Sick of unjust vote dismisses

In my opinion, a majority vote should always win in dungeons. That's how pretty much everything else works in life. Depriving 2 people of the right to have voting power is also just, quite frankly, wrong. Having a race to see who initiates a kick first if 2 people disagree with 2 more people is also really...annoying.

And really, leaving a dungeon and eating the penalty would still be faster and better than making it halfway or more through, getting kicked, and having that time wasted + the knowledge that they will likely complete it without you or have no penalty + the queue wait on top of the time wasted in the dungeon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KaedrianLiang

I've been kicked maybe somewhere under 30 times, so lets say at least 3 players voted against me each time. So that leaves 90 players unsatisified enough/trolly enough to vote kick me for my play style. While atleast 2231 players approve of my play style.

---

If we do a bit of napkin math, we find out that this is roughly a 4% kick rate, and that's only if we assume both that your numbers were accurate and that every single other person you partied with commended you. Neither of these are probably true, but without knowing actual statistics it's fair to say that the kick rate for you is under 4%. My guess would ballpark it at much closer to 1-2%, but even at 4% that's not a bad number. I'd be interested to see how many people have actually been kicked more than 5% of their dungeon runs while they're an angel and don't deserve it, because my guess is I could count all of the people like that in FFXIV on one hand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bauxite

...I'd be interested to see how many people have actually been kicked more than 5% of their dungeon runs while they're an angel and don't deserve it, because my guess is I could count all of the people like that in FFXIV on one hand.

---

That bar is set unreasonably high. People should only need to be themselves and not angels. And 1st-timers thru prae do not deserve to be vote kicked, nor do under geared players, or people who do not speed run. Those all should fall under vote kick abuse.

From what the OP posted, it would seem that he wanted to force a speed run and the other players objected to his attitude and his ways and vote kicked him properly.

Counting the accused as an auto no means the dungeon must be unanimous in a 4 man. 3 vote yes, 1 (you) vote no, otherwise it's a 2 v 2. They need a tie breaker and that doesn't happen in even man parties like we have. So by removing the accused it's a 3 or 7 man panel which is fine imo. If 4/7 don't want you there, majority rules and you're out. If 2/3 don't want, majority rules. It 'feels' unfair because it's 'only 2 people', but it's 2/3rd of the affected people. The crappy part is 2 buddies can cue up and manhandled people, but 3 people can still do the same under the new system. When it's 4 randoms, the system is fine. People vote what they think. It's pre made that can abuse, but we can't stop that unless we create yet another piece of red tape. Another rule, and whatever that rule is will still be abusable because every system is.

I don't like the auto no vote unless we had odd number parties because then it's just deadlock which defeats the purpose, and writing a 500 word essay everytime you need to kick someone isn't a practical solution, nor is the extra manpower to review all this more elaborate reporting.

Sure, in a perfect world every kick would be instantaneously reviewed and dealt with, but that's so prohibitively expensive it's not practical. As another poster said, it's the 'least evil' of a great many worse options. We can't fix the system by layering more systems, we cant fix it by adding stronger punishments as that just gives more power to abusers of said system, and we can't fix it with absurd levels of expensive manpower.

IMO, it should be a deadlock before being a case of disenfranchisement. 3 people voting = higher chance the person being voted against needs to go. As it stands now, you can be booted without a majority, and that's wrong. If you have 1st person vote yes, 2nd person vote yes, 3rd person (person being voted against) made an automatic no, then it lets that 4th person decide if the person being voted against needs to go. Increased chances of fairness.

Also, it doesn't have to be a "500 word essay". That's quite an exaggeration. The reasons they have listed now are single words. And how would SE, say, increasing account ban length for abusing vote kick "give the abusers more power"?

And when a paying customer is kicked wrongly after contributing to the duty, they've lost X minutes of their sub time as well as taken abuse. I don't see why this isn't worth spending resources to correct. If they don't want to, they should just stop claiming that kicking people wrongly is such a serious offense.

