on the fourms so we can have a record.
5) I'm fine with the fourm accounts part, however what happens if we have a long time lurker and he starts playing. Why should we exclude lurkers?
6) Works for me.
7) Works for me, however each rdm would have to be considered so there is a possibility of the sentence being reduced as one Rdm could be found invalid.
8) I don't see too many issue with this although it could become a issue if a accused is abused and he is out of tries for the day.
9) I would say only Leads as they already have a lot to do and this would discourage people from fighting it.
10) and 11) I see no issues as long as 1) is met.

 

I'm sorry but this is just so stupid. The whole point of moderators in the first place is that they're given the privilege of being able to review reports and make a decision on the outcome. Then, if they're caught abusing or performing their job incorrectly they get reported and potentially demoted.
What you're proposing throws the concept of moderators out the window. What's the point of moderators then if their decisions don't mean anything and we have to consult a goddamn jury (I mean seriously? this isn't court) just to get a slay out. There's barely enough time as it is for moderators to review the evidence and they're just one person.

EDIT: I'd also like to point out that moderators know the rules (or are supposed to anyways) but a jury might not necessarily, and they could end up voting in favor of someone who RDM'ed. The rules are not to be interpreted, they're very straightforward, so there's no point of this kind of thing whatsoever.

I really hope this whole thing was just a troll.

 

So your stating cops have no point In society either? Because my suggestion mods are acting more as cops than judge, jury, and executioner.

 

For shit sakes dude, this isn't real life. Nobody's liberty as a human being is at stake here. Someone being arrested is not equivalent to someone having to sit out a round on an online game.

 

The staff, in reporting cases, are the jury and the rules are the judge. The jury determines the guilt of a player beyond reasonable doubt and the punishment is decided based on what the judge has stated for most situations. If the jury finds the defendant guilty, they then act on the judges behalf to become the executioner.

This is a poor suggestion. So poor it was my first input given after logging back onto the forums. -1.

 

So when someone gets Rdmed and has to sit out the rest of the round that doesn't matter? Their liberty to play the game and survive was destroyed.
I think because they made someone sit out they must defend their actions in front of a jury. I think that's fair.

 

I would also like to point out we have a jury of staff who check on almost every report and ban appeal. Usually invisible, I like to believe most staff look over the reports and appeals and if they feel it was handled improperly will contact higher staff members or start a staff discussion over the way it was handled or how the role should be enforced

 

But that puts two roles in the hands of the mods. If they are both the jury and executioner than they can just say "Guilty!" and than execute the accused. I much rather be examined by someone who is not holding the axe ready to drop it.

Yes we do have that, but what happens when they stopped. As far as I know that is not a requirement. The jury would be a requirement.

 

We don't need to be like an actual justice system, this is a video game. Just follow the rules and don't be an asshole and you wont be punished.

All mods know what verdict to give and when. Deal with it.

 

So if the staff are just the jury and fill that capacity as they are expected, do you want them to say "mother may I" to some other person based on every decision?

When a player is reported, they are given the chance to plead their case. Why don't we just add representatives for the defendant and the plaintiff?! Why not? I mean, it sounds like a complete ridiculous suggestion like this one.

If staff do not fulfill the capacity of jury and executioner to what is expected of them, players can report them, it will be reviewed in the same manner as an original report, and it will be handled. Adding more hands into a pot is not the best way; it over complicates situations. Keep it simple. Nothing is wrong with the current system.

Staff please lock this.

Thank you for your time and suggestion.

 

The 'jury' system is flawed in cases like this. This is why we have a 'set' of rules to abide by and admin discretion when needed. If powers are abused, or even if reports are -ignored- and proper actions not taken, mods get demoted, and some step down, due to these actions.

This entire idea of 'It would help' and 'I would feel better' is your own opinion and would crash and burn the way things are done.

I will give a PERFECT example of a guy I banned the other day.

I was modding a server late at night and a guy RDM'd another Inno, so I put him on slay and reminded him, 'Accidental RDM is still RDM.' Which the server outcried, 'BUT HE DID IT BY ACCIDENT.'

After the slay, he came back in and shot a barrel as I walked by, killing me and damaging another Inno. His reply was, 'Accidental Fire.'

By your logic, you would let him go. And the server would then become dissolved quickly into, 'Mob Justice.'

Mob Justice is not a good thing.

 

If only following the rules and don't be a asshole worked for everyone. This is why we have a real life justice system.

I've said it before staff would still be able to see if the report was valid or not. If it was invalid than it would be dismissed on the spot. If it was valid than they would have the option of "Guilty or Not Guilty" if they plead guilty than they serve the slay/punishment if they plead not guilty than it would be taken to court.
Furthermore if the report is found not valid by the staff than the accuser would be notified on why and would be able to further fight it if they wish.

Where did I say nothing would be done? The rules are still there they are just given the chance to fight it if they wish.

 

Why make things exponentially more complicated?

The current system is just fine.