Did you know not performing as you think another player should in a group

[Reynhart]

You can think it is rude until you are blue in the face, but at the end of the day, vote kicks are a democratic process.

It's a democratic process that never requires more than 50% approval from the group. It's deeply flawed.

[missybee]

It's a democratic process that never requires more than 50% approval from the group. It's deeply flawed.

I would venture if half of the people in a given group want someone removed, more often than not, vote dismiss is working as intended™.

Are there going to be instances of vote kick abuse? Of course!

It's far from perfect, but I think half the party is a good enough metric.

[Reynhart]

I would venture if half of the people in a given group want someone removed, more often than not, vote dismiss is working as intended™.

Democracy is not "half", it's "more than half". "2 out of 4" and "4 out of 8" are not the majority.

[Paladinleeds]

Democracy is not "half", it's "more than half". "2 out of 4" and "4 out of 8" are not the majority.

The game rightly doesn't count the person being subject to kick. Thus it is 2/3 (66.6...%) and 4/7 (57.14285714285714%). Think of it like a jury. The defendent (in this case the person being subject to a motion for dismissal), is never part of that jury. There's better examples I'm sure but that is what came off the top of my head.

[Reynhart]

The defendent (in this case the person being subject to a motion for dismissal), is never part of that jury.

Nor is the plaintiff (in this case, the person initiating the kick).

[missybee]

Democracy is not "half", it's "more than half". "2 out of 4" and "4 out of 8" are not the majority.

Since you can't vote for or against your own dismissal it's actually 2/3 or 4/7. Not 50%

That sounds more or less like a majority vote to me?

I kind of don't really see what the big to-do about it is at any rate. If you have a pulse, you hit a few buttons, you occasionally do mechanics, and don't act like a complete anus, you are very unlikely to get kicked. As aforementioned, abuse does happen, but it is the exception rather than the rule.

...and you have to at least entertain the notion that if a given person is getting kicked SUPER often, maybe it isn't abuse?

[AngeloFlick]

It's a democratic process that never requires more than 50% approval from the group. It's deeply flawed.

Since you can't vote for or against your own dismissal it's actually 2/3 or 4/7. Not 50%

[Reynhart]

Since you can't vote for or against your own dismissal it's actually 2/3 or 4/7. Not 50%

Your voice is just an automatic "no". Like the one initiating the kick is an automatic "yes". You can't call it democratic is you prevent one person from "voicing" his/her opinion.

[HyoMinPark]

Your voice is just an automatic "no". Like the one initiating the kick is an automatic "yes". You can't call it democratic is you prevent one person from "voicing" his/her opinion.

Considering parties are either 4 people or 8 people, if you were to be given an option regarding your own dismissal, most people are going to, of course, vote "No! I don't want to be dismissed!" Considering this, your "automatic no" rather than be given an option/"counting vote" is to prevent stalemates--which would ultimately render the vote dismiss feature worthless in a lot of 4-man settings if one other person (aside from yourself) voted no. The person who initiates the kick is going to be voted as a "yes" by any and all logical stand points: they want you dismissed, so it makes sense that their vote is a yes, and it makes sense that it is considered. Thus, the 2/3 and 4/7 votes primarily considered is still "majority rules."

If the devs were to do as you suggest by not counting the vote of the kick initiator and the chosen to be dismissed (going off of your plaintiff/defendant example above), parties would have to consist of an odd number of participants in order to prevent stalemates and ties when doing vote dismisses. And since that seems unlikely, the current system is, more or less, working as intended.

[Reynhart]

Considering this, your "automatic no" rather than be given an option/"counting vote" is to prevent stalemates

If someone is obviously, undoubtedly a jerk or a troll, it won't be that difficult to gather 3/4 or 5/8 "no".
The votekick system is abused precisely because stalemate is that easy to avoid.