I say they should back up that claim, or stop claiming it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NyarukoW

That bar is set unreasonably high. People should only need to be themselves and not angels. And 1st-timers thru prae do not deserve to be vote kicked, nor do under geared players, or people who do not speed run. Those all should fall under vote kick abuse.

From what the OP posted, it would seem that he wanted to force a speed run and the other players objected to his attitude and his ways and vote kicked him properly.

---

You're right that people shouldn't have to be angels, I just see a lot of "I was kicked for absolutely no reason what the hell!!!!!" posts where a little digging shows that, no, they really were being a dick to other people. The bar is really "not being a dick" rather than being an angel, and the number of people who get constantly kicked from groups for not being a dick is low enough I could probably count it on one hand. For the purposes of this, we'll say "constantly" is more than 4% of their groups.

But 2 is a majority. You don't get to have a place on the jury at your own trial. There are 3 people that have decide if you are harrassing, afk, whatever because they are the affected party. I don't want some troll in my run wiping us every 30 sec to get a vote to stay. 3/3 is unanimous.

The giving more power was more a reference to when vote kick threads pop up in the past and someone suggests people vote kicked a ton (trolls) should eat a penalty (some have suggested full day bans etc) is just another abusable tool.

As for SE banning vote kick abuse harder, I don't even know what the punishment is right now tbh. Of course it's worth spending resources to correct, which they currently do. But how MUCH. A players 30 min lost isn't very much monetarily. 15 a month, 30 days, let's say 2 hrs a day. 60 hrs/15 bucks 25 cents an hr. Half an hour. How much attention does 12 cents buy you? Not much. If you play a lot it's even less. A couple cents doesn't earn you the best gm lawyers at your beck and call. It's just not realistic. The 509 essay was an exaggeration, but the costs of creating a more complex system to report and hiring people to address those reports is not. And in the end, all this effort would only be helpful to a statistically small problem that is rooted in player interaction which is the hardest, most complex type of mmo problem to fix. You can't fix people.

You guys realize this is a troll topic right? Ths OP made this to mock all other legitimate threads about kick abuse this is someone very commonly done in other forrum websites especially gamefaqs.

and ppl trying to defend him claiming to force pull that is a just kick and a form of abuse you shouldn't threaten your tank and act like an asshole an expect to not get kicked

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Izsha

But 2 is a majority. You don't get to have a place on the jury at your own trial. There are 3 people that have decide if you are harrassing, afk, whatever because they are the affected party. I don't want some troll in my run wiping us every 30 sec to get a vote to stay. 3/3 is unanimous.

The giving more power was more a reference to when vote kick threads pop up in the past and someone suggests people vote kicked a ton (trolls) should eat a penalty (some have suggested full day bans etc) is just another abusable tool.

As for SE banning vote kick abuse harder, I don't even know what the punishment is right now tbh. Of course it's worth spending resources to correct, which they currently do. But how MUCH. A players 30 min lost isn't very much monetarily. 15 a month, 30 days, let's say 2 hrs a day. 60 hrs/15 bucks 25 cents an hr. Half an hour. How much attention does 12 cents buy you? Not much. If you play a lot it's even less. A couple cents doesn't earn you the best gm lawyers at your beck and call. It's just not realistic. The 509 essay was an exaggeration, but the costs of creating a more complex system to report and hiring people to address those reports is not. And in the end, all this effort would only be helpful to a statistically small problem that is rooted in player interaction which is the hardest, most complex type of mmo problem to fix. You can't fix people.

---

That's the thing though! Since the person being kicked has no vote, one other person's vote will be nullified as well. Whether the person votes Yes or No, the same result will happen if 2 others vote Yes: the person will be kicked. In example, that DD I mentioned. The 2 dps wanted the healer gone. The healer could not vote, and I voted no. Because the healer could not vote, it was my lone vote vs. the 2 dps. So, 2 people got what they wanted, and 2 didn't. The healer and I were both disenfranchised because of this system. That is not a majority. The way vote kick is now, it's a race to see who starts the kick first if this situation happens. It's even more problematic that the entire reason the 2 did it was to be able to get a majority to vote abandon, since neither me or the healer would vote Yes on that. They abused a feature in order to abuse another feature.

