Community Suggestion Stop banning people for info they couldnt possibly know?

[Anthony]

Suggestion Title: Stop banning people for info they couldnt possibly know?
Suggestion Description: People are getting banned for situations where they are believing they are assisting players in a situation where they are allowed to; for example "Ten Toes", assisting an arrested/in process to be arrested player against the Cops; but the player was either freed en route, was in a car crash, or died and needed EMS. Causing players to raid PD before they arrived, or kill cops after the player was freed.

I am suggesting that there needs to be a reform on this kind of issue, why are players getting banned or removed for simply not being omniscient or clairvoyant? We are playing a game after all, if a Player believes with all genuine benefit of a doubt that what they are doing is within the rules; surely they should be looked at with better grounds?

A few examples crossed my mind and that I've been a part of.

Example A) Police arrest someone at the Bazaar for 9.5. On the way to PD a crazy Medic accidently swerves into the cops which totals the car. While the suspect was being arrested he said Ten toes and his org communicated it. His org at Suburbs then gears up and five minutes later believing that reasonable time has elapsed, raid PD. But the suspect is still with Officers on the Highway being revived. Everyone who raids PD gets banned.

Example B) Police believe a person has committed multiple Murders by accident and tell someone IC they are being given max sentence for murder. Which is "Ten Toes". An org member hears this, tells the rest of his dudes about it, they gear up and kill all the cops on scene. However, it turns out the Cop was a pistol cop; who had no DNA of the scene yet and the person was a bystander. Everyone who gets involved gets banned.

Example C) A suspect being arrested for "Ten Toes" near Bazaar gets freed during the arrest, the initial wave of people freeing the suspect all die , but the freed suspect manages to escape. Without further communication - the Cops no longer know who was originally Ten Toes and the freeing assailants are now fighting Cops under the belief they are fully within the rules - but the person is now free making it against the rules. The people who are now trying to free "nobody" all get banned for not seeing through the fog of war.

When an org member is in combat they sometimes are shit at giving comms or not and sometimes decisions are made on a hair. The wrong decision can happen and it should be understood that we shouldn't ban players for just seeing through the mist.

Why should this be added?:
- Fairness for Players.

- More understanding within the Community.

- Less bans for unavoidable gameplay.
(By this, I mean that bannable behaviour is typically gameplay that is to be avoided, like RDM / Metagaming. I dont see mistakes as avoidable, by nature they are mistakes and usually within this community if it is identified that an offender is making a genuine mistake they usually are left off with a warning and not week long bans.)

What negatives could this have?:
- I can't really think of any.

What problem would this suggestion solve?: I went into a lot of detail further above but I can expand if questioned on it.

 

[DanielRabbit]

A negative would be rather you have to witness it and know for sure that he is being arrested and know if he is 10 toes. if he wasn't you'd be banned for 2.5. if he died and you didn't investigate it'd be 2.5. if he was being revived and no cops were there and pd raid it would be against 2.5

 

[Allen Kennedy]

People aren't banned for making reasonable assumptions that turn out to be false. They're banned for starting shootouts and risking their lives, based on little to no evidence.

If you're referring the the incident about a week or so, in which about a dozen players raided PD to free someone who was already free. It was the responsibility of those players to at least, actually know who it was they were trying to break out, and have a reasonable assumption that the person was in fact arrested, or in the process of being arrested. I'm not totally familiar with that incident, however to the best of my knowledge, the person who was arrested and let go was actually a part of the PD raid to free themselves, which goes to show just how stupid that whole incident was. If you're gonna shoot cops and risk your life, you should know who you're actually risking your life for, at the very least.

I would like to see some kind or org perk where you can text the dealer to find out if someone is in police custody, be that either handcuffed, in jail, or dead. I think that would definitely help avoid these types of things in future. Maybe suggest that, as opposed to asking the staff team to stop enforcing the rules.

 

[Liambo]

I would like to see some kind or org perk where you can text the dealer to find out if someone is in police custody, be that either handcuffed, in jail, or dead

Tbh that's sounds great

 

[Ezza]

TLDR; Dont follow what others do and they complain when it turns out they broke the rules, instead assess every situation on your own accord before diving in headfirst.

 

[Goonsberg]

Never got banned for anything unnecessary and I always rolled around with the biggest idiots on PERP

AKA don’t be an idiot???

 

[Jack Bruhross]

Never got banned for anything unnecessary and I always rolled around with the biggest idiots on PERP

AKA don’t be an idiot???

you played with collier to?

