On the fairness of the dispute process: an open letter

[Dorganath]

Dear Layonara Community:
  Some questions have arisen lately regarding the Disputes, Grievances and Requests for Reimbursement system...questions which I have addressed to some degree in a post in that particular sub-forum. The information in that post is important enough, I believe, to sticky and lock so that people can reference it, but I personally also believe that some may wish to comment constructively, or perhaps less-so, on what I have written. As such, please give this thread a read:
  http://www.layonaraonline.com/forums/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=32672&posts=1
  And then, if desired, discuss below.
  My only request is that everyone keeps the discussion civil and on-topic.

[Vyris]

I've always said it's Leanthars sandbox, I play with the toys he provides and I treat them nicely, lest I be asked to leave the sandbox. I think the grievance system is at best a juggling act, and I think it shows to some great degree how much Leanthar and the GM team care about the community for them to implement and maintain a system like that.

Vyris

[Pseudonym]

I can't see what people's problems are *shrugs* No system will work for everyone 100% of the time.

The system you have decided upon is clearly defined and it's requirements unambiguous. Surely that is all we can reasonably request?

And .... what Vyris said.

[Eight-Bit]

I'm going to be a lot less long-winded than you on this Dorg, but I've been here practically forever. Let me tell you, this system is no better and no worse than dealing with a GM in an individual basis. This system, unlike the previous method which was to bug a GM personally, is atleast consistant. It is the best way without someone entirely devoted to following every single person that ventures out of Hlint. It's stern, but consistantly fair.

I'll use a simple metaphor to illustrate my post-midnight ramble. Think of trying to return something without proper paper documentation to prove you actually bought it. Even if they know you bought it, and even if you bought it an hour previous to returning it, chances are you're not getting a new one. Or at best store credit.

Needless to say I've had a bad shopping experience today.

[AbnerMojo]

Not to play Devil's Advocate here. But maybe it is time for a new system other then the Soul Strand one in it's current form? That is really the heart of the matter here I think.

See this is one of the odd cases where everyone can be wrong, and right at the same time. There are to many factors going back and forth here to ever try and say what is fair. Even more so is you have to balance community fairness with individual fairness. Bioware has a bug, people will abuse it, it leads to perceptions of favoritisim, etc, etc.

All I could think of to replace it with, and please this is just an individual idea lets not turn it into a 'Heres why your wrong' debate, is take it out of a automated process like the Soul Strand system is now. And say such things happen only in CDQ's, and GM Quest. Completely flip the situation from being 'I was alone when this happend and dont have a witness.' To 'There is no doubt a GM saw it, other players saw it, and we all know what happend.' I know it comes with it's own problems, and reworkings. But having a firm trust in the staff I feel is a lot more valuable then a game mechanic. And it will have just as many flaws and drawbacks as any other system I'm sure, I just think if trust is the main issue here, this would be one possible alternative.

But like I said. It's just an idea I'd throw out there. I'm sure people have lots of their own.

[Chongo]

That was very well written Dorg.

People are always going to be hurt when they're telling the truth and there's no way to prove it.  Especially when their percieved efforts are on the line.

There is one question I have on this.  What if the said player can irrefutably prove wrongful death in the touchy event of a DT or perm'ing their character?  Is it a matter of the burden of investigation (which very well could bog the team down to a standstill if restrictions weren't placed), or maybe that pretty much anything can be fabricated mirroring the event in a selfmade module (I honestly don't know if this can be done, but it seems fairly likely)?

I had a very good talk with Rev today regarding the system, and she cleared up a lot (blue ribbon for PR efforts), but I did want to ask that one question.

[KageKeeper]

Very well written Dorg.

Thank you for taking the time to type that out in such a nice, concise manner.

~KK

[lonnarin]

Honestly I think 3 non GM/WL witnesses are even more valid than a single GM/WL witness.  No matter what somebody's trust level or position is, they are still ultimately human and not infallible; still subject to either lapses in observation or favoritism.  Large scale numbers of cooperative witnesses on the other hand require that 3 people must be wrong for a report to be wrong, rather than just one.  This is nothing new, it is merely human nature; how many police officers would truthfully give their family members or close friends a parking ticket?  Active screenshots on the other hand, which clearly show evidence of a string of events are even more accurate than human observance, especially if they show the sequence of events, interpersonal strife, a games mechanics breakdown of events in the dicerolls box, etc etc.  They have as many witnesses as the people who view them after the matter, and therefore should be publicly posted to the grievance post for maximum witnessing.

