Jump to content

Community Votes


Recommended Posts

I have a serious question. Why are situations pertaining to staff or a specific battalion or group a discussion in the community? I feel like a staff report or CMD report or player report isn't something the community should be allowed to vote on. The only reason it should be open to the community in the first place is for anecdotal evidence to present itself. Its not a VOTE on whether the person broke the rules or not. The decision is not the community's decision to make, its the higher ups decision to make. So why does everyone instinctually start voting? 

Can we as a community agree to stop voting on REPORTS and only comment if providing evidence? It comes down to "Did they break the rules? Should they be punished for it?" Its not a matter of opinion or a vote on whether thats true or not

Edited by Logicless
  • Agree 2
  • Funny 1
  • Friendly 1

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
  • Management

Just because the community votes on it doesn’t mean it will go the way they voted. High Staff/High Command will obviously investigate and deal with the situation the way that they see fit. Public reports are for public discussions. Providing evidence of their sides of stories. However majority of these reports usually tend to have either no evidence or just petty stuff that truly does not call for any type of punishment towards anyone.

  • Agree 5

ezgif-4-6f1b17d05a.gif

i am literally captain tukk

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Marvel said:

Just because the community votes on it doesn’t mean it will go the way they voted. High Staff/High Command will obviously investigate and deal with the situation the way that they see fit. Public reports are for public discussions. Providing evidence of their sides of stories. However majority of these reports usually tend to have either no evidence or just petty stuff that truly does not call for any type of punishment towards anyone.

I totally understand that, it comes down to people being degenerates and flaming eachother when neither party was involved. What I am saying is to stop voting and arguing, instead provide evidence or nothing at all

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
  • Management
29 minutes ago, Logicless said:

I totally understand that, it comes down to people being degenerates and flaming eachother when neither party was involved. What I am saying is to stop voting and arguing, instead provide evidence or nothing at all

Well basically what I’m saying is the votes mean nothin in terms of what will happen. People just +1/-1 basically just to express their own opinion on the matter. However I’ve noticed that people won’t take reports seriously if it has little to no evidence or the evidence is just very petty. I personally have never been a fan of public reports as they’ve always just been large memes or have caused unnecessary drama. I think reports should be handled privately with the people required rather than the entire community.

  • Agree 1

ezgif-4-6f1b17d05a.gif

i am literally captain tukk

Link to comment

The community is allowed to vote/discuss topic within the community so that the High Staff can see the perspective of the community members. Whether or not the community votes are taken into account is something that I can not comment on as I am not a member of the High Staff team. But personally I believe that being able to see the communities opinions on topics is a very important thing to have in running a community.

Link to comment
Just now, Luther said:

The community is allowed to vote/discuss topic within the community so that the High Staff can see the perspective of the community members. Whether or not the community votes are taken into account is something that I can not comment on as I am not a member of the High Staff team. But personally I believe that being able to see the communities opinions on topics is a very important thing to have in running a community.

Right and that falls under involvement in the situation. If a community member experienced what the report was about, they are more than welcome to chime in, but their friends chiming in because they are friends is just leads to toxicity within the community. 

Example: CMD report on CMD XYZ
He bullied a 12 year old non stop in voice chat. 12 year old makes the report

but CMD ABC of a separate battalion -1s because "There is not enough evidence" or "This is just a mad cringe baby" because he likes CMD XYZ

All I'm saying is instead of voting, provide evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, in support of the report or against the report.  If you were not involved or have no evidence to add, you shouldn't comment. Its not a vote, its a report. 

  • Winner 1

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, Marvel said:

Well basically what I’m saying is the votes mean nothin in terms of what will happen. People just +1/-1 basically just to express their own opinion on the matter. However I’ve noticed that people won’t take reports seriously if it has little to no evidence or the evidence is just very petty. I personally have never been a fan of public reports as they’ve always just been large memes or have caused unnecessary drama. I think reports should be handled privately with the people required rather than the entire community.

And if reports were handled more privately life would be easy. Thats essentially what I'm mentioning. But the current infrastructure doesn't really allow for private handling of reports. 

Problem with CMD? CMD report
Problem with Staff abusing you? Staff Report
Problem with a player? Player report

This should become more civilized and less of a toxicity fest. I'm not innocent on this either, and I think if it got restructured as a "Presentation of Evidence against XXX" including anecdotal and solid evidence from other community members who now speak up, instead of +1/-1 based on evidence presented by original poster. 

  • Confused 1

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Logicless said:

Right and that falls under involvement in the situation. If a community member experienced what the report was about, they are more than welcome to chime in, but their friends chiming in because they are friends is just leads to toxicity within the community. 

