KatiyaKramer wrote:Brilliand wrote:Suggestion #2 is good. I'm astonished that people can (unreliably) avoid getting reported by just breaking too many rules.
Anyone who gets reported twice in one game should have a report generated, even if the reports are for two different reasons. (The reason listed on the report can be whichever, the trial jurors will sort it out with the "duplicate report" button.)
This is already a thing.
If someone is reported by 2 different people for 2 different reasons, a report will generate for one of those reasons. Jurors are expected to go through every report when they receive it and not just check for the validity of the report under the reason listed, but for any other rule breaks. If there are other rule breaks (preferably ones more severe than the original report), they are expected to dupe for said reason. If a report is incorrectly filed under one reason, but guilty for another, they dupe it over for the right reason and inno the original report.
I cannot tell you how many times I've come across a report filed under "Inappropriate Username" (Where the town name in question was completely innocent) when the written details suggest it should be a Gamethrowing report that was misfiled by one of the 2 reportees.
As for the other 2 suggestions. No. The forums aren't meant to be used for witch hunting, and it's just easier on the judges to only take care of the most severe of rule breaks through the forums. And punishing someone for having 4 open reports that are all guilty by instantly banning them is too strict and would quickly kill the game. The 4 strike system is meant to give people warnings to stop their behavior, not instantly ban someone for being a noob or having a fuck up here and there. Yeah you have idiots who are constantly breaking the rules left and right, but Trial will get them. There is absolutely no need to turn this into a severely strict situation. No one wants this. NO ONE.
But then we get back to the whole extremes thing I mentioned in my reply. You clearly seem to think that BMG's rules are too lenient. That's a fair position to hold. However, your suggestions, if implemented, would make the rules draconian. they'd be WAY too strict, to the point where the average player could easily get perma-banned after a few bad days. This is just as bad as, if not worse than, the current system. All your suggestions would do is exchange one set of problems for another set of problems. The state of Trial would be different, but no better.RedHeadStepChild wrote:But I will say this, why not make everyone's job easier and throw all the rules out the window and put in big red letters on the Log in screen Play At Your Own Risk!
Here at BMG, we are not responsible for the content other players bring into the game ....see Flavorable...I can be sarcastic too.
RedHeadStepChild wrote:My point is this..think of it this way, the toxicity is a growing and spreading like a wild fire, you cant put it out with a fire extinguisher, you have to use a number of different things to help fight it. I.e. water dropped by aircraft, CO2 spread by crop dusters, fire breaks dug in the ground ahead of the fire, until eventually you start a controlled fire ahead of the main blaze so it no longer spreads. As someone who helped fight the wildfires in southern California in 2003, all these techniques, and more were used to fight it.
RedHeadStepChild wrote:Than lets hear some of your ideas then. Since I seem to be the only one throwing ideas or suggestions out there, and everyone else saying NO! Without throwing your own ideas out there, lets here what you have to say then.
*deep breath*RedHeadStepChild wrote:Than lets hear some of your ideas then. Since I seem to be the only one throwing ideas or suggestions out there, and everyone else saying NO! Without throwing your own ideas out there, lets here what you have to say then.
Be careful who you’re talking about before you make generalizations. Your rules are too strict for everyone, not just people who already break the lenient rules that currently exist.RedHeadStepChild wrote:The people who are causing the problems are the ones saying its too strict
MysticMismagius wrote:*deep breath*RedHeadStepChild wrote:Than lets hear some of your ideas then. Since I seem to be the only one throwing ideas or suggestions out there, and everyone else saying NO! Without throwing your own ideas out there, lets here what you have to say then.
-Return to older rulebooks where more grey cases of rule breaking can be punished (Especially the Syanna rule)
-More juror/judge freedom in general in interpreting the rules
-Implement a longer time penalty for leaving while alive outside of Ranked
-Some sort of reward for jurors, so that more people do it (and thus more people get punished as less reports slip through the cracks)
-Update the in-game rules screen with each Trial rulebook update, so everyone is on the same page as to what the rules are
-Make posting links its own category rather than HS/H, because that’s dumb as hell and muddies what “hate speech and harassment” meansBe careful who you’re talking about before you make generalizations. Your rules are too strict for everyone, not just people who already break the lenient rules that currently exist.RedHeadStepChild wrote:The people who are causing the problems are the ones saying its too strict
That happens anyways. Every time there's a rulebook update, there's a whole big fuss about it because some people like the changes, some people think they're bullshit, and some people don't care, with every single change. What I want with that point is for people to be able to vote the way they think is right by the spirit of the law without being weighed down by its letter.RedHeadStepChild wrote:Hell Yes Mystic. I like this! Thank you much for posting. You Rock!
I really like the last 2 marks.
The only one that gives me pause is rules being up to interpretation. This causes too big of a margin for error, because 1 judge could say yes its gamethrowing or its offensive whereas another could say no i dont find it offensive or i dont see it as gamethrowing. If the mods all get together and set a standard and everyone follows that standard then there is no reason for interpretation.
As far as being too strict...we are just going to have to agree to disagree. Simple as that. You can say no one wants this all you want. But it seems the only ones responding to ANY of my posts are mods/judges.
...
It's not my thoughts of what constitutes a rule break, i am going off of the current set of rules that mods/devs create.
