[NEW] Community Disruption Silencing Program (!votemute)

[Voth]

To the TW Community: We understand and hear the basically constant frustration that many of you have regarding some of the more disruptive and toxic players in the zone and their speech which is highly questionable in morality and borders on spamming. We have developed this program to put the power in the hands of the people to silence those who spew this sort of generally unacceptable speech, so that TW Staff is not the sole arbiter of what speech is and is not acceptable. By putting the power in your hands, we hope to make the environment more enjoyable and tolerable for the majority of our population.

----

Feature Enhancement: Community Disruption Voting (!votemute)

Trench Wars Staff has introduced a new feature to enable community policing of our local chat environment. !votemute is now a feature of TW-Pubsystem. This feature is meant to help the community silence trolls and other speech the pub community finds distasteful. Please note, this includes speech that would otherwise not be enforced under the current zone rules. If there is speech which players find inappropriate for any reason, they may execute a !votemute <playername> to the TW-Pubsystem bot to begin a vote to have the player silenced:

1. Player initiates a !votemute by sending :TW-P:!votemute <playername> (e.g. :TW-P:!votemute LF)

2. A message will then be sent to pub indicating a player has requested to begin a vote to mute <playername>. This message will look like this: MUTE VOTE: Hookecho wants to vote to mute LF. To begin the vote, PM me with ::!votemute LF

3. A second player PM's :TW-P:!votemute <playername> to second the vote, then the voting will begin.

4. Players will vote by PMing :TW-P:!votemute y (for yes) or :TW-P:!votemute n (for no).

a. If you initiated or seconded, your vote has been automatically counted as "yes".

b. If you are targeted as the player to be muted, you vote has been automatically counted as "no".

5. The vote will remain open for two minutes. After two minutes:

a. If the vote passes (=>60%), a ?cheater call will be sent to online moderators to mute the player. The player will be issued a one hour silence. Players who are silenced do not have to play, but do have to be in the arena for the timer to count down.

b. If the vote fails (<60%), no further action occurs. The player who was targeted will then be immune to !votemute for 1 hour.

Some final notes:

In order to be eligible to participate in any !votemute related activities, you must be playing in Public 0 for at least five minutes.

Finally, any attempt to defraud the !votemute system will be considered game mechanics abuse (bug abuse) and is punishable by a zone ban. (note from the Ban Op: you may be subject to more severe punishment than the bug abuse rule constitutes if the situation warrants it)

----

Any questions/comments about this system and how to use it can be directed to any staff member directly or via a ?help call when playing.

PLEASE NOTE: We will likely be working on making this system automated (meaning a staff member will not need to be present to initiate the mute, it will simply happen automatically as a result of the vote results) once the kinks are worked out. This is a new program and new code and we want to have staff around to witness any irregularities that may occur for the roll out of the program.

[Vehicle]

Nice. Thanks Voth and whoever else was involved. I think this is a great idea and a good attempt at threading the needle. Power to the people!

[Falconeer]

To me this is both good and bad, it's good that speech offences would be dealt with by limiting speech rather than a ban. A player can still play the game etc. so there is no excessive force issues.

Problems I can foresee:

1) Trolls or toxic people might group up, initiate fake vote mutes on themselves, make sure those fail and then they have 1 hour immunity where they can be especially toxic or egregious and say whatever they want.

2) There is a huge clubhouse mentality in this game, partly re-enforced by zone nationalism. This is not limited to trolls who are usually individuals who troll without discrimination, rather it is groups of people who dislike outsiders, other zone players, unskilled players etc. This clubhouse mentality could be compounded or encouraged by voting systems where groups of people can easily ostracize other members of the community. People in other zones already gang up on other members of the community and there are huge double standards and lack of any reasoning behind it.

For problem 1) I suggest the system still needs monitoring and for problem 2) I would like to see some sort of approval system by staff. If it's obvious that a group of players are just trying to get someone muted as some coordinated effort that really has nothing to do with what the player was saying then staff should veto the vote and not pass it even if 60% voted yes.

I also think 60% is too low. Votes like this in every game are usually high in the 90s, but otherwise I've seen games go as low as 75% which is highly fair. But 60% is over kill. As well it should probably be 75% of the active playing population. If there is a way to determine someone is idle then it would be good, this way we're not asking for a 75% vote when 19 out of 30 players are idle/afk. The vote will never pass even if all 11 players active vote yes.

[Rab]

Stuff that depends on players being proactive to work won't work because players aren't proactive. You know who the offenders are, ban them. This could be done and dusted over a couple of days, instead we have another weird initiative from tw staff.

[Hookecho]

For problem 1) I suggest the system still needs monitoring and for problem 2) I would like to see some sort of approval system by staff. If it's obvious that a group of players are just trying to get someone muted as some coordinated effort that really has nothing to do with what the player was saying then staff should veto the vote and not pass it even if 60% voted yes.

