... What inefficiency? Are you implying that it should work like this?
Player A sends in a player complaint.
Staff reads it. Insta bans the player whom the complaint was filed on and then closed a request.
Is that how you expect it to work?
Are you back to posting reductionist nonsense and proving you're just a troll again?
Let's say a player is getting harassed. I'll spell it out for you, and for everyone else who's curious about how the system actually works:
- So a player opens a request ticket. They don't wish up as it's happening, allowing staff to respond immediately; they put in a request so it sits on a long line of things to investigate and resolve, opening the complainant to continued harassment.
- Someone reads it. Finally.
- Next steps? Pulling run logs to find the situation the player is describing. Only Admins+ can access the runlog, and only Producers can resolve staff complaints, so it's only in the interest of Producers to investigate. Runlogs get wiped and get turned into "old runlogs" on each reboot, and a following reboot wipes the old runlog, so if the request was submitted before two reboots, it's now impossible to get a runlog.
- If it's a badly informed situation, then clarification inquests. Requiring more time to formulate questions and receive responses from a player who presumably described their situation as best as they could.
- Then a call for all other staff to pitch in, maybe they observed something similar during their monitoring. Unless staff are specifically told to pay attention to staff complaints, they generally don't bother with this. They don't even resolve character reports in a timely fashion a lot of the time, why would they comment on something above their paygrade?
- Then waiting for the player to login. Then observing him directly. More time wasted waiting for the player to login, more time wasted for other players when their staff stop watching them, etc. This is the most inefficient and ridiculous part of the process. Ideally, their behavior should have already been caught by the staff assigned to monitor their clan group.
- Finally, pulling him in to have a conversation with him. The only actually useful part of this process besides getting lucky enough with the runlog. Live conversations just work better for player-staff relations in any game where communication is text-based.
- Then however it turns out. The player would get a "Thank you for your feedback" request resolution.
The complainant never gets an idea of what happened, if anything. Contrast with games that publicize their moderation actions, both for the purposes of informing people about resolved problems, and general responsibility to keep staff actions transparent. Perhaps the guilty party disappeared, perhaps they're given more time to perpetuate the same behavior they were already carrying out.
You seem oddly opposed to discussing the staff's willingness to accept criticism compared to the players. Is that a tough subject for you?
- So a player opens a request ticket. They don't wish up as it's happening
If they wish up and someone is around, they will of course look into it. But we're discussing requests. What does a wish up have to do with anything? If they wished up, it's a lot easier of course. But it also requires someone on staff to be available at "that" exact moment. Saying that bad situations do not get stopped by others wishing up is ridiculous and untrue.
- Someone reads it. Finally.
The requests are usually read within the same day. There are 2-4 staffers for each area, at least one of them will read it. To say that requests take very long to be read is the same as saying that character applications take long to be approved. Are they? Be honest.
- Next steps? Pulling run logs to find the situation the player is describing. Only Admins+ can access the runlog, and only Producers can resolve staff complaints, so it's only in the interest of Producers to investigate. Runlogs get wiped and get turned into "old runlogs" on each reboot, and a following reboot wipes the old runlog, so if the request was submitted before two reboots, it's now impossible to get a runlog.
You're jumping all over the place. I dont know on purpose to muddy the water, or just due to inattentiveness. Are we talking about a player complaint, or a staff complaint? If it's a staff complaint, then nobody needs to wait for a player to login. It's all in-staff. There is no such thing as "impossible to get a runlog" that's ridiculous. Hasnt been for a long time. I dont even know why you're saying this. You yourself should 'know' what you're saying is bs. If it's a staff complaint, then producers are investigating it. There is no monitoring players, unless they're somehow involved. Since the example was a 'harassment' example, then it's a player complaint, not a staff one. So of course there is player monitoring. Are you saying that the player should be punished "before" proven guilty?
- If it's a badly informed situation, then clarification inquests. Requiring more time to formulate questions and receive responses from a player who presumably described their situation as best as they could.
Hi! I saw this guy in a black hood diddling another person in a black hood. I think the other black hood was thirteen years old. Yes. If a complaint like this gets sent, the staff has "nothing" to go on. If the guy wished up during this happening, then sure. It's viable that a staffer would've caught it. Or at the very least, was able to correlate the wish up date/location/source with the complaint/source for runlogs. But if all you get is a complaint that doesnt have "any" information in it, but black hoods. Yes. More information is needed. Where did it happen. Who was it. When. Staff are not psionicists.
- Then a call for all other staff to pitch in, maybe they observed something similar during their monitoring. Unless staff are specifically told to pay attention to staff complaints, they generally don't bother with this. They don't even resolve character reports in a timely fashion a lot of the time, why would they comment on something above their
paygrade?
Again. Is this staff complaint, or a player complaint example? I was talking about a player complaint. What are 'you' talking about? What do staff complaints have to do with character reports? And the character reports are resolved the proper way. Before staff resolves it, staff discusses the report. Once they're done discussing it, it'll get resolved. If it gets insta resolved, then ... nobody freaking sees the report. Do people send in character reports for staff to read, discuss, make decisions on, and give feedback? Or to see the "your report was resolved" message? What's more important?
- Then waiting for the player to login. Then observing him directly. More time wasted waiting for the player to login, more time wasted for other players when their staff stop watching them, etc. This is the most inefficient and ridiculous part of the process. Ideally, their behavior should have already been caught by the staff assigned to monitor their clan group.
Are you implying that the player should get punished before their guilt is proven? This is silly, criticizing for the sake of criticizing.
- Finally, pulling him in to have a conversation with him. The only actually useful part of this process besides getting lucky enough with the runlog. Live conversations just work better for player-staff relations in any game where communication is text-based.
You know it's been awhile since ginka, right? It's not even the same server. There are no impossible to get runlogs. It is difficult to "find" the right moment though, admittedly.
- Then however it turns out. The player would get a "Thank you for your feedback" request resolution.
The complainant never gets an idea of what happened, if anything. Contrast with games that publicize their moderation actions, both for the purposes of informing people about resolved problems, and general responsibility to keep staff actions transparent. Perhaps the guilty party disappeared, perhaps they're given more time to perpetuate the same behavior they were already carrying out.
Well. That is the staff policy. If a player gets punished, it is between staff and that player. While it's good that someone reported this, they dont get a detailed step by step report of how the person got punished. This isnt a blood sport to revel in. Sometimes the infraction is minor, but requires correction. Putting it on display is humiliating and will drive a player away. Only because the person messes up, does not mean they are not a good person, or deserves playing. Sometimes, they are a shitty person and once banned, it doesnt matter. But it's staff policy not to discuss it. If you dont believe that staff will stop things like sexual harassment of minors, then you're beyond help and maybe should find some other hobby.
You seem oddly opposed to discussing the staff's willingness to accept criticism compared to the players. Is that a tough subject for you?
Well. It's just, you're full of shit on occasion and I call you for it. It's weird. You have at least some knowledge of the inner workings of the game. But you either purposefully misrepresenting it, or you dont understand it. I dont get it. But whatever. I hope you're having fun, at least.
So. If your main point is that a request system is much more ineffecient then a staffer being right there in the room when infraction occurs, then yes. It's true. But ... since that's not always the case? I mean you're comparing a mainstreamed email reporting system to being there in person? Yeah. They're vastly different.
