Sick of unjust vote dismisses

[Starrywisdom]

That's the thing though! Since the person being kicked has no vote, one other person's vote will be nullified as well. Whether the person votes Yes or No, the same result will happen if 2 others vote Yes: the person will be kicked. In example, that DD I mentioned. The 2 dps wanted the healer gone. The healer could not vote, and I voted no. Because the healer could not vote, it was my lone vote vs. the 2 dps. So, 2 people got what they wanted, and 2 didn't. The healer and I were both disenfranchised because of this system. That is not a majority.

Only on the official FFXIV forums can someone try to say that 2 of 3 is not a majority ; you heard it first here folks.

[Bluevann]

In example, that DD I mentioned. The 2 dps wanted the healer gone. The healer could not vote, and I voted no. Because the healer could not vote, it was my lone vote vs. the 2 dps. So, 2 people got what they wanted, and 2 didn't. The healer and I were both disenfranchised because of this system. That is not a majority.

You shouldn't count the healer in the formula because the healer is the subject of the poll. There is a conflict of interest, and that is why the poll only goes among the other three participants. And when there is three participants, the victory always goes to 2 vs 1.

It's like you're with two friends and you're trying to decide whether to eat pork or not. Do you think the pork should vote too? Of course not, it's obvious the pork would vote No. Therefore, the pork is not included in the poll. Polls always have to go through an odd number of participants, or there will be instances of draws.

[Adire]

Only on the official FFXIV forums can someone try to say that 2 of 3 is not a majority ; you heard it first here folks.

/facepalm

Way to not read the context at all. Let me show you some simple math:

There are 4 people in a 4 man group. 2 people want to kick someone, and 2 people don't want that someone to be kicked, 1 being the person being kicked. Since the kicked person does not get a say, that leaves 3 people to vote, 4 people total are in the dungeon, but only 3 get voting power. 2 people don't want a kick to happen, 2 people do, but because one can't vote, it means the 2 who are on the pro-kick side will win, even though 2 are against it. 2 winning against 2 is not a majority. Math, people!

I'm arguing that the person being kicked's rights should matter people....that they should be counted as a vote.

You shouldn't count the healer in the formula because the healer is the subject of the poll. There is a conflict of interest, and that is why the poll only goes among the other three participants. And when there is three participants, the victory always goes to 2 vs 1.

It's like you're with two friends and you're trying to decide whether to eat pork or not. Do you think the pork should vote too? Of course not, it's obvious the pork would vote No. Therefore, the pork is not included in the poll. Polls always have to go through an odd number of participants, or there will be instances of draws.

I don't think comparing human beings to pork is a good analogy. I also don't see why draws are necessarily a bad thing. They are preferable IMO to someone getting their rights completely stomped on. If we're all equal that is....

In Team Fortress 2, the person being voted against is automatically counted as a no. What's the conceptual difference? Every person involved in a disagreement deserves a voice. We are not objects.

[Chihaya]

Never played team fortress, but mostly likely it doesn't only have 4 players involved.

People are complaining right now people bringing a friend so they can vote kick.

Well if it takes unanimous 3 votes to vote kick someone, you just need to bring a friend to troll the heck out of people without the risk of getting vote kicked.

And IMO, for a complete random DF where everyone is random - if half of the party wants you gone (as in 2/3 vote like now) you should probably gtfo.

I agree that you dont get to be the jury at your own trial

[Adire]

No, it doesn't. Conceptually however, them giving the person being kicked a say in the matter is morally correct though. Denying someone the right to have a voice at all and therefore making another person's voice moot is not, and something should be changed if this is how it is designed to be.

Also, I strongly disagree. If you've contributed to the dungeon, have done nothing wrong, and you're being griefed, you have every right to stay for your rewards, as you've put in work towards them. You should stand up for your rights.

Also, this "trial". Who gets put on trial for this situation is a matter of who clicks the button first, not who is a reasonable suspect for a crime. It's like giving a button to a criminal and a victim and saying "whoever pushes this last gets put on trial. by the way, the jury is one other criminal and one other random person"

[Chihaya]

have done nothing wrong

Vote kick doesn't happen out of the blue most of the time.
If complete strangers decide to vote kick you and it passed, most likely it is something you done (or didn't do when you are suppose to) - you just didn't notice it.
Yes there are abuses when people bring a friend. But as I see it, as someone that solo queues, it is rare.

Also, this "trial". Who gets put on trial for this situation is a matter of who clicks the button first, not who is a reasonable suspect for a crime. It's like giving a button to a criminal and a victim and saying "whoever pushes this first gets put on trial. by the way, the jury is one other criminal and one other random person"

In this case, jury is the 'criminal' and 'TWO' random person, and the so called criminal would need to get the approval of at least one other.
I have seen this before, and vote kicked didn't pass and the person that initiated the first vote kick got vote kicked afterwards.
Please don't think of people as dumb sheeps - I can't speak for all, but most of us probably can see which person is causing trouble in the duty.

Anyways I don't think we are going to be able to convince each other, so there no point of me posting anymore - but keep in mind this current voting system is what SE have decided and with the support of a rather large player base also.

[Sapphic]

To be fair, I think pretty much every time someone in an LS/my FC hits 50 and tries to watch CSs in the story dungeons, they get kicked. To me, that's far uglier than an oddball kick here and there that most people seem to argue against.

For the most part I do agree with you, though.

So why aint the LS taking em through CM and Prae like any good LSs would?

[Adire]

Good question. I thought Balmung was supposed to be one of the more newbie friendly servers!

[Amelia_Pond_Behemoth]

Going back to the OP, if I was the tank in that situation, not only would I have voted in favor of kicking the OP, I would have initiated the vote to do so. Quit abusing tanks and forcing them to pull faster than they're comfortable with.

[MeiUshu]

Mind posting your source? I really hope this is not correct. Where are their standards for determining if something is vote kick abuse or not if these reasons are valued so lowly? Any reason other than these, with the exception of maybe a player's skill holding the others back from completing an instance, is getting dangerously close to immoral kicking imo. If they don't have standards, then that's pretty disorganized and seems like it would often cause no punishment to be done.

Players should at least be forced to fill out a form to show their reasoning for their kick if the other reasons are not the reason for the kick. Documentation is important, and such a thing would help determine if the kickers are lying or force them to post their reason, whether it's good or not being left up to the GM to decide.

send in an abuse of kick and you will get the same answer as those that send a kick abuse in received, there you will have your proof without having another to post it .. if you check other topics you will see the answer from the GMs about this...clearly posted.

Mei