Suggestion - BRQ

[nitromon]

I noticed ENT has been recruiting more mods, yet the BRQ list just keeps growing and growing.

I almost never post BRQs, very rarely, but I read them a lot. I noticed there are some "habitual" BRQ posters and I would even describe them as "BRQ abusive." In fact, a lot of the BRQs I've read which I replied, I always pointed out the rules the "poster" himself actually broke. But since ENT has a policy, they do not ban the poster, these were never held accountable. I'm guessing it is because you do not want to discourage people from posting BRQs, but you can see there's a trade off.

I suggest this rule be changed and allow mods to ban "posters" for the offenses they've incurred in that game.

- It will give players a reason to behave in the game, if they want to post BRQs on other people.
- It makes them "watch" their own replay first, making sure they didn't break any rules themselves.
- It will reduce the BRQ list.

Like I've said, I rarely post BRQs. It is not because I don't see people misbehaving in the games. Often, it is a matter of whether it is worth it b/c I know there is a long list. I excuse minor offenses, unless it is a repeater that I remember. I am typically a chill guy in the games too, but as human, at times I lose my cool and I flame. In those games, I would never post a BRQ b/c I feel it would be hypocritical of me.

Anyways, just a suggestion to help your mods.

[BeerLord]

Well we do have some habitual posters. But many of them are good, and really help us to keep the games cleaner. But yeah, some are so full of drama in their own games they create more work for us by making other players angry which causes some of them to act out. Not sure there is anything to be done about that.

[Karils]

I noticed ENT has been recruiting more mods, yet the BRQ list just keeps growing and growing.

I'd like to counter this by pointing out the emptiness of the staff application section. The last person to have an app processed was RedMercedez (arcanium), and that was on the 22nd of October. Prior to that, the most recent app processed was processed on the 25th of September, and it was denied.

They may be trying to recruit more mods, but it doesn't look like many are stepping into that position.

That said, I agree that many of the offenses in the BRQ section feel to me like they need to be dealt with faster if only because banning someone too late after the fact can remove the opportunity to make them realize what they did wrong.

I think that if mods become a bit more active/one or two mods got added the problem would be pretty well mitigated.

[HodoR_]

I think it's a good idea from my perspective. Sometimes people just go full TK after they have been angered by other player's toxic attitude, which in my opinion is not acceptable, but understandable.

Also a lot of players being reported are new and not aware of the rules therefore do not know how to post a BRQ to report for flame and such.

#support #BRQ lives matter

[aRt)Y]

We have not really hired many recently.. and the ones we did balanced out the staff members who are busy with life otherwise.

Ban request posters are not the issue - it's our staff's resource of time. The solution? Apply for a moderator position. :)

[HodoR_]

@art)Y
I might have drifted a bit from the subject of this post (big list of BRQ), but I think @nitromon raises a good point. If you accuse somebody for rape, and it turns out it's BS, you can get prosecuted in many justice systems for attacking one's reputation. Extreme example? Maybe. Hotel? Trivago.

But IMO ppl that act like douche in game and report somebody for a minor fault should be exposed to a sentence as well.

[Karils]

@art)Y
I might have drifted a bit from the subject of this post (big list of BRQ), but I think @nitromon raises a good point. If you accuse somebody for rape, and it turns out it's BS, you can get prosecuted in many justice systems for attacking one's reputation. Extreme example? Maybe. Hotel? Trivago.

But IMO ppl that act like douche in game and report somebody for a minor fault should be exposed to a sentence as well.

If my opinion counts, I think this should ONLY be applicable in extreme circumstances like the real world example you made.

Reasoning -> Say someone accuses people of flame, and they DID, but it was minor enough that no ban was issued, I don't think that would mean they should get the consequence instead.

IF however, a person claims maphack or something else with little/no evidence, and it is found that no maphacks were used/they made a request out of anger at the person, then perhaps.

My actual solution would be to bar those individuals from the BRQ section though, with dodging on that potentially a separate offence similar to dodging a normal ban. That way they can still play the game, but not waste peoples' time on their BRQs. Better yet if you can shadowban someone from the BRQ section, but im not sure if thats a thing on these forums?

