So votekick >abuse< is practically allowed?

[Niwashi]

Option 1: We only consider reasons for dismissal that are specifically stated to be an abuse of the vote dismiss feature. On the plus side, this does provide a clear and definitive set of guidelines for the use of the feature. On the downside, it is limited by the creativity of customers to find ways of disrupting a run outside of what is listed. Otherwise, the list of possible violations will be too extensive to be used efficiently or will be too vague to provide a definitive set of guidelines.

That's not a limitation at all. Disrupting a run is harassment, and harassment is already listed. The problem is that GMs are allowing it when no harassment has taken place, at least not on the part of the player who got kicked.

Neither option actively prevents abuse of the feature. Abuse of the feature is prevented due to account actions taken by GMs after an investigation to encourage customers who do misuse the feature to discontinue that behaviour.

Which would only be effective if once the GMs do that investigation, they act on it. Any vote-kick for harassment or cheating needs to result in a suspension from the game. It's up to the GMs' investigation to determine whether that harassment or cheating actually took place (in which case the offending kicked player needs to be banned) or whether it did not (in which case the players who kicked him out are the ones committing the harassment and need to be banned). That needs to happen every single time such vote-kicks are used. Not once every ten thousand times, but on every vote kick.

It should be impossible to select "AFK" or "Disconnected" unless the player actually is afk or disconnected, both of which the software can recognize. And any vote-kick for any other reason should automatically trigger a GM ticket that has to be acted on. If a vote-kick happens for any reason other than a disconnect, then somebody is breaking the rules to disrupt the game of other players. A week or so of not being able to play the game should convince people not to do that.

Unfortunately, that's not what's happening. Currently, the effective "rule" is that people can go ahead and harass other players as much as they want, because SE doesn't like being confrontational, so never punishes any sort of action, regardless of whether it breaks the ToS or not.

Different playstyles, or simply not being "good enough" in the mind of some other player are NOT valid reasons for kicking anybody. If one player doesn't like how another player in their party is performing, then they have the option to leave themself, not the right to kick out the other player. It's the player unwilling to continue the run together that needs to be out.

Kicking somebody else out of a run is a drastic action, and when this feature was first being developed, we were promised that such power would not be given to players without a guarantee that it couldn't be abused. That's why the kick feature has a list of reasons on it in the first place. That's there to ensure that it couldn't be used to get rid of players just because you don't like them. Ignoring that list of valid reasons is inviting abuse. Either start enforcing the rules built into the vote-kick system, or else remove vote-kick from the game altogether. (Obviously, the former would be preferable.)

[NyarukoW]

....
It should be impossible to select "AFK" or "Disconnected" unless the player actually is afk or disconnected, both of which the software can recognize. ...

Actually as much as I wish that the system can detect AFK or Disconnected, this actually a very difficult problem to solve. The origins of this actually lies in the "halting problem" see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92WHN-pAFCs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem

AFK or disconnected is actually indistinguishable, but SE has implemented timers and timeout along with some heuristics to make a reasonable guess at this. But to expect the system to get this right 100% of will either take the age of the universe, or it will be mistaken at times. How many times have you seen players get the red disconnect symbol over their head but they are still talking to you in the mumble or other voice comm and still moving and doing stuff in game? I've that more than a few times, usually followed by really bad result of lag induced raid wipes (imagine they just got shriek in T7). Alternatively, the afk auto-follow fairy healing SCH sure doesn't look like they are AFK, but they really are. So SE is really wise to leave this up to players, but it does opens it up to vote kick abuse.

Furthermore, SE send people the non-definitive auto generated response because SE is reserving the right to apply human wisdom and smarts for investigating and applying action. Anyone that choose to interpret that as open season to vote kick others is asking for penalties. I've got those response immediately after submission, but given limited man power, I've usually only got to talk to the GM and provide additional supporting fact anywhere from 2 to 5 hours later. But the GMs are not letting this stuff slip. Our former FC master, who not resubbed for 6 months now, had fun trolling CT and earned a warning, after which he stopped doing CT altogether. The trouble making FC member that was instigating all of this continued to troll and earned himself a suspension and came back and called the rest of us snitches and left the FC. The GMs may be swamped and may not be very fast to respond, but don't expect to get away with it doing it repeatedly. Players need to actively report the trolls, and vote kick abusers.

....
Any vote-kick for harassment or cheating needs to result in a suspension from the game.
...

The danger here is if you are the minority or one in party of trolls like the one my former FC would put together for CT, good luck if you don't get up getting suspended because you are telling them to stop harassing the other players or alliances. They'd vote kick you for harassment for spoiling their fun. Unfortunately, any serious penalty will require human intervention and wisdom to decide and assess, because the most difficult problems after all are people making trouble for other people.