For example, if one sees a screenshot of a dead wizard by a monster without trueseeing and the sequence of events shows the following... "Player X casts invisibility, Now entering PVP area (server transition msg), Monster X without trueseeing kills Player X"  Then it's fairly obvious that some form of bug is going on.  Conversely, when Player X runs into Player Y who flagrantly breaks server rules, and a big stack of screenshots is produced showing Player Y in the action and effectively admitting to the infractions, then the hard evidence of documentation should always supercede the opinions of people in positions and the communal debates of character held in the restricted GM forums.  The trick however is documentation, and being very timely and consistant about it.  Take so many screenshots that if you printed them out and collated them, you could animate the scene by flipping through the pages.  

That being said, the policy of needing a GM or WL for a soul strand reimbursement does pose a confounding variable to the nature of the process itself.  It indicates that one must either be a friend of a GM or WL, being in their own party to have a valid witness, or that for some reason the GM/WL must be at least familiar and interested with the character in question to warrant being in just the right place at the right time.  Furthermore, as GMs and WLs tend to have higher level characters than most, (not a symptom of favoritism I might add, but one of sheer logic: long term players earn more trust and responsibilities than others) they tend to have a limited range of available groupies to chose from, usually other GMs and WLs.  As such, the potential for "self-reporting" a reimbursement elevates once everybody is in the same party and there are multiple GMs/WLs witnessing eachother.  The party dynamics of being grouped indeed indicates that they have a same goal.  Therefore an extra line might be wise to the rule that the GM/WL witnessing a soul strand foul should probably not be in the same party when it happens.  GMs presiding in GM mode on the other hand are at least more apt to being XP impartial.

It's an interesting debate, but until the human role of witness is replaced by infallible computer AIs without agenda, then it will be subject to the pitfalls of human nature.  As one who hardly ever gets Soul Strands for any reason, I of course would prefer that ALL Soul Strand reimbursements be stricken for whatever reason at all, including bugs.  It's an annoying and tedious process that not only saps incredible amounts of time, effort and sanity for the Grievance officers, but also creates widescale animosity when biased observations are made that some people are reimbursed more than others.  To say that ALL such observations of unbalanced justice are unfounded due to the nature of the offender's trust level or hierarchal position however is faulty as well... otherwise ALL politicians would never lie and ALL police officers would be 100% law abiding.  We know this not to be the case, and that all systems involving human interaction are simply as faulted as the humans contained therein.

In closing, the claws of fate are always impartial, and soul strand reimbursement should probably not be allowed at all based upon witness alone, but solely on empirical data to be judged on a case by case basis; screenshots and server logs.  Besides, the Hall of Heroes is empty enough as it is; we adventurers need to realize that death is simply another part of life, and move on with it.

[Weeblie]

As a response to AbnerMojo's post:

The SS system is something quite unique to Layonara and should, in my opinion, still be here. It's something that makes (most ) people respect death. When the Soul Mother was on vacantion, the number of deaths shoot through the roof. People went to places that they simply dared not with the current system as death was... well... nothing, really. Death was just a respawn and a few hours wait in Hlint, nothing more than that.

As a response to lonnarin's post:

I both agree and disagree with you. Three independent witnesses is normally indeed "worth" more than one single witness. BUT, think about it for a little bit longer. Most people tend to party together with people who they do know rather well and the accounts might in fact be biased (one see what one wants to see). Trust on the internet is something rather tricky and that's why a GM/WL witness is required. To put it simply, generally, I put a bigger trust on a player I haven't met before if he or she is a GM/WL than if he or she isn't.

Having the SS Reimbursement rules stricken to "Only reimburseable due to GM actions - i.e. unintentional events happening on quests; GM crashing, GM accidently poking with the kill wand, GM spawning creatures that he felt afterwards was way to strong for the party to handle, etc." might be a thought as that would cleanly kill the biggest part of the favouritsm view for the moment.

[AbnerMojo]

O.K. Weeblie, but whats more important? A system where there is more room for trust between staffers and community members? Or limiting the amount of times a player can risk their character taking reckless actions without consequence? In my expierience as a PnP DM, absolute charcter death is a bit to important an event to leave up to a game mechanic. And is an area that needs to be looked over by rational human judgement. But thats just my opinion. And as for playing with out respect for death, well thats an issue of bad roleplay. And should be addressed as such. In that a player be warned, then if it continures, not be allowed to come back.