The same thing happened in Halatali. 2 people wanted me gone, and me and the other person wanted them gone. They started the kick first, so I was gone. Because I had no right to vote, and the other person could not save me with their No vote. And because they hit the button first. I imagine the other person was removed after me too. I politely tanked the whole dungeon for them and got nothing, they abusively kicked me and got everything. It was a waste of my time, and while not costing me much numbers-wise, it was a very bad experience that was still a waste of my time.

Not to mention, this isn't a trial. Trials are supposed to have an impartial jury and/or judge.

As for the giving more power thing, I think we were thinking about two different things. I was speaking about what SE does to their account, not a lockout timer or anything like that. Apologies if I wasn't very clear with what I meant there.

I don't believe much is done to people, as people clearly don't fear abusing the feature. The GM responses someone mentioned earlier don't click with the warning in the kick window and the claimed severity of punishments possible for people who abuse it. The GM responses were pretty much "We can't do anything to them most of them time". One even said that a kick against a player just because you don't like their playstyle is allowed.

And I'm aware it's not much money, but it's still our money, going to SE. The ability of players to waste your time at all using a feature intended to have the opposite effect shows there's a problem with said feature. I also don't see how reading a kick reason, comparing it to an abuse report, and reading chat logs is a lot more work than what they already do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MageBlack

I saw someone vote kick another player in WoD because they were another BLM. The BLM that initiated clearly said it was because he didnt want someone to take his loot if it dropped. Is that abuse?

---

That is Jerk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adire

That's the thing though! Since the person being kicked has no vote, one other person's vote will be nullified as well. Whether the person votes Yes or No, the same result will happen if 2 others vote Yes: the person will be kicked. In example, that DD I mentioned. The 2 dps wanted the healer gone. The healer could not vote, and I voted no. Because the healer could not vote, it was my lone vote vs. the 2 dps. So, 2 people got what they wanted, and 2 didn't. The healer and I were both disenfranchised because of this system. That is not a majority.

---

Only on the official FFXIV forums can someone try to say that 2 of 3 is not a majority ; you heard it first here folks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adire

In example, that DD I mentioned. The 2 dps wanted the healer gone. The healer could not vote, and I voted no. Because the healer could not vote, it was my lone vote vs. the 2 dps. So, 2 people got what they wanted, and 2 didn't. The healer and I were both disenfranchised because of this system. That is not a majority.

---

You shouldn't count the healer in the formula because the healer is the subject of the poll. There is a conflict of interest, and that is why the poll only goes among the other three participants. And when there is three participants, the victory always goes to 2 vs 1.

It's like you're with two friends and you're trying to decide whether to eat pork or not. Do you think the pork should vote too? Of course not, it's obvious the pork would vote No. Therefore, the pork is not included in the poll. Polls always have to go through an odd number of participants, or there will be instances of draws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starrywisdom

Only on the official FFXIV forums can someone try to say that 2 of 3 is not a majority ; you heard it first here folks.

---

/facepalm

Way to not read the context at all. Let me show you some simple math:

There are 4 people in a 4 man group. 2 people want to kick someone, and 2 people don't want that someone to be kicked, 1 being the person being kicked. Since the kicked person does not get a say, that leaves 3 people to vote, 4 people total are in the dungeon, but only 3 get voting power. 2 people don't want a kick to happen, 2 people do, but because one can't vote, it means the 2 who are on the pro-kick side will win, even though 2 are against it. 2 winning against 2 is not a majority. Math, people!

I'm arguing that the person being kicked's rights should matter people....that they should be counted as a vote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluevann

You shouldn't count the healer in the formula because the healer is the subject of the poll. There is a conflict of interest, and that is why the poll only goes among the other three participants. And when there is three participants, the victory always goes to 2 vs 1.

