Battleships- a solution

[Jinx]

the problem with petitioning an abuse is - in a way a system of reputations.



what it lacks is being objective. - that is not that people do not try or have no ambition to be objective - its just that there are mechanisms that are in the way.

what such a system does primarily is to create two classes of players. - one that can petition and complain, another that is complained about. - ( unless the system provides sufficient mechanism that an independent can in the very same way petition a facition owned battleship to be taken away - AND have the same chances provided the same evidence is provided ! )

on a more subtle level, it creates smugness ( if the above is not fulfilled ) - one group feeling / or being - more immune to repercussions of abuse, the other one more vulnerable.

too often i heard from official factions ( especialy those with a so called "high standard" of roleplay - the term "because we can" or "we do what we want" - when presented with critizism ) - that doesn t mean that the critizism was always just or fair, but the answer surely reaked of way too much self rightousness and a feeling of immunity to critizism - all in all a bad show.

mind, i heard the same from non-factionized people. - but as factions like to point out, they not only claim higher standards but also act according to that claim. ( acting up to the claim, not to the practice of it )




then there is a very dangerous problem with the "reputation" and "being a good buddy" - as one might call it. - there are simply players that a faction is MUCH MUCH more reluctant to petition for an abuse than others. - these can be veteran players - or players that it would be highly "unpopular" to petition for an abuse.

at the same time - players with less reputation or a bad reputation are petitioned for less without hesitation. such mechanisms happen unconsciously most of the time.

some "deals" are done hidden behind the scenes in skype. - stating "alright - he messed up, but we cleared it all up in skype ... and we re good friends again" - thats cool - but does the no-name john doe gets the same chance? - to "clear things up in skype with his buddies"? or does he go straight for the petition.

thats the areas where things become unfair.




if you truely think that the suggested system makes the server a "better place" and that things are as "fair" or "unfair" as they are now... or even much better. then you can petition for it to igiss to agree with it.

but if things become worse - i wonder if you d stand to your mistake - or even apologize to those that became victim of the system... cause there will be victims.

of course - even now we have victims. - those that claim to have become victims of the bad RPers in large and powerful ships - and no one apologizes to them either.

but the difference is - when players started disco, they started disco at a certain state of freedom. - so when "you" ( you = anyone that complains ) started, you knew what was coming... all the good and all the bad sides.
when we change things drasticly - we change the conditions. - and players that started here in a state of freedom see their enviroment change to a state that they did not "agree" on when they started.

yes - change has to start somewhere and at some time in order to actually change anything. - so why not start fair... :

"With the system I would like to introduce, the faction would NOT be able to restrict the purchase of capital ships. They would ONLY be able to petition the admin team to have someone's cap-flying rights removed, AFTER that individual had been shown to be screwing up. Adaquate proof would have to be shown." ( JihadJoe )

here is how it would look when it was fairer:

"With the system i would like to introduce , a player would NOT be able to restrict the purchase of capital ships. They would ONLY be able to petition the admin team to have someone's cap-flying rights removed, AFTER that player had been shown to be screwing up. Adaquate proof would have to be shown."

just a few words change a one sided statement to a fair one. - each player is treated as what he is.. - a player.

at no time, the term "faction" or "individual" is written down. - a player with a warship is a player with a warship. - it is not a faction player with a warship and an individual player with a warship. hold factions no less but also no more responsible for what they do - as much as you hold non-factionized players responsible.

a faction player that petitions has as many rights to petition as a non-factionized player. - cause after all... just cause we want factions to uphold a higher RP standard doesn t mean they do.

and even with this altered statement... the problem stated above ( buddy system / bias ) remains.

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC