On the fairness of the dispute process: an open letter

[Force_of_Will_]

I think Twidget Has a good Idea .
Ive always liked the old death system . Where you die you take an xp hit.

[OneST8]

Speaking SOLEY for MYSELF...

I would like to state that it is just as easy to forge a logfile as it is to forge a screenshot.

I personally place very little weight on either unless *I* took the screenshots/logfiles myself *or* I implicitly trust the person(s) who did.

I guess it's a good thing I have nothing to do with the disputes and grievances directly. *grins*

Anyways, sorry for the interjection. Just felt the need to voice a personal and non-Layonaran-representitive opinion.

[Sab Kaylag]

@ OneSTB I don't think many people know how to fake it ... though I do know it's more than possible

First let me state that i think the despute prosses should exist with only the GM's when they're in GM mode or with extreme lienecy like before, and i'd vote for the only in GM mode option.  Next that spontanious quests (which i thought i had been on two of) should still exist because they enhance the community without having to sign up, and that RP xp should be able to be given by GM's when they're in GM mode.  

the trust issue, if we can't trust the GM's to run spontanious quests and reward for good RP then how could we trust them for disputes. Granted ill be the first to say that I don't trust the team yet.  But for now i give them the benefit of the doubt as i don't know the team yet either.  the few members i have met seem to be good people and the two spontanious (spontainious for me at least) small quests i was on were done well.  

I know that GM's will go to their friends first most likely if they're running a quest and need someone to "spear head" it.  It's only natural they know their friends and trust them to play well, rp well (probably), and over all would choose someone they thought would do a good job for what they needed rather than a random player/character they don't know.  

That said if GM's have spare time they'll probably go check on their friends also just to see whats happening.  Though (from personal experience) they may also feel like checking on some new characters just to see whats up and how they play.  (i blame this all on human curiosity.  Some GM's will like that mode best but most will probably enjoy playing just as much or more.  
 
when they're in player mode i have to agree with what Lonnarin said about GM's and WL's traveling with other high level characters for the most part.  Though most of them probably have a second lower level character. they will still have the people they travel with.  I don't believe that this is favoritism.  
My character will travel with almost anyone (except goblins) but others are more picky.  some people will never travel with a paladin ... some paladins probably won't travel with me after a while.  it's the way it is it's not favoritism to travel with the people you travel with.  Yes it CAN incur a benefit but it won't always.  yes you have more of an opportunity to get your death back or whatever if there is glitch. But it was RP that placed the ussual GM in your party.  (or not if there isn't one)  the reason it is GM's and WL's only that can approve recompsation is because L, the big guy in charge, can trust those people.

Sure i don't trust them all, and some of you probably don't either, but it's not our world.  And since L made the world I trust him.  
Feel free to respond in anyway you want.  I'm new and am not aiming this at anyone just contributing my two copper pieces to the general server discussion taking place.

[Dorganath]

This last post reminded me of something else...
  It's a falacy that all characters of GMs and WLs are high levels and are thus somehow excluding the vast majority of characters on the server from being in groups with them.
  I can think of several instances where GMs and/or WLs have other low- and mid-level characters, myself included.
  It doesn't matter what "suit" a GM player has on...that player is still a GM. And a WL player is still a WL, regardless of which character he or she may be playing at the time.
  By granting GM or WL status, we're not saying we trust a particular character more, we're saying we trust a particular player more. As such, I am really quite mystified at why it would make a difference.
  But hey...if the community wants the policy to become even more restrictive, I'm sure we can accommodate that.

[jrizz]

well said Dorg!
There is no reason to change the dispute system as it is now. What you are missing is that this system gives you options to "protect" your PC from bug or lag related issues. We all know who the WLs and GMs PCs are. If you are planning on going somewhere deadly try to get a WL or GM PC to go with you. This way if a system issue causes you some kind of loss you have a trusted wittness. Keeping that trusted list as large as possible is best for all.