MysticMismagius wrote:That happens anyways. Every time there's a rulebook update, there's a whole big fuss about it because some people like the changes, some people think they're bullshit, and some people don't care, with every single change. What I want with that point is for people to be able to vote the way they think is right by the spirit of the law without being weighed down by its letter.RedHeadStepChild wrote:Hell Yes Mystic. I like this! Thank you much for posting. You Rock!
I really like the last 2 marks.
The only one that gives me pause is rules being up to interpretation. This causes too big of a margin for error, because 1 judge could say yes its gamethrowing or its offensive whereas another could say no i dont find it offensive or i dont see it as gamethrowing. If the mods all get together and set a standard and everyone follows that standard then there is no reason for interpretation.
As far as being too strict...we are just going to have to agree to disagree. Simple as that. You can say no one wants this all you want. But it seems the only ones responding to ANY of my posts are mods/judges.
...
It's not my thoughts of what constitutes a rule break, i am going off of the current set of rules that mods/devs create.
True, there is no universal standard for too strict or lenient. I just feel like your suggestions push the Trial System from one extreme to another, and I've seen the results of people trying to fix their problems that way. It's very ugly. On that last point, neither KatiyaKramer nor myself are mods/judges.
Are you using the rules that are displayed in game, or the lastest (Pay to Play) Trial System rulebook? Remember that those are very different from each other, so if you use the wrong rules, they might not be accurate.
RedHeadStepChild wrote:Exactly, you are correct it does happen. Hence one reason why we have the problems we are having now.MysticMismagius wrote:That happens anyways. Every time there's a rulebook update, there's a whole big fuss about it because some people like the changes, some people think they're bullshit, and some people don't care, with every single change. What I want with that point is for people to be able to vote the way they think is right by the spirit of the law without being weighed down by its letter.RedHeadStepChild wrote:Hell Yes Mystic. I like this! Thank you much for posting. You Rock!
I really like the last 2 marks.
The only one that gives me pause is rules being up to interpretation. This causes too big of a margin for error, because 1 judge could say yes its gamethrowing or its offensive whereas another could say no i dont find it offensive or i dont see it as gamethrowing. If the mods all get together and set a standard and everyone follows that standard then there is no reason for interpretation.
As far as being too strict...we are just going to have to agree to disagree. Simple as that. You can say no one wants this all you want. But it seems the only ones responding to ANY of my posts are mods/judges.
...
It's not my thoughts of what constitutes a rule break, i am going off of the current set of rules that mods/devs create.
True, there is no universal standard for too strict or lenient. I just feel like your suggestions push the Trial System from one extreme to another, and I've seen the results of people trying to fix their problems that way. It's very ugly. On that last point, neither KatiyaKramer nor myself are mods/judges.
Are you using the rules that are displayed in game, or the lastest (Pay to Play) Trial System rulebook? Remember that those are very different from each other, so if you use the wrong rules, they might not be accurate.
You know how frustrating it is to see one judge handle a report for gamethrowing then suspend the person, then another judge handle another report of the exact kind of gamethrowing only for them to say "this does not Warrant a suspension"? It's less frustrating than what we've currently got. I've seen so many reports that I wanted to guilty so bad, but they would be inno by the book. If even half of them got guiltied that would be an improvement.
And of course people are going to fuss because they're not allowed to get away with murder anymore. But murder is what makes town of salem what it is ;D Hence why I said earlier, if you are in a supervisory or enforcement position, you are going to piss people off. Its called doing your job. I was talking mainly about fuss within the juror community but that's my bad for not being clear.
Alas, you make some good ideas there Mystic. Keep it up. I salute you. Thanks.
I'm using the latest set of rules to include those on the trial system juror page. Give that a reread. You'll find that half the things you think are against the rules, especially with GT and Cheating, actually aren't anymore, or can't be effectively punished.
Jerme wrote:Quite a few were unsettled for getting suspended or banned for "just making a joke", which either are inside jokes, so nobody but them understand them, or secondly. or secondly aren't really jokes to the rules. You can find a few examples for that on the appeals board, as well as example for other of the excuses you brought up, and then you can compare, which of them were deemed valid and which not.
also your "request" to lock this thread might break Forum rule 12.
RedHeadStepChild wrote:And also I am not even going to mention the bug that several mods say there is about the wrong reason why people are being banned/suspended.
Hagg1s wrote:Jerme wrote:I believe the quote of Flavorable was a sarcastic reply to the OPs thread.
My response was equally sarcastic in response to Flavorable's sarcasm combined with a strong desire to gauge the OP's response.
KatiyaKramer wrote:RedHeadStepChild wrote:Plus not to mention, you mentioned before that there are not really any bugs with the system, then why May I ask did you overturn someone who was banned with no reports against them? Id say that right there would constitute a serious bug in the system now wouldnt it?
viewtopic.php?f=40&t=100848 referenced here
This is not the first instance of this, nor will it be the last. And also I am not even going to mention the bug that several mods say there is about the wrong reason why people are being banned/suspended.
Firstly, that has not been overturned yet. Jerme stated in that appeal that the ban in question would be under investigation.
As far as I'm aware, if someone is banned with no reports, it could mean that a Dev was involved in that banning, but as I said, the latest that came out of that appeal thread was that it was under investigation, and not overturned yet.
Secondly, the wrong reason thing is when users who are banned and suspended log in and are given a reason as to why they were banned/suspended, when it reality it was for another reason. Like a user logs in and sees they were suspended for HS/H, but the guilty report was for spam. This is an issue the Devs need to fix when they get a chance, and it's not the fault of the judges/Gmods/admins.
Return to Trial System Suggestions
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests