Trial Rating Inaccurate; Reports Wrongly Judged

[Cynlydia]

I'm not really sure if this goes here; feel free to move this thread.

This is primarily addressed to the mods, but comments from others would be appreciated too. I'm not sure if anyone else has this same problem.

So basically I've found that multiple reports on the Trial System, mostly which I have voted 'guilty' to, have been closed obviously incorrectly. This also has the side effect of causing my Juror's Trial Rating to be worse than it should be, but that's not my main concern; which is, mainly, that many reports are getting closed incorrectly.

I would like to include links to a few such reports - not sure if this is allowed, but I can't think of any better way to provide evidence of what I'm notifying you of.

Spoiler: 1) https://www.blankmediagames.com/Trial/v ... id=1806267
2) https://www.blankmediagames.com/Trial/v ... id=1814154
3) https://www.blankmediagames.com/Trial/v ... id=1730388
4) https://www.blankmediagames.com/Trial/v ... id=1805887

These aren't necessarily the best examples, just a couple I randomly picked out from a range of report reasons. I'd also like to add that many of the 'Impersonating BMG Employee' reports, in particular, have been deemed innocent while they are clearly guilty (and please correct me if I'm wrong). Specifically, the games with a bot claiming to be a bot created by BMG to welcome new players.

It doesn't really matter to me whether I have a reputable Trial Rating or not, since my contribution will remain the same. I also completely understand that it's not very easy at all to solve the issues surrounding bots and repeat rule-breakers. I just wanted to let you know that it includes, to an extent, the Trial System, in case anything can be done about that.

[bluewave41]

You're gonna have to find some good examples then...

1. Never once did they say they work for BMG in any form
2. That's not worth suspending someone over
3. Spam doesn't mean in a row, it's flooding chat. Excessive use of garbage emojis counts here too
4. Again, never said they work for BMG

[Cynlydia]

In response to the poster above me, whose comment is much appreciated, I would first like to make clear that I’m not particularly interested in debating the quality of the examples given, since incorrectly judged reports are an issue regardless of whether I am capable of choosing the most inrefutable examples.

However, I do believe it’s necessary to briefly clear up a few things:

1 and 4: Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think offences are limited to the exact title of the rule. IMHO, ‘impersonating BMG employee’ should extend to false claims of affiliation with BMG, since the negative implications are the same: the reputation of BMG may be incorrectly tarnished, or the general quality of the game is ruined for the other 14 players. These are negligible technicalities and should not change a ‘guilty’ to an ‘innocent’.

2: Perhaps not, but in that case, what is? Your biggest argument here would probably be that having an inappropriate name is not a direct offence or attack to anyone in particular; but if any name is reportable, then this one should be. Some people may think differently, but I think it’s up to BMG to decide; hence, guilty.

3: I’m not sure if it’s very noticeable, but the emojis were sent by multiple people. Highlighting just the reported player’s messages, it’s not actually flooding chat. I’ve seen people send more legitimate messages together than what happened there. It may be slightly annoying, but it doesn’t make the game impossible to play. People typing in all-caps is worse than that.

Anyway, that’s beside the point; even if you still firmly believe incorrectly judged reports are not happening (which I strongly reaffirm they are, but I digress), judging differently to the majority should not count as judging ‘wrong’, especially when so many offences are up for debate. In the Trial System guide, it is said that a juror may vote innocent even if the offence is legitimate as long as they believe it is not enough to warrant suspension; but I’m fairly certain many jurors would logically vote guilty on some reports if they believe it should be left up to BMG.

Sorry about that; I tend to ramble and have already cut some things short.

[bluewave41]

In response to the poster above me, whose comment is much appreciated, I would first like to make clear that I’m not particularly interested in debating the quality of the examples given, since incorrectly judged reports are an issue regardless of whether I am capable of choosing the most inrefutable examples.

However, I do believe it’s necessary to briefly clear up a few things:

1 and 4: Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think offences are limited to the exact title of the rule. IMHO, ‘impersonating BMG employee’ should extend to false claims of affiliation with BMG, since the negative implications are the same: the reputation of BMG may be incorrectly tarnished, or the general quality of the game is ruined for the other 14 players. These are negligible technicalities and should not change a ‘guilty’ to an ‘innocent’.

2: Perhaps not, but in that case, what is? Your biggest argument here would probably be that having an inappropriate name is not a direct offence or attack to anyone in particular; but if any name is reportable, then this one should be. Some people may think differently, but I think it’s up to BMG to decide; hence, guilty.

3: I’m not sure if it’s very noticeable, but the emojis were sent by multiple people. Highlighting just the reported player’s messages, it’s not actually flooding chat. I’ve seen people send more legitimate messages together than what happened there. It may be slightly annoying, but it doesn’t make the game impossible to play. People typing in all-caps is worse than that.

Anyway, that’s beside the point; even if you still firmly believe incorrectly judged reports are not happening (which I strongly reaffirm they are, but I digress), judging differently to the majority should not count as judging ‘wrong’, especially when so many offences are up for debate. In the Trial System guide, it is said that a juror may vote innocent even if the offence is legitimate as long as they believe it is not enough to warrant suspension; but I’m fairly certain many jurors would logically vote guilty on some reports if they believe it should be left up to BMG.

Sorry about that; I tend to ramble and have already cut some things short.

Your problem is you think BMG handles reports, they don't. Reports are solely handled by the community and those are community votes which are accurate.

That's how it goes and you can make whatever arguments you want but those reports were closed correctly and won't be changed.

[Andrej3]

well of course things are getting wrongly judged
a player was using racial slurs to harass someone and it was deemed innocent
a player was spamming about something very inappropriate and it was deemed innocent
a player posted maf names in will and was deemed innocent

[Meandrina]

dont necro post

[Jerme]

If you claim this happened, please provide some the example reports.

[StrahmDude]

If you claim this happened, please provide some the example reports.

Check the top post in the spoiler dude.

[Jerme]

If you claim this happened, please provide some the example reports.

Check the top post in the spoiler dude.

Please do not practice Post necromancy. Secondly: I wasn't talking to the OP, but to Andrej3.

Locking post.