If a change to the SS system is being looked at I suggest this:
1. remove the SS replacment option from the disputes forum.
2. Increase the number of SS(s) to 15 to make up for any bug, lag, or techinical issues (keep the SMD at level21)
3. State this clearly in the death system wirte up.
OR
1. same as above
2. Move SMD to 20th level
3. same as above

[Tanman]

I think the system works well in order to keep things civil and sensible in the world. Its what makes people go "Ohh..we better stay careful" or "lets better not go there." And I think it is a fair system. In my opinion, if you give more trust to the players like what it is suggested there is *always* going to be a few percentage that is going to abuse it. Its whether the team wants to accept that percentage of abusers or not.

I look through the various disputes and grievances column, and I don't think  the system has a problem. BUT having said that I think  there is a consensus from the community that if a request is *denied* that the team do not believe the player, and so the player then attempts to try and justify themselves and then it causes all these problems, where in actual fact, the team is denying it because they need to make sure everything is consistent by keeping to the rules (because that could bring across a whole set of other problems).

Leanthar has pointed this out being consistent in a reimbursement, but I think this post should be stickied or something so that the community understands the teams stance on denied requests.

On a more lighter note, its just a game. And characters are inevitably going to die. When I received a few DT for my first character I was feeling a sense of loss too. So I thought make a new one and another, until now I have 4 in total. If one of my characters perms I think "Oh well, make a new character" or if my character dies and is in that reflective state then I just pull out another character. Problem solved.

_________________________
Edit: This post mainly focuses on SS Returns.

[Sab Kaylag]

first off @ Dorg
You make an exellent point.  It is the player not the character trusted.  My thoughts were if they were in GM mode it would lead to less bias ness.  I personally don't have a problem with it i just think it MIGHT resolve the problems you stated others might have

Next i realize that all GM's probably don't have high level characters.  And that WL's and GM's probably have at least have a second character It's just that It seems to become GM you would need to have been here for a while and be at least semi active... so a better chance of having a high level character.  And WL's from what i read have to have one Char at least lev 20??

This was just an explaination of my reasoning you make an exellent point

@Jrizz
I like your idea much better than my own.  and whole heartedly support it.  If the SS # were between 10-15 i'd still agree

Edit to make readable

[Leanthar]

The problem with the SS (and keep in mind this thread is not about SS's) is that I had initially set it up for 5 DT's, then 7 DT's and now it is at 10 DT's (took about 1 year to get to 10 DT's and it has been there for 3.5 years now). I will not go any higher with the exception of giving 5 more with the Soul Mother Defense.

[jrizz]

SMD is a great way of adding longevity to a PC. But the XP needed between 20 and 21 has proven to be a deadly hump to get over. Not all people (players) can make WL status and leapfrog that hump. That is just a fact due to time, effort, and play style but hey someone needs to be lead by the WLs . SO adding anymore SS(s) is off the table, how about moving SMD to 20th level?

[Weeblie]

Sure! But... um... there's one bad thing, though... You don't get any feats at level 20.

Just thinking a little about the fairness of the dispute forum. Actually, it seems that (denied) SS is more or less the only thing making people upset. Lost items and so on have very clear guidelines (player error and/or it's not a unique item = denied) and there are rather few of those request turned away. People also tend to simpy swallow it up if they do get denied, as... well... in 99% of the cases, they are most probably cursing at themselves: "Why did I do that?? How could I be so stupid that I put my Longsword of Whackiness (but not Uniqeness) +10 in the trashcan? Gaaah!"

[Gulnyr]

jrizz - 12/7/2006  2:19 PM

how about moving SMD to 20th level?

There isn't a feat selection at level 20.  Level 18 is the last feat selection level before 21, not counting class bonus feats.

[Tanman]

In my mind I was writing for that in mind. I'll edit it to reflect that it is written for those SS requests

It makes sense that they would put up a fight with SS loss as a pose to the item of wackiness. With a SS at this stage, you can't get it back but with that item you can!

Weeblie - 12/8/2006  9:02 AM
Just thinking a little about the fairness of the dispute forum. Actually, it seems that (denied) SS is more or less the only thing making people upset. Lost items and so on have very clear guidelines (player error and/or it's not a unique item = denied) and there are rather few of those request turned away. People also tend to simpy swallow it up if they do get denied, as... well... in 99% of the cases, they are most probably cursing at themselves: "Why did I do that?? How could I be so stupid that I put my Longsword of Whackiness (but not Uniqeness) +10 in the trashcan? Gaaah!"