It's like you're with two friends and you're trying to decide whether to eat pork or not. Do you think the pork should vote too? Of course not, it's obvious the pork would vote No. Therefore, the pork is not included in the poll. Polls always have to go through an odd number of participants, or there will be instances of draws.

---

I don't think comparing human beings to pork is a good analogy. I also don't see why draws are necessarily a bad thing. They are preferable IMO to someone getting their rights completely stomped on. If we're all equal that is....

In Team Fortress 2, the person being voted against is automatically counted as a no. What's the conceptual difference? Every person involved in a disagreement deserves a voice. We are not objects.

Never played team fortress, but mostly likely it doesn't only have 4 players involved.

People are complaining right now people bringing a friend so they can vote kick.

Well if it takes unanimous 3 votes to vote kick someone, you just need to bring a friend to troll the heck out of people without the risk of getting vote kicked.

And IMO, for a complete random DF where everyone is random - if half of the party wants you gone (as in 2/3 vote like now) you should probably gtfo.

I agree that you dont get to be the jury at your own trial

No, it doesn't. Conceptually however, them giving the person being kicked a say in the matter is morally correct though. Denying someone the right to have a voice at all and therefore making another person's voice moot is not, and something should be changed if this is how it is designed to be.

Also, I strongly disagree. If you've contributed to the dungeon, have done nothing wrong, and you're being griefed, you have every right to stay for your rewards, as you've put in work towards them. You should stand up for your rights.

Also, this "trial". Who gets put on trial for this situation is a matter of who clicks the button first, not who is a reasonable suspect for a crime. It's like giving a button to a criminal and a victim and saying "whoever pushes this last gets put on trial. by the way, the jury is one other criminal and one other random person"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adire

have done nothing wrong

---

Vote kick doesn't happen out of the blue most of the time.
If complete strangers decide to vote kick you and it passed, most likely it is something you done (or didn't do when you are suppose to) - you just didn't notice it.
Yes there are abuses when people bring a friend. But as I see it, as someone that solo queues, it is rare.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adire

Also, this "trial". Who gets put on trial for this situation is a matter of who clicks the button first, not who is a reasonable suspect for a crime. It's like giving a button to a criminal and a victim and saying "whoever pushes this first gets put on trial. by the way, the jury is one other criminal and one other random person"

---

In this case, jury is the 'criminal' and 'TWO' random person, and the so called criminal would need to get the approval of at least one other.
I have seen this before, and vote kicked didn't pass and the person that initiated the first vote kick got vote kicked afterwards.
Please don't think of people as dumb sheeps - I can't speak for all, but most of us probably can see which person is causing trouble in the duty.

Anyways I don't think we are going to be able to convince each other, so there no point of me posting anymore - but keep in mind this current voting system is what SE have decided and with the support of a rather large player base also.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

To be fair, I think pretty much every time someone in an LS/my FC hits 50 and tries to watch CSs in the story dungeons, they get kicked. To me, that's far uglier than an oddball kick here and there that most people seem to argue against.

For the most part I do agree with you, though.

---

So why aint the LS taking em through CM and Prae like any good LSs would?

Good question. I thought Balmung was supposed to be one of the more newbie friendly servers!

Going back to the OP, if I was the tank in that situation, not only would I have voted in favor of kicking the OP, I would have initiated the vote to do so. Quit abusing tanks and forcing them to pull faster than they're comfortable with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adire

Mind posting your source? I really hope this is not correct. Where are their standards for determining if something is vote kick abuse or not if these reasons are valued so lowly? Any reason other than these, with the exception of maybe a player's skill holding the others back from completing an instance, is getting dangerously close to immoral kicking imo. If they don't have standards, then that's pretty disorganized and seems like it would often cause no punishment to be done.

Players should at least be forced to fill out a form to show their reasoning for their kick if the other reasons are not the reason for the kick. Documentation is important, and such a thing would help determine if the kickers are lying or force them to post their reason, whether it's good or not being left up to the GM to decide.

