Anonymous kicking in LSes: Please fix this.

[Zagen]

I was a victim along with others in my past Linkshells where a /annon would kick random players out for harassment to end a LS that my leaders created, The leader was trying to figure out who was doing the kickings and it was retarded.

Also, Reason why I am saying this is because I was also accused in the past before on other Shells for kicking random people that I never have.

So yes,
I was a victim on some shells.
I was accused in some shells.

Did LS leader know?
Hell NO!

Guess what the solution has been in game since launch, Shell holder can't figure out who is kicking people then he/she removes all sacks. Problem solved...

Don't start a shell and give people sacks if you can't trust them, don't join a shell if you can't trust the members in power is this hard to understand?

[Greatguardian]

"Don't pass out pearl sacks left and right. The less there are, the less will have the privilege to kick. Don't ask SE to waste time with redundant stuff because people are butt hurt about getting sacked from a sack. "
This is interesting, all my ls have sacks so they can all put messages in the heading like what nm they want to kill and a date of when they want to. You either trust the people in your shell or you dont. If you dont trust them, then why are they in your shell in the first place.

There are very specific text commands that allow the Shellholder to determine who can set a lsmes, be it Sacks/Shell, Shellholder only, or Everyone. Having a sack is purely a tool for adding and removing people.

I'm not trying to put you on the spot, but the number of people who try to make adjustments to the game without knowing what options are currently in the game are staggering. I'm willing to bet very few others here knew about that text option either, and it's been around since the beginning of the game.

[Khiinroye]

The most that needs to be done on this is for the shellholder to be notified when someone is removed, and by whom. Maybe an option in the LS menu to review the history of removals for when they happen with the ls leaders logged off (keep the history for 1 week or 20 events or some such). The ability to promote / demote sacks while they are not logged on is probably too messy to try to fix.

Remember, this was originally a JP game, and thus the system was designed to prevent embarrassment by publicly showcasing that someone was removed from the shell. The anonymity allows people to say things like "oh, I decided to leave the shell for such-and-such reason" rather than admit to others that they were kicked. Making the information public could lead to further harassment in those cases. Too many people in different cultures instead take this opportunity to say "SUM ***** KIKKED ME OUT LS FOR NO RAISON!!! SAY 2 FACE N NOT ONLINE N C WUT HAPEN *****!!! U ALL SUK!!11!!"

If you think you were kicked as harassment, don't ask the sacks why you were kicked; ask the ls leader when they are online. If it was harassment and not intended by the ls, s/he can demote or kick people abusing their sack, repearl unintended kickees, and GM those who log in and out of the ls with a sack to abuse it. If your "asking why you were kicked" looks like the line in the previous paragraph, you probably deserved your kick.

The only time I've had my pearl broken was when I made a pearl with my sack, equipped the pearl, went on ls, and said something like "hey, look, I made myself an extra pearl, please don't break it!" (i.e. asking to be joke kicked). LS leader was the first to kick me, which unexpectedly broke my unequipped sack as well, so I tracked him down, got repearled/sacked, and lulz were had.

[Raxiaz]

Every time I defend against what some people are saying, they just repeat themselves. The same "solutions" have been stated over, and over, and over. Without any modification whatsoever!

Hypothetical situation. Let's say you were in a linkshell with people you liked. You enjoyed going to their events, and you loved talking with those people because they helped make the game more fun for you. One day, some unknown entity begins removing members unexpectedly. Several people were kicked, others were spared. After a half hour of /tells and reorganization to distribute pearls, the matter has been brought up among the linkshell leader and sackholders. All sackholders claim innocence, and the LS leader is genuinely clueless of the matter. The kicking continues in spurts, over the course of a few hours, even -after- the LS leader has unsacked everyone. Due to lag on the system, whoever is getting on the LS just to kick people is also getting off, too fast for the leader to even see who it is! After a wasted afternoon of being irritated beyond belief, the leader orders a new shell and has pearls redistributed. Some leave the LS, others stay with it. The LS is never the same.

How is this okay? How is this acceptable? How is it that the perpetrator can get away with this so easily if he wanted to? I can't accept any argument against this suggestion due to this simple hypothetical situation and my own past experiences. Like I said, this is not a rampant problem. But it is something that SE needs to address - some way, some how, some time. I'd much rather they work on more important things first, but you would be ignorant to state this situation isn't a problem and that no fix needs to be implemented in any form.

[Zagen]

Every time I defend against what some people are saying, they just repeat themselves. The same "solutions" have been stated over, and over, and over. Without any modification whatsoever!

Hypothetical situation. Let's say you were in a linkshell with people you liked. You enjoyed going to their events, and you loved talking with those people because they helped make the game more fun for you. One day, some unknown entity begins removing members unexpectedly. Several people were kicked, others were spared. After a half hour of /tells and reorganization to distribute pearls, the matter has been brought up among the linkshell leader and sackholders. All sackholders claim innocence, and the LS leader is genuinely clueless of the matter. The kicking continues in spurts, over the course of a few hours, even -after- the LS leader has unsacked everyone. Due to lag on the system, whoever is getting on the LS just to kick people is also getting off, too fast for the leader to even see who it is! After a wasted afternoon of being irritated beyond belief, the leader orders a new shell and has pearls redistributed. Some leave the LS, others stay with it. The LS is never the same.

How is this okay? How is this acceptable? How is it that the perpetrator can get away with this so easily if he wanted to? I can't accept any argument against this suggestion due to this simple hypothetical situation and my own past experiences. Like I said, this is not a rampant problem. But it is something that SE needs to address - some way, some how, some time. I'd much rather they work on more important things first, but you would be ignorant to state this situation isn't a problem.

Disregarding your scenario might have happened once or twice to a few people and not a large enough amount of people for this to have been drama worthy for all the years I've enjoyed drama threads on various forums I'll say it again:

Don't start a shell and give people sacks if you can't trust them

Nothing in game needs to be changed to "fix" your scenario.

The same solutions come up because for the majority of people they work and have worked since the game was launched.

[Raxiaz]

So what do you do if you think you can trust them and then they turn out to be assholes? Your "solution" does nothing in that case and let me tell you, a lot of people on FFXI are deceitful little bastards. Maybe not to you, but others, perhaps.

Really, the "human idiocy" does go both ways here.

[Kimble]

Well honestly, if you desacked everyone but the one who keeps logging out fast enough to not get desacked, you kinda know who it is.

[Zagen]

LOL I've never had this issue personally I guess I just choose who I trust very wisely and learn from the trust I've mistakenly placed in other people.

Though I doubt it should be the development team's responsibility to prevent a LS leader from making poor decisions or not learning from poor decisions in the past.

[Raxiaz]

They don't show up in the list if they don't stay on for more than 5 seconds. And it doesn't take but 3-4 seconds to kick one person. And it's not logging out, it's putting it on then changing it. Loading delays not only on the linkshell holder's side but on the server's side and even the perpetrator's side lead to the holder's naivety of the person's name.

[Kimble]

Either way, at that point, you know who it is doing it and if he isnt staying on log enough to desack him, what can you do?