[Poll] Enable Player Kick voting?

[HeiligWahrheit]

Hello everyone!

As suggested, we'll continue with our next voting:

Should the Player Kick Voting be enabled?

The pro's:
- AFK's can be kicked without an admin -> Important, if less players are online and the teams are unbalanced.
- Any player breaking the rules can be kicked without an admin.

The con's:
- The voting can be executed by any player at any time - it may disturb the gaming experience.
- Disliked players could be kicked without breaking any rule.

Let us know your opinion in here!

How to we set up this vote?

You have several choices. The choice "No" should be clear and will be compared to the sum of all other votes - the majority wins. But you can also choose, at which percentage a player can be kicked. We'll take the average of the votes

Best regards,
HeiligWahrheit

 

[Phallic]

Voted no since I distinctly remember this feature being prone to abuse and all too readily used by ill-intentioned people who seek to stir things up or troll. Also, I very much agree with the point of it very frequently degenerating into a popularity contest, especially in cases where one may play either too good or not good enough by whatever arbitrary standard certain people tend to set. Some particular bullies may also spam it the same way map vote gets spammed if it doesn't pass.

Though yes, in theory it would be nice if there were an option to get rid of, let's say, AFK players without first consulting an admin but the in-built kick vote wouldn't appear to be the viable solution imo.

 

[Scofield]

Haha, a vote where the organizers definitely want it to be No.
Do you want to make fools out of players?
Why blur the votes when the answer is Yes?
Vote must be either Yes or No!
Now pure score is 7-7!

 

[HeiligWahrheit]

Hm, sometimes people like @Scofield just need the ability to read or do I need to write the obvious things?

You have several choices. The choice "No" should be clear and will be compared to all other votes - the majority wins. But you can also choose, at which percentage a player can be kicked. We'll take the average of the votes

-> The choice "No" will be compared with all other votes.

So yes, right now, it's 8x "Yes" and 7x "No" (obviously). So if it stays as it is right now, a player kick vote would be implemented, where 75% of the players need to vote "Yes" for kicking a player.

But thanks for your kind answer and insinuating some fake polls I never expected something else by you Scofield!

 

[DenalDouglas]

Hm, sometimes people like @Scofield just need the ability to read or do I need to write the obvious things?

-> The choice "No" will be compared with all other votes.

So yes, right now, it's 8x "Yes" and 7x "No" (obviously). So if it stays as it is right now, a player kick vote would be implemented, where 75% of the players need to vote "Yes" for kicking a player.

But thanks for your kind answer and insinuating some fake polls I never expected something else by you Scofield!

As shocking as this might be, I'm actually going to have to speak up in Scofield's defense. I understand your intentions now, but the wording of the original post is a bit ambiguous ("compared to the sum of all other votes" might have been better) and even I initially thought the same thing he did about it. But my vote in favor stays the same regardless, so it really doesn't matter to me how it's worded.

 

[HeiligWahrheit]

I just changed it, thanks for the hint ;-)

As I'm not a native english speaker, my wording might not be the best. But there is a difference between thinking something initially (like you did, I'm thankful for every hint regarding my wording) and insinuating fake polls - that I never did ;-)

 

[TKO_Flight447]

Ignore schofield, he is just having his normal tantrum.

My vote is ABSOLUTELY NO.

People are going to abuse this and it will create a major distraction every time the "vote kick player" appears on the screen. The distraction will create drama, and the drama will create fights, and then people will get kicked/banned. Unfortunately, we are not mature enough as a player base to only use it when necessary such as AFK's or rain rapers. There is a reason so many other gaming communities have this function turned off. I agree to an extent about voting for things such as maps, but I do not agree about giving the in-game players the power to choose who gets to stay or get kicked.

 

[Pinky]

I voted YES for several reasons. There are so few times when there are many players on, such as 18 or more. When there are 6 - 8 players, one or two afks really mess up the teams and we can't boot them.

