Original Post
Report Thread rules for staff.
Currently, how a user's report is handled depends completely on the personality of whichever staff deals with their case. For example, person 1 reports person 2 for rigging, but person 2 is innocent. Staff member 1 sees sufficient evidence to ban person 2 but staff member 2 does not. How person 2 is treated depends on which staff member gets to them first, or whichever one is bothered to deal with the report at all. Staff members with the same personality as staff member 1 support person 1's report. However, within that group of staff members, how person 2 is treated is still dependent on which staff member deals with person 1's case. Staff member 3 supports person 1's case, but doesn't want to ban person 2 without a chance to prove their innocence so staff member 3 messages person 2 and gives person 2 24h to respond to the report with their side of the story. Staff member 1, however, would ban person 2 without giving the user a chance to prove their innocence. Now person 2 will have a harder time sharing their side of the story as it can be hard getting your story supported when you're banned (I've experienced being ignored in the ban appeals thread all too well).
The example above is why I would like to introduce rules for staff members when dealing with public reports on the report thread, here are examples of rules that can be introduced:
If a user(s) is reported;
- send the reported user(s) a notification of the report and give the user(s) 24h to respond. If they fail to respond, take necessary action based on legitimacy of the reporter's evidence or statements of witnesses.
If the user(s) is found guilty;
- ban for (however long depending on the offense), if the user was banned for a repeated offense, double the ban time.
- check their ban appeals, failure to respond to their ban appeals will result in a warning, if this continues, you will be awarded infraction points for ignoring a user's appeal.
I just believe things like this should be introduced to clean up how reports are dealt because right now I don't see any formality or any kind of process to it, with the exception of scam reports.
The example above is why I would like to introduce rules for staff members when dealing with public reports on the report thread, here are examples of rules that can be introduced:
If a user(s) is reported;
- send the reported user(s) a notification of the report and give the user(s) 24h to respond. If they fail to respond, take necessary action based on legitimacy of the reporter's evidence or statements of witnesses.
If the user(s) is found guilty;
- ban for (however long depending on the offense), if the user was banned for a repeated offense, double the ban time.
- check their ban appeals, failure to respond to their ban appeals will result in a warning, if this continues, you will be awarded infraction points for ignoring a user's appeal.
I just believe things like this should be introduced to clean up how reports are dealt because right now I don't see any formality or any kind of process to it, with the exception of scam reports.
Originally Posted by Fates
Maybe, and I'm just throwing ideas around, make it a rule that if a banned player requests for a second opinion of someone other than the person handling their appeal, they will get one. It would work in the same fashion as how asking for a lawyer in America does. If they ask for another opinion the staff member must get one before deciding anything else. The pros are that bias is less likely to happen, but the cons are that your appeal may take longer to be completed.
This will make it the players responsible for asking for another opinion. Of you fail to ask and you later cry about bias then that's on you. If you ask and the staff member fails to get you one before making a decision they will be punished.
Last edited by Kradel; Apr 14, 2016 at 02:52 PM.
blue
pink
pink
Currently i think the system is fine while if someone is wrongly banned it's a inconvenience it's better than if the person was guilty and he gose and trolls more people or gets rid of tc
You don't really have the right to determine the length of the ban doubling the ban length for a repeated offense is also a bad idea because what if some dud the same thing but a year later? Why double it?
Things like ban appeals are always handled when they can there is not really a such a thing As a staff member purposely ignoring them and even if they did someone else would handle it or the staff member would probably get removed also if a staff member is getting infraction points or banned i doubt they would even be on the staff team
Different cases call for different action and putting the staff under a bunch of rules would just make things more complicated
You don't really have the right to determine the length of the ban doubling the ban length for a repeated offense is also a bad idea because what if some dud the same thing but a year later? Why double it?
Things like ban appeals are always handled when they can there is not really a such a thing As a staff member purposely ignoring them and even if they did someone else would handle it or the staff member would probably get removed also if a staff member is getting infraction points or banned i doubt they would even be on the staff team
Different cases call for different action and putting the staff under a bunch of rules would just make things more complicated
10:22 AM <cocacobra> honestly tll was cool at first
10:22 AM <cocacobra> but now everyones kinda cunty
10:22 AM <cocacobra> but now everyones kinda cunty
~
I'd agree that we should look at the issue of a limited number of Ban Appeals effectively getting ignored.
However, restricting the time frame in which users can be banned as a result of a report, in my opinion, isn't a good thing. For example, when dealing with scam reports, giving users 24 hours to shuffle items around does not help us at all. When dealing with ingame spammers, giving users 24 hours to shit in a server does not help us at all. When dealing with trolls, giving users 24 hours gives everyone 24 hours to feed them.
To any staff group that can access Ban Appeals, infraction points don't work like you might expect them to. It'd be a somewhat obnoxious system, and I don't think it would actually make anyone on the staff happy. I'd prefer a system where staff members would deal with Ban Appeals because it's meaningful to do so rather than a system where a staff member is punished for not doing so.
However, restricting the time frame in which users can be banned as a result of a report, in my opinion, isn't a good thing. For example, when dealing with scam reports, giving users 24 hours to shuffle items around does not help us at all. When dealing with ingame spammers, giving users 24 hours to shit in a server does not help us at all. When dealing with trolls, giving users 24 hours gives everyone 24 hours to feed them.
To any staff group that can access Ban Appeals, infraction points don't work like you might expect them to. It'd be a somewhat obnoxious system, and I don't think it would actually make anyone on the staff happy. I'd prefer a system where staff members would deal with Ban Appeals because it's meaningful to do so rather than a system where a staff member is punished for not doing so.
Squad Squad Squad lead?
The standardization of Toribash Squad roles may have gone too far!
The standardization of Toribash Squad roles may have gone too far!
Yeah 50% of ban appeals get ignored I had a time on an alt when I get help banned for no reason for a week without hearing anything I got unbanned after making 10 appeals saying I did not do anything. I support this idea.
Forumite
Couldn't you make like a dedicated lmod group for ban appeals? Sounds kinda strange, yeah.. but even without necessarily giving them powers you could have their job be to sort out/hear out the player's side of the story and then communicate that to higher staff (not necessarily the person who banned them in the first place, please!) so that action can be taken.
If you were to make that lmod position a necessary gateway to higher staff (smod+?) you could kill two birds with one stone - give people incentive to apply to such an unrewarding position as well as sort out undedicated staff members from the real deal. Cuz I mean... nothing says dedication like sifting through a huge pile of shit in order to be of service to the community.
Make that three birds, actually. It also removes the bias necessarily present when a staff member looks at their own actions and is attempting to be convinced that their initial judgment was less than perfect.
If you were to make that lmod position a necessary gateway to higher staff (smod+?) you could kill two birds with one stone - give people incentive to apply to such an unrewarding position as well as sort out undedicated staff members from the real deal. Cuz I mean... nothing says dedication like sifting through a huge pile of shit in order to be of service to the community.
Make that three birds, actually. It also removes the bias necessarily present when a staff member looks at their own actions and is attempting to be convinced that their initial judgment was less than perfect.
Last edited by pouffy; Apr 14, 2016 at 04:29 AM.
