Abuse/Vote-kick in CM

[Zedd702]

So thinking someone is taking things too far by accusing someone else of being a criminal in real life is a bad thing? He could have said it about anyone and I'd have said the same thing. I don't even know Ellatrix and the poster HIMSELF admitted what he said went to far. Get the stick out of your butt.

Once again this is something both you and Ellatrix have a hard time with. So I say it to you: lern2reed.

I said that I was not vouching for what Chamaleon said, but I'm sayin that she provoked her (I am referring to characters, not the person behind the avatar. If you play a female character you are a female to me on this forum). And I was referring to you always showing up in instances such as that, which usually does involve her. Perhaps it's just right place wrong time for you, but you do show up like superman to a burning building when threads hit that mark.

I give them the chance to switch to regular gear. If they don't, I leave. New players I can understand wearing the best gear they have which isn't great. But to intentionally lower your gear just so you can turn a profit at other peoples expense doesn't sit well with me. This thread is full of opinions and people trying to argue opinions. While a GM may have told Zedd one thing, I've seen other GMs say other things, more akin to the thread that was previously linked. It's a group decision on whether or not that individual's playstyle merits being kicked from the group. Deciding to wear gear that is below what you actually have is part of one's playstyle. They stated multiple times (including in that thread) that they will usually go with what the majority of the group wanted.

As for whether something is right or wrong, that's all opinion and conjuncture. So to avoid the drama, I give the them the option of switching to their real gear. If declined, I simply remove myself from the duty without saying another word. Not a big deal, I can do other stuff in game while I wait for the 30 minute timer to wear.

Also I'd like to address this as you make somewhat of a valid point. This is where the line gets thin, such as my situation, the group I was in was a premade group that went Duty finder. It'd be one thing to be 4 random people agree on a vote, which does happen, but I've seen it be halted as well due to lack of votes, as well as seeing it backfire on the person initiating the vote. It's another thing where the group is premade with intent to allow a random join them, do all the work to the final boss to remove them so that you have a higher chance in getting the loot you wanted and THEN blame it on my ilvl 90 boots. This is when GM investigations come in at.

[Noahlimits]

Once again this is something both you and Ellatrix have a hard time with. So I say it to you: lern2reed.

I said that I was not vouching for what Chamaleon said, but I'm sayin that she provoked her (I am referring to characters, not the person behind the avatar.

I never said he didn't provoke her. I'm saying that it didn't warrant a personal attack. That's like someone shooting you because you shoved them while walking past them.

As far as kicking someone at the end of a dungeon because you're in a pre made and want more loot, that's not at all the same as the scenario I was talking about. Obviously that's harassment, but if the players don't admit to that being the reason in chat, it's a he said-she said situation where nothing will likely happen. Doesn't make it right, but it's the reality of what will happen since it's hard to prove intent.

[Zedd702]

I never said he didn't provoke her. I'm saying that it didn't warrant a personal attack. That's like someone shooting you because you shoved them while walking past them.

And I agree with what you're saying. I was clarifying...

As far as kicking someone at the end of a dungeon because you're in a pre made and want more loot, that's not at all the same as the scenario I was talking about. Obviously that's harassment, but if the players don't admit to that being the reason in chat, it's a he said-she said situation where nothing will likely happen. Doesn't make it right, but it's the reality of what will happen since it's hard to prove intent.

Actually, in my previous post as I stated, the GM said it most certainly was not harassment, but it is grieving. They opened a ticket to investigate the matter. Although, GM's do not advise the reportee of the status of the outcome (I believe this is primarily due to bragging or boast rights with "hahaha you got banned blah blah) grieving is indeed punishable by temporary ban. I have a couple of friends who talked as high and mighty as Ellatrix, but have been verified of such actions and both received temporary bans and they knew they were well deserved. I even lol'd at them (because that's what friends do, laugh and live) and they moved on about it.

EDIT: Oops I forgot to add they received warnings prior to them being banned.

[Noahlimits]

And I agree with what you're saying. I was clarifying...

The only problem with 'grieving' is that it's so vague as what can be constituted as what people are grieved by. People could say they are grieved by just about any action in game. :\

[ChameleonMS]

The only problem with 'grieving' is that it's so vague as what can be constituted as what people are grieved by. People could say they are grieved by just about any action in game. :\

I agree with 100% about the vague state of this issue. The overall problem is that no set rules for conduct have been handed from on high by the GMs. They take everything on a "case by case" basis.
Here we are arguing the varying points of view, when a GM could settle the entire argument with the following:

If a player meets the level/class requirements for a dungeon and that player's playing actions are appropriate for the dungeon in question, then vote to kick would be an abuse.
Or, the GM could state,
If vote to dismiss was presented to the party and accepted, that is judgement of the group at hand and should be accepted as correct. The dismissed player has no grievance.

But, we continue to receive crickets from the GMs. Thus, everyone is left in this limbo of grievance.

[Zedd702]

The only problem with 'grieving' is that it's so vague as what can be constituted as what people are grieved by. People could say they are grieved by just about any action in game. :\

Same can be said about the category "Harassment" and to some extent "Cheating" as well...

"AFK" and "Offline" are the only ones that are really concrete tbqf.

The most common thing I see is those that cannot tolerate one wipe, they immediately go offline (this is their way of trying to avoid taking the penalty with having the team remove them, instead of them leaving) to me I would define this one as cheating rather than offline.