Quote Originally Posted by Doozer View Post
Relying purely on anecdotal evidence is weak at best. They will never implement anything like that anyway. And "one vote as a collective" means you're taking away votes from the individuals, period. Who would choose what to vote? The party leader? What if someone doesn't agree? What if it's an 8-man party, 7 were a premade, and only 3 actually want to kick the person, but one of those three is the one that gets to 'choose'? Do you expect there to be some kind of internal vote? If not, that's not a vote at all.

Just because people can abuse the vote kick system, that doesn't mean the system should be changed. A vote is a vote. If people agree, the reason for them agreeing doesn't make their vote any less valid.

Oh, and... reporting couples because they kicked you? Yikes. Seems like a knee jerk response, honestly.
My experience is clearly shared, and not just by the OP either. So it's not anecdotal. Secondly, it wouldn't change much. It'd be an internal vote for the premade block, using the same rules as voting now. If no majority is reached, the vote doesn't pass. There's nothing wrong with making couples beholden to the other people in the party, rather than being able to lord over them. It is a common occurrence.

As for an 8 man experience, couples or duos generally have no sway there. It could easily be kept within light party/4-man duty functions only, since it's obvious certain functions can be programmed to be accessible by number of party members or duty requirements anyway.

It is the proper response to harassment and abuse. When the system can be abused so easily and so often it should be changed. It's not really a vote if it doesn't involve all members of the party. Obviously, they could also start including the kick-ee's voice in the vote, thus requiring a 3/4ths majority, rather than a 2/3rds. The way the vote kick system is setup now gives too much power to couples within 4 person duties, is easily abused, and gives no vote to the person being kicked.