Both of those items are currently happening in this case. We are still manually reviewing and approving these instances. While the end goal would be to have this automated, the only way we can really beta test is to "do it live" so to speak. It is the intention to smooth out the areas where you see these problems with some sort of automated checking, but we need to see what the stories look like before it can be written.

[Falconeer]

Both of those items are currently happening in this case. We are still manually reviewing and approving these instances. While the end goal would be to have this automated, the only way we can really beta test is to "do it live" so to speak. It is the intention to smooth out the areas where you see these problems with some sort of automated checking, but we need to see what the stories look like before it can be written.

Questions:
Do staff votes count?
Would the bot calculate 60% based on the current amount of active players it counted? So can the bot determine who is active out of 30 players? based on who is typing and playing the game? If the bot determines 18/30 are active then 60% of 18 is 11 votes yes. If the bot actually counts 60% of 30 players whether they are available or not then you need 18 votes yes, which is a tall order.

Also after doing the math 60% is actually a lot of yes votes, so it can stay at this voter range.

If it's possible for the bot to determine a number to count the 60% of votes... then I suggest for typing basically anyone who typed in the last 2 minutes in spec (to match the 2 minute vote timer), and then for playing the game basically everyone would be counted who is in game. So if 10 players are playing, and 5 people typed in spec in the last 2 minutes, the bot would initiate a 60% vote out of 15 people, (even if 40 people are in the arena) so you would need 9 votes yes.

[Hookecho]

Do staff votes count?

If staff have been playing in the arena for five minutes, they would be eligible to vote, yes. Just like everyone else, staff are unable to vote from spectator mode.

The person who initiates and seconds a vote is displayed in the public chat, and we also receive a record of it in our internal system. If someone feels that a staff member is abusing the system, they should submit a complaint through the proper channels (https://trenchwars.org/support, or twcomplaints@gmail.com) with supporting evidence.

Would the bot calculate 60% based on the current amount of active players it counted? So can the bot determine who is active out of 30 players? based on who is typing and playing the game?

The bot is counting votes, not players (similar to !shufflevote). The only way you can vote is to be playing for five minutes.

If a player's motion goes to vote, technically they've already got >60% of the vote at the start of the vote (those who initiated and seconded vote yes [2/3], the player being targeted vote no[1/3]). Even if no one else votes after, this vote would still pass in this current state.

[Falconeer]

Oh okay, counting votes not players, makes sense and easier to implement. And in this case it's also only people playing pub for 5 minutes who can initiate the vote.

Again my only concern is abuse then, in which case you only need 2 players to abuse (maybe not common, but still possible). Someone could vote to mute a player even if they said nothing at all. And then even lie and claim the player said things in PM if a mod asks. So yeah... it still needs moderating until it can be better automated...

There is actually a vote kick system in the game King Arthurs Gold. I got kicked in the course of a few months? like 20 times. the kick lasts for 30 minutes each time. I have to go on the KAG discord and ask for an unban. Number of times I was unbanned? also 20 times. The admins saw the kicks were all abuse and kicked those people for 30 minutes who initiated the vote on me. The admins have full server/chat logs etc. Basically vote kick only exists in that game for extremely abusive text or griefing your own team... But this is an example of a game where admins still have to get involved despite the automated vote kick existing.

[rothe]

How is this any different than the Community-Driven Silence Program that you created voth that went to shit?
Well other than this gives groups of people the power to silence others just because they don't like things they said lol.. Which is a horrible fking way to run things. I honestly wondered just how insular this community would get and this couldn't be more of a definition of.. Well someone isn't officially breaking any rules but "We" who is the "We"? that is still going to be hidden lol and the reasoning behind the silence.. Again that isnt going to be questioned even lmao.. Your just putting forth a program to outright silence community members on the basis of who has the most friends in the arena at the time lmao..
Zero rules apply because your last silence program completely failed everyone agreed on that..
So a new one that.. Has no rules other than silence people for what exactly?
I mean you admit this will be used for shits and giggles and clearly lmao one of the new staff members hopped in right away to cheer this new ban system but how many reports have they actually read. Honestly do people know how back stabby and I mean no disrespect because i am too tbh but pettay we all are?

Is it the jokers you want to get rid of or the people who go into arenas and crash games? Maybe ask yourself that.
Do you want to get rid of the people who contribute to matches when they are in the arena or the people who constantly add nothing to arena matches and cause havock or throw matches then leave the arena once its dead and say hey lets head over to another zone lol?
Who of those do you think are the worse offenders?

