+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: News and Announcements (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: Rule 1.0 (/showthread.php?tid=137959)
Rule 1.0 - Garrett Jax - 04-09-2016
Quote:Rule 1.0 Server administrators will impose sanctions on players for violating server rules and for any actions that harm server gameplay.
Rule 1.0 has been a tool used by the Admins in times past to rid the Community of toxic players that deliberately seek to harm server gameplay. In most cases, these individuals have skirted the rules, or taken extreme advantage of allowances within the rules with the intent to grieve others. For victims of this style of play, they are left helpless to counter such behavior and end up quitting the game entirely. When they do complain, they are shouted down and told to 'get gud'.
The following is a list of steps the Admins have agreed to take in dealing with players who have been accused by two or more parties of harming server gameplay, where tangible evidence is slight or nonexistent.
Step One: An Admin or preferably two, will meet with an accused troublemaker, discussing the complaints directed at him and how his behavior is disrupting server gameplay. In turn, the player may make a defense of his actions, explaining to the Admins his side of things. If, after the discussion, the person is found, in the judgement of the Admins, to be guilty of harming server gameplay, he will be officially warned in private, his actions henceforth being closely monitored. Hopefully, this will get his attention and the negative behavior will stop. If not, the Admins will proceed to Step Two.
Step Two: If complaints continue to come forth, or the Admins personally witness said disruption, the person causing trouble will get publicly sanctioned and warned of future ban if his disruptive behavior continues. If he fails to comply even to this, then it's on to Step Three.
Step Three: An enforced server ban of indefinite duration.
Step Two: If complaints continue to come forth, or the Admins personally witness said disruption, the person causing trouble will get publicly sanctioned and warned of future ban if his disruptive behavior continues. If he fails to comply even to this, then it's on to Step Three.
Step Three: An enforced server ban of indefinite duration.
Rule 1.0 has always been a judgement call on the part of the Admins, and not one that has been used often. Some may have problems with it, due to the fact that evidence is sometimes difficult to present in cases like these. However, the Admins, like most of us here, want to see this Community prosper and grow. We definitely do not want to lose members easily, by rendering overly harsh judgements or being too lax in enforcing rules. We anticipate that most people we speak to will respond to Step One, or at least Step Two, if it gets that far. Step Three should be used rarely, and generally when it becomes painfully obvious that the person is deliberately trying to be disruptive.
This announcement is essentially for Admins in establishing protocol for use of Rule 1.0. We felt it important to let the Community know that we have established this protocol and will endeavor to use it in an effective manner in making this server a welcoming place for all.
RE: Rule 1.0 - Vendetta - 04-10-2016
Thanks for this. It keeps us in the loop.
RE: Rule 1.0 - Lythrilux - 04-10-2016
This sounds good. It adds transparency whilst keeping it private for the individual and lets them know specifically if they're causing trouble.
On a less related note, would this ever apply to player factions?
RE: Rule 1.0 - sindroms - 04-10-2016
(04-10-2016, 12:15 AM)Lythrilux Wrote: On a less related note, would this ever apply to player factions?
Or groups that are currently around and organized by one such player. Can the other participants get smacked as well, pretty please?
RE: Rule 1.0 - E X O D I T E - 04-10-2016
What will prevent groups/griefers from colluding on skype/elsewhere so they can remove someone (like a faction leader of a faction they are opposed to) from the server via OoRP means?
RE: Rule 1.0 - Arioch - 04-10-2016
They may, but we'll still ask for anything to back up their claim. As well as we'll have multiple admins talk to various individuals in separate chats. Even if people come forward, doesn't mean we'll take their word and that's it. We'love get both sides as well as ask others if such a thing is true.
RE: Rule 1.0 - Sciamach - 04-10-2016
Can't wait to see this weaponized and used against people and factions that some people don't like.
RE: Rule 1.0 - nOmnomnOm - 04-10-2016
What would be an example of actions that would harm server game-play?
People are saying here that this can be used to gank up on someone.... well what are the things that someone could be charged for that this involves?
What does it cover?
RE: Rule 1.0 - Jeremy Hunter - 04-10-2016
(04-10-2016, 03:34 AM)Scourgeclaw Wrote: Can't wait to see this weaponized and used against people and factions that some people don't like.
That my friend is already happening.
Player request Scourgie.
Player requests.
RE: Rule 1.0 - sindroms - 04-10-2016
Admins probably do not even need a reason to boot someone off the community. In the end, it is their call.
The fact that 1.0 exists is most probably to remind the community that they choose not to do that but rather would show the community what is going on.
We had plenty of times when members of the community were removed without a sanction thread. It is not like the team needs to explain their actions.