Should vote-to-dimiss remain anonymous?

[StarHate]

I've reported for vote kick abuse one time, was contacted by a GM and the first thing he asked was if I knew who initiated the vote, so if the GMs aren't even going to take the time to check the logs, then yes it should show the person that initiated it, and the how the people voted.

The GMs can see it. They are asking you if you knew who it was to see if it was obvious or not. I am willing to bet 99% of people who report a ticket for "vote kick abuse" are really just sore that they got kicked. If the vote kick passed, it is EXTREMELY unlikely it was abuse - unless you are saying that the majority of the group was in some giant conspiracy against you. You are kind of proving the point as to why people think it should stay anonymous. If it passed, there is a very small chance it was abuse of the system; however, you want a name gosh darnit so you know who to report!!!!

[Niamh_Rillemaugh]

You also can't send /tell cross-server, which is the problem the person I was quoting was bringing up.

I wasn't talking about tells. I was talking about any type of communication that is possible during an instance. It doesn't matter if the harassment is isolated to the instance. It's still harassment.

[Vetaro]

The GMs can see it. They are asking you if you knew who it was to see if it was obvious or not. I am willing to bet 99% of people who report a ticket for "vote kick abuse" are really just sore that they got kicked. If the vote kick passed, it is EXTREMELY unlikely it was abuse - unless you are saying that the majority of the group was in some giant conspiracy against you. You are kind of proving the point as to why people think it should stay anonymous. If it passed, there is a very small chance it was abuse of the system; however, you want a name gosh darnit so you know who to report!!!!

That certainly is not always true and that was proven to me in a run. Like i said our healer got kicked for CHEATING and the only thing he did was that he died when the tank failed to protect him. That was 100% an abuse of the system for a really stupid reason. Also the majority of a party doesn't always mean muchs unless it is maybe a full party.

[StarHate]

That certainly is not always true and that was proven to me in a run. Like i said our healer got kicked for CHEATING and the only thing he did was that he died when the tank failed to protect him. That was 100% an abuse of the system for a really stupid reason. Also the majority of a party doesn't always mean muchs unless it is maybe a full party.

Of course it isn't always true. If there was a 100% perfect system then this thread wouldn't even exist. What you have to ask yourself is how reasonably frequent it is. Are you honestly telling me you believe that the MAJORITY of the time, when someone gets vote kicked, it is because the group is just secretly against them and abusing the system? Of course not, because that is ridiculous. You don't build systems based on the outliers.

[ckb]

No, it should remain anonymous, both the identity of the initiator and the votes of the party. I don't want to be the target of verbal abuse from people I have started the vote to kick over the verbal abuse they've heaped on other players. The result of the vote to kick or abandon reflects the party sentiment, not just the person who initiated it. Anyway, even if you had the identity of the person who initiated, you cannot prove it was harassment without something in the chat logs.

LOL, no. If you aren't willing to put a name on it then you shouldn't be using the feature. Your real name isn't Niamh Rillemaugh so you already have that wall to hide behind and blacklist. You don't need an extra layer. Anonymity is 99% of the problem with the internet these days. You put a persons identity on something and they at least try to act like something that resembles a human being.


Sincerely,
Chris Brooks

[Mcshiggs]

Wild assumption

Way to jump to conclusions, I was in Haukke Manor Hard mode on my monk for an animus book, as soon as we zone in someone says fast run, mnk can't aoe and I get kicked, so if you want to say that's not abuse of the system I don't know what is.

[MilesSaintboroguh]

LOL, no. If you aren't willing to put a name on it then you shouldn't be using the feature. Your real name isn't Niamh Rillemaugh so you already have that wall to hide behind and blacklist. You don't need an extra layer. Anonymity is 99% of the problem with the internet these days. You put a persons identity on something and they at least try to act like something that resembles a human being.


Sincerely,
Chris Brooks

Google must love you.


News flash, people are jerks whether they use their real identity or a fake name. If I am going to kick out a troll from my party, I don't need him or his friends trying to either find me in world or on the lodestone and stir up something and require a GM intervention to clean up the mess.

Also, showing who vote kicked you doesn't reduce the amount of kicks being used. Left 4 Dead 2 used to hide the identities of people that started a vote kick until Valve patched the system to show who started a kick. Kicking since then has not changed one bit.

[AdamFyi]

Snip

Is that a fact that showing who initiated a vote kick does not reduce the abuse? I can understand your stance on the matter, but your example was wishy-washy at best. Sounds more to an opinion of perspective rather than a fact. And if it as you say that it doesn't change anything, then I really see no reason to not make it transparent.

Having your name flaunted around like a flag when you initiate a vote dismiss/abandon would make people more reluctant to initiate them because if that vote kick does not pass for whatever reason, your members are going to stare dagges at you. And if they end up choosing to dismiss you instead, the GMs sadly can't intervene as it is a dispute within the party. This can also be used when an abuse of the vote dismiss/abandon occurs to report said individual. I don't see much of a downside to showing who initiated the vote kick, personally.

Maybe they should rectify the fact that each member of an almost full pre-made party of 3/7 are all counted as individual votes?

[MilesSaintboroguh]

It's already explained why they don't show names when vote kick is brought up; whether or not the kicking is legit or abused, internet drama ensues the minute you start pointing fingers for anything and that is something Square wants to avoid for their sanity and the sanity of the community.


Showing names would not make people more reluctant to start a kick, false or not, because since every instance is cross sever, people know that they can just do whatever they want since they can't be followed. Failed votes when showing who started the vote would just cause more drama unless you decided to keep the kickee from knowing they're being dismissed as it is right now. Names are hidden to reduce the drama and if anyone is going to report someone for abuse of the votes, they'll just write up the whole party regardless because everyone had to have agreed in the first place.

[ckb]

Stuff

When I made the comment it was intended in a much larger scope than just an MMO where you canBLACKLIST anyone. That is the easiest fix for harassment in any MMO. SE and valve are 2 very different companies and SE has always been heavy handed with violations like the one you stated. People are even bigger jerks with anonymity and no accountability. Like I said, put a name on it and let SE do the rest. If it doesn't work you can come back and say I was wrong. I'm ok with being wrong but it's like saying league of legends has a horrible community so every other online community is horrible. Based on my experiences with SE over the last decade plus they take that type of behavior seriously and don't mind banning people.