voting New Voting Proposal

[BirdyMurakami]

I think now would be a good time for me to speak up about this. I have to say that so far, even with all the updates, the voting methods we have now can easily be abused and has caused major problems for servers since its update. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of democratic voting on servers but with what we have now, it just won't work. I hope you will read this Klei because a change needs to happen. 

"Tweaked default voting rules to be a bit stricter: requires a minimum of 3 votes and must be unanimous." This will never work. It may work if everyone is against one person but if one person is not able to vote for whatever reason (maybe due to bugs) or if there are a team of "trolls" or "griefers", then this method is flawed. Also, having only three people to make voting work? What if there are two people playing with each other and there is one other person who is destroying your base. "Oops! Not enough people! Can't kick me! Sowwy!" Me and several of my comrades have been outraged by this. 

"Vote buttons are now disabled when the minimum Player count requirements are not met." This doesn't make it any better. Players who are new may not even know these voting features exist or it just eliminates or discourages the possibility of voting altogether. 

Here's what I think should happen. There should be majority rule, similar to what we have here in the United States Supreme Court and other judicial practices. If there are more "yes" votes, then whatever action is prompted will happen. If there are more "no" votes or if the votes are tied, then nothing happens. If someone doesn't vote, it counts as neutral or undecided.

In addition to this, in regards to vote kicks, a temporary ban should be in place depending on how many votes were enacted upon a person and how many times they were kicked on that server. For example. if that was their first offense and had only 2 votes, then they could be banned for 30 seconds. If they had multiple offenses and they had 7 votes, then they could get banned for 10+ minutes. This is to allow the remaining players in the game to get themselves back on their feet. If anyone would be concerned that this could also be abused, then that person who would initiate the votes must stay on the server for a certain amount of days (or be whitelisted), which can be configured in the settings. 

Please respond to this as soon as you read it. 

[Kitty Cat Meow]

I like what you suggested, I think it would work much better than the current system.

While we're on the topic of voting being broken, I have as few suggestions of my own:

First off, display who initiated the vote. People need to be held accountable for their abuse of the voting system.

Secondly, I think it would be interesting if players had more voting power based on how long they have survived. Perhaps players would have 1 "voting power" by default and earn ~0.2 additional "voting power" per ~5 days survived? That would put more voting power in the hands of a hard-working winter survivor than a day-1 griefer.

[rezecib]

@BirdyMurakami If the worst case of a voting system is as if the voting system wasn't there, that's not abuse of the voting system. Abuse is where the voting system makes things possible that are worse than not having the voting system. Currently the system is designed to minimize abuse. It could probably stand to be made a little less on the unanimous end, but I definitely disagree with majority rule; that would make abuse much easier.

I do agree that there should be temp bans involved in the kick system, though.

[BirdyMurakami]

6 minutes ago, rezecib said:

@BirdyMurakami If the worst case of a voting system is as if the voting system wasn't there, that's not abuse of the voting system. Abuse is where the voting system makes things possible that are worse than not having the voting system. Currently the system is designed to minimize abuse. It could probably stand to be made a little less on the unanimous end, but I definitely disagree with majority rule; that would make abuse much easier.

I do agree that there should be temp bans involved in the kick system, though.

I'm not sure if you are understanding my point, though. Here's an example from my personal experience with this. I was playing with two other people (3 on one side). There were three griefers that decided to come on and wanting us to restart the server or they destroy our bases (3 on the opponent). There were two other neutrals (2 undecided/others). Now, imagine if you need unanimous votes in order to kick somebody out. Surprise! You can't! The three griefers won't vote each other out nor they can do it to us. There's a stalemate right there. But what if there were majority votes? Us three as well as the two neutrals would vote the griefers out. That's the only way we would be safe and if they grief us and if they're out, we can just rollback. Eventually they will just give up. The two neutrals were on our side. 

Regardless if this could be even more abused or not, if you are worried that you may get voted out all because of this new rule, then you should group up with friends or make allies. Ever since this new voting system initiated, people of both sides have been grouping up. It became dangerous to play alone on a server because you can just be kicked out regardless of who you are. 

[rezecib]

@BirdyMurakami I do understand your point, but the most relevant comparison is no vote kick vs having vote kick. If you couldn't have kicked them anyway without vote kick, then it's not vote kick abuse. It's obvious that vote kick is not the silver bullet to solve all problems with griefers, but making it easier to kick/ban can generate its own set of problems, which is why it's tuned so far to the unanimous end.

[BirdyMurakami]

15 minutes ago, rezecib said:

@BirdyMurakami I do understand your point, but the most relevant comparison is no vote kick vs having vote kick. If you couldn't have kicked them anyway without vote kick, then it's not vote kick abuse. It's obvious that vote kick is not the silver bullet to solve all problems with griefers, but making it easier to kick/ban can generate its own set of problems, which is why it's tuned so far to the unanimous end.