 

[Roger Dolan]

I see where you are going but usually the unwritten rules are the ones that I feel apply in this server the most. Such as "Common Sense" , Dont charge at a guy pointing a gun at you when all you have is a baseball bat. Look at my case that was (Is currently) My longest ban... 1.6, 2.5, 3.4 - User attempted to kill someone in front of a cop with a their vehicle because they were "stood on their 4 million dollar car". When questioned about it he lied about the situation attempting to say he was "parking his car better". // Extended for 1.1 in shoutbox, very salty actually My ban was originally 1 week but since I "misbehaved" and called people "twig arms" , my ban was extended from 1 week to 2 weeks, to 3 months, to 6 months then My comment regarding the 6 months where I said "boo hoo only 6 months" it was extended to a PERM BAN. Now, I understand what I did was not polite which I now know resulted in this long 6 months ban but simply thinking you can get away with saying mean things can/will result in a ban that the admins think is apporpiate. In regards to gameplay bans, this is the same case as Admins will determine if what you did during gameplay broke "role playing" rules. I believe the rules are written Cleary, and you must understand how gameplay mechanics work on this server before rushing into things such as "Mugging people' and "Stealing cars" because you need to MOST IMPORTANTLY know when to do something and not to do it. Hence why some actions are deemed appropriate when done in a proper RP fashion.

 

[TylerReadman1]

TLDR; Dont follow what others do and they complain when it turns out they broke the rules, instead assess every situation on your own accord before diving in headfirst.

sounds like fun!

 

[Goonsberg]

you played with collier to?

Patrolled with him a couple times and don’t know how we didn’t get demoted let alone perma banned

 

[money]

In A, you should have the communicating org member follow the cop while he relays information to the rest of you. Raiding PD is meant to be highest risk in terms of risking your life, so trying to intercept the cop or ensure they do end up inside PD first is the best way.

In B, you make a dispute and it gets accepted.

In C, it depends on context on how long after the second wave of org members arrive. Assuming they just came, even if the arrested suspect just ran off, it is reasonable to shoot police to ensure his escape and to find and free him and take the guns from fallen friends.

 

[MalekIsWeird]

People aren't banned for making reasonable assumptions that turn out to be false

Very bold claim considering what happened tonight…

I support this suggestion because intention is very important. I’ve seen A1L make a great example iirc where he exonerated a player for “rdming” because the KOS invalidly was called by a friend of his whom he trusted. I believe that’s more fair than simply banning anybody who breaks rules as if it’s all black and white.

 

[Bnjemann]

This whole suggestion just seems like a demonstration of failing to see how accountability works.

We aren’t banning people for receiving misinformation and acting on it, we’re banning them because they're using their friends outlandish and obviously incorrect word alone as a validation for a rule break.

 

[Anthony]

This whole suggestion just seems like a demonstration of failing to see how accountability works.

We aren’t banning people for receiving misinformation and acting on it, we’re banning them because their using their friends outlandish and obviously incorrect word alone as a validation for a rule break.

You mention accountability but seem to place it in the wrong place. The person giving the incorrect information (if deliberate) should be punished. The scenario you seem to describe is to make it so organization members simply don't trust each other. Whats to stop a player at the Bazaar being detained by the Police to give a 2k ticket to scream ten toes and some random fella one-shots them but gets banned for "not being aware of the risks" or "should have done due diligence". It seems like the amount of times this shit occurs where things happen by the slim chance without a report are extremely lucky, and the way your ruleset frames this particular section of being aware is so flimsy it allows an entire clan to be banned based on the fuck-up of one or two people.

Take a recent example;

Spoiler: Example

Person A is being arrested for ten years.

Person B and C want to free them, while making person D aware of the potential fight.

Person D declines to initially participate.

Person B and C attack the cops to free A, A is freed, B dies and C is seen being killed by cops, by person D.

Person A gets freed in the interim, making the situation no longer "Ten Toes" and runs away.

However at this point, the fight restarts as more cops respond and fire at B and C, D now comes to help them, but is now in "Rulebreak Mode" because he somehow is expected to know person A has run off in an entirely different direction.

Person E is asked by Person D for help after being made aware of the situation. And E joins in and kills cops.

Person D and E get banned, and no one else is punished.

Are bans really warranted in a situation like this? I dont think so.

