Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > Blue Community > Blue Server Chat

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-15-2014, 04:20 PM
Frieza_Prexus Frieza_Prexus is offline
Fire Giant

Frieza_Prexus's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Houston, TX.
Posts: 749
Default Policy Discussion: Spelling Out GM Procedure & Making Everyone's Lives Easier

Introduction

While the staff normally does an excellent job managing the server, there are certain areas where the processes are chaotic and inefficient. This leads to frustration, confusion, and extra work for everyone involved. The following is a short proposal that the staff adopt formal procedures for submitting, resolving, and appealing raid disputes:

Why change things?

Currently, raid petitions are handled reasonably adequately as a whole, but there is a large amount of detritus for the staff to sort through, and formal procedures will help reduce the workload to a manageable level. So, why adopt formal dispute resolution procedures?

1) Established policies will allow the creation of public and documented precedent.

2) Forcing summaries and word limits onto petitions will make the review process far more efficient. By allowing additional argument & explanation at GM discretion, injustice can be avoided so that the decision makers are fully appraised of the situation.

3) An official system puts proper channels into place so that the GM staff and the players know exactly where each other sits. There are no back channels to go through or deals to make. Appeals, arguments, and defenses are all fully public, concise, and officially submitted. Any requests to deviate can simply be met with "follow the procedure" as opposed to the current system of "send me a PM, and I'll get to it at some point."

4) The public nature of such a system will prevent the spread and abuse of misinformation that frequently surrounds raid disputes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SUGGESTED PROCEDURE
1) Petitioning guild submits a complaint via the petition forum
A) A 3-5 sentence summary
B) Two pages MAX of argument/counter argument
C) Appendices of logs and fraps (unedited by highlighted for ease of reading & convenience.)
D) All appendices & fraps MUST be properly organized (logs bolded & fraps met with time stamps [Ex: train aggro @3:52 FD @7:34]
E) All Petitions (& defenses) will be made public as they were submitted verbatim

2) Accused guild is given/allowed to view the submitted petition & evidence
A) Accused guild submits a defense in the same format as the complaint

3) GM reviews all evidence in the submitted complaints & engages in additional fact finding in the server logs as necessary and requests additional evidence if necessary
A) GM's should rarely need to request additional evidence as guild officers should be smart enough to present all relevant evidence. Evidence omitted from the initial petition/response by neglect will NOT be considered without a reasonable excuse (Ex: a player who was on vacation came home and uploaded new fraps)

4) GM issues a ruling.
A) All rulings and arguments, evidences, and appendices shall be made public the moment the ruling is issued
B) All rulings will consist of a short statement of the case including the ultimate disposition (part A guilty / not guilty etc.), a brief statement on why the GM staff ruled the way it did, and a brief statement explaining the punishment and its justifications.
B) Rulings may be appealed in the same format as the original complaint
C) Appeals are owed NO response, and are heard strictly at the discretion of the senior GM staff

5) If all involved parties can reach mutual agreement, GM intervention will be deemed unnecessary and the petition dismissed.
A)Frivolous or abusive petitions/appeals will result in punishment for the abusers
B) If an accused guild admits wrong doing and presents no defense, that admission will be considered favorably when determining punishment
__________________
Xasten <The Mystical Order>
Frieza <Stasis> 1999-2003 Prexus
"I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." JOHN 14:6
  #2  
Old 08-15-2014, 05:03 PM
Juntsie Juntsie is offline
Aviak

Juntsie's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Grobb
Posts: 65
Default

Juntsie appreciate dis well-reasoned, procedural suggestion. No dispute that it would work real gud, but it suffer from one big problem:

Not classic.

Project 1999 raid disputes should not require legal briefing, appeals, and procedural formats. Game about bashing stuff and getting pixel to impress female, not legal briefing. Dis is Everquest not Litigationquest. Some folk, like Juntsie, specialize in professional service, but it should not be imposed on all. Dere was no formal process in classic.

GM got better tings to do den conduct administrative review of complaint. They have to make boxer run in big circle, dey have to help newbie who fall thru world, dey have to enforce the platinum standard, etc.

Yet, even bigger problem exist becuz system would be unbalanced. GM would be absolutely staggered if Juntsie submitted petition on behalf of guild or submit amicus brief in support of raid guild he like. Whole raid game would devolve into who retain Juntsie first, cuz they would surely win dispute. Dis not in interest of justice.
__________________
/s/
Juntsie Grobbstein (Green)
Juntsie Professional & Shaman Services, LLC
Licensed Troll Professional (J.D., M.D., Th.D., R.D., R.C.C., Ph.D., C.P.A., L.S.L.P)
Known Associates: Oakenhops Valebrewer (51 Druid <Dial a Port>); Korezril (50 Monk <Ancient Blood>) ; Xeirella L'Veldriss (52 Necro)


Professional troll services fer gud rates, including da raid dispute resolution. Dis message confidential and not intended for tax purpose. Protect swamp. Tink green before print.
Last edited by Juntsie; 08-15-2014 at 05:33 PM..
  #3  
Old 08-15-2014, 05:07 PM
Bboboo Bboboo is offline
Fire Giant

