Jump to content
Server time: 2019-05-19, 09:32
Ryan Shepherd

Report Structure

Report Structure   

28 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

This is something that bothers me quite a lot regarding the reports structure.

The way reports are at the moment, a report is posted, PoVs are posted and then the shit storm reveals its face.

The OP and the suspects argue back and forth quoting rules left fight and centre and explaining their view on the rule and how the opposite party broke said rule, the other party does the exact same thing, thats not productive.

Personally, I believe Gamemasters do not ask enough questions apart from the obvious, 'Do you have video evidence?' Etc.

The way I suggest for reports to be more productive and less time consuming  would be the following:

The OP posts the report and his poV. 

The suspects when called in or by their own free will, post their PoV.

No more posts are permitted once the PoV has been posted, that is their time to shine and get in as much detail as possible.

After that if further questions are required, GMs can ask them and the person they are directed at can answer.

Finally the verdict can be posted after GM discussion.

No more back and forth, quoting rules and pleading how they are right and the other party is wrong, we are all right in our own eyes, its life, that enables GMs to look at clear cut PoVs and not 3 pages of people arguing with one sentence each.

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post

I definitely agree with you suggestions 100%. Those back and forth's aren't even desireble at the moment and most of the time staff is called on to restore order and command everyone to stop spamming the thread. I think it is reasonable and should be a rule that OP creates a reports, posts his POV with additional evidence, then others (accused, allies, potential witnesses) post their POVs. After that they'd be forbidden from posting anything else unless directly asked by member of a staff in charge of said report. Exactly like you described it. I think that should be a thing here so I'm all in favor of it.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree to some extent, i think there should be no posts unless its related to the report bringing in new evidence, new witnesses or anything else that might assist the staff to resolve the report . 

Share this post


Link to post

Would also be much better if people edited their posts instead of making new ones, i'm sure that would help as well 

Share this post


Link to post

Threads shouldn't need a warning to be honest. People are adults they don't need fifteen free replies to get whatever low key jabs in that they want before a GM says 

813801833_giphy(34).gif.70c63f5fb8512f572cb5dde37d57a6d8.gif

Like what's the point in enabling a bunch of flame and bullshit for a while? I mean on the other hand it's helpful to reply to reports and quote rules and point out where you feel the other party is being dishonest or whatever sometimes. I don't have a perfect solution to this but I mean, something like you suggested while also enabling us to say where we can call out a lie or something like that would be nice too. 

Share this post


Link to post

Even adding a part to fill in for the OP regarding questions for the accused to answer and adding rules the OP thinks were broken before posting. The accused does the usual POV but also answers the questions provided by OP. Then let the GMs take control. Having to think of questions to ask the accused and/or attaching the possible rules broken to the report could make the OP clarify in their own head where they think that the accused has gone wrong and could reduce salt reports or reports that get thrown up 5 minutes after the situation takes place. 

Overall I agree that allowing flame/flame baiting for however long it takes for logs to be posted and the staff adding a reminder not to do such things is unfortunately a problem because people can't be mature and patient.

+1

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think we need to change the structure. I think we need to stop holding people's hands, giving them gentle reminders to not post needlessly, arguing back and forth, etc.

 

Over the years we've simply let people go from arguing there case (which everyone should be allowed to do, as well as make constructive counter arguments)  to full on anarchy full of snarky replies, memey povs, and arguments breaking out over everything. Honestly we shouldn't be telling people to be nice, we should be pointing them for failing to be.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Zanaan said:

I don't think we need to change the structure. I think we need to stop holding people's hands, giving them gentle reminders to not post needlessly, arguing back and forth, etc.

 

Over the years we've simply let people go from arguing there case (which everyone should be allowed to do, as well as make constructive counter arguments)  to full on anarchy full of snarky replies, memey povs, and arguments breaking out over everything. Honestly we shouldn't be telling people to be nice, we should be pointing them for failing to be.

So, what? You think attitude like that should be punished in some way? Let's say in form of receiving a warning?

Edited by Tewudin

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, Ryan Shepherd said:

After that if further questions are required, GMs can ask them and the person they are directed at can answer.

I would agree but I don't really trust the GMs to ask questions. I'd much rather have people point out the rule breaks and argue about it then have them completely forgotten when the verdict is done.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Tewudin said:

So, what? You think attitude like that should be punished in some way? Let's say in form of receiving a warning?

Directly from the report rules:

 

Only post appropriate content Posting any comments that do not directly address the report or that are in any way inappropriate will not be tolerated.

 

So yes I think we should be coming down harder on people posting needlessly in reports. 

Share this post


Link to post

Report threads should only allow one post per person, would stop the back and fourth, important stuff only, stop people getting points through arguments and make the staff teams job easier.

Share this post


Link to post

I mean tbf I got hit with a warning and 3 points the other day for adding a youtube video to a serious comment. 


Yet I see folks having the comment version of a diss-track competition in their report section and GM's suddenly vanish until a verdict is given. 

So yeah:

I'm +1 ing either an full on ban on extra comments after PoV unless the GM's ask.... that or points for those who think the report section still awards them beanz for funny comebacks 0_o 

Share this post


Link to post

Idk if it needs to be reworked its ok atm i think.

 

Havent seen a big problem with it

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Used to be a rule that a report goes up. Each person involved in a report would give a detailed POV and then thats it.

Any back and forth would result in points and any extra info needed would have been asked for by the staff members involved. 

No idea when this changed but it was brought in to stop reports exceeding a page in useless posts. Im sure other ex staff members at the time will remember this like @Terra

Share this post


Link to post

You post your POV and then are later notified you were mentioned in a new POV.  You read the new POV and realize you’ve now been accused of a rule break. 

The right to defend yourself in a report should not be impinged.

Share this post


Link to post

In all honesty I couldn't trust the current staff team expect for a handful to actually do their job when it comes to the report's I legitimately see report's now as you said povs arguments staff warning then 0 questions verdict.

If staff do their jobs reports would be solid, I shouldn't have to quote the rule page to get my point across that's their job.

Edited by Eagle

Share this post


Link to post

I think the major problem right now is that many reports have conflicting PoV's because one side or both are "embellishing" the truth. Those reports end up being closed because of conflicting PoV's and not being able to take one member's word over another. I suggest that reports should be made private, with each member involved posting their PoV but only staff being able to read and/or see the evidence. With that in mind, if someone posts a PoV that conflicts with actual video evidence from the other side, that will help stop people from lying to get away with rule breaks.

Share this post


Link to post

-100

you are accused of a crime

you got to court and argue why you're innocent

same applies to reports

 

any white name and their mom can report me, and without me explaining WHY i did what I did,  we get even more questionable staff verdicts.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...