---

send in an abuse of kick and you will get the same answer as those that send a kick abuse in received, there you will have your proof without having another to post it .. if you check other topics you will see the answer from the GMs about this...clearly posted.

Mei

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adire

/facepalm

Way to not read the context at all. Let me show you some simple math:

There are 4 people in a 4 man group. 2 people want to kick someone, and 2 people don't want that someone to be kicked, 1 being the person being kicked. Since the kicked person does not get a say, that leaves 3 people to vote, 4 people total are in the dungeon, but only 3 get voting power. 2 people don't want a kick to happen, 2 people do, but because one can't vote, it means the 2 who are on the pro-kick side will win, even though 2 are against it. 2 winning against 2 is not a majority. Math, people!

---

Except in your terrible situation and argument you aren't looking for a majority to kick you - you are looking for a unanimous decision. Thus why it's counted out 2/3 and not 3/3. Please stop spreading your ignorance.

Didn't read the rest posts bc cba but yesterday had a real unjust votekick for my friend in WoD...
At Cerberus suddenly the kick poped I went "srsly!?" in chat a bard also stepped up and after asking around turned out the sch initiated it (he was there with FC friends.... and justified the kick with "others agreed") just because the stupid possibility to get locked out from Atomos fight by stepping on the jump in/out platform in the first 15s (my friend dodged the devour attack and accidentally stepped on it... got locked out).
Had a nice discussion with the one that kicked... he felt he was right.... well the bard openly stepped up he got my commi and vice versa. I still dont get the argumentation "because he didnt follow"... friend locked out at 1 trsh fight and was there at cerby right after doen't justify a kick at all...
Won't go further bc that pissed me off - just a lil >.<

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adire

I don't think comparing human beings to pork is a good analogy.

---

Considering that I was making an example in which the subject was to be EATEN, to use a person instead of a pork would have made it a much worse analogy. <_<

(EDIT: If in the end it really offends you, pretend I said "broccoli". Magical talking broccoli.)

I really don't like doing hard mode or expert anymore everyone is impatient and bitchy. The other day we obviously had a noob dragoon with low level gear that couldn't keep DPS going very well. Tank started cussing the DPS out and calling us morons at each tiny mistake.

I decided to roll a tank to 50 to help avoid these situations.

Was kicked in one WOD run in early 2.5 no idea why was tanking the first boss we all wiped but we all know that that is the hardest boss in the raid.

I think it was mainly because one person was from the same server and had a problem with me won't go into details or name names but it's stupid to get kicked on one wipe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dererk

Was kicked in one WOD run in early 2.5 no idea why was tanking the first boss we all wiped but we all know that that is the hardest boss in the raid.

I think it was mainly because one person was from the same server and had a problem with me won't go into details or name names but it's stupid to get kicked on one wipe.

---

If you were MT, unless you spun the boss in circles or stood in flare AoE's you didn't cause the wipe anyway.

Sounds like someone just didn't like you. :|

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sapphic

So why aint the LS taking em through CM and Prae like any good LSs would?

---

That is exactly what happens. I guess they're just eager to finish the story so they don't want to wait for people to get online at first. But when they get kicked for watching cutscenes that usually convinces them to wait for an LS/FC run. Or if they don't care about the story, they just skip all the cutscenes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starrywisdom

Except in your terrible situation and argument you aren't looking for a majority to kick you - you are looking for a unanimous decision. Thus why it's counted out 2/3 and not 3/3. Please stop spreading your ignorance.

---

I'm saying I would not have been kicked wrongly, nor would the healer have been kicked wrongly, if we had voices, as we deserve to have as human beings. Please stop spreading YOUR ignorance. Thanks. 2 vs 2 is still not a majority nor is it unanimous, pretend that one person doesn't deserve a voice and a vote if you like, but in the end it's still 2 people and their interests outvoting 2 other people and their interests in this situation, one is just deprived completely of voting rights, and one's vote is made pointless as a result.