[Bixby]

Any vote-kick for harassment or cheating needs to result in a suspension from the game.

That'd make it too easy to both ruin a dungeon run and get people who kick you for it suspended. Just be careful about what you say (or say nothing at all) while you're getting everyone killed over and over, then play innocent & confused when they vote kick you. As an added bonus, since every kick results in a suspension, you'd know it worked, too, since you're not getting suspended yourself.

Automatic investigation? Maybe. If they get enough (well-trained) GM staff to make that feasible. Automatic suspension? Not so much.

[Ellatrix]

stuff that didn't read what the GM wrote

Go back and look at what the GM posted, about how when one player may think they aren't doing anything wrong, it is annoying/offensive to a few others in the party then they vote to kick. Also, again, go be bad on your own time and not mine. If the rest of the party wants to win and you're the one holding everyone else back, hurray for vote kick.

The majority of people who get kicked deserve it. Posting anecdotes is only half of the story, and if someone is getting kicked repeatedly they are definitely doing something wrong.

[NyarukoW]

...
The majority of people who get kicked deserve it. ....

Utter garbage. There is no data to substantiate that claim, especially if you exclude the AFK and offline cases. You can call out a troll in a troll party on CT or ST, guess what, you will get kicked. But deserve it because you refuse to troll with them. Right. People in partly formed parties with their friends will vote kick anyone else even if it is their own tank or healer that is messing up. If you point out their mistakes you can be one vote kicked.

....
If the rest of the party wants to win and you're the one holding everyone else back, hurray for vote kick.
....

Yep, call everyone else a troll. Trolls wipe parties for fun, new/newer players just because they can not speed run, does not mean they are not trying or holding people back. People that don't want to speed run are also NOT holding people back, nor are 1st-timers watching cutscenes. Vote kicking people for the playing the game as intended is vote kick abuse, and that both reportable and actionable.

[Niwashi]

go be bad on your own time and not mine. If the rest of the party wants to win and you're the one holding everyone else back, hurray for vote kick.

And that's the very attitude that should get people banned from the game. There are tools in place for dealing with situations where the group cannot complete the content, or even where you simply don't want to complete it with that group. That's what Leave and Vote Abandon are for. It's NOT what vote-kick is for. If you use Vote Kick, a tool expressly designed for eliminating trolls who are harassing players and trying to disrupt their game, and instead use it to get rid of inexperienced or poorly geared players, or those who don't play up to your imaginary standards, then you're abusing the system and should incur punishment for that. Unfortunately, SE's reluctance to impose penalties means this abuse is almost never punished as it should be, and many people have started treating it as though it were expected and normal to harass other players this way.

[Mardel]

And that's the very attitude that should get people banned from the game. There are tools in place for dealing with situations where the group cannot complete the content, or even where you simply don't want to complete it with that group. SNIP

It's not the type of attitude that is the hindrance. It's the people who aren't putting forth any effort to improve themselves. I can recall a time in Halitali hard where a bard was only using straight shot. I asked kindly if they'd use dots + buffs because it wasn't fair for the whole party giving their all. They ignored first time, asked again, they got angry and said something along the lines of don't tell me how to play (that was the last thing they got to say before i vote kicked.)

Sometimes people need to be kicked for being super bad, end of story.

[Alukah]

It's NOT what vote-kick is for.

Do you work for SE? If not, what makes you think you can decide how this tool can be used? What makes you think your word weights more than a GM's, who already explained their criteria of when it's not okay to vote kick? Why should a party restart a whole dungeon just because one person decided that they don't care about your help and you shouldn't tell them how to play?

[LunaHoshino]

There are tools in place for dealing with situations where the group cannot complete the content, or even where you simply don't want to complete it with that group. That's what Leave and Vote Abandon are for.

I'm sorry, but if three people are able and willing to complete the content but cannot because one person is holding them back for whatever reason, why should those three players be forced to leave or vote abandon?

Just the other day I was helping an FC mate through story mode Garuda. It was me, said person (who had done the fight on another server and knew how it went), another person from our FC, and a healer who was running it for the first time. We explained the fight to the healer, offered to answer their questions, and were prepared for a few wipes. But a few wipes turned into nearly a dozen because this person just did not learn the mechanics no matter how many times we explained it to them, marked where they should be standing, etc. We eventually ran out of time without managing to complete the fight all because of that one person.

We were nice and didn't kick them, but we would have been more than justified in doing so. They were the sole reason we were unable to complete the duty-- when we got a friend to run it with us, we one-shotted it.

[Krr]

I'm sorry, but if three people are able and willing to complete the content but cannot because one person is holding them back for whatever reason, why should those three players be forced to leave or vote abandon?

Yes, because it's your own fault for using Duty Finder instead of a strict Party Finder if you are that obsessed with getting a clear (or multiple clears.)