These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Suggest that CCP change their policies on GM decisions

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
FightingMoose
Chroma Corp
#1 - 2013-12-19 19:24:53 UTC
My proposal is simple:

1. Allow discussion of bans and/or GM actions on a specific subforum within the official EVE forums. As long as other forum rules on no personal attacks are upheld, I don't see a reason why this couldn't be done. Furthermore, limiting it to a specific subforum would make moderation easy in the other areas, alongside explaining that there will be no official action or response based on a forum thread.

2. Create a transparent process for escalating petitions of GM actions. The biggest benefit of this would be to encourage uniformity within GM decisions and end some of the arbitrary decision making processes that have prevailed in the past.

Part of the CSM's job is to create transparency and give players a voice within CCP. And it does that very well on broad issues. But on individual issues, it has been my impression that GM decisions tend to made arbitrarily and without requirement for backing up, etc. This is further stifled by not allowing discussion of said incidents on the forums, something which seems extremely draconian and ultimately unnecessary if there is uniformity within these actions.

I'd appreciate any comments or criticisms of this proposal.

Proud owner of an Ibis.
trader joes Ichinumi
Doomheim
#2 - 2013-12-19 20:02:32 UTC
FightingMoose wrote:
My proposal is simple:

1. Allow discussion of bans and/or GM actions on a specific subforum within the official EVE forums. As long as other forum rules on no personal attacks are upheld, I don't see a reason why this couldn't be done. Furthermore, limiting it to a specific subforum would make moderation easy in the other areas, alongside explaining that there will be no official action or response based on a forum thread.

2. Create a transparent process for escalating petitions of GM actions. The biggest benefit of this would be to encourage uniformity within GM decisions and end some of the arbitrary decision making processes that have prevailed in the past.

Part of the CSM's job is to create transparency and give players a voice within CCP. And it does that very well on broad issues. But on individual issues, it has been my impression that GM decisions tend to made arbitrarily and without requirement for backing up, etc. This is further stifled by not allowing discussion of said incidents on the forums, something which seems extremely draconian and ultimately unnecessary if there is uniformity within these actions.

I'd appreciate any comments or criticisms of this proposal.


The primary issue is the additional cost for CCP.

Banned players lie. They lie a lot. They will go to this subforum with their fake tale and try to stir up controversy. They will manufacture chat logs and do everything they can to convince people that CCP is the bad guy. For every case of someone who was banned improperly, there are a hundred exploiters explaining how they were banned improperly. This forces GMs to spend time refuting a constant stream of lies and this costs money.
Hesod Adee
Perkone
Caldari State
#3 - 2013-12-19 20:27:22 UTC
trader joes Ichinumi wrote:
FightingMoose wrote:
My proposal is simple:

1. Allow discussion of bans and/or GM actions on a specific subforum within the official EVE forums. As long as other forum rules on no personal attacks are upheld, I don't see a reason why this couldn't be done. Furthermore, limiting it to a specific subforum would make moderation easy in the other areas, alongside explaining that there will be no official action or response based on a forum thread.

2. Create a transparent process for escalating petitions of GM actions. The biggest benefit of this would be to encourage uniformity within GM decisions and end some of the arbitrary decision making processes that have prevailed in the past.

Part of the CSM's job is to create transparency and give players a voice within CCP. And it does that very well on broad issues. But on individual issues, it has been my impression that GM decisions tend to made arbitrarily and without requirement for backing up, etc. This is further stifled by not allowing discussion of said incidents on the forums, something which seems extremely draconian and ultimately unnecessary if there is uniformity within these actions.

I'd appreciate any comments or criticisms of this proposal.


The primary issue is the additional cost for CCP.

Banned players lie. They lie a lot. They will go to this subforum with their fake tale and try to stir up controversy. They will manufacture chat logs and do everything they can to convince people that CCP is the bad guy. For every case of someone who was banned improperly, there are a hundred exploiters explaining how they were banned improperly. This forces GMs to spend time refuting a constant stream of lies and this costs money.



That could be mitigated a lot if CCP introduced some way for players verify what was said. Say by giving the person the GM is communicating with a link that lets anyone see the full discussion between the player and GM. Then take action against anyone who starts a thread without providing their link. Or adjust the forum software to make that automatic.

If someone fabricates a chat log, then bring in moderation. First have the moderator paste the genuine chat logs, then bring down serious public punishment. Other posters will quickly get the message that dishonesty is not tolerated there.
trader joes Ichinumi
Doomheim
#4 - 2013-12-19 22:44:42 UTC  |  Edited by: trader joes Ichinumi
Hesod Adee wrote:
trader joes Ichinumi wrote:
FightingMoose wrote:
My proposal is simple:

1. Allow discussion of bans and/or GM actions on a specific subforum within the official EVE forums. As long as other forum rules on no personal attacks are upheld, I don't see a reason why this couldn't be done. Furthermore, limiting it to a specific subforum would make moderation easy in the other areas, alongside explaining that there will be no official action or response based on a forum thread.

2. Create a transparent process for escalating petitions of GM actions. The biggest benefit of this would be to encourage uniformity within GM decisions and end some of the arbitrary decision making processes that have prevailed in the past.

Part of the CSM's job is to create transparency and give players a voice within CCP. And it does that very well on broad issues. But on individual issues, it has been my impression that GM decisions tend to made arbitrarily and without requirement for backing up, etc. This is further stifled by not allowing discussion of said incidents on the forums, something which seems extremely draconian and ultimately unnecessary if there is uniformity within these actions.

