"Solving bias is impossible, taking steps to prevent it is"
Im going to stop you right there. We have taken steps to prevent it. Its in the form of giving autonomy over admin applications to the EAO, Its in the form of being able to ban players, its in the form of being able to suspend admins.
You are trying to solve a problem that doesnt not actually exist on the server because you do not understand how the server works.
↩ Akefu-Brewer Do you think being biased or having favor is bad all the time?
If No, then you have no argument.
If Yes, then you are just wrong and have no argument.
"and they would actually be brought back if we keep this current system."
And guess what.. they would be banned again.. how strange of a concept is that.
You just don't understand how the server works. You are also just wrong and its pointless to keep attempting to tell you how the server does actually work.
The "people" have never actually mattered. The ultimate decision is up to the Executives or Wild.
Idk man. The problem you say of people being unbanned after being filing an unban appeal and having it approved isn't actually a problem. Thats not corrupt. Thats how an unban appeal works.
You just don't have a grasp on the servers actual problems.
This suggestion could get implemented and the effect it would have on the server would be almost nothing. Whether or not that almost nothing effect is positive or negative would be impossible to quantify.
At the end of the day, nothing would change, because your solution isnt actually a solution and the problem doesnt actually exist.
Except the Executive Admin Officer isn't perfect. Never has. I'm not, Elmon wasn't, Fionn wasn't, you weren't, Nero wasn't, Zaid wasn't, and inFAmas wasn't. This is why Assistant Executives exist. My vote hinges not on any matter of bias, but rather on the fact that seeing a reason someone's vote is the way it is much more helpful for making a final decision than a vote with one or two words.
I never claimed they were perfect. I even acknowledge that everything is in my opinion (which should be honestly held pretty high considering my tenure on the server)
Ego aside, of course the system we have in place isn't perfect. The owner isnt perfect, neither are the admins, policies, or players. This is obvious.
His solution is forcing players to give reasoning.
I don't believe forcing players to do anything is good. This is my ideology.
You are still allowed to (and should) give reasoning behind every vote.
A logical person who knows how the server works would imply that the issue is with admins who arent qualified enough being promoted due to bias. This is obviously a problem. I could write pages of threads about this, but this isn't what OP is claiming.
OP is saying that players who filed successful ban appeals and got unbanned, are being unbanned because of bias. This isnt an actual problem. Well maybe it is, but its actually so insignificant that it doesnt matter.
Of course people giving reasoning is helpful. If you want your vote to have more "weight" then you should give good reasoning. I however, do not believe your vote should just be completely cast aside if you don't give reasoning. If you need that much "help" then maybe you are not really qualified to be in the position you were elected into. How hard is it to quantify if someone should receive super admin.. (its not hard.) if you are capable of speaking English and can follow simple rules you have a very high chance to get admin on TF. The executives should have a general grasp of how the server is working, how your admins behave (if you are the EAO).. etc. The peoples reasoning should be helpful, but not the ultimate decision maker.
God I actually knew you were going to call me out on that but I thought it was actually so clear I wouldn't need to explain it.
Yes breaking the rules is bad.
No I do not believe you should be forced to do anything. If you want to grief go ahead, but you will get banned. If you want to troll go ahead, the admins should be there to punish accordingly. Is that a hard concept to follow?
Im validating the human concept of using reasoning to forumlate a conclusion yes. Im not validating forcing people to give reasoning to further this agenda that ban appeals are corrupt.
Your entire paragraph (sentence?) just doesn't make sense. Im sorry if im not understanding correctly.
Yes. Please do whatever you want on TF. Join the server. We need players. Please. Join. The. Server. Look its so fun.
However, if what you do does not fall within our rules, you will get punished. So act accordingly.
(This is slightly comedic now that im looking at your post history. You cannot actually join the server because you are indefinitely banned. In your appeals you claimed shdwo is biased (and a dipshit) which is probably true. However, you did break the rules so you deserve to be banned. I cannot say for certain, but this probably has a big factor on why you proposed this and gives me insight to why you are specifically attacking ban appeals claiming they are corrupt.)
You are derailing your own original post. I would advise you to stop because you are actively breaking down your own argument by making unsupported and just wrong claims.
Instead, just stick by saying it would be nice to have more input on applications, and it will probably be approved because its a nice general idea that is obvious and people like thinking they contribute to the larger group. (the reason why some ban requests have like 10 vouches on INCREDIBLY obvious requests that are going to be accepted regardless if anyone voted or not)
That makes more sense.
Okay so yes you are right. If you made it a rule, it would be a rule. However, this rule does not improve the average players experience, and further complicates our rules that "barely anyone reads that staff have been proven to look to when LOOKING for ways to ban players they dont like abusively" You are contradicting yourself here.
An average player wont like their house being griefed. Thats why we have rules against it.
An average player doesnt like being trolled in chat. Thats why we have rules against it.
An average player doesnt think ban appeals are legitmate so.. we make a rule to FORCE players to give reasoning to make the system a little bit more fair... ? that doesnt make sense. Doesn't the ban manager have authority over the final call? Are you calling him corrupt? maybe? who am I to say if he is or isn't. However, thats not what you are claiming. I think you believe your vote actually matters, which it doesnt.
its a pretty widely held sentiment that the rules are too complex, and adding rules that further restricts an average players experience is, in my opinion, a wrong direction to go.
Well thats just not what your original post is saying. You are probably not going to be able to get the suggestion to remove voting approved. Good luck though.