Assuming everyone's wishes are counted as a vote, which is what I'm saying should be done and is not what is currently done, a 3/4 vote would be required for a kick to succeed, which is a majority. As it is now, since the person being kicked does not get a vote, 2/4 people can win against the wishes of 2/4 people. I seek to make it require a majority, not a unanimous decision.

Cutely wording it to make it look like I'm unaware one person is not getting a vote and making it appear that I don't believe 2/3 is a majority number to try to falsely make me look foolish, when the entire context of my arguments is based on the knowledge of that fact and disapproval of it, is quite insulting, and it's sad that your comment continues to get upvotes by people who apparently cannot or do not wish to try to understand my argument. Kudos to you on entertaining the peanut gallery though, but that is spreading ignorance at its finest.

Also, I'm quite amused and yet appalled at how many people seem to be forgetting there are 4 people in a dungeon. 4 people, not 3 people and 1 object. Certainly hope this isn't the attitude overwhelmingly found in game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluevann

Considering that I was making an example in which the subject was to be EATEN, to use a person instead of a pork would have made it a much worse analogy. <_<

(EDIT: If in the end it really offends you, pretend I said "broccoli". Magical talking broccoli.)

---

Sorry, I won't be comparing humans who deserve rights to inanimate objects that do not.

http://a404.idata.over-blog.com/3/10..._the_troll.jpg

I'll just leave this here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atlaworks

You're harassing people who disagree with you with terms like "are you even reading".

---

Funny guy, you certainly weren't reading on my thread xD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Talia_Hailwind

Funny guy, you certainly weren't reading on my thread xD

---

There's a lot of lack of reading that goes on here. I've gotten much more used to it since this thread, for better or worse :/.

That guy is a nice example of someone who doesn't bother to read.

You necro'd a three month old thread just to insult me. This seems more than unnecessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atlaworks

You necro'd a three month old thread just to insult me. This seems more than unnecessary.

---

Witty comeback loading....
ETA 3 months.
Don't hold your breath.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Talia_Hailwind

Funny guy, you certainly weren't reading on my thread xD

---

/facepalm

Whatever makes you happy I guess.

The only constant in those dungeons is you...

I was votekicked once in an expert dungeon. Not a word was said in the entire dungeon, no one had died, tank held aggro and dps pewpewd and I healed/holy. Then in front of 2nd boss "You have been dismissed from the duty"
Was really pissed cause I didn't have much time to play that day and wanted to finish my roulette before reset, but because of that votekick I couldn't

What they need to change is that all 3 players must vote yes.
Currently if you votekick say the tank, if I vote yes, and my friend vote yes, and the other player votes no, the tank will get kicked.

That sucks. But you should have made the topic "Devs vote kick abuse must be punished."

As far As the responses. They are cute. Especially the I've never been vote kick ones meaning OP did something wrong...that's silly. I've never been cursed at, have you? Oh you did something wrong. Like my friend says "uwotm8"

As far as what the whole story was, it doesn't matter. Everyone lies. But I'm sure This is someone's story. And that's enough.

RISE FROM THE GRAVE, OH OLD THREAD

THOU SHALL NEVER BE FORGOTTEN

MUHAHAHAHAAAAAAA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kiara1

snip

---

That was the point I was arguing in this thread. Disenfranchisement is wrong. The system being designed to lean towards Yes votes is wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adire

You'd be surprised how abusive people can be in DF, especially when they're in the same FC. I've been trolled AND vote kicked before. I've been kicked for no reason right before boss fights before. In 4 man dungeons, all it takes is for 2 people to vote yes, and you're gone. I'm aware that I seem to have unnaturally bad luck with this, but it still happens, believe me. Considering DF puts you in groups with people you're likely to never see again, I think it makes some people feel justified in treating others like they're less than human.

---

But it's such a rare occurrence really. This game typically has a great community. People like yourself just want to focus on the rare negatives, really.