[Discussion] Closing an Action Request

[Daigestive]

Suggestion: I think this has become a big problem. Not to mention any scenarios but if an AR is made i believe "we have resolved the issue" or " i have spoken to **** can you close the AR" shouldnt be a good enough reason for it to be closed. All i am suggesting is some kind of rule that means in order to close an AR it has to be COMPLETLY JUSTIFIED to a staff member with it's reasoning. This would stop people having to re-open AR and also people closing AR for the wrong reasons. Sorry if i've offended anyone but this is merely a suggestion to make the server and forums better. To sumarise i believe that every comunity member should have to give a Valid and justifiable reason when closing an AR instead of just 'we sorted it out' because it should be less about you're relationship with the other guy and more about if they broke the rules or not.

-Dai John :wales:

Any feedback will be appreciated aslong as justified with a reply

 

[Ludus]

I agree honestly, if you want an AR deleted then the chances are you probably shouldn't have posted one on the person in the first place, however it should be handled by a staff member regardless of the scenarios.

 

[ΙεΙίος1]

lelios1 died during a raid.
lelios1 realised that a guy made a small unrealistic movement.
lelios1 posts an AR as he is mad and wants his weapon refunded.

After an hour or so.

lelios1 is not mad anymore.
lelios1 feels bad about the guy.
lelios1 requests for his AR to be closed.

With your suggestion,

An admin denies lelios1's request.
The guy gets banned for very long as he had a bad record, even though he claims to have changed.
Poor lelios1 feels bad.
The guy gets mad and blames lelios1.
lelios1 then gets bullied by the guy.
Other people join the guy.
lelios1 suicides.

I wouldn't like this rule. Many times people post ARs for those little things just because they are mad at that moment. They should be able to close their AR after they realised that the person does not need a punishment. Also most of the times people close ARs when the rule breaker ruined their "RP" experience so if they want to close the AR it is their problem.

 

[Deleted member 4084]

I closed an action request on @ShadowJoey due to the vile things which were said. Both on the application for Enforcer and the action request. I was mad at the time and calmed down. I then requested @Fredy to delete it so people could no longer use it against ShadowJoey.

I guess it's a sense of whether you think they should be punished at that one specific time, being honest, some people would then have no chance of redeeming themselves. I mean, if they fucking scam you for VIP (Which is a big rule to break) then don't close it I guess. But it's the user's discretion, I personally think it should stay that way and no other user should demand it be taken down until a staff member deals with it.

 

[matt]

In my opinion this rule is dumb, if I make an AR on a friend just in the moment for something that was clearly a slip up or an accident, because i'm mad at them, and then I realize there's no point crying over spilled milk, and no point falling out with a friend because i was :steamsalty: I can't reverse the AR over what is clearly an accident and not a purposeful rulebreak.

This rule will just make the community more filled, and in my opinion is just silly.

 

[Allen Kennedy]

My opinion on the idea:

Alright, the way I see it here, if the rule broken affected only the person making the AR, then they should have the right to close it at any time.

However if the rule break affected multiple people, who entrusted the person making the action request to see it through, or if the rule broken was broken for the rule breaker's own personal gain/profit, even if it didn't negatively affect anyone else.
For example:

Being a lazy sod and running the intersection red lights for no reason.
[Comment additional examples below]​

If any of the latter is the case then the action request may not be closed at will, and whether the AR can be closed or not would be down to staff member discretion.

 

[Daigestive]

/phone accidental post instead of comment sorry

 

[ΙεΙίος1]

No ceri, you did not say what Allen said at all. Yes I read your post again and again trying to see if you indeed said anything about it but no. Before I start let me say that by calling me stubborn is not going to help you at all and also you rating my reply dumb after you said that every feedback is appreciated is immature and pointless. Right, so:

All i am suggesting is some kind of rule that means in order to close an AR it has to be COMPLETLY JUSTIFIED to a staff member with it's reasoning.

This is your entire post. All the other things are examples or unecessary stuff. You are saying that you want a rule that stops people from closing their ARs on others "without a justifiable reason". That "justifiable reason" is really blury if you ask me and you do not really explain what a justifiable reason would be. With this in mind you have given us the thought that you do not want to allow people to close their ARs at all. You completely agreed with what Ludus said. Let's see what he said shall we?

I agree honestly, if you want an AR deleted then the chances are you probably shouldn't have posted one on the person in the first place, however it should be handled by a staff member regardless of the scenarios.

He is saying that if a person posts an AR the AR must stay no matter what. You come later though saying that you agree with Allen. Allen said that if the rule breaker broke a rule that affected negatively the person that made the AR the person that made the AR should be able to close it if he wants but if the rulebreaker affected many people the AR should stay and the rule breaker must be punished. If you indeed meant this then firstly you are going against your original post and againts Ludus (who you agreed with before) and secondly the whole post is pointless because if the rule breaker affected many people he IS going to get punished anyways.

 

[rat]

If anything we should be advocating the use of other means to settle rule infringements... ARs are a last resort when a user truly believes somebody deserves to be punished for a rulebreak. If the reporter acted out of spite and realises his mistake, even if the rule was broken (most of the time it's a minor thing anyway), it shouldn't be taken further.

 

[MoronPipllyd]

My opinion on the idea:

Alright, the way I see it here, if the rule broken affected only the person making the AR, then they should have the right to close it at any time.

However if the rule break affected multiple people, who entrusted the person making the action request to see it through, or if the rule broken was broken for the rule breaker's own personal gain/profit, even if it didn't negatively affect anyone else.
For example:
Being a lazy sod and running the intersection red lights for no reason.
[Comment additional examples below]
If any of the latter is the case then the action request may not be closed at will, and whether the AR can be closed or not would be down to staff member discretion.

Allen has the right approach to this, in most cases people will only remove Action Requests if they've spoken to the specific person that affected their roleplay. Typically if the Action Request was for a more serious offence that would have affected more than one person it will be considered nonetheless.