New crew moderation methods.

[Maddolis]

Hey, just opening up a post for all the regulars out there with hundreds of hours/1year+ of LVP experience who feel that modern crew techniques have ruined some of the fun LVP atmosphere.
I know there are many people out there (as I have talked to many ingame, on irc, msn and the forum) so this thread will be moved to the "Open for discussion" section.

In order to have a constructive debate that'll hopefully get somewhere and to have both the players and the crew working cooperatively and not against each other, we should set a couple of ground rules.

Players:
-As tempting as it may be, do not compare the LVP crew or modern LVP with the Nazis, on any level- be it comparing specific admins to specific Nazi leaders or simply using "nazi" as a metaphor.
-If you have a problem with a particular crewmember, say so- but don't express your problem using insults, prepare your argument constructively and with prepared evidence if possible (ie no "fag", "prick" or whatever).

Crewmembers:
-No calling people retarded.
-If you have a problem with a particular player or clan, say so- but don't express your problem using insults, prepare your argument constructively (ie no "fag", "prick" or whatever).
-You will judge each argument in an unbiased manner, without looking at who posted if necessary.
The player's history will have nothing to do with how important or useless the argument is (ie if I suggest something, take it as seriously as if mr.flamer or miss.management said it- consider the argument, regardless of who made it).
-Crewmembers will be charged *5 euro (to be paid directly to the paypal account of maddolis@hotmail.com) per post.

*Terms are unnegotiable.


Let the chaos begin!

[Richard]

As I said in my post in the B&A topic, and in my PM to you, this topic is all fine by me.
I'm glad you made those rules, saves me some time.

But I'd like to add one thing.
Do not post off-topic, or say something like 'oh, good argument' or something like that. The first time only the post will be removed, and, if not forgotten, a PM to the person about it. The second time you'll directly get a warning. Why? I do not want this topic turned into crap again.

Go ahead.

[Sander]

Agree ^^

Lol @
-Crewmembers will be charged *5 euro (to be paid directly to the paypal account of maddolis@hotmail.com) per post.
So I want to add:
-Players will be charged *5 euro (to be paid directly to the paypal account of donations@sa-mp.nl) per post.

Anyways, my opinion is quite simple, be respectful to each other.
And I know I can be disrespectful sometimes, but 80% of the time it's not even my fault.
For example a few weeks ago, a player PM's me: Hey noob. (Or something like that.) and he even repeated it at least twice.
.. That's an interesting approach of starting a conversation.
And after that he dares to ask for a pluspoint. Like, wtf. Get the f*** out of my sight. There is no way I will help such a player. He is on my mental ignore list from the first second I saw his message.

I'm sure the nice® approach works for every crew member.
So no difficult rules needed, just think: What do I want in a normal conversation? Or: How do I want that other people approach me.
Do you want others to start flaming directly, or do you want them to start a normal and nice conversation.

[Maddolis]

With all due respect, that incident is very insignificant compared to a lot of the crap me and a good number of my mates experience. When pm'd "fuck you" or something, make the most of it with a humorous response that doesn't flame them but shows that you don't care (eg "whatever," or if you don't mind, "ok but make sure you use protection" or something similar).
Player: "hey noob"
Admin: "hey"
Player: "gimme a pluspoint"
Admin: "Sorry but as a noob I dont know how to give out pluspoints"
/mute if they fly off the hook.

Also, I don't believe I or guys like shoebox have opened conversations like that.
Anyway, to make my first point (I'll leave some others for later in the thread, as to tackle issues one step at a time), I think some players are treated unjustly.
Nerd got a few-month ban ("perma ban") for flaming Barry on msn (note, there is a block+delete function on msn), and shoebox for defending him. I find shoebox's ban for defending his mate to be silly enough as it is, but to be perm-banned for it is ludacris. Then HaZe was recently given an ingame ban (although he's unbanned now) for a small amount of flame on the irc.
I think LVP should be split up into its juristictions- an ingame ban for ingame behavior, an irc-channel ban for irc behavior, teamspeak ban for teamspeak behavior, and leave msn out of it.

