Player Reports Section

[Wuhtah]

We're trying to make sure all reports from the past few months are taken as a priority!

 

Whilst we clean up, we are thinking of ways to improve the report system and I do have a few ideas. I also was given many from this post (thank you!!) And from the post I made as well.

 

I really appreciate most of your guy's input here and I do apologize for it taking so long.

[sky~]

17 minutes ago, Wuhtah said:

We're trying to make sure all reports from the past few months are taken as a priority!

 

Whilst we clean up, we are thinking of ways to improve the report system and I do have a few ideas. I also was given many from this post (thank you!!) And from the post I made as well.

 

I really appreciate most of your guy's input here and I do apologize for it taking so long.

Good to hear, but what about when this happens in the future again? The whole restricting the amount of characters, not being able to reply before an admin takes it etcetera was supposed to fix this issue but it didn't.

[Wuhtah]

Just now, sky~ said:

Good to hear, but what about when this happens in the future again? The whole restricting the amount of characters, not being able to reply before an admin takes it etcetera was supposed to fix this issue but it didn't.

 

Yep, while we're lowering the reports we have ideas and I'm trying to see what will work. I will bring it up at the next staff meeting too to see how exactly we can work reports to make it all admin friendly and player friendly. Last time, this didn't really happen. This time, getting input from both you guys and the staff team will happen.

 

Once I get my bearings in place, I'll go ahead and post a few of my ideas on my forum moderation sub team thread if you're interested and if you have any feedback to them!!

[TBA]

Reports should be solved in accordance with the date for their start. Cherry-picking is a big no-no.

Edited October 1, 2022 by TBA

[Wuhtah]

3 minutes ago, TBA said:

Reports should be solved in accordance with the date for their start. Cherry-picking is a big no-no.

 

Completely agreed! I understand that many admins choose reports that look "easier" which I was one of those admins who did a ton of sub team work, so I thought "at least I'm getting something done". I don't want to punish those admins, because whatever they take is helpful.

 

But the priority SHOULD be older reports. That's where the forum mod team should come in then. If a report has sat longer than 48 hours, then forum mods should be taking it. If a report comes in that is. PD or SD and literally 80% of admins are in those factions, forum mod should make a habit of picking it up.

 

Kilerbite is on vacation for a few days, but we're going to get together this upcoming week and talk about what changes we can make and what we can do better.

[Triple Seven]

Seeing the same people return in the reports section after seeing them get 'permanently' (gtaw seems to have an odd definition of permanent if you ask me) banned, means something is going wrong in the ban appeals section just as well. Just earlier I read a conclusion of a report on a player on their last warning:  combat logging and got away with it.

 

"Not bad enough to enact the final warning"

 

???????

[Wuhtah]

3 minutes ago, Triple Seven said:

Seeing the same people return in the reports section after seeing them get 'permanently' (gtaw seems to have an odd definition of permanent if you ask me) banned, means something is going wrong in the ban appeals section just as well. Just earlier I read a conclusion of a report on a player on their last warning:  combat logging and got away with it.

 

"Not bad enough to enact the final warning"

 

???????

 

I agree with the terminology. We should not be saying permanent bans if they will not be permanent. I was told this a few months back.

 

I try to use the words "banned for X amount of months, they can appeal once it's up" sort of thing. I never use the word permanent because not everything will be permanent unfortunately. Whether my decision is overruled or I give the person another chance (doesn't happen often).

[Triple Seven]

59 minutes ago, Wuhtah said:

 

I agree with the terminology. We should not be saying permanent bans if they will not be permanent. I was told this a few months back.

 

I try to use the words "banned for X amount of months, they can appeal once it's up" sort of thing. I never use the word permanent because not everything will be permanent unfortunately. Whether my decision is overruled or I give the person another chance (doesn't happen often).

 

I think calling it indefinitely and then giving the term amount of months before they can appeal for the first time would be better. However, there should also be actual permanent bans obviously, without chance to appeal.

Edited October 1, 2022 by Triple Seven

[Adv]

1 hour ago, Triple Seven said:

Seeing the same people return in the reports section after seeing them get 'permanently' (gtaw seems to have an odd definition of permanent if you ask me) banned, means something is going wrong in the ban appeals section just as well. Just earlier I read a conclusion of a report on a player on their last warning:  combat logging and got away with it.

 

"Not bad enough to enact the final warning"

 

???????

 

 

Hey, i'll give a quick timeline of events

 

 

July: **Player combat logs**

July: **Player gets reported**

July: **Player gets permbanned for another report**

September: **Player gets unbanned on a final warning**

September: **Report gets answered (admin handling wasnt able to handle, so I handled), they'd been unbanned and i spoke to the player and added it to their record, but theyve already promised to be on their best behaviour.

 

I'm not going to ban them for something that was committed after the second chance has been given - on this occasion. That's not a precedent i'll set for future final warnings - if it was something that was done AFTER the unban they'd be banned already.

 

I should have clarified that more! 

Edited October 1, 2022 by Adv

[Westen]

I'd like to see more consistency in terms of punishment issued. It appears there's no consistency and people can lie to admins on reports and get warnings, whereas first time offenders get admin jails for something that wasn't malicious.