[jrizz]

Gulnyr - 12/7/2006  12:32 PM

jrizz - 12/7/2006  2:19 PM

how about moving SMD to 20th level?

There isn't a feat selection at level 20.  Level 18 is the last feat selection level before 21, not counting class bonus feats.

Well that would make it harder but not impossible.

[Gulnyr]

jrizz - 12/7/2006  3:50 PM

Gulnyr - 12/7/2006  12:32 PM

jrizz - 12/7/2006  2:19 PM

how about moving SMD to 20th level?

There isn't a feat selection at level 20.  Level 18 is the last feat selection level before 21, not counting class bonus feats.

Well that would make it harder but not impossible.

Thinking more about this, I think Soul Mother Defense really needs to be an epic feat to help maintain what little fear of death our characters have.  Making it available earlier would lead to a minor version of the Soul Mother's vacation, so that people would be more likely to take certain risks knowing it will be that much easier to reach the level where the SMD feat is available.  Having it beyond the epic XP hump helps keep permanent death a spooky and real possibility.

I don't think the current setup is really 'broken.'  Having characters lose all ten soul strands before level 21 isn't so much unfair as unfortunate, so there's really nothing to fix about this particular system.  And I don't think making SMD available earlier would have any impact on the perception of the fairness of grievances and disputes, either.

[EdTheKet]

Please keep this on topic. If you want to discuss the death system, please create a new thread.

[Polak76]

I like reading these forums but this thread is becoming quite sizable and frankly I can't believe people go to such lengths to dispute over a computer game.

To avoid being a hypocrit I've had my issues and discussed them accordinly, but I've come around a full circle and it took a break from Layo to realize how rediculous it can get.

I like Lilswanwillos comment:

(((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.))

hahah, that in my opinion is the right attitude to have.

People take this world way too seriously.  I feel sorry sometimes for Leanthar having to spend so much time meeting other peoples needs on a world he created HIS way.  We need to remember we're guests and stop complaining about technicalities.

Anyway I simply now enjoy my short sessions with a few of the lads from my zones.  I think Dezza's already got 3-4 tokens and he's only level 8.  you know what we do about it...we laugh!  We think it's hilarious how unlucky his character is but in some twisted way it fits neatly into his bio and character development.

Cheers,
Polak76

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

I'll do quick(ish) notes.

* Logs and screenshots are easy to forge. This said, I wouldn't do it, because exploiting the system wouldn't be a very good way to encourage it to work for me when I deserve it, would it?

* There are three reasons I haven't submitted to be a DM. Firstly, I don't know a blasted thing about the toolset. Second, I simply don't have the time to devote. And thirdly, I was immature enough, early in my time here, to have ruined the trust the Team might have otherwise had in me. (For WL, switch the first reason for "I don't have a character high enough level.") I know that roughly half the time I would be devoting would be towards helping out with the disputes and reimbursement requests - face it, there are a LOT of them, and many of them (especially within the past two weeks) have been "Oh, let's see if we can get it reimbursed; reimbursement policy be dratted!" The Invis bug is well-known, as is the GSanc bug, as is the policy on lag-related death and disconnection death. Why waste the Team's time? I wouldn't want my time wasted.

* If Pyyran were to pick up 5 more DTs in his next five deaths, well... That's the way the cookie crumbles. PC death happens, even with your most beloved characters. I'd be pretty devastated, but I'd move on to another character.

* I would personally be opposed, as someone with GOOD SMD rolls, to an XP hit at each death rather than the fear of perma-death. I can't objectively say which reason is stronger (the fear of real death being good, or the fact that I'd lose LOTS of XP), but I do have to say that I'd be opposed to changing the Death System... Just to chip in on that.

* The way disputes are handled now is great. The one or two times I've had reimbursable DTs, things went very well... The two or three DTs I've gotten at least in part from the Lagbeast, I let lie. But... It's not those that love the community more than their characters who clog things up, is it? To remove the reimbursements altogether, for items, XP, gold, and DTs, would, I think, be a mistake. There are enough things that happen that players really don't have control over, that really should be reimbursed, that would slip through the cracks. Perhaps the Team should just be a bit less patient and lenient with those who post for reimbursement?

