Anonymous Punishments

[Mewi]

Well in light of a recent event I think it may be best to think of a new method of punishing which may/may not reduce drama.   I was thinking of anonymous punishments, where a player cannot put a name to which GM that punished them.

I'll go into detail,  user B gets banned for violating rule A by GM C,  GM C modifies the Ban list on the staff board to include user B and his/her violation.

User B complains about being banned and posts on the forums,  a GM will not acknowledged who banned him, but will tell them why they were banned.  If screenshots are needed then GM C will blank out there name.

This whole system will be public information but the GMs who administered the punishments will not be.  The reason for this system is so that the less mature players cannot put a name to the ban and hold an immature grudge toward a GM for doing their job.  Once evidence is posted,  as many GMs that are available will make a post to the thread that user B posted and those GMs will state that they concur with the punishment.  ( having as many staff members posts.. reduces the chances of that player putting a face to the person who banned them )

If a confliction comes in the way a staff discussion will be made to see if the ban was truly justified.

So... what do you think?


Edit:  Oh yeah... it may be difficult to implement this kind of system if your GM staff is lacking activity lol.

[Loki]

As long as the GM's do their jobs, it sounds okay. Maybe better.

[Guest]

mmm good idea...
it also makes me think of the secret service idea

basically its the same thing as you posted here the only difference is these agents (the GM's) have randomized GM names when they do this stuff (ie GM-x etc) so no one knows who they are
the idea behind that is so the screen shot is 100% unedited

imo i really like it ^^

[Anti-Static Foam Cleaner]

Warnings will be a problem.

[Mewi]

Warnings will be a problem.

I am inclined to agree, but people usually don't spaz over warnings XD  of course they may be able to tie a name to the GM if they knew who warned them in the first place

Unless you can make a hide name command that when the GM types her/his name is hidden and only shows up as like "Operator" or "GM"  sort of like @fakename I guess.

[Majora_younglink]

Sounds like a good idea and something that should work most of the time.
I think the only problem that may arise is that players may think the GMs are acting cowardly by not revealing who is doing what and not to mention it does kind of create a kind of distrust in the relationship between players and GMs as they don't know what any one GMs tendencies are. (Like which GM has a tendency to overreact over certain issues)

Also, it might also be a problem if a GM does something that not necessarily everyone agrees with on the team. But thats only a problem I guess if the connection between your GM team is strained or weak.

[Mewi]

As far as I'm concerned it is not the communities job to keep track of the GMs activities.  That only leads to uber unnecessary drama.  I'd only expect a community member to report 'unjustice' to the Head GM and then have that GM investigate the situation.

I'm not sure what would make it "cowardly"  the players don't really need to know who is punishing who, only that they are being punished, for a reason, and that the rest of the staff backs up that GMs decision ;p  I think that allowing them to know who is the GM administering punishment allows them the ability to spread lies about that person, and creating a lot of unneeded and unwanted stress.

But then again someone will have to put my idea into practice to really see how it will work x3

[Shinn]

nice idea, but we already have this in place with a slight touch to it, in Saga GM's have two chars ..1 is their actual GM where they go online to interact with players and the other which is named like this ( GameMaster00, GameMaster01, GameMaster02..and such) that they use to bot hunt and handle anything that will involve in ban or jail. No player knows which GameMasterXX is which GM thus creating less flame wars targeted towards one particular GM instead the whole staff where everything is handled accordingly. Thus far this system seems to be flawless but perhaps I'll re-edit and inform a bit more about it later as time goes on.

[Helrouis]

nice idea, but we already have this in place with a slight touch to it, in Saga GM's have two chars ..1 is their actual GM where they go online to interact with players and the other which is named like this ( GameMaster00, GameMaster01, GameMaster02..and such) that they use to bot hunt and handle anything that will involve in ban or jail. No player knows which GameMasterXX is which GM thus creating less flame wars targeted towards one particular GM instead the whole staff where everything is handled accordingly. Thus far this system seems to be flawless but perhaps I'll re-edit and inform a bit more about it later as time goes on.

doesn't seem to be effective. also, people aren't interested.

[Shinn]

doesn't seem to be effective. also, people aren't interested.

...huh?  what are you talking about lol..I don't care if people are not interested...the thread starter said "But then again someone will have to put my idea into practice to really see how it will work x3" ..and I simply replied that as it is put into practice at ragnarok saga...and if you don't think it's effective so be it..

Regards,
Shinn.

[Helrouis]

doesn't seem to be effective. also, people aren't interested.

...huh?  what are you talking about lol..I don't care if people are not interested...the thread starter said "But then again someone will have to put my idea into practice to really see how it will work x3" ..and I simply replied that as it is put into practice at ragnarok saga...and if you don't think it's effective so be it..

Regards,
Shinn.

yea, just being honest.

[lrellok]

As far as I'm concerned it is not the communities job to keep track of the GMs activities. 

I am afraid i have to disagree.  It falls back to the argument of who watches the watchers.  Put simply, the players ARE supposed to police the GM's for corruption, and thus must know if one or two gm's are the problem or if it is the whole team. 

I have actually seen this a lot, where and admin is trying to defend a GM's decision, then another, then another, and months later realizes that the GM was corrupt.  One of the reasons that I feel very strongly that all punishments should have a name attached is that some admins do not realize they have a problem GM until they see "GM xyz unfair to me" a half dozen times in the report forums.   

This might be a good idea if it where possible to ensure zero corruption across the entirety of RO.  However, i fell it might be to easily used to cover for bad GM's, letting them hide behind it, and create more drama, not less, as players angry about actual problems take their gripes against, (in order); the whole GM team on the servers forums, the admin in or out of game, the server on the RMS rating section, and finally the RMS forums.

I think that the net result of this system will be the server getting trashed on RMS by players angry about a specific GM.  Becouse they no longer know which one it is, they grip about the whole team, the admin gets defensive, and the players come here and trash the server as a whole. 

(@me dons Lucian's volcano armor)

[baseballGuy]

if your a GM then you should be ready for the grudges that people will bestow on you.

[mark_sanbeda]

if your a GM then you should be ready for the grudges that people will bestow on you.

Its too bad that even the good one's gets to be cursed 

[Guest]

if your a GM then you should be ready for the grudges that people will bestow on you.

Its too bad that even the good one's gets to be cursed 

and it often makes some of the really good ones quit >.<

i mean as a GM yes you have to expect ppl to accuse you of corruption and yatayata
and sometimes it gets over whelming and makes them want to quit and such.....
but its unfortunatly just a part of RO.....
even if the GM is good and just following the rules and etc, there will still be corruption theories about them