 

[Allen Kennedy]

Whats to stop a player at the Bazaar being detained by the Police to give a 2k ticket to scream ten toes and some random fella one-shots them but gets banned for "not being aware of the risks" or "should have done due diligence"

Common sense. If you know you're not going to be arrested for a major sentence, then you don't shout ten toes. If you do, then you're punished for it. And if you're some random fella and you hear someone shouting ten toes, you shouldn't lift a finger to help, because they're "some random fella" and not anyone you know and trust not to make up bullshit. Why would you risk your life and liberty for "some random fella"?

 

[Ellie]

As Allen said previously; don't 'KOS cops' for people you don't know/that's not in your org, for dead people or people that's not spending +7 years in jail for their actions.

You make it sound like people who falsely call out to people for help won't get punished, but they do. It's just about common sense and not scream 'KOS cops' as soon as you get handcuffed and not knowing why.

Rule 3.4 is the biggest rule we have and can be used in almost every situation, especially when you risk your life and imprisonment by killing cops. You must investigate or at least asking why and question the 'KOS' before actually risking anything.

 

[ALOO89]

i agree with baning people over kosing for people who they dont know


but when org member say 10 tos or kos i think you should help org member and if u find that he break rules by saying and his not 10 tos then its his fault cant imagen asking him why/what did u do while cop watching me asking him that will make breaking him out of the jail harder than it is everyone will know

You must investigate or at least asking why and question the 'KOS' before actually risking anything.

as i said most cop if they see you asking your friend what they did or anything else they will just cuff you or will be ready for you in pd camping there 10 mins so its not really good idea to ask and shit specially if it org member

also there is not really much time to ask him what did you do and he cant really explain everything while u ask him the cop will ask u to leave and give 3 sec then cuff and take u to jail

 

[MalekIsWeird]

I don’t think anybody is contesting that KOSing for strangers without investigating is silly and irresponsible.

The problem is when your own org member deceives you into breaking rules and initiated an active situation such as a shootout where it’s necessary that one must respond immediately to that by protecting said org member against police or another civ while assuming it’s for the initially explained 10 toes then it ends up turning out unjustified to call 10 toes.

The person who was deceived shouldn’t be banned for having their hand forced if it’s clear their intention was obviously not to break rules or support rule breaks. Anybody can be deceived by the someone they trust.

 

[Anthony]

Common sense. If you know you're not going to be arrested for a major sentence, then you don't shout ten toes. If you do, then you're punished for it. And if you're some random fella and you hear someone shouting ten toes, you shouldn't lift a finger to help, because they're "some random fella" and not anyone you know and trust not to make up bullshit. Why would you risk your life and liberty for "some random fella"?

I think you should attempt to empathise with players a bit more in this case, it's a game, people play it for fun, Perpheads can be summed up as a cops and robbers game with a lot of fluff on either side. With that being in mind, people are going to want to fight Cops (The players deliberately given free equipment in order to be cannon fodder for these players.) I have seen personally many times people go against the Cops simply because they can, I.E breaking out players cuffed, helping out when ten toes happens. To pretend this isn't the case is just denying reality. The moderation should cater to the community it's elected by.

Furthermore, while it may make sense from a Moderators perspective that players should "investigate more" 99% of the time it's unrealistic to do so, if an Org member tells you they're being raided you have a choice whether to believe them or not and if you are in the Org what reason would you have to not believe them? You're going to respond with a gun and kill the perceived raiders? Same thing with Ten Toes. If it's someone you trust to play alongside in an Org its pretty much a given you'll trust them when they tell you they're ten toes, leading to you getting banned for the whims and mistakes of others, whether intentional or not. That is bad design.

Punishments and severity for them should always be based on the intention of the player and the harm on the community it imposes. Unavoidable mistakes and miscommunication happen and approaching situations from the side where players should "just investigate more" is a bit privileged. It assumed a reality where players are literally afraid to play the game for fear one of their Org members might decide to get everyone banned one day for the fuck of it.

 

[MalekIsWeird]

I think you should attempt to empathise with players a bit more in this case, it's a game, people play it for fun, Perpheads can be summed up as a cops and robbers game with a lot of fluff on either side. With that being in mind, people are going to want to fight Cops (The players deliberately given free equipment in order to be cannon fodder for these players.) I have seen personally many times people go against the Cops simply because they can, I.E breaking out players cuffed, helping out when ten toes happens. To pretend this isn't the case is just denying reality. The moderation should cater to the community it's elected by.

Think about it for a moment.

If you hear a stranger whom you’ve never met before or don’t know all that well plead out to you to do the most dangerous mission to save him. Is it reasonable in any way for your character to risk everything? I’d say no. If he’s your gang member or your long time friend then sure then it makes sense because you have a bond.