Trying to read this plus your previous post is like trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle. Could you give detailed reasons why you think this way? 

[Mday]

Before we have vote kick:

Dont play on public with no admin.

After we have vote kick:

Dont play on server that has lower number of players playing on it and has no admin.

 

I guess it is better to have the vote kick than not.

 

So far I haven't see any players complaining about actual abuse of the vote kick system. However we do have this OP talking about the frustration of not able to use the vote kick. I think this suggest that abuse of the vote kick system is not common, and it is more a common situation where players whom have legitimate reason to use the vote kick system find themselves unable to do so.

[BirdyMurakami]

5 minutes ago, Mday said:

So far I haven't [seen] any players complaining about actual abuse of the vote kick system

1

There aren't many people speaking out on these issues. :/

[Mday]

37 minutes ago, BirdyMurakami said:

I'm not sure if you are understanding my point, though. Here's an example from my personal experience with this. I was playing with two other people (3 on one side). There were three griefers that decided to come on and wanting us to restart the server or they destroy our bases (3 on the opponent). There were two other neutrals (2 undecided/others). Now, imagine if you need unanimous votes in order to kick somebody out. Surprise! You can't! The three griefers won't vote each other out nor they can do it to us. There's a stalemate right there. But what if there were majority votes? Us three as well as the two neutrals would vote the griefers out. That's the only way we would be safe and if they grief us and if they're out, we can just rollback. Eventually they will just give up. The two neutrals were on our side. 

Regardless if this could be even more abused or not, if you are worried that you may get voted out all because of this new rule, then you should group up with friends or make allies. Ever since this new voting system initiated, people of both sides have been grouping up. It became dangerous to play alone on a server because you can just be kicked out regardless of who you are. 

The way I see it:

1) If the three had indeed burn your base to force a restart. 

Report to admin

2) If they didn't not burn your base.

Keep playing until you all die.

 

And I am curious. What makes you think the two other neutrals would vote against the griefers? If they don't give a damn to your situation or if they don't mind a restart then it is very likely that they would not vote against the griefers.

[BirdyMurakami]

8 minutes ago, Mday said:

The way I see it:

1) If the three had indeed burn your base to force a restart. 

Report to admin

2) If they didn't not burn your base.

Keep playing until you all die.

 

And I am curious. What makes you think the two other neutrals would vote against the griefers? If they don't give a damn to your situation or if they don't mind a restart then it is very likely that they would not vote against the griefers.

We were playing on a Klei Official server. And if we were on a different server, reporting to admin would be a bit of a painful process (sometimes, I may not even know where to report). Oh, and in addition, griefers can use alternative accounts, so banning won't do too much. 

Those two neutrals were on our side in that situation. I'm not saying everyone will vote for the good and abuse may still happen regardless. But what I am proposing overall is supposed to help a huge sum of players who just simply want to play. 

[Mday]

9 minutes ago, BirdyMurakami said:

There aren't many people speaking out on these issues. :/

So in reality there are more players suffer from the abuse but they have all decided to not talk about it? That seems unlikely to be the case too.

How often do you see "groups of griefers" anyway?

From my experience, not that often. After all, if you are a griefer then all you need is a torch to burn a base down. You really don't need to team with anyone.

[BirdyMurakami]

10 minutes ago, Mday said:

2) If they didn't not burn your base.

Keep playing until you all die.

 

 

Not relevant to my discussion thread but my reaction to this: I can never die. :3 (mostly)

 

[Mday]

6 minutes ago, BirdyMurakami said:

We were playing on a Klei Official server. And if we were on a different server, reporting to admin would be a bit of a painful process (sometimes, I may not even know where to report). Oh, and in addition, griefers can use alternative accounts, so banning won't do too much. 

Those two neutrals were on our side in that situation. I'm not saying everyone will vote for the good and abuse may still happen regardless. But what I am proposing overall is supposed to help a huge sum of players who just simply want to play. 

In that case, the server owner (aka Klei) has already decided what is best for them. They have decided to give no damn to these issues. If you are concern about griefing may be you shouldn't be playing on Klei offical in the first place.

Klei is able to create so many great game and yet some how they have managed to host the worst DST server of all. Host is always red for no reason and rubber banding issue never get solved. These official server really demonstrate how bad the DST experience can be if you don't play on a reasonable well managed server.

[BirdyMurakami]

24 minutes ago, Mday said:

In that case, the server owner (aka Klei) has already decided what is best for them. They have decided to give no damn to these issues. Then why do they keep making updates on voting? If you are [concerned] about griefing [maybe] you shouldn't be playing on Klei [Official] in the first place. Those servers are most commonly played on. I go there to attempt meeting good people. It has worked a few times. 

Klei is able to create so many great game and yet some how they have managed to host the worst DST server of all. Host is always red for no reason and rubber banding issue never get solved. These official server really demonstrate how bad the DST experience can be if you don't play on a reasonable well managed server. This isn't relevant to the issue I'm stating. 

7

If you stand strongly against this then please state YOUR detailed reasons on why you oppose.

 

34 minutes ago, Mday said:

So in reality there are more players suffer from the abuse but they have all decided to not talk about it? That seems unlikely to be the case too. Think of modern politics, in particular the U.S. Many of the people here don't take an interest in these issues, even if it is an issue to them; they don't want involvement. 

How often do you see "groups of griefers" anyway? There was only one group I saw so far. But the amount we see should not matter. Any number is lethal. 

From my experience, not that often. Then you're lucky. After all, if you are a griefer then all you need is a torch to burn a base down. You really don't need to team with anyone.  However, if you're a committed griefer, you would know that you would get kicked right off the bat if you are a loner. If you were to team up with someone, you can make someones life even more miserable. This has happened to me and a few other friends of mine. 

You need to take consideration of others' experiences. I've witnessed countless griefer attacks, many bases of the innocent destroyed, and yet they don't speak about it. 

[Mday]

3 minutes ago, BirdyMurakami said:

If you stand strongly against this then please state YOUR detailed reasons on why you oppose? 

 

You need to take consideration of others' experiences. I've witnessed countless griefer attacks, many bases of the innocent destroyed, and yet they don't speak about it. 

Birdy, If you read my post carefully I don't oppose to your idea at all.

However I do believe that each server has different rules against griefer/ ghost troll etc and it is up to the server owner and admin to decide how to treat these issue.

Klei's possition is well know of. They don't want to get involved in policing servers. They keep their official server vanilla meaning there won't be any mod/customer setting. They don't add the vote kick system to make the Klei official server better. They do this because most other server owners and players cares about vote kick. Similarly they don't add the mod support to install mods on their servers. They do it for the community instead.

[Schism_989]

I've played for a few months already, and went on my different servers, and only found one singular griefer. The vote kick system we have now can save innocent players from being kicked by a group of trolls and griefers as much as it protects them, so you need to keep that in mind as well. This is my knowledge of it.

Also, the system you're suggesting can be abused more than disabling Movement Prediction. If this was a thing, if there were even one more troll than innocent players, they could easily BAN AN INNOCENT PLAYER. The system we have now is just fine.

[Schism_989]

29 minutes ago, BirdyMurakami said:

If you stand strongly against this then please state YOUR detailed reasons on why you oppose.

 

You need to take consideration of others' experiences. I've witnessed countless griefer attacks, many bases of the innocent destroyed, and yet they don't speak about it. 

Dude... He was. If you look at his post, he literally asks you how many attacks you've seen. Take time to read through, not skim through.

[BirdyMurakami]

9 minutes ago, Mday said:

Birdy, If you read my post carefully I don't oppose to your idea at all. It seemed like you were opposing it though with these counterarguments. 

However I do believe that each server has different rules against griefer/ ghost troll etc and it is up to the server owner and admin to decide how to treat these issue.

Klei's [position] is well know of. They don't want to get involved in policing servers. They keep their official server vanilla meaning there won't be any mod/customer setting. They don't add the vote kick system to make the Klei official [servers] better. They do this because most other server owners and players cares about vote kick. Similarly they don't add the mod support to install mods on their servers. They do it for the community[.] instead. 

Then Klei could give options for those servers then. They could give options for "majority", "unanimous", or "none" (no options) voting for each server. What the default should be? That is up for debate. 

[Schism_989]

Their default is up to Klei. They choose what their vote system is, and if they don't chose one, fine as it is. The official servers are more for meeting fellow players in my opinion, and you play with eachother on other servers. And griefing is going to happen, whether it be from Giant or player. It will happen. 

EDIT: And as for giving player servers a choice for voting systems could work, but I really can't see it happening for another millenia.

[BirdyMurakami]

26 minutes ago, Schism_989 said:

26 minutes ago, Schism_989 said:

I've played for a few months already, and went on my different servers, and only found one singular griefer. The vote kick system we have now can save innocent players from being kicked by a group of trolls and griefers as much as it protects them, so you need to keep that in mind as well. This is my knowledge of it. I am completely aware of what is going on. Read my reply in an earlier post starting with, "Here's an example from my personal experience with this."

Also, the system you're suggesting can be abused more than disabling Movement Prediction wat? I know what it is but how is this any relevant to MP?. If this was a thing, if there were even one more troll than innocent players, they could easily BAN AN INNOCENT PLAYER I never said anything about permanently banning players; only keeping them out for a short time depending on the amount of times they were kicked and how many votes were in place. . The system we have now is just fine.

 

13 minutes ago, Schism_989 said:

Their default is up to Klei. They choose what their vote system is, and if they don't chose one, fine as it is. The official servers are more for meeting fellow players in my opinion, and you play with eachother on other servers. And griefing is going to happen, whether it be from Giant or player. It will happen. THIS is exactly why I'm proposing this in the first place. With an attitude like that. Step into others' shoes for a moment: how would you feel if you got griefed and all your hard work got burned up all because of someone who you couldn't vote out whose only intention is to make others miserable.

EDIT: And as for giving player servers a choice for voting systems could work, but I really can't see it happening for another millenia.

 

[rezecib]

18 minutes ago, Schism_989 said:

EDIT: And as for giving player servers a choice for voting systems could work, but I really can't see it happening for another millenia.

The system is very open to modding, I'd be surprised if there isn't a mod "Vote Configurator" or something popping up in the next week or two.

[BirdyMurakami]

3 minutes ago, rezecib said:

The system is very open to modding, I'd be surprised if there isn't a mod "Vote Configurator" or something popping up in the next week or two.

THAT should at least be implemented in an admin panel, both in the game files and in-game where it can be easily accessed. 

[Mday]

Quote

Those servers are most commonly played on.

You mean the klei official servers?

Last I check there are 12 Klei official servers on this plant earth, each can host 8 players. So assuming that servers are always full 24/7 these server provide 96 slots in total. Right now steam says there are 4k players online. That mean Klei is hosting for 2.5 % of the total DST player base. I don't think that makes Kles offical servers the most commonly played on.

But 

Quote

There was only one group I saw so far. But the amount we see should not matter. Any number is lethal. 

Also Birdy believe that:

Quote

if you're a committed griefer, you would know that you would get kicked right off the bat if you are a loner. If you were to team up with someone, you can make someones life even more miserable. This has happened to me and a few other friends of mine. 

Now, lets consider a scenario where 4~7 out of 8 players on a Klei offical server are griefers. In such case the vote kick system just won't be enough to remove the griefer, not even with the Birdy purposed systems as following:

Quote

If there are more "yes" votes, then whatever action is prompted will happen. If there are more "no" votes or if the votes are tied, then nothing happens. If someone doesn't vote, it counts as neutral or undecided.

So after going through Birdy's logic it seems that the only vote kick system that can meet Birdy's demand, is gota be like the following:

Quote

If there is 1 "yes" votes, then whatever action is prompted will happen.

Meanwhile, I can hear all the griefers typing crying about:

Quote

Step into others' shoes for a moment: how would you feel if you want to grief and have fun and all your effort went to waste all because of someone who you couldn't vote out whose only intention is to make griefers miserable.

 

[Schism_989]

6 hours ago, BirdyMurakami said:

With an attitude like that. Step into others' shoes for a moment: how would you feel if you got griefed and all your hard work got burned up all because of someone who you couldn't vote out whose only intention is to make others miserable.

You aren't getting my point. Griefing is inevitable whether it's by player or not. Deerclops, Goose/Goose, Rook, Bearger, there's a bunch of things that could do that.

And as for this "Step into other people's shoes" you don't think I've been griefed before? I have a forum post that explains my first encounter. I know what it's like, so don't assume I don't.

Quote

If there are more "yes" votes, then whatever action is prompted will happen. If there are more "no" votes or if the votes are tied, then nothing happens. If someone doesn't vote, it counts as neutral or undecided.

This is extremely abusable. If three out of five players are a team of griefers (as you say seemingly exist) they can easily ban or kick innocent players and recieve no consequences. I've seen servers that usually only have 4 or 5 players, so if 2:4 or 3:5 or even 4:6 are griefers, they can ban innocent people and not vote for other griefers. If this idea were to happen, then teams of griefers will show up frequently and they can bypass the kick system completely, unlike the unanimous system, where you can simply have 3 people vote to kick them, and if thry get all three votes, assumine everyone votes, they're gone. For a while at least. What you're suggesting a system I've seen abused countless times on games like TF2 and GMod. Find the right assholes, you've got yourself vote abusers.

[Schism_989]

6 hours ago, rezecib said:

The system is very open to modding, I'd be surprised if there isn't a mod "Vote Configurator" or something popping up in the next week or two.

Pretty sure people haven't made a mod for that for a reason. That whole "highly absusable" thing I keep mentioning for the "more than the other" vote system actually happens... a lot. For none, it'd just be "Hey, do whatever you want, we don't really care" and Unanimous is "This is the least abusable voting option that actually does something."