[DMOE]

I'm digressing slightly here I know but please bare with me!
  You know....It's just character death....
  And before the screams of "I worked hard on my character" and "I care about my character"...So do I!  
  But when push comes to shove....It's just a character.
  I've been playing PnP for over 12 years now and I've lost many characters and each one hurt!  I have a folder of 'dead' characters..
  In fact I've actually killed characters over their principles....That's right...I've know they would permanently die and done it anyway because it was what was IC to do!
  Here's an example:
  DM: You know charging that machine gun nest is gonna kill her right?  Your not suppose to charge the %*$£%^ thing!
  ME: She has a martyr complex...you know that!
  DM: Yeah, I know....I gave it you!  And I know it's IC for here but she is gonna die for good!!
  Me: I know that!!
  DM: *sighs* Go on then
  *character charges machine gun nest and dies horribly*
  DM: Hand me your character sheet *DM takes it and writes DEAD across it handing it back*
  DM: Right...go role up the new one in the other room and for heavens sake stop crying woman!!! Your make me feel bad!
  I'd like to point out I had played that character weekly for two years.
  Now....Every place like Layo NEEDS a permanent death system or things just get silly.  I think that the DM's truely do the best they can to work with Bioware's buggyness and be as fair as possible.  Layo isn't PnP....Not all deaths can be only quest based otherwise there is no risk to playing your characters and the decisions you make outside of quests....We have a system...It works as best it can...Can we please give the Team a break for doing their best?
  Also why don't people stop taking every DT as an omen of dread and instead see it as one step forward towards there next RPing challenge on Layo?

[twidget658]

Bring back part of the old death system where each death is a loss of xp. That is an immediate consequence for a death. The reason why some players push the limits is because the reward outweighs the consequence (the POSSIBILITY of a loss of a soul strand) Hit the player where is hurts...xp. Of course, the Soul Mother could then retire.

[Weeblie]

AbnerMojo - 12/7/2006  9:30 AM

O.K. Weeblie, but whats more important? A system where there is more room for trust between staffers and community members? Or limiting the amount of times a player can risk their character taking reckless actions without consequence? In my expierience as a PnP DM, absolute charcter death is a bit to important an event to leave up to a game mechanic. And is an area that needs to be looked over by rational human judgement. But thats just my opinion. And as for playing with out respect for death, well thats an issue of bad roleplay. And should be addressed as such. In that a player be warned, then if it continures, not be allowed to come back.

Just pointed out that in my opinion, removing the system should definitely be at the bottom of the "solutions" list. Removing the option of reimburse SS at all is definitely more prefered in my view.

twidget658 - 12/7/2006  11:02 AM

Bring back part of the old death system where each death is a loss of xp. That is an immediate consequence for a death. The reason why some players push the limits is because the reward outweighs the consequence (the POSSIBILITY of a loss of a soul strand) Hit the player where is hurts...xp. Of course, the Soul Mother could then retire.

I can already see people starting to run for cover. At least after what I have heard from people who did experience it before (1+ million XP loss kind of hurts)...

And... Agree with you, DMOE.

[Lilswanwillow]

here, I'll be a bad guy:

remove the disputes.  your character died.  its a game.
If one of my characters die tomorra, you know what I'll do?

SUBMIT A NEW ONE  I don't want the loss of xp, I like the chance of death.   I know, time, energy: but most of us, if not all, have two characters.  if not?  make a second or third, an if you die, too bad.

[Chnmmr]

My view:

Players need to be able to give the DM's the benefit of the doubt.  The admin and staff allow the server to run smoothly.  When the players start to distrust the DMs, the server starts to fall apart and turn ugly.

On the other hand I think the DMs need to give a bit more leway when handling disputes etc.  It is far to easy to die from -massive- lag spikes, bioware bugs and such.  One can have a lag free day then have a lag spike death because someone with 50 containers filled with stacked items enters the server.

I would love to see more spontaneous quests.  My first quest on this server was a spontaneous one.  And it went somewhat badly as the DM spawned a creature (amongst other things) ontop of a bunch of low levels that was able to kill my character outright with a single spell.  It happens, the DM felt bad that it went unexpectedly and that he/she misjudged things, but it continued on and I was given life again under the pretence that I wasn't 'quite dead yet'.  It was fun, we all enjoyed it, I learned something and so did the DM.

On the otherhand, DMs need to trust the players more and not pressume each is trying to cheat or abuse the system.

[Pen N Popper]

I think the disputes forum, and in fact the char submissions and other forums, have one overwhelming thing that makes them work and worth keeping: Transparency.
  Perhaps people have not played on other PWs where such openness in the process of disputes does not exist. The division between players and GMs grows exponentially when people are left to guess on motives, etc. The disputes forum here is, in my opinion, one of the bits of brilliance that keeps Layonara community solid. It maintains a perspective on your own grievance as it relates to others, and displays the consistency of the team's response.
  We may not always agree with the answer to a grievance. We may not always like the resolution of a dispute. We can, though, see the rationalization and thoughts behind each and every one. Be thankful for that.