Bboboo's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 817
Default

I think the GMs have addressed being against this sort of thing due to how every situation is different and would just cause arguments over disputes to just go on forever.
  #4  
Old 08-15-2014, 05:17 PM
Yumyums Inmahtumtums Yumyums Inmahtumtums is offline
Planar Protector

Yumyums Inmahtumtums's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,073
Default

TLDR
__________________

Yumyums Inmahtumtums - 59 Shaman
Lemonspoon Icebeaner - 52 Enchanter
Yumyums Inmahtumtums - 60 Enchanter
  #5  
Old 08-15-2014, 05:24 PM
Gimp Gimp is offline
Fire Giant


Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 547
Default

LawyerQuesting hard
  #6  
Old 08-15-2014, 05:26 PM
Swish Swish is offline
Planar Protector

Swish's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 19,275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yumyums Inmahtumtums [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
TLDR
Any chance of a summary, op?
  #7  
Old 08-15-2014, 05:29 PM
Frieza_Prexus Frieza_Prexus is offline
Fire Giant

Frieza_Prexus's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Houston, TX.
Posts: 749
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juntsie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Not classic.
In classic EQ, server GMs were given wide discretion to settle disputes. This falls well within those powers. Additionally, such procedures have no bearing on the game itself when talking about "not classic." This does nothing to affect the content, but it has everything to do with how the staff communicates with the players.

This changes nothing in the substance of what the GMs say or do. This only influences how they communicate their rulings to the players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juntsie
In sum, proposal seem bit cumbersome and formalistic. Juntsie prefer alternative raid dispute resolution. Dis would create too much litigation about raid dispute, and take too much GM staff time.
The current raid scene is bloated with excessive petitions, fraps, and headache inducing cries for attention. By formalizing the procedure and setting hard limits on what people can submit, the workload is REDUCED from what we currently have. The staff has been close to a breaking point many times over the years from excessive petitions over the most trivial of slights. They've always been handled with a flurry of disorganized petitions, private messages, and cries of favoritism and corruption. Formal procedure helps eliminate this.

Alternative dispute resolution, while I agree it is imminently favorable, is not always a realistic option. Especially here. When ADR fails, these procedures reduce the headache and communicative bloat the petition process currently faces.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bboboo
I think the GMs have addressed being against this sort of thing due to how every situation is different and would just cause arguments over disputes to just go on forever.
Look at the procedures a bit more closely; they change nothing substantive. They only define the process to be more predictable and streamlined. At no point is GM discretion limited. Again, the goal is to reduce the amount of work and frustration the GMs currently face.

These procedures provide quick and efficient closure for all parties in a thorough and public manner which is certainly in the interest of justice.
__________________
Xasten <The Mystical Order>
Frieza <Stasis> 1999-2003 Prexus
"I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." JOHN 14:6
  #8  
Old 08-15-2014, 05:36 PM
Swish Swish is offline
Planar Protector

Swish's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 19,275
Default

first sentence of point 2 re this thread
  #9  
Old 08-15-2014, 05:38 PM
Frieza_Prexus Frieza_Prexus is offline
Fire Giant

Frieza_Prexus's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Houston, TX.
Posts: 749
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swish [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Any chance of a summary, op?
1) The resolution of raid disputes is too disorganized.

2) The staff hates getting a petition that's 20 pages long and written by a 5 year old.

3) Spelling out exactly HOW to submit a complain/defense makes it easier, faster, fairer, and more efficient for everyone.
__________________
Xasten <The Mystical Order>
Frieza <Stasis> 1999-2003 Prexus
"I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." JOHN 14:6
  #10  
Old 08-15-2014, 05:41 PM
Juntsie Juntsie is offline
Aviak

Juntsie's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Grobb
Posts: 65
Default

Fireza have no evidence dat procedure above is classic. It not classic. Juntsie move to dismiss cuz no evidence that classic and that element of essential ting on server. Dis simple, direct argument should win, cuz "not classic" argument win most of time. It should win here, too, cuz game Everquest and not LitigationQuest.

Game about bash for fun and get pixel for female attention. Raid dispute should not change nature of game wit giant formal procedure dat cause headache. Juntsie no like dat raid dispute happen, but no excuse for LitigationQuest.

Beside, as shown above, dis proposal unbalanced, cuz Juntsie would effectively have power to cause any party to win raid dispute, regardless of merits.
__________________
/s/
Juntsie Grobbstein (Green)
Juntsie Professional & Shaman Services, LLC
Licensed Troll Professional (J.D., M.D., Th.D., R.D., R.C.C., Ph.D., C.P.A., L.S.L.P)
Known Associates: Oakenhops Valebrewer (51 Druid <Dial a Port>); Korezril (50 Monk <Ancient Blood>) ; Xeirella L'Veldriss (52 Necro)


Professional troll services fer gud rates, including da raid dispute resolution. Dis message confidential and not intended for tax purpose. Protect swamp. Tink green before print.
Last edited by Juntsie; 08-15-2014 at 05:43 PM..
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:00 PM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.