Example: CMD report on CMD XYZ
He bullied a 12 year old non stop in voice chat. 12 year old makes the report

but CMD ABC of a separate battalion -1s because "There is not enough evidence" or "This is just a mad cringe baby" because he likes CMD XYZ

All I'm saying is instead of voting, provide evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, in support of the report or against the report.  If you were not involved or have no evidence to add, you shouldn't comment. Its not a vote, its a report. 

Just because people aren't involved in a situation doesn't mean that they shouldn't have a vote in said situation. I think as long as people do their research into the situation, what is wrong with voting on said topics? Also all evidence that is available should be provided in the initial report, for everyone to see. Also most of the issues these reports are about only involve one or two people so how are they going to get community feedback if you are saying only those involved can vote on said subject?

2 minutes ago, Logicless said:

And if reports were handled more privately life would be easy. Thats essentially what I'm mentioning. But the current infrastructure doesn't really allow for private handling of reports. 

Problem with CMD? CMD report
Problem with Staff abusing you? Staff Report
Problem with a player? Player report

This should become more civilized and less of a toxicity fest. I'm not innocent on this either, and I think if it got restructured as a "Presentation of Evidence against XXX" including anecdotal and solid evidence from other community members who now speak up, instead of +1/-1 based on evidence presented by original poster. 

Also if you want something handled privately/anonymously that is exactly what the Liaison  Team is here for.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Logicless said:

All I'm saying is instead of voting, provide evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, in support of the report or against the report.  If you were not involved or have no evidence to add, you shouldn't comment. Its not a vote, its a report. 

this is common sense, which a lot of people lack because they like to put their 2 cents where it doesn't belong.
 

 

2 minutes ago, Logicless said:

And if reports were handled more privately life would be easy.

This sets up a system of corruption and potential for people to "break" rules without others knowing. Maybe a public showing of a particular situation is not always best but it keeps people informed.

 

 

3 minutes ago, Logicless said:

But the current infrastructure doesn't really allow for private handling of reports. 

Not true.

spacer.png

Link to comment
  • Management
3 minutes ago, Logicless said:

And if reports were handled more privately life would be easy. Thats essentially what I'm mentioning. But the current infrastructure doesn't really allow for private handling of reports. 

Problem with CMD? CMD report
Problem with Staff abusing you? Staff Report
Problem with a player? Player report

This should become more civilized and less of a toxicity fest. I'm not innocent on this either, and I think if it got restructured as a "Presentation of Evidence against XXX" including anecdotal and solid evidence from other community members who now speak up, instead of +1/-1 based on evidence presented by original poster. 

Well there’s nothing saying you cannot report people privately. When I was Director I had several people ask if the could report someone without utilizing the Forums and it’s allowed. We’d just have them copy and pasted the format onto a google doc or just chat with them anything of the sort. Idk if the current Directors do that or have done that but that’s always an option.

ezgif-4-6f1b17d05a.gif

i am literally captain tukk

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Maverick said:


 

 

This sets up a system of corruption and potential for people to "break" rules without others knowing. Maybe a public showing of a particular situation is not always best but it keeps people informed.

 

 

Not true.

I don't really mean Private like noone can see, I mean private like, only comment if you have evidence, instead of acting like your vote matters

  • Disagree 1
  • Confused 1

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Logicless said:

I don't really mean Private like noone can see, I mean private like, only comment if you have evidence, instead of acting like your vote matters

You trying to suppress peoples votes or something? Of course the communities votes matter, how else they going to get the community feedback?

Edited by Luther
Revision
  • Agree 3
Link to comment
  • Management
2 minutes ago, Maverick said:

This sets up a system of corruption and potential for people to "break" rules without others knowing. Maybe a public showing of a particular situation is not always best but it keeps people informed.

This is easily avoided as long as the ones responsible for handling the report inform the community of their decision and reasoning behind so and any evidence that is relevant. There is in my opinion no need in a public report but there will always be a need for the community to be informed on whatever happened.

  • Agree 2

ezgif-4-6f1b17d05a.gif

i am literally captain tukk

Link to comment
Just now, Luther said:

You trying to suppress peoples votes or something? Of course the communities votes matter.

When it comes to rule breaking community votes don't matter, community votes still apply to suggestions/applications and all other areas where it makes sense. However a report is not a community vote, its a report so high staff/command can take action based on evidence presented. 
However one person may not have all the evidence required to take action, and requires anecdotal backup from community members who experienced the same thing.