[Falonthas]

i have played on other PW before
one of the hardest to level by the way so much so that it constantly got either great reviews by the people who loved it or the lowest reviews for those that couldnt stand to lose the xp they had fought so hard to gain

i speak of this because they dont allow people to get to over 12th level without visible rp that gives back to the world
they dont have such a massive realm as layo only one server to police
you have factions that are application as are Prc and any ecl race
each dm controls a noble house which also has a faction
sometimes these factions get along
sometimes they dont
but there is a siphon that they use that makes it so you dont earn one single xp in the game unless you prove your not there to grind
 you have to give back to the world or you will simply be at that wall that has no way over
low magic low levels but phenomenal rp abound because you learn to not need levels to play
that 2nd level thief may mug you if you go into that alley
but hes a theif thats what you risk
you may lose anything you have gathered and prize if you fall or are beatendown as they have a mode for
you can be jumped and beaten up and your gold taken
or your items taken
the bank charges fees to get your coins back
you may run into an evil person yes they exist there and he may not like your god so he will kill you
 and all this happens there from 1st to 12th level there may be one 15th or 14th and they are captain of the guards or house commander as such


the system here is great
so you lose a strand if you roll badly
yes there are bugs and you die
but you dont lose your equipment
and yes you risk permanent death after a time
this isnt something that is about favorites
this is about the perception of the game we love to play
afterall its still a game

L and the team have created this incredible world for us to roam around in and yes in time be 40th level if we play smart and put in the time just as in PnP

we have so much potential for what can be accomplished that to let petty interpersonal ego clashes interfere would be the worst possible solution

just go out and have fun,sometimes yes dying is part of the fun
and if you lose what you have mourn a bit
but then grab a drink and your quill and put your next vision onto a submission and the world shall continue to evolve around us all

[Dorganath]

First, thanks for everyone's comments.
  I'm not really going to comment or elaborate on anything at this time except to point out two things:
  1) This is not about Soul Strand loss/reimbursements but about the process of reimbursements in general. Please do not focus on that one singular aspect as you discuss this.
  2) For those of you who may have perhaps not been here quite as long, as was mentioned in the post, we're on our third iteration of the policies for reimbursements. Previous ones were far more lenient in terms of witnessing (i.e. 3 supporting statements, etc.). We put a lot more trust in our player base and that trust was rewarded by a choking of the system through requests which were largely a matter of player error, a misunderstanding of the rules in general or just "let's see if this works" kinds of things. It was taking far too much time, and people abused the process. Perhaps yes, this was one of those instances where a few spoiled it for the many, but sometimes that happens.
  Anyway, carry on.

[Filatus]

I'm surprised the topic moved from the way disputes are handled to suggesting to abolish the soulstrand-system. Crazy suggestion in my opinion and I don't see how it relates to the fairness of disputes, other than cutting down disputes by 50 % and carving out something that makes Layonara and the way you consider your PC's longevity special.

Now, on the fairness of GM's and WL's being present, I never saw something wrong with this system in place. But Lonnarin did make an interesting point.

The way it is now, statements of the GM or WL, present at the occurence that led to a dispute, are given more credit than screenshots.

On the one hand, I know logs can be faked, but if for example three people supply screenshots of a death through invis bug, one should give them the benefit of the doubt if another case was approved based on the word of a WL or GM.

My point is, if a screenshot gives an accurate overview of what happened, and what happened would fall under one of the reimburseable DT's it should be approved whether or not a GM or WL was present. Invisbugs for example are as clean as a whistle if you have a screenshot of what happened.

Because of the way the system works right now the fact that you were accompanied by a GM or WL when it happened, makes the invis bug reimburseable. While having several screenshots clearly depicting what happened does not.

They are both the same bugs and in both cases you can be absolutely certain it happened. Yet, having a GM or WL along suddenly makes it reimburseable.

Because of this, I'd suggest limiting it to only GM's who are logged on through the DM Client and are not playing one of their PC's.

When they are logged on with their avatar, there is a clear difference between them and the averadge player. And it also removes the problem where some players never adventure with GM's or WL's and others do it continuously.

EDITED: Rephrased

[cbnicholson]

I thought that was well written and clear, Dorganath.  As for some of the points raised here. Hmm. Transparency, as Pen and Popper said it is the teams biggest asset in handling disputes.  I personally read almost everything *yes my job is dull* on the forums and can say while I don't always agree 100% with the decisions, I see the policy, I see the thought process or reasoning behind it and as long as that continues, its fine by me.  As for Soul Strands and perming, as is real life, The fear of loss is what makes life real.   Same applies to this game.  My opinion, but without the fear of real loss, I don't think the rp would be nearly as good.