[Rejected] Regular players voting on ban appeals or player complaints

[alb]

Hi, thank you for taking the time to read this post.

 

For Ban Appeals

 

I think that when a ban appeal is made, regular players should be able to vote:

 

yes, unban him (with a reason)

 

no, do not unban him (with a reason)

 

This is a great idea because it would allow regular SG members to get their say on an individual. Rulebreakers are not always caught on demo or screenshot, and often cases are left undecided as both parties do not have adequate information. However, if a large number of players vote in favor or against the player, it could easily decide their fate.

 

Player Complaints

 

I have seen many player complaints made in the past due to personal grudge. This just takes up forum space and wastes the admins time to read, when they could be banning people who deserve it. I have also seen player complaints where the information is very true, although the evidence is not sufficient.

 

So you should also add a voting poll on player complaints, with options to:

 

Vote for the ban of the individual (with a reason)

 

Vote against the ban of the individual (with a reason)

 

like i stated before, higher rankings are not always right. they don't always see everything, and so the say of the people would have great effect.

 

Thank you for reading my post, if you are against this idea please post why and i will update it as best as i can

[Jaffa]

You can't democratically ban someone, it doesn't make sense.

 

We require evidence to make bans to remove any personal bias, popularity issues, or simple lying from the equation. Your system involves all three of those things.

[alb]

You can't democratically ban someone, it doesn't make sense.

 

We require evidence to make bans to remove any personal bias, popularity issues, or simple lying from the equation. Your system involves all three of those things.

 

how does democratically banning someone not make sense? It makes perfect sense. and popularity issues? if someone has negative popularity on SG, it's for a reason. they are an idiot or a troll, etc. They deserve to be banned. If they are just the average player like i am, popularity wouldn't play a role in deciding their fate. personal bias is a very important part of voting. again why should someone who generally acts like a dick not be subjected to bias? If you go out of your way to be nice to people and really be a part of the community, personal bias would not be present.

 

with my system, valid reasoning would have to be given to every option. Plus, i know people would lie. it's not like if an admin decided to unban him and one vote said no and the reasoning was "hacking", obviously it wouldn't be taken into account because it's not the MAJORITY..

 

elections and bans should be taken more into the hands of the popular vote.

[James]

Hi, thank you for taking the time to read this post.

 

For Ban Appeals

 

I think that when a ban appeal is made, regular players should be able to vote:

 

yes, unban him

 

no, do not unban him (with a reason)

 

This is a great idea because it would allow regular SG members to get their say on an individual. Rulebreakers are not always caught on demo or screenshot, and often cases are left undecided as both parties do not have adequate information. However, if a large number of players vote in favor or against the player, it could easily decide their fate.

 

Player Complaints

 

I have seen many player complaints made in the past due to personal grudge. This just takes up forum space and wastes the admins time to read, when they could be banning people who deserve it. I have also seen player complaints where the information is very true, although the evidence is not sufficient.

 

Our staff have the power to reject the complaint if need be, player complaints are mostly genuine, from what I have dealt with there is mostly sufficient evidence, due to demos/screenshots, if not, they are rejected. I don't really understand what you are getting at...

 

So you should also add a voting poll on player complaints, with options to:

 

Vote for the ban of the individual

 

Vote against the ban of the individual

 

like i stated before, higher rankings are not always right. they don't always see everything, and so the say of the people would have great effect.

 

Thank you for reading my post, if you are against this idea please post why and i will update it as best as i can

 

 

In reply to the player complaints:

 

Our staff have the power to reject the complaint if need be, player complaints are mostly genuine, from what I have dealt with there is mostly sufficient evidence, due to demos/screenshots, if not, they are rejected. I don't really understand what you are getting at...

 

In reply to the ban appeals:

 

The problem with this is bias. If you get EVERY SG member voting on a ban appeal, it would be a mess. Myself, and the rest of the staff are fully capable of handling ban appeals, why would we need a 'jury' in this case if the previous bans (if any) and player complaints speak for themselves?

[EvilShadow98]

Not going to work out. If there was something missed in a demo, than I am sure an AO+ would not mind evaluating it again if someone points it out. If someone really is trying to get another individual banned by personal grudge, the complaint will get rejected if not enough or no evidence is shown. Jaffa already mentioned everything else that is flawed with this idea.

[alb]

Not going to work out. If there was something missed in a demo, than I am sure an AO+ would not mind evaluating it again if someone points it out. If someone really is trying to get another individual banned by personal grudge, the complaint will get rejected if not enough or no evidence is shown. Jaffa already mentioned everything else that is flawed with this idea.

 

 

read my reply to him and then reply please

[Drox]

elections and bans should be taken more into the hands of the popular vote.

 

Sorry comrade, thats not how we run things.

[EvilShadow98]

read my reply to him and then reply please

 

Sure.

 

how does democratically banning someone not make sense? It makes perfect sense. and popularity issues? if someone has negative popularity on SG, it's for a reason. they are an idiot or a troll, etc. They deserve to be banned. If they are just the average player like i am, popularity wouldn't play a role in deciding their fate. personal bias is a very important part of voting. again why should someone who generally acts like a dick not be subjected to bias? If you go out of your way to be nice to people and really be a part of the community, personal bias would not be present.

 

with my system, valid reasoning would have to be given to every option. Plus, i know people would lie. it's not like if an admin decided to unban him and one vote said no and the reasoning was "hacking", obviously it wouldn't be taken into account because it's not the MAJORITY..

 

elections and bans should be taken more into the hands of the popular vote.

 

As much as people would love to see idiots/trolls leave, if they are actually not breaking any rules, they are allowed to stick around. Just because someone is not liked should not mean they are to be voted gone from the community. If they are indeed idiots, they will soon be on their way to being permed anyways.

[fanatiik]

You'd be surprise how people would abuse that and troll people.

[jazzy]

I am sorry, you have been voted off the Island.