The other reason is a way to keep the a-holes in check. So many players have been run off by bullies with little punishment to the offenders. And we all know who they are.

pinky

 

[Pinky]

Thank you for putting up the poll. I appreciate your hard work Heil and all admins. It's a tough job that I enjoyed doing until I got a lecture from Ice about booting Toxic for being afk. He apparently went to spectate but the game showed he was in the game. I asked several times. No response. I boot him. Instead of taking the 10 seconds to come back into the game, he went crying to Ice and I got a lecture. So I said piss on it.

 

[DiscoMagpie]

LOL at Ice's reaction, glad to see he's still here.

As for the topic, I guess I should jump in as well. I agree that it's a double-edged sword, that I suppose is only going to be implemented (if it does) to lessen the admin's burden, and that's to make the majority of players essentially "an admin" when there isn't one around.

I agree with almost all the points that were made, they're all valid. Just like map voting and friendly fire, those three topics will forever be the biggest debate of this server. And it seems we're always split on these, never having a big majority.

My biggest concern with turning voting back on is that yes, it will create distraction and needless tension in the game. I don't know if that's still the situation, but I can imagine Flight here getting most of the votekick attempts. BUT if he can ignore those, then I don't think they'll be successful. But I don't understand the "90% or more" vote option, and the amount of people that voted for it.

In all of the votes I've initiated (or coordinated), I've never had such a high percentage from the players voting, no matter the amount of players. Getting 90% of votes is simply not an option for any vote, no matter if it's to kick a player or vote a map. Thus I believe that turning back the voting, only to give it 90% threshold is pointless, as votes will be cast overwhelmingly often, and at the same time will almost never result in success.

I'm not saying the poll/vote should be redone, but I ask anyone who reads this and wants voting to be turned on again, to vote for the lower percentage options, preferably 60% or 70%, as those are both manageable, and at the same time are high enough of a limit for the vote to be considered a "majority vote".

Personally, I'd like to have an admin on 24/7, or at least at all times that there are players in, so we can ensure a just and pleasant atmosphere, but since that's pretty difficult to do unless we make most players admins, I suppose voting would be the next best option.

 

[DenalDouglas]

LOL at Ice's reaction, glad to see he's still here.

As for the topic, I guess I should jump in as well. I agree that it's a double-edged sword, that I suppose is only going to be implemented (if it does) to lessen the admin's burden, and that's to make the majority of players essentially "an admin" when there isn't one around.

I agree with almost all the points that were made, they're all valid. Just like map voting and friendly fire, those three topics will forever be the biggest debate of this server. And it seems we're always split on these, never having a big majority.

My biggest concern with turning voting back on is that yes, it will create distraction and needless tension in the game. I don't know if that's still the situation, but I can imagine Flight here getting most of the votekick attempts. BUT if he can ignore those, then I don't think they'll be successful. But I don't understand the "90% or more" vote option, and the amount of people that voted for it.

In all of the votes I've initiated (or coordinated), I've never had such a high percentage from the players voting, no matter the amount of players. Getting 90% of votes is simply not an option for any vote, no matter if it's to kick a player or vote a map. Thus I believe that turning back the voting, only to give it 90% threshold is pointless, as votes will be cast overwhelmingly often, and at the same time will almost never result in success.

I'm not saying the poll/vote should be redone, but I ask anyone who reads this and wants voting to be turned on again, to vote for the lower percentage options, preferably 60% or 70%, as those are both manageable, and at the same time are high enough of a limit for the vote to be considered a "majority vote".

Personally, I'd like to have an admin on 24/7, or at least at all times that there are players in, so we can ensure a just and pleasant atmosphere, but since that's pretty difficult to do unless we make most players admins, I suppose voting would be the next best option.

I changed my vote from 60% to 70%. I still think having the kick vote is the way to go, but if there are that many concerns about abuse, maybe a higher requirement would be better. But I also agree with what you said about 90% being too high, and I think the same could be said for 80%, so 70% seems to be the best compromise.