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Logicless said:

When it comes to rule breaking community votes don't matter, community votes still apply to suggestions/applications and all other areas where it makes sense. However a report is not a community vote, its a report so high staff/command can take action based on evidence presented. 
However one person may not have all the evidence required to take action, and requires anecdotal backup from community members who experienced the same thing.

In my opinion community votes would still matter when it comes to rule breaking. Like I said before, it isn't up to the community on whether or not he/she gets punished or what type of punishment they get, but I'm sure High Staff like the community feedback when choosing the severity of their punishment.

  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
  • Management
2 minutes ago, Luther said:

In my opinion community votes would still matter when it comes to rule breaking. Like I said before, it isn't up to the community on whether or not he/she gets punished or what type of punishment they get, but I'm sure High Staff like the community feedback when choosing the severity of their punishment.

I think what Logic is trying to say is that on most reports the feedback given from the community can be lackluster at most. People tend to meme reports which is fine imo, I like memes, however they always end up being like 75% meme and 25% arguments over the most silly things like dual wielding dooku. Anywho I’ve talked too much on this thread so Imma stick to lurking around from here on.

  • Agree 1

ezgif-4-6f1b17d05a.gif

i am literally captain tukk

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Marvel said:

I think what Logic is trying to say is that on most reports the feedback given from the community can be lackluster at most. People tend to meme reports which is fine imo, I like memes, however they always end up being like 75% meme and 25% arguments over the most silly things like dual wielding dooku. Anywho I’ve talked too much on this thread so Imma stick to lurking around from here on.

While I completely agree with you about most of the feedback being lackluster, I would like to believe that when High Staff takes the community feedback into account, they separate the memes from the actual feedback.

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Marvel said:

. Anywho I’ve talked too much on this thread so Imma stick to lurking around from here on.

We're having a discussion so I see no issue. The point is to have the discussion


 

 

7 minutes ago, Marvel said:

I think what Logic is trying to say is that on most reports the feedback given from the community can be lackluster at most. People tend to meme reports which is fine imo, I like memes, however they always end up being like 75% meme and 25% arguments over the most silly things like dual wielding dooku. 

Yes this is one of the things, but another is just people putting  +1 or -1 with no logical reasoning, or people who spout bs like -1 this CMD report is dumb he treats me nice

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Logicless said:

I have a serious question. Why are situations pertaining to staff or a specific battalion or group a discussion in the community? I feel like a staff report or CMD report or player report isn't something the community should be allowed to vote on. The only reason it should be open to the community in the first place is for anecdotal evidence to present itself. Its not a VOTE on whether the person broke the rules or not. The decision is not the community's decision to make, its the higher ups decision to make. So why does everyone instinctually start voting? 

Can we as a community agree to stop voting on these and only comment if providing evidence? It comes down to "Did they break the rules? Should they be punished for it?"

Synergy is a Community by the people for the people, That's why people are allowed to leave their opinions on topics

  • Winner 3

Current:   

Former:  Veteran Administrator 212th CPT Alpha-66 | Wilhuff Tarkin | Nils Tenant | Dao   Naval Chief of Engineering | 501st XO | 501st TCC 501st Echo | 501st Hardcase 501st Heavy Lead

Link to comment

I think the idea of "voting" on stuff like reports actually makes sense when you consider it's more about people giving their view on the severity or justification of what happened. When it comes to reports, from what I know of, there are no outlined specific punishments for every rule break. Having the community show their opinion based on character and severity of situations makes sense, especially when trying to make a decision.
And having an outside perspective that's probably less bias giving their view with the info that's given from both sides helps.

Imagine having a CMD report where only the battalion could vote. A lot of BCMD reports come from someone outwith the battalion, or are atleast posted by someone outwith. And BCMDs are big positions in the community, we vote for their application, why shouldn't we be able to give opinion on a potential removal? Being battalion exclusive in this regard will most likely end up in biased outcomes.

Edited by BigZach
  • Winner 1

 

"I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot." - Logic

Link to comment

The main point is PRODUCTIVENESS. So evidence not votes. I think the votes should be minimal, less opinion based more evidence based. 

Example of BAD report:

+1 Dude is rude sometimes

-1 Hes nice to me

Example of a Good Report

This post isn't surprising, one time he actually did the same thing to me, but didn't think much of it at the time, Heres proof: (Or Heres what happened:)

This doesn't seem like something they should be reported for, because I was involved in this situation and heres how it actually went down: 

  • Funny 1
  • Informative 1
  • Confused 2

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment

I'm sure this has been said. 

But Synergy's motto has been "A community of the players for the players" While i'll be the first to admit it hasn't always seemed to be that way in it's history, that is what it was designed to be. So if we have a situation that effects the community in any way it will be made public knowledge for transparency. 

