Forum:CC kicks

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > CC kicks
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 20 October 2010 by Degenret01.

Hello everyone. This thread is a proposal for a new policy in the CC, and if it doesn't belong on the yew grove go ahead and move it. (This is not a personal attack nor a complaint about any specific incident.)

I have been unfairly kicked multiple times, as well as seen unfair kicks directed against others. Most of these problems start when someone disagrees with a ranked user, and tries to debate with them. Commonly, this leads to the ranked kicking the other user, and accusing them of trolling/flaming etc. After the person is kicked, ranks will often order that the conversation end, and that they will again kick anyone who keeps it going. Currently, these unfair kicks go completely unpunished, as well as unexplained, especially if the victim is a CC only user or new user. Ranks can kick without warning, can kick when there is a conflict of interest, even kick many users in short time and never have to give any reason for the kicks. Even if a rank was to kick at random- when no hot topic was going, no spamming or anything else, their action wouldn't even be questioned.

This is a major flaw in our system, and must be fixed. I would like to propose that ranks keep a log of any kicks that they make, and that this log be easily viewable to all users on the rank's userpage. Furthermore, I would like ranks to be required to explain any kick that they are asked to explain, provided it isn't blatant spamming, swearing, etc. This log would eliminate the anonymity that ranks currently have when kicking, as this makes it possible for ranks to do whatever they want and then blame someone else. If the rank truly has a valid reason to kick, they will lose nothing from this policy.

Here's an example of the kick log:

  • Username of the person kicked: (insert name here)
  • Time of the kicking: (insert time here, use military time for this) <--- This section may not be necessary, but unless it gets opposition I do wish to include it
  • Reason for kick: (insert reason here) <--- This would be the reason the ranked kicked. Even if they fill out this space, they may be required to explain further and/or give a specific quote rather then simply "flaming" or "trolling".

All ranks would have this log posted posted on their talk page and have the policy explained to them as to avoid any confusion, should this pass.

Currently, I'd estimate that questionable kicks occur at least once a day. For all we know a rank could have kicked 10, 20, or even 50 users unjustly and never had to even give 1 reason why they kicked. If this isn't an obvious injustice I can't imagine what is.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 3rd age farcaster (talk).

Discussion

Comment - Not saying this is a bad idea, but there's no real way to force people to do this. What if all ranks say, "I didn't kick that person". What if there was a GP spammer bot that someone was trying to kick and it left, so they kicked a player and didn't intend (or know) that they did. It wouldn't be a common occurance, but there's no way to make this happen. You can't do anything if there's no proof that a certain rank was the kicker, and the only way to do that is if 1 rank was in cc, which is pretty darn rare. HaloTalk 16:10, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oh look, this thread again. ajr 16:12, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Beyond that, per RS:CONSENSUS all ranked users are required to give an explanation on request, for any of their judgment decisions. ajr 16:15, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
Then that concensus has been viloated. Even if it wasn't, how can we be sure which admin made the action? Also, I dont even see where on that page it says they must explain actions. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 16:25, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Moved to Clan Chat Forum I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 16:14, August 25, 2010 (UTC) 

*facepalm* - Oppose. This policy is impossible to enforce. --LiquidTalk 16:15, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, then propose 1 that is possible to inforce and be constructive rather then destructive perhaps? Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 16:22, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
It's called trust. --LiquidTalk 16:26, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
Thats like taking a nap in the middle of the street and trusting that people will not hit you. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 18:19, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
Some people (like me) chose the sidewalk. HaloTalk 04:02, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
Ever heard of a bed? It got four legs, a mattress, sheets and pillow. 222 talk 13:15, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Extreamly strong oppose - This is unenforcible. Plus, it makes it seem as if we don't trust our ranks. I believe, as Ajr said, we already have said that ranks have to give a reason for a kick when asked, but we know they never do that because they're all terrible people who steal candy from young children. ʞooɔ 07:59, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

I trust them all and none steal candy except one, some random guy called "RayOxide" LolHunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 08:06, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - This is just to much work, hard to enforce and kinda silly. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 08:06, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I 100% agree with the idea, but unfortunately it just wont work. <example> someone goes into the CC, and kicks someone for the lols, but then they remember they have to add it to the log, so they add this:

  • Kicked: Strpure058498306
  • Time: 09:27, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
  • Reason: I was bored.

</example> My point is nobody will add to the list if they think they're going to get into trouble for kicking the person or if they kick someone unjustly.   Swizz Talk   Events!   09:29, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - I would support, but frankly, it would be impossible to enforce or even implement. Per Swizz. Perhaps something simpler. Like reminding ranks they are obliged to give a reason when requested (obviously this only applies to disputed kicks). It would also be nice if we could ask the general Wiki community to be vigilant and remember any controversial discussions/actions in the clan chat, in case we need evidence. 222 talk 13:15, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Per Swizz, I don't believe there is any way this can work. Perhaps it'd just be quicker and simpler to request ranks take a screenshot every time? In cases where you believe your kick received was unjust, you as the receiver of a kick should instantly take screenshots of as much of the preceeding conversation as possible. It's in most cases easily determined then if the rank was in the right or unjust. Making it mandatory would make a huge mess/hassle of crap anyway, and any rank watching his/her back would screenshot when they believe that the user they kicked is likely to rant about them after. melonWatermelon slice.png 14:05, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Instead of wasting time responding to each of you, I'll just make a paragraph here. Its not like I'm doing this just because I hate ranks, or because I think there might be some issue in the future. I naturally trust ranks until they do something to violate that trust. They have violated it multiple times, both to me and to others. Just because some of you havn't seen it doesn't mean its not happening. Furthermore, I would be happy with ranks just explaining all kicks, but they don't do that. Again, I'm not just trying to predict their behavior- I have experience with ranks doing this. I skimmed that consensus article, and couldn't find anything regarding cc kicks. I plan to look at it again, but if I still don't find anything, then we should assume that no policy regarding explaining kicks exists. Regarding enforceability, if you think it can't be enforced propose a new policy that can be enforced. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 15:16, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Ranks are given because of trust. First, it does not say who kicked you, so you will have to guess which admin did it. Second, as an admin, I was put into a position of trust, if my actions continually break that trust, then I should not be an admin. but for me to explain each and every kick or block is overkill. 16px‎AtlandyBeer.png 15:35, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Its usually very obvious which admin kicked you. It also helps if they don't deny it when you ask them. Also, due to the consensus system, I'd guess that an admin can unfairly kick 10+ users a day for no reason and not be de-ranked, since anything remotely controversial or out of the norm will never pass. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 15:40, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
If you think that anything our of the norm will never pass, why are you arguing? 16px‎AtlandyBeer.png 15:45, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
What you expect me to just ignore my threads when people draw the wrong conclusions or try to spread false information? Also, are you aware of any policy requiring that ranks explain their actions? If so, please link me to it. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 15:50, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
I am not saying avoid your thread at all. However, this is the second thread that I know of that has you talking about a block that you have received. Both times you want people to explain their actions. The first one you wanted an apology after providing only 3 screenshots of talk that may or may not be construed as you being disruptive. There is no screenshots of what happened before that. Now you want admins to have to explain their kicks. You also generalize that admins kick during argments, then end the argument and kick people who restart it. I have been an admin for quite some time, and do use the cc and have never seen an unjust kick. Maybe I have been lucky, maybe the 20 hours a week I play isn't enough. However I trust most crats, admins, and wikians to do the right thing. I will never feel that anyone needs to explain their actions unless it is consistently happening. It seems that it only has been happening to you. 16px‎AtlandyBeer.png 15:56, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
I am not talking about a block here or there, and the two threads are completely different things. I did NOT want an apology on that one, and, again, it has nothing to do with this one. I also provided 1 screneshot of what was going on in the cc at the time. I couldn't get more screneshots because they were off the chat page. I do not generalize, I have seen it. Not once did I say every single admin has done that, nor am I accusing you of doing anything regarding kicks/blocks/etc This is exactly what I ment by people trying to spread false information. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 16:02, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
What false info am I spreading? You started a thread complaining about a kick and you wanted an explanation. You offered little proof. You are now starting another thread asked admins to explain their kicks. I would like ranks to be required to explain any kick that they are asked to explain I talked about both of them above. What is false about it? 16px‎AtlandyBeer.png 16:08, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

