[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.

 

[PlayerTri]

wouldn't it be abuse of power? for example, a player who shoots better than others, and people, feeling angry, will create a vote to kick him? or, for example, a player captured the main enemy and most of the annoyed players will kick him, but he didn’t break the rules, isn`t it? where is this fine line that will determine whether they are right or wrong? Until this is defined, I vote NO, otherwise I could support a 90% probability and only, no 80 or 70 percent

 

[Scofield]

Heilig, friend, sorry if I didn’t read everything regarding voting. I understand what you mean. In this case, there are no questions. But it would be clearer to first vote Yes or No, and then figure out how to organize No (if "No" choose).

As for voting. I can express my opinion since I have been playing this game for a long time. More than 10 years ago there was the most popular Ukrainian server 14dss.ua, more than 30 players every day. Unfortunately, rip

There ff was disabled and player voting for removal was enabled; no one knew the admins at all.
So about voting: it was very convenient! Players in the chat discussed who to kick in case of violations and AFK.

This way, administrators can safely play the game instead of constant supervision. There will be no one who is in charge and who is not. Everyone will be equal.

 

[Scofield]

wouldn't it be abuse of power? for example, a player who shoots better than others, and people, feeling angry, will create a vote to kick him? or, for example, a player captured the main enemy and most of the annoyed players will kick him, but he didn’t break the rules, isn`t it? where is this fine line that will determine whether they are right or wrong? Until this is defined, I vote NO, otherwise I could support a 90% probability and only, no 80 or 70 percent

this never actually happened in the game. the goats are playing calmly. everyone is focused on the game and only reacts when there are violations.

 

[Phallic]

It may all be fine and dandy in 80% of cases and then there are the remaining times or rounds when you are subject to some trolls or sore losers with a power complex that want to get rid of some particular player at whatever cost.

It's this randomness and unpredictability that lies at the heart of the problem and that is simply something that cannot and should not be afforded when it comes to something as crucial as kicking players in my opinion.

Also, I don't think 14DSS is something to aspire to or worth emulating, it already starts with the name, short for 14. Division der SS which makes me glad that server is gone.

 

[paranoid]

I guess people just wanna press the "7" button again like in old days

 

[Scofield]

It may all be fine and dandy in 80% of cases and then there are the remaining times or rounds when you are subject to some trolls or sore losers with a power complex that want to get rid of some particular player at whatever cost.

It's this randomness and unpredictability that lies at the heart of the problem and that is simply something that cannot and should not be afforded when it comes to something as crucial as kicking players in my opinion.

Also, I don't think 14DSS is something to aspire to or worth emulating, it already starts with the name, short for 14. Division der SS which makes me glad that server is gone.

Quit the conspiracy theory and don't try to read between the lines

 

[toxic2]

As for the vote topic, I will vote (Yes)
It seems as though the HELLO server needs all the nooby tweeks it can get these days.
Friendly fire off so no splash damage to m79 foot shooting, absolutely YES to vote kick

 

[toxic2]

I remember when Pinky used to cry non stop and accuse me of hacking. As he himself Used to issue the votekick against me because he couldnt compete. Constantly a vote kick being issued by the crying players against good players.
Bro cried to all the admins trying to have me banned.
I was watched and watched and low and behold... Toxic does not cheat. So Pinky cried more and more about anything and everyone until he left the game.
Than he returns, and remembers he kicked me like 10 years ago when vote kick was enabled and makes a post here about it.

Mind you i have No recollection of this, but clearly he cried himself to sleep night after night about this one instance or he would have not brought it up.

So i called him an id*ot and my post was removed and i was issued a warning. Good job regulating free speech.

However dragging someone's name thru the mud and posting they're "Crying" seems to be accepted as his post has not been removed.
So cry more Pinky when you don't get your way.

Cry in the shower, cry yourself to sleep, cry while you eat and keep letting me live rent free in your empty head.
CRY CRY CRY.

To be perfectly honest, adding vote kick back to the server is not a good idea. But I'll vote for whatever people don't like at this point.
vote to disable FF so we can noob tube our feet and exploit the game, buuuuuuut in the same token vote to enable vote kick to kick the people exploiting the game.

Yall never can just leave the game the way it was meant to be played.

 

[HeiligWahrheit]

Insulting someone is not part of free speech.

Any player is allowed to make suggestions on what can be changed on the server. This time, pinky suggested to activate vote-kicks. Independent of the background: If the admins agree, that this could be a good poll in our forum, then players can vote. That was just the case here.

Yall never can just leave the game the way it was meant to be played.

The game / server settings changed over the last years/decades. There is no "way it was meant to be played". Slight changes are / have been made time after time.

I will not justify myself for letting the community decide, what changes should be made here.