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
  • Winner 2
  • Informative 1

former: cadet,private,private first class, specialist,Sergeant,Staff Sergeant,Sergeant First Class,Master Sergeant,First Sergeant,Sergeant Major,Command Sergeant Major,Warrant Officer, Sergeant Major of the battalion, 2nd Lieutenant,Lieutenant,Captain,Major,Lieutenant Colonel,Colonel,Commander,Executive Officer,Battalion Commander,Regimental Commander,Marshal Commander,501st,212th,DU,21st,CG,RANCOR,104th,SOBDE,Jedi,Naval,41st,Event Job,Gamehelper,Gamemaster,Gamemaster Officer, Gamemaster Manager, Gamemaster Director, New Admin, Admin, Senior Admin, Veteran Admin,Head Admin, Director,Managment, Founder, Retired Founder, forum mod, forum admin,forum dev,Yoda,Mace WIndu

current: Versock

Link to comment

The community is like a democracy. We all vote on certain things that help better the server, as well as the overall experience. Founders/HS only step in when it’s needed. Also you shouldn’t be getting mad at people dumbing you. I get dumbed too, and I have now learned to just accept it. It’s just people disagreeing with what you said.

On to your point no I don’t think our voices are restricted, because than why should we even play? If we can’t have what we majoritly agree on, than why play on the server. Just not a smart idea 

  • Pay Respect 1

Former: Liaison

 

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, Pythin said:

. Also you shouldn’t be getting mad at people dumbing you. I get dumbed too, and I have now learned to just accept it. It’s just people disagreeing with what you said.

I care so much about the reputation number by my name. You get a dumb because I was clearly calling for him to discuss with me as this is a DISCUSSION. 

  • Confused 1

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, Pythin said:

The community is like a democracy. We all vote on certain things that help better the server, as well as the overall experience. Founders/HS only step in when it’s needed. 

 

This is actually a system of vigilantes. you dont sit in front of 200 forum members for breaking rules in real life. You sit in a room of UNBIASED peers while evidence is produced in a civil environment and the judge delievers the final verdict. On here its getting thrown into a trial of your friends and enemies all roasting eachother while the evidence is ignored by the flamers and the memelords.

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Dinaric said:

You seem to have a grudge against me, not sure as to why but we can talk about it in DMs instead of acting like you’ll do something on the forums. I am entitled to my opinion and I dumb people for posts that I think are really really dumb. I will not cause drama/toxicity on a website because you wanna call me out now

I actually have no opinion on you, I think you're an SA which shows you have respectable judgement, I just disagree with the way you react to discussion on the forums. When you disagree it should be a thought out discussion rather than dumbing the post and closing out. The reason I called YOU out was because I've seen you do it multiple times, I want to hear all opinions and reasoning on this matter, not just "I agree or disagree"

On the server the "Take it to PMs" Joke was a bit far on my end and I apologize. I was just giving you a hard time because you treated the situation as hostile when it was just friendly advice. Not tryna hurt your feelings.

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Unkindled said:

It’s not that big of a deal...

Nobody is treating it as such, I'm promoting healthy discussion about how the server is ran. Giving it a good hard look because why is it run this way? Because thats the way its ALWAYS been run.

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Logicless said:

And if reports were handled more privately life would be easy. Thats essentially what I'm mentioning. But the current infrastructure doesn't really allow for private handling of reports. 

This is just objectively untrue. You just have to care enough to actually go through the proper channels and talk to someone. It's the same thing with permanent blacklists. If you took a step back and actually think about what you're going on about then you'd understand how its all set up and why its set up that way. I dont like public commander or staff reports as much as the next guy,, but sometimes its just what you have to do as a last resort to deal with a situation. Thats why most reports don't go anywhere because people use them as a first resort and don't understand why they exist. Idk why you're making another one of these posts because you're just pointing out something that everyone already knows. When ACTUAL reports with real evidence and stuff comes out, yea, its real spicy, but the votes that come out generally come with evidence and personal experiences, which is very important. Useless votes are always not counted, thats how it always has been. This really doesn't seem to be a discussion at all tbh because everyone is saying essentially the same thing and I agree with it. Things that effect many people should have community feedback. And having outside, unbiased opinions on topics are also very very important to actually making effective changes. 