1: That it had anything to do with blocks

2: That I wanted an apology- I only wanted an apology if he came out and admited he did it for absolutely no reason. Clearly he won't admit that, and he probably did have a reason for doing it. But seeing as hes not stating that reason, who knows.
3: Proof isn't an issue. I don't really mind being kicked. I do think its a problem, however, when ranks dismiss anyone who questions their actions as an internet troll.
4: I never said all admins kick during arguements.
If you want to discuss that thread go over there and do it. This thread is a seporate issue, and, weather you mean to or not, tieing them together is ruining any chance of this thread passing. I'm trying to be helpful here, and trying to move on from that incident and see if we can use it to improve the wiki. Bring up that issue again is only going to turn this into a chaotic mess of personal attacks. I would hope thats not your goal. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 16:19, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
Look, the idea isn't bad, but the proposal has no chance of passing because it's impossible to enforce. The most you can do is try to get a consensus to force ranks to explain their kicks when it is clear that they did it, either through confession or through logic. (Of course, that's going to have to be a new thread.) --LiquidTalk 16:21, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
I'll try that later. Just wish everything didn't have to become a flame war. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 16:27, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
This is not a flame war. This is someone disagreeing with you 16px‎AtlandyBeer.png 16:31, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
And dragging up irrevelent issues as well as making up false information. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 16:33, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
I have not dragged up irrelevant issues nor made up false information 16px‎AtlandyBeer.png 18:35, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
That kick is an irrevelent issue. What about "no specific incidents" don't you get? This is about avoiding unfair kicks in general, has nothing to do with that specific incident. Yes, you can argue if it wasn't for that I wouldn't have made this thread, but then again if he had explained himself I wouldn't have aether. Also, if it was just 1 kick It wouldn't have been a big deal, but as I said this has occured more then once, and I'v seen it happen to other also. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 18:59, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
I am sorry but I think this is more of a personal issue than one that effects (affects?) the wiki as a whole. 16px‎AtlandyBeer.png 22:10, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
Responding to kicks effects the CC in general. I other complaints about unfair kicks, and I'm sure you are awear that I'm not the only one who has complained about them, whether the kick was truely unfair or not. As I said, If ranks have no arn't required to explain these kicks, they wont, even if the kick was justified. You cannot possibly believe ranks will and have never kicked unfairly, can you? I know we should trust our ranks, and we do. Innocent untill proven guilty doesn't mean no laws, same with assume good faith. Creating a rule designed to stop unfair kicks does not mean that we are declairing all ranks untrustworthy. Regarding personal issues, first off, as I keep saying this has happened before. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 02:17, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
It's "affects". Smile Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 22:20, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
No one ever said you have to explain every single kick. 222 talk 06:45, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - It's just a kick and you'll be back in an hour. -.- Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 22:23, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

It has happened multiple times Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 02:17, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Liquid2 has a point Twig Talk 772kZGs.png 06:19, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Alternative proposal

Seeing as the above proposal frankly, has absolutely no chance of passing in its original form. I though I might simplify things a little here.

My proposal is in two parts:

Part one

Create some form of binding policy regarding the clan chat, which is probably the most poorly policed (by both ranks and normal users keeping ranks "in line" If you don't mind the wording) and controversial aspect of the the wiki. Currently, any disputes have nothing to base their solutions on as there is no policy regarding the clan chat, while there are 5 or so policies regarding user behaviour on the Wiki. Like it or not, the CC is an important part of the wiki.