Throw on top of that people going priv freq to feed off the main freq in pub for hours on end adding nothing to the match other than to piss of anyone trying to have a solid base match. Now that is considered alright to do and praised as top notch behavior in the Zone/Arena but still these speech guidelines keep coming up lol?

Your worried about what people say yet not their actions? Like you think their actions don't impact game play more so than words. What a world we live in.
Even though this program has failed so many times in the years upon years I have played this game it keeps coming back in different forms and actions of players are ignored they can troll the shit out of a arena and that is totally alright but fk me if they say something that hurts someones feels....

[Mootland Farmer]

Appreciate the work put in Voth, but why not try to make the game more engaging instead? And these guys may have less time to chat and be disruptive. Ideas include; removing private frequencies, blue-out for spectators, removing safety zones, reduce respawn time, map size appropriate for the amount of players in-game.

[rothe]

01-15-2021, 03:25 PM
Originally posted by Nipple Nibbler View Post
example
I log on and start being a giant twat in pub
someone does a help call about it
if first offence you simply tell person to ?ignore me
staff member talks to me to attempt to reason with me
if I am a repeat offender and clearly not able to be reasoned with, but I am not technically breaking other rules, you put the question to staff chat
if 2 staff members agree you go forth with the punishment
if 1 staff member says no then you don't

Ok lets go with this idea for one moment. What about the people who abuse the report system or send in false reports? Personally I have never sent in a report going on 20 years now of playing and after reading reports of players omg you have no idea what some of you say about one another nor the language you use just to try to get back at one another.
Should false flags get bans too? How far do you want to "Alter" the rules? Because let me tell you the reports that come in are ugly as hell. Mods just choose to laugh them off as jokes 99% of the time because they are friends with many of the people those 1% of real reports that are listened to. Well that's where bias comes in and no one mod should be making decisions thus we have a standard rule book. On that note...
How would you feel if ALL reports were made public?
You know...
You report someone.
Your report is made public so everyone can see what you said and about who..

So Voth going back to this post. In another thread.
Your Idea behind this seems so off base that your just saying people who have a problem with another player. I quote your words. " We have developed this program to put the power in the hands of the people to silence those who spew this sort of generally unacceptable speech." Generally unacceptable to who? Who ever is online at that moment in time with their buddies?
But those people are not clearly breaking any sort of rules again I quote you.
"Please note, this includes speech that would otherwise not be enforced under the current zone rules."
So what EXACTLY is the goal of this program? Does it have a goal? Clearly the Community-Driven Silence Program which was worded the same failed so I am still wondering what is the goal of this? Who thinks alike the most?
You want to get rid of people you don't like/agree with but who aren't "officially" breaking any rules? Lets see what kind of mindset does that sound like...
Your not focusing on any type of their actions..
Just their words.. I mean if someone is dodging ignore there is a simple solution to that right? There is a rule for that right? This just seems... Well you want to silence people with this without any form of reason behind it.

Happy Valentine's day

[J-B-Inc]

I only play this game to talk shit am not even good at it but it is all fun u can allways put me on ignore if u want dont come on here and cry the older i get the pussy this zone get and the players

[hellmouth]

trancetunes is a faggot with AIDS

[Gila Monster]

Well I just got muted for 60 INGAME minutes by 3 people who were all in the same squad during a slow period in pub. Good job you fucking assholes. I don't understand why the currently existing mute function isn't sufficient. You fucking nerds have nothing better to do than overcomplicate and break things that don't need to be fixed. So, for the record:
1. suck my dick
2. you're a bunch of ass holes
3. i hope you die in a fire

Good job pushing more players away with your retarded "fixes".

[Gila Monster]

Just so everyone fully understands how retarded this feature is, you can be muted by a couple players during a slow period for 60 minutes that only count down while you're in-game and prohibit you from using bot commands.

If it's a busy week for me, my entire week might amount to only 60 minutes of game time. I could, and *have* been muted by a group of player squaddies, for what could be my entire game time for a week, during which I can't communicate with anyone or use bot commands, without warning, without breaking rules.

Do I really need to explain how fucking stupid this is? And this is the stupidest shit of all:

4. Players will vote by PMing :TW-P:!votemute y (for yes) or :TW-P:!votemute n (for no).
a. If you initiated or seconded, your vote has been automatically counted as "yes".
b. If you are targeted as the player to be muted, you vote has been automatically counted as "no".

Players don't vote. A ton of players don't even know how to use bot commands. A ton of players don't even pay attention to chat or game messages. Are you fucking serious? Do you have any idea how many team shuffle votes end up like 1 vs 1 during crowded games? Do you really think it's a good idea to make a feature that 2 people can use to punish 1 person unless that person convinces other people in chat to vote no?

This is the most incompetent idea I have ever seen implemented. I am actually appalled that someone approved of this and allowed it to go forward.