  • Winner 6
Link to comment

Lastly, you keep making these "brave" forum posts trying to "discuss" things you don't agree with for the reason of "these things are like this just because its how it always is!" Things are set up like this so we don't turn into the thing we left behind when this server was created. This server and community was built on the idea that everyone deserves a voice. Yes, some people use that voice to be a retard and spew nonsense or just try and get attention. The things you're trying to say and argue and point out, honestly make no sense to me as to why. Maybe you're just vying for attention on the forums or you're just trying to change the server for the better one forum post at a time, I have no idea, but because of how this server was set up you deserve that voice and I support your use of it. But remember, you got beaned for being ultra sped on the forums trying to be "brave" and "controversial" to "expose the flaws of the system". Good luck with your discussion attempts though.

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
  • Winner 5
  • Informative 1
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Egg said:

Lastly, you keep making these "brave" forum posts trying to "discuss" things you don't agree with for the reason of "these things are like this just because its how it always is!" Things are set up like this so we don't turn into the thing we left behind when this server was created. This server and community was built on the idea that everyone deserves a voice. Yes, some people use that voice to be a retard and spew nonsense or just try and get attention. The things you're trying to say and argue and point out, honestly make no sense to me as to why. Maybe you're just vying for attention on the forums or you're just trying to change the server for the better one forum post at a time, I have no idea, but because of how this server was set up you deserve that voice and I support your use of it. But remember, you got beaned for being ultra sped on the forums trying to be "brave" and "controversial" to "expose the flaws of the system". Good luck with your discussion attempts though.

You are one of the people who would be affected in a negative manner if things were purely evidence and not friends boosting eachother. Get off my post unless you want to have a real discussion

This isn't a fucking forum suggestion, its questioning something its not some "Brave post" I just genuinely had the question and thought it should be placed here. You aren't someone who encourages open discussion. So please don't attack me over trying to discuss

Edited by Logicless

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Taz said:

What're you doing, soldier?!?!?

Get this thing on right now!
Image result for gas mask

I like my toxicity raw thank you very much. Helps to build up a resistance for when you cant get to your mask in time 

 

Edited by Egg
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 2
Link to comment
1 minute ago, Logicless said:

You are one of the people who would be affected in a negative manner if things were purely evidence and not friends boosting eachother. Get off my post unless you want to have a real discussion

I dont understand your meaning by this my lad. I'm always down for a good old discussion. Every single thing that I got on this server I worked hard for, so don't you DARE claim favoritism unless you want to provide evidence for your entirely baseless accusation. Also, I dont appreciate your hostility, and no, I will not "get off your post."

  • Funny 1
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Logicless said:

You are one of the people who would be affected in a negative manner if things were purely evidence and not friends boosting eachother. Get off my post unless you want to have a real discussion

This isn't a fucking forum suggestion, its questioning something its not some "Brave post" I just genuinely had the question and thought it should be placed here. You aren't someone who encourages open discussion. So please don't attack me over trying to discuss

if it was battalion exclusive dealing with battalion situations from how you view him, it should logically be much easier on his end.

 

"I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot." - Logic

Link to comment
Just now, Egg said:

I dont understand your meaning by this my lad. I'm always down for a good old discussion. Every single thing that I got on this server I worked hard for, so don't you DARE claim favoritism unless you want to provide evidence for your entirely baseless accusation. Also, I dont appreciate your hostility, and no, I will not "get off your post."

You join telling me to stop making posts to "discuss" Its no secret we don't like eachother, so why can't you just leave me the fuck alone. 

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
Just now, BigZach said:

if it was battalion exclusive dealing with battalion situations from how you view him, it should logically be much easier on his end.

Not if its purely evidence, rather than opinion. The evidence shows he promoted people regardless of their behavior within/outside the battalion,  His best buds can do whatever they want (as evidenced by slurs hidden on the old roster), he let people into the battalion at the rank of specialist breaking an old CMD rule. And the battalion was in shambles. No friend perspectives can detest that.

We're dropping everything to do with Egg below this line
_______________________________________________________

  • Optimistic 1

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment

I genuinely don't understand whats so detrimental about not being able to +1/-1 a report if you aren't involved in the decision making or have no evidence to present. Please someone try to explain the actual benefits of putting memes and throwing shade or saying you support or don't support the report?

Why is Marvel being more mature and actually discussing while you guys smol brain this post? (Love you Marvel we just don't normally agree)

Edited by Logicless

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
Just now, Logicless said:

I genuinely don't understand whats so detrimental about not being able to +1/-1 a report if you aren't involved in the decision making or have no evidence to present. Please someone try to explain the actual benefits of putting memes and throwing shade or saying you support or don't support the report?

It gives Highstaff the knowledge of how to community is thinking, which can lead to making a better decision or allowing them to consider the community view as they try to listen to us whenever they can

  • Agree 3

🌓🌙

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, Logicless said:

I genuinely don't understand whats so detrimental about not being able to +1/-1 a report if you aren't involved in the decision making or have no evidence to present. Please someone try to explain the actual benefits of putting memes and throwing shade or saying you support or don't support the report?

Why is Marvel being more mature and actually discussing while you guys smol brain this post? (Love you Marvel we just don't normally agree)

The votes aren't actual votes. You know the HC can Exec order decisions. The idea of the +1/-1 is a quick way for a TLDR of general consensus. I feel like you're just putting too much value in each singular +1/-1.

Edit: Even on the most percievably vote based thing, commander apps, the HC can chose to give someone with more -1s than +1s a go at an interview, which if I remember correctly has happened before.

Edited by BigZach
  • Agree 2

 

"I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot." - Logic

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Logicless said:

Not if its purely evidence, rather than opinion. The evidence shows he promoted people regardless of their behavior within/outside the battalion,  His best buds can do whatever they want (as evidenced by slurs hidden on the old roster), he let people into the battalion at the rank of specialist breaking an old CMD rule. And the battalion was in shambles. No friend perspectives can detest that.

We're dropping everything to do with Egg below this line
_______________________________________________________

Very spicy indeed. I'm going to at least defend myself because you weren't even an officer at the time of my original removal, so I understand your perspective since you probably never got the full picture. 

1. I promoted people based off of the work that they did for the battalion. I heavily dislike public punishment because they are humiliating and demoralizing and usually downright unnecessary for a video game. I would always punish someone if there was actual evidence of wrongdoing. For example xeight being demoted from major after being arrested in debrief, alexz being removed from the battalion as cpt for rdming with a grenade.

2. My "best buds" leaving slurs on an old roster is honestly lost to me. If its us calling each other retarded or leaving memes on each other's notes on the roster, anything particularly vulgar was removed while I was in charge, but after I'm not in charge anymore, I seriously have no idea what you expect me to do.

3. Letting people in at specialist, also doesn't break any rules, so idk what you're trying to say by bringing it up. As bcmd, you are allowed to promote anyone to anything you want because you are in charge of the battalion. Thats how that works. People join as pvt and then you can promote them to xo if you really want to.

4. Battalion was in shambles after Hudson gutted the entire high command and resigned within the week. Yea, ill admit, things had been better and I was burned out, but shambles I don't really know and I've admitted to that already. 

Lastly, in regards to us not liking each other, I dont care about you as a person necessarily, but its how you use your words and your attitude that I don't appreciate. I try to give you the benefit of the doubt as to you being a better person and try to put my thoughts forward and not be hostile, but you come at me cussing and very hostile trying to dredge up old stuff about me for no reason at all.

Tying it back to the original thread. Everyone should be able to have a voice on big reports. It is on the person submitting said report to bring enough proof forward to convince others that a removal or punishment should take place. My thought process is, if the whole community is allowed to vote on the applications, everyone should be allowed to vote on the reports.

 

  • Agree 2
  • Winner 2
Link to comment
  • Management
4 minutes ago, BigZach said:

Edit: Even on the most percievably vote based thing, commander apps, the HC can chose to give someone with more -1s than +1s a go at an interview, which if I remember correctly has happened before.

This is true. 

Also this post has gotten way out of hand. I believe the discussion is over and at this rate I just see the same things said over and over again. I think we should all just leave it at that.

ezgif-4-6f1b17d05a.gif

i am literally captain tukk

Link to comment
Just now, FatherHanz said:

It gives Highstaff the knowledge of how to community is thinking, which can lead to making a better decision or allowing them to consider the community view as they try to listen to us whenever they can

So where does this include memes and flames? What you're saying isn't actually the current system because people DO the +1/-1 but they also put in their two cents or memes which floods the report, making other people less likely to read and +1/-1 accurately (in the current system) and it just turns into a host of people posting their opinions

 

1 minute ago, BigZach said:

The votes aren't actual votes. You know the HC can Exec order decisions. The idea of the +1/-1 is a quick way for a TLDR of general consensus. I feel like you're just putting too much value in each singular +1/-1.

I understand where this is coming from, but shouldn't the +1 -1 reaction be prioritized so the post doesn't become overflowed with the memes that always follow and the evidence goes unseen by others viewing the post? I'm not saying people can't put down their reactions on the post, the biggest issue is the nonsense that follows. And yes I was giving a +1/-1 too much value.