shoebox and Nerd shouldn't have such long bans from such small amount of flame.
I believe many admins don't give a damn about flame, but rather about attitude.
If some random says "fuck you" a few times in mainchat, they may get a DaBot warning after the 5th or 6th time, but when some [HC4L] or I write a single sentence in caps or one questionable non-english word then we'll get a mute or a kick. Simply wearing the [HC4L] tag, irregardless of past behavior tends to add days to a ban. If shoebox or Nerd were in [BA] I'm sure their !why lists would be 20% the size and they'd be playing LVP right now. The crew seem to believe that these players move out of their way to make trouble for others- but it is simply through our controversial behavior in gangchat where we are issued mutes, kicks or bans, and only after that do we argue.
Most of the time when we/[HC4L] are flamed, we ignore or agree with the flamer, and if crewmembers viewed every player as if they were [HC4L] then there'd either be a whole lot more bans or a whole lot less.
If you look back at the logs and read over shoebox and Nerd's last statements on an LVP-owned place (lvp irc channel, ingame) and still think that they've deserved to be banned for the last couple of months, then you're taking this game far too seriously.

a)I'm fine with irc behavior prolonguing ingame bans, but not beginning ingame bans.
b)Moderate people based on the action itself, not based upon who is doing the action.

[Sarge]

Tbh, people make their reputation at the start of a game

And HC4L ( just saying it as it is ) Has a "bad" reputation.
I don't mean you guys are "BAD"  but I mean your all known as flamers.
And the last weeks u guys are changing , which kinda confuses me.
And now here I see this topic where you say in my eyes: unban shoebox and nerd since it's just a game
""We'll be nice until you unban them...""

And it's true, WE all flame ALOT, players/admins.
but there's still a diffirent 'flaming' cuz I can say to nakebod like : hey noob
but then he knows I'm kidding
and when someone else says to him 'hey noob' he can get banned....I don't wanna loose my nakebod for that reason.
I think I can say that cuz of the way people ''know'' someone...

but correct me if I'm wrong but here I only see some excuses to unban shoebox/nerd.

[Maddolis]

but correct me if I'm wrong but here I only see some excuses to unban shoebox/nerd.

I see what you mean, but shoebox and Nerd are the perfect example of the way admins are biased against players. There will be plenty of further posts unrelated to the shoebox/Nerd perm-bans, I assure you.

[Sarge]

shoebox and Nerd are the perfect example of the way admins are biased against players.

So you are telling me, Shoebox/Nerd have NOTHING at all to do with this whole topic ?

[Peru]

An Admin's attitude towards a player is obviously based on that player's attitude as well. If a player constantly breaks the rules, indirectly insults Crew members or does other actions that are not considered breaking a rule but are still annoying, then Admins will develop a negative attitude towards those players. Admins are people too, and they have all the right in the world to get 'pissed' at someone.

I'm pretty sure that a crew member will not insult or be completely biased against a player just because they want to, there is always a reason.

[TEF]

I'm pretty sure that a crew member will not insult or be completely biased against a player just because they want to, there is always a reason.

You'd be surprised, unfortunately enough.

I think LVP should be split up into its juristictions- an ingame ban for ingame behavior, an irc-channel ban for irc behavior, teamspeak ban for teamspeak behavior, and leave msn out of it.


a)I'm fine with irc behavior prolonguing ingame bans, but not beginning ingame bans.
b)Moderate people based on the action itself, not based upon who is doing the action.

I agree with you completely, Maddolis. I would also like to thank you for the creation of this topic, as it's always great to see the input of players and the opinions that they have.

Sorry for such a small post, but I can't think of anything to add (I typed up a lot concerning my own moderation techniques in my "comeback" post, so I guess that exhausted my writing capabilities for the time being).

[Richard]

-As tempting as it may be, do not compare the LVP crew or modern LVP with the Nazis, on any level- be it comparing specific admins to specific Nazi leaders or simply using "nazi" as a metaphor.

From your own startpost.

Pretty emo and 1940sGermany if you ask me.

From the HC4L topic. Pretty disappointing. Opinion of yours or not, you stated that players shouldn't do it, yet you do it yourself.
I expected better.

Both yours and Terrors post were trashed. Before you complain about that, here's my reasoning:

As for Terrors post: It's again not a place to talk about. His ban appeal is, or here in CSI where he can complain about it.
As for Maddolis' post: Simple, comparing to the nazi's.