Part two

Send out a notification/request to all CC frequenters and ranks to be vigilant and take screenshots whenever something that may result in a disputed kicking takes place. This should provide more evidence and clarification for when we discuss these matters. Finally, make it clear that all disputed/controversial/unfair? kicks need an explanation, if the situation arises. Obviously, "trolling" is not an excuse as only unclear kicks will need explaining and kicking the general trolling/disruptive players won't cause a discussion to occur unless they are really dumb.

Finally

A few things that will form absolutely no part in the proposal.

  • A kick log (or anything that resembles one) is too difficult to implement and maintain.
  • A requirement for every kick to be explained, as it is an absurd suggestion when over 80% of kicks[source needed] are "valid"

Well, thats about it 222 talk 06:45, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

"Alternative" discussion

Oppose Part 2 - How are we meant to differentiate between a disputed kick and a deserved kick? Also this is basically the same as 3af's proposal expect you're asking for pictures instead of our words. I don't think you understand that no matter how trusted a user is, the chances their going to send you a picture that could lead to them being de-ranked or getting into trouble are really low.   Swizz Talk   Events!   08:15, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

As it says, I am requesting ALL users to take images of anything that may be a disputed kick. I'm sure people know how to clear their clipboards if it amounts to nothing. 222 talk 09:05, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - I didn't ask that they explain all kicks, I just want them to be required to explain any kick if asked to. I think this is a good start, so I will support. Regarding trusted users not sending pics, if they don't send it and the person who was kicked did they would I'm sure be in much bigger trouble then if they had just honestly sent the picture and explained the kick. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 15:17, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - We have rules on the RS:CC page (the first rule says that all RSW rules apply in the CC), so I don't see what the point of part 1 is. I've received a few unfair kicks myself before I got ranked, but it's not that big of a deal. As for part 2, you don't need a discussion to do that. If you want to go and tell people that they should take screenshots when a disputed kick occurs, then go ahead. --LiquidTalk 16:31, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

I want this to be clear - Are ranks required to explain kicks upon request or not? Please link me to were it says so if it does. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 15:08, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...

How about, just this. Ranks are required to explain any kicks when requested by the greater community. Very simple. Then we don't have to spend weeks asking why someone was kicked.

Discuss, 222 talk 05:44, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

The greater community?   Swizz Talk   Events!   10:40, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Defined as when people request an explanation on one of those complaint threads that pop up once a month. 222 talk 10:41, September 25, 2010 (UTC)
Its a good idea, and seems to work seeing as nearly every rank already does it. It seems like its just Dtm who has problems about not doing it. I don't know if I should focus on that specific incident or not. I tried, and it seemed like it would just turn into a flame war. The best solution is that we as "the greater community" discuss with Dtm his reasoning and try to make sure that he doesn't do it again. But, if thats not possible, I will gladly support this idea. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 12:09, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - There's no way to make ranks explain when you can't tell who did it. HaloTalk 12:20, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

So we'll just do nothing? 222 talk 22:15, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

Support (?) - If they confess to doing it, can't we conclude they did it? I don't know much about this myself having never been in CC, so if my vote doesn't count or something my bad. Mr. Anura 12:28, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

But no one ever does. And you can't force them to tell. It's impossible to keep people accountable to this. HaloTalk 12:30, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
You are right, and I don't see it having any major impact but its better then nothing isn't it? And if people want it, which at least two seem to, I see no reason to block it. Mr. Anura 23:37, October 5, 2010 (UTC)


This request for closure is complete A user has requested closure for CC kicks. Request complete. The reason given was: complete

222 talk 08:34, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

Closed There is no consensus on what actions can be taken, mostly because they are not enforceable. However, we would hope that ranked people would have the moral fiber to admit when they kick someone, and say why when asked.--Degenret01 06:17, October 20, 2010 (UTC)