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, Logicless said:

So where does this include memes and flames? What you're saying isn't actually the current system because people DO the +1/-1 but they also put in their two cents or memes which floods the report, making other people less likely to read and +1/-1 accurately (in the current system) and it just turns into a host of people posting their opinions

 

I understand where this is coming from, but shouldn't the +1 -1 reaction be prioritized so the post doesn't become overflowed with the memes that always follow and the evidence goes unseen by others viewing the post? I'm not saying people can't put down their reactions on the post, the biggest issue is the nonsense that follows. And yes I was giving a +1/-1 too much value.

So the actual issue you want to address is how people act when reacting? Most of the time it's harmless banter. I don't really think anyone should be worrying about memes, usually they're a nice change of pace from the repeating or incohesive points. 

  • Funny 1

 

"I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot." - Logic

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Egg said:

 

Tying it back to the original thread. Everyone should be able to have a voice on big reports. It is on the person submitting said report to bring enough proof forward to convince others that a removal or punishment should take place. My thought process is, if the whole community is allowed to vote on the applications, everyone should be allowed to vote on the reports.

 

I understand the argument that the person is expected to bring all the evidence, however lets go back to the 12 year old getting harassed by his CMD in voice chat and he reports it. (Lets assume the CMD is guilty) That kid isn't going to know who else to talk to to get evidence, he probably wasn't recording, its his word vs. the word of the CMD, and the community may just assume the kid is whining over nothing, call him a cringe baby, dumb his post, and the Kid voids the report and leaves the server. CMD gets off with no punishment

Of course thats a very specific example, but not  one thats completely impossible.

Another example: Apparently theres a staff feedback form (I think there was an old one) but I didn't know that. A gamemaster made an event breaking MULTIPLE Gamemaster rules and then did not post an AAR, which is against the rules. I decided since a gamemaster is staff, and breaking rules falls under staff abuse, I made that post, because I did not know of any GMO/GMMs and was struggling to spot them in the teamspeak.  The community ended up thinking it was a situation to +1 -1 and as mentioned in the previous example, I got called a mad cringe baby essentially. When really this was my way of contacting GMO and GMM

1 minute ago, BigZach said:

So the actual issue you want to address is how people act when reacting? Most of the time it's harmless banter. I don't really think anyone should be worrying about memes, usually they're a nice change of pace from the repeating or incohesive points. 

I agree on a commander application or staff app it is a nice change of pace, however reports aren't really a joke imo

  • Informative 1

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Logicless said:

I agree on a commander application or staff app it is a nice change of pace, however reports aren't really a joke imo

I think a good meme here or there can help those that may be too invested in the situation take a step back.

 

"I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot." - Logic

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, BigZach said:

I think a good meme here or there can help those that may be too invested in the situation take a step back.

No reason for people to get super invested if the only thing is the reactions of +1/-1 and the evidence in support or against the person in question

  • Disagree 1

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment

TEW.gif

But guys!
He doesn't agree with me on the synergy forums. I HAVE TO REPLY

Chill guys it's only the forums

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 4
  • Winner 1

former: cadet,private,private first class, specialist,Sergeant,Staff Sergeant,Sergeant First Class,Master Sergeant,First Sergeant,Sergeant Major,Command Sergeant Major,Warrant Officer, Sergeant Major of the battalion, 2nd Lieutenant,Lieutenant,Captain,Major,Lieutenant Colonel,Colonel,Commander,Executive Officer,Battalion Commander,Regimental Commander,Marshal Commander,501st,212th,DU,21st,CG,RANCOR,104th,SOBDE,Jedi,Naval,41st,Event Job,Gamehelper,Gamemaster,Gamemaster Officer, Gamemaster Manager, Gamemaster Director, New Admin, Admin, Senior Admin, Veteran Admin,Head Admin, Director,Managment, Founder, Retired Founder, forum mod, forum admin,forum dev,Yoda,Mace WIndu

current: Versock

Link to comment

@LogiclessJust so you are aware, if the GM if of he event that you are referencing considered it to be an encounter, an AAR is not required. It could have been a better solution to contact a GMO+ rather than making a staff report, which is likely why you received so much negative feedback on the report that you made.

Edit: My mistake, I got that mixed up with the debrief rule, but encounters are indeed required to have an AAR so my bad on that. 

Edited by Pog

Former:

Jedi Youngling

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, Pog said:

@LogiclessJust so you are aware, if the GM if of he event that you are referencing considered it to be an encounter, an AAR is not required. It could have been a better solution to contact a GMO+ rather than making a staff report, which is likely why you received so much negative feedback on the report that you made.