I'd appreciate any comments or criticisms of this proposal.


The primary issue is the additional cost for CCP.

Banned players lie. They lie a lot. They will go to this subforum with their fake tale and try to stir up controversy. They will manufacture chat logs and do everything they can to convince people that CCP is the bad guy. For every case of someone who was banned improperly, there are a hundred exploiters explaining how they were banned improperly. This forces GMs to spend time refuting a constant stream of lies and this costs money.



That could be mitigated a lot if CCP introduced some way for players verify what was said. Say by giving the person the GM is communicating with a link that lets anyone see the full discussion between the player and GM. Then take action against anyone who starts a thread without providing their link. Or adjust the forum software to make that automatic.

If someone fabricates a chat log, then bring in moderation. First have the moderator paste the genuine chat logs, then bring down serious public punishment. Other posters will quickly get the message that dishonesty is not tolerated there.


The thing is, game companies are very secretive about how they find exploiters, so that exploiters have a harder time avoiding punishment. Players often aren't given the specific evidence that incriminated them. So you would get these logs that say something like "Dear X, you have been banned for exploiting Y" and the player will say something like "I wasn't exploiting Y. It was an Accident! I was running program Z and that must have confused the moderators.".

So your proposal will still require that GMs put in more work to create a report detailing evidence against players and it will help exploiters avoid future protection.

And I promise you, this particular forum would require a ton of moderation. Even with strict punishments. Likely as much as the rest of the forums combined. You would have angry posters trying to vindicate themselves. Trolls stirring up these posters and people who love drama picking sides and flaming. It would be Crime & Punishment on steroids.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#5 - 2013-12-30 21:32:18 UTC
No, if a GM makes a decision it wasnt done in some haphazard way, you did it, you knew you shouldn't have and whether GM X makes you pay more than GM Y is irrelevant, stop breaking the rules and then you wont have to worry about GM actions.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
FightingMoose
Chroma Corp
#6 - 2013-12-31 16:04:16 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
No, if a GM makes a decision it wasnt done in some haphazard way, you did it, you knew you shouldn't have and whether GM X makes you pay more than GM Y is irrelevant, stop breaking the rules and then you wont have to worry about GM actions.


I never have, but inequality between GM punishment/actions is not "irrelevant," that's a huge issue.

Proud owner of an Ibis.
Michael Loney
Skullspace Industries
#7 - 2014-01-01 16:43:28 UTC
It sounds like you want a more open 'court' system. This has failed terribly in real life ( in CA ans US ), and I can't imagine if you asked the internet to play jury!

I very much doubt that GM's go around with a ban hammer and start swinging at anything that moves. They likely have proof and just cause however if they start revealing HOW they ban people then the ones being banned will know how to avoid / fight it. This is how our real life system got so messed.

I feel bad f you got banned and are 100% in the clear, I say fight it, go to the CSM members directly, e-mail CCP directly, but do not put it up here! Even if you had the best and most 'clean' evidence of your actions, once it goes public CCP cannot reverse it!! It sets a precedence for others to follow and soon the system if flooded with players who did something stupid, got banned but can follow formula A-B-C to try and get the ban reversed.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#8 - 2014-01-01 19:19:01 UTC
Yes GM's can arrive at different conclusions. But then you can always ask to escalate the petition to a senior GM, if you feel the decision was wrong or unjust.

But I disagree with allowing the discussion of GM actions on the forum, in any way.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
#9 - 2014-01-01 20:18:20 UTC
FightingMoose wrote:
My proposal is simple:

1. Allow discussion of bans and/or GM actions on a specific subforum within the official EVE forums. As long as other forum rules on no personal attacks are upheld, I don't see a reason why this couldn't be done. Furthermore, limiting it to a specific subforum would make moderation easy in the other areas, alongside explaining that there will be no official action or response based on a forum thread.


It's a basic rule for internet forum: admin/gm/etc decisdion are not a topic for pubblic discussion.

When not so (I think anyone with experiense in sites/forum managment could confirm this) the whole forum is floodded with circular, self-referential discussions damaging the real forum topics and purpose.

Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-01-02 02:35:51 UTC
In my province the teachers disciplinary board publishes decisions often with the name redacted. It is a sign that they are active and if you cross certain lines you are gonna lose your teaching ticket. However the decisions are NOT up for discussion or debate, they have been made.

Would the OP accept the occasional reporting of bans of the month as a dev blog, no names just indicators in general terms . . .

Personally I understand that
a) The GMs do not want to have to justify their actions over and over again
b) Rules announced just seem to bring out the worst in internet lawyering
but
c) The players would like a bit more insight as to what was done and why.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
FightingMoose
Chroma Corp
#11 - 2014-01-03 15:36:38 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:


Would the OP accept the occasional reporting of bans of the month as a dev blog, no names just indicators in general terms . . .

Personally I understand that
a) The GMs do not want to have to justify their actions over and over again
b) Rules announced just seem to bring out the worst in internet lawyering
but
c) The players would like a bit more insight as to what was done and why.

m


I think that would be incredibly fair. I agree completely with a and b. Any insight would be helpful. I get the feeling that ultimately the GMs are fair and punishments are uniform. But an occasional blog like this would help players understand that the GMs are in fact out there, being uniform and fair. Even quarterly would be sufficient if monthly would be too much of a burden.

Proud owner of an Ibis.