[Sylvanas]

Reasoning -> Say someone accuses people of flame, and they DID, but it was minor enough that no ban was issued, I don't think that would mean they should get the consequence instead.

I don't think anyone suggests that, why mention it at all?

IF however, a person claims maphack or something else with little/no evidence, and it is found that no maphacks were used/they made a request out of anger at the person, then perhaps.

Tons of people have always believed everyone except themselves and their friends map hacks. Map hack is like God to them. They can't see it, but they're convinced it's everywhere and that it plays a role in everything that happens around them. It's just a way more convenient reason for dying than failure. They're not ill-intentioned, they're just stupid and in denial.

[Karils]

Reasoning -> Say someone accuses people of flame, and they DID, but it was minor enough that no ban was issued, I don't think that would mean they should get the consequence instead.

I don't think anyone suggests that, why mention it at all?

IF however, a person claims maphack or something else with little/no evidence, and it is found that no maphacks were used/they made a request out of anger at the person, then perhaps.

Tons of people have always believed everyone except themselves and their friends map hacks. Map hack is like God to them. They can't see it, but they're convinced it's everywhere and that it plays a role in everything that happens around them. It's just a way more convenient reason for dying than failure. They're not ill-intentioned, they're just stupid and in denial.

My first point you quoted was just an example off the top of my head, not one that would be likely to actually happen, I know.

Your last quote is exactly why I feel like it'd be worth barring people that make claims like that from the BRQ section. They may not be trying to do anything BAD necessarily, but maphack claims take time and effort to verify and not all of the people which review BRQs are comfortable checking for MH in the first place. That is why I used that as an example, coupled with the fact that it results in a large ban if it is true.

[Burnt]

Your last quote is exactly why I feel like it'd be worth barring people that make claims like that from the BRQ section. They may not be trying to do anything BAD necessarily, but maphack claims take time and effort to verify and not all of the people which review BRQs are comfortable checking for MH in the first place. That is why I used that as an example, coupled with the fact that it results in a large ban if it is true.

from a server's perspective in general, you'd rather tolerate unnecessary mod works than discouraging people from reporting...

[BeerLord]

"Tons of people have always believed everyone except themselves and their friends map hacks. Map hack is like God to them. They can't see it, but they're convinced it's everywhere and that it plays a role in everything that happens around them. It's just a way more convenient reason for dying than failure. They're not ill-intentioned, they're just stupid and in denial."

I would not use the word stupid, but otherwise that is really well said. I dont think people realize how long it takes to process a maphack ban request. One ususally needs to watch it over and over, returning to suspicious moments to review, and then often needing to review other games of suspicious individuals. It is really time consuming.

[HodoR_]

@BeerLord
Also I think it's pretty rare that you can, without a single doubt, prove that somebody MH. Unless said MHer blantantly incriminate himself (mouse clicks logs for instance).

Back to the topic now : after reading other's comments I came to realize that my initial position is wrong. I believe going down that road is a very, very slippery slope. You don't want the community to be afraid to post BRQ in fear of getting banned themselves. It wouldn't be healthy for ENT imo.

The purest intentions brought the worst in humanity.

[BeerLord]

"Also I think it's pretty rare that you can, without a single doubt, prove that somebody MH."

That is just not true.

[bezdak]

You don't want the community to be afraid to post BRQ in fear of getting banned themselves. It wouldn't be healthy for ENT imo.

This. It's the whole reason of our policies and in extreme cases we can still ban the OP, it just needs to be approved by oversight staff also, so no worries there.

I think everything has been said now and this topic can be processed.

[nitromon]

Oh, before this gets closed. I wasn't suggesting that someone gets banned b/c they post a lot of BRQs and were denied. I was saying that some of these people break rules in those games themselves and those should be accountable b/c regardless they shouldn't break rules. For example, if a person was griefing in the game and he posts a BRQ for another player who also was griefing, but only the person in the BRQ gets banned while the poster who violated the same rule did not.

Now that was a pretty obvious example. However, I've watch some BRQs where the poster was votekicking abuse, pausing, saving the game, etc... and then has the audacity to post a BRQ on someone else. I say, they all should be banned. Currently on the person in the BRQ gets banned. To ban the poster for his offenses in the same game, someone else has to make a separate BRQ for that poster. Doesn't that increase the BRQ list?