All Events and encounters are required to have After Action Reports
(Context: I made this rule and @Shockpoint fully supports and enforces it)

0ziRKwH.png


Link to the public rules doc 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tKqrzHTfbp5AhzCbw2EAR4vRQFfRQIyEU8e_jpknCMk/edit?usp=sharing

  • Agree 2
  • Winner 1
  • Informative 1

former: cadet,private,private first class, specialist,Sergeant,Staff Sergeant,Sergeant First Class,Master Sergeant,First Sergeant,Sergeant Major,Command Sergeant Major,Warrant Officer, Sergeant Major of the battalion, 2nd Lieutenant,Lieutenant,Captain,Major,Lieutenant Colonel,Colonel,Commander,Executive Officer,Battalion Commander,Regimental Commander,Marshal Commander,501st,212th,DU,21st,CG,RANCOR,104th,SOBDE,Jedi,Naval,41st,Event Job,Gamehelper,Gamemaster,Gamemaster Officer, Gamemaster Manager, Gamemaster Director, New Admin, Admin, Senior Admin, Veteran Admin,Head Admin, Director,Managment, Founder, Retired Founder, forum mod, forum admin,forum dev,Yoda,Mace WIndu

current: Versock

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Logicless said:

I genuinely don't understand whats so detrimental about not being able to +1/-1 a report if you aren't involved in the decision making or have no evidence to present. Please someone try to explain the actual benefits of putting memes and throwing shade or saying you support or don't support the report?

Why is Marvel being more mature and actually discussing while you guys smol brain this post? (Love you Marvel we just don't normally agree)

Alright. memes aside, the idea is to give the community a voice in whats happening in the community. If every report was decided behind closed doors, with no public interaction, it would be very east for staff to abuse/play favorites, or for the community to think that staff is abusing/playing favorites. At the end of the day, the votes don't do much more than show High Staff what the consensus of the community is. Especially considering the only times it's ever an issue, is when the action being done is a grey area, or the person is a longstanding community member who people like. Other than those rare occurences, the voting is mostly unanimous. 

Whatever the reason is, there's no harm in it, and you making this thread (and defending your point so aggresively) is a little weird, if I'm being honest. 

|Longest Serving Attack Regimental Commander||Thigh High Connoisseur|

j5VeS9D.jpg

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Finn said:

 

Whatever the reason is, there's no harm in it, and you making this thread (and defending your point so aggresively) is a little weird, if I'm being honest. 

Im discussing, only hostility I showed was towards Egg. I am explaining why your points don't make sense to me, I do apologize for any other hostilities

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment

I don’t know if this has been said because I’m not gonna bother reading this entire book of fuckery but no offense logic but if we didn’t do community voting wouldn’t that mean you are still banned?

Certified Giga Chad

 

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Cox said:

I don’t know if this has been said because I’m not gonna bother reading this entire book of fuckery but no offense logic but if we didn’t do community voting wouldn’t that mean you are still banned?

You missed the point entirely. Its purely for reports. 
Staff is dealt with by staff
CMD by high command
Players by staff
I am not saying you can't vote on applications, that process is important to the integrity of the server

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Taz said:

this thread is just @Logicless at this point

:Pepega:

-Never heard that one before
-Gets worse as people make comments that aren't discussing my original question
-I suck at explaining things

I'm not toxic. You're just making it really hard to not treat you like an idiot.

Link to comment

So, just a kind a summary of both sides of the discussion as I understand after reading:

Logic's Proposal: For Reports concerning the breaking of rules or breaches of duty, the only individuals who should comment on said reports are those capable of providing some form of evidence either for or against the punishment of the reported individual, so as to better help the High Command reach an informed decision. This would in term, restrict those from leaving their opinions/memes in the discussion of the reported individual and keeping things focused.

Opposed: As Synergy adopted the saying of "By the players, for the players", everyone should be allowed to have their input on reports, regardless of whether or not they actually provide anything meaningful to the discussion or provide evidence, but instead to just provide a (potentially partially uninformed) community opinion on the matter. In some cases, this may be to determine the severity of the punishment, even though punishments are supposed to be pretty set in stone for most rules and rarely budge (save for extremely special circumstance) if the decision is fully and entirely unbiased.

 

DId I get that right?

  • Winner 2

The guy who got drunk and pretended to be a vacuum for an hour

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, Marvel said:

This post has survived too long.

Good point. Seems this post the more we keep it unlocked the more its gonna turn into a toxic waste dump. Gonna lock this post. The amount of hidden comments and warnings handed out are just enough reason to shut this down.

  • Agree 5
  • Funny 3

Currently trying to not be a forum gremlin

Former Chancellor Palpatine | Former Yoda & Mace Windu | Former Shaak Ti & Anakin | Former Delta Squad Scorch | Former Mas Amedda | Former Director | Former Management

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...