* Players! The problem lies with us! We're the ones making the reimbursement system bog down! The burden of making things run smoothly doesn't lie nearly as much on the Team as it lies on us. POLICE YOUR OWN ACTIONS.

[Etinfall]

I partially agree with Lilswanwillow and Polak76. Remove disputes over soulstrands. But keep the disputes over items and exp the same or even with more need of evidence. That would cut the time fixing disputes for the GM's. It might upset people at first but it would soon be accepted practice.

[Cp_Winddancer]

*gets down near the bottom reads Ed's statment and stands and claps*

Folks lets face it anyone who has been here for any amount of time has suffered a bug.  Is there a chance you could die, well yeah is there a chance you could lose something well yeah, is it the end of the world well no.  I personally think and a GM is more than welcome to correct me if I am wrong but the biggest issue has to do with simply (and I am guilty of this as well) reading the rules and only making valid reinbursement requests.  Rules are Rules and as such to play here you have to follow them.  Would I like to have my character be LE yes, but I have to request it and frankly I just don't feel like taking the time to sumit the request so what do I do continue to play my character at the alignment she was approved for.  As it has been said before it is not the GM or admin staffs job to play babysitter to us players.  If we were to stop wasting so much of thier time with invalid claims and requests we would see more content, have more quests, and hopefully have more fun.  Its that simple.  Personally I know that the group I like to RP with does not have either a WL or GM in it, so what we still have fun.  If we as players run off the GM's then we wont have them and will destroy the place we go to get away from the world or as my wife calls it her sanity time (the time that she gets away from my antics).  From personal opinion the best quests are the spontaneous ones where all of a sudden the Celestiral being of pyrotechron shows up as we are leaving Firesteep and kill one of us for attempting to steal their ore.  Obviously a GM kill so what I moved on that is what the creature would have done.  One of the best times I have had.  I guess my request is simple please stop wasting the staffs time so that we all can have those fun times that we came here for.  

Gm's(this lumps the admin staff in as well) thanks for the effort and keep up the good work.  

-Winddancer-

[Dorganath]

Seriously, everyone...
  My point in posting that was not to engage in a discussion of the Soul Strand policy. Even before we had a policy, there were reimbursements, though only Leanthar could authorize one, and he did so at his own sole discretion. That's not really the issue, and focusing in on that one aspect of things really misses the point.
  The point was to illustrate the "whys" and "hows" of what we do and how we operate in regards to the reimbursement process, though in truth, it has parallels to everything the GM Team does.
  When a person or a group of people operate in a manner in which no one else knows or understands, the result is usually curiosity, and curiosity unfulfilled leads to suspicion. Suspicion gives way to rumor and rumor breeds resentment. The GM Team is very aware that there are some very negative perceptions out there among the community regarding us, the way we do things, and so forth. There's an "us vs. them" mindset that may be caused by a number of things, but in my experience it's primarily caused by misconceptions, misunderstandings or both. The community views us as authority figures to a degree, and I suppose that's accurate in this context. And in that view, there's often a reluctance to bring things up for fear of reprisal or retribution. In such an environment, negative feelings fester and grow, and eventually they erupt in one way or the other.
  None of that is healthy for this community, or any community for that matter.
  The purpose of my post in the Disputes forum, and the post which started this thread, was to further clarify one aspect of how the GM Team operates and to do so in a way that illustrates and clarifies the transparency for which we strive in the process. And it was my hope that by posting that and explaining that the same rules apply to the GM Team as to the rest of the community...in fact, more rules apply to the GM Team, that people would better understand what it is we do, and not whisper behind the scenes or get caught up in suspicion or unanswered questions, such as the ones that prompted that post in the first place.
  Soul Strand reimbursement was mentioned because it was a common and identifyable example and it was also related to the PM that started this, but it was never the real center of the matter. My intent was not to launch a discussion of the Soul Strand system, the reimbursement of unfairly lost Soul Strands or ways to avoid GMs from being perceived as showing favoritism. It was also not intended to solicit ways to relieve the GM Team of this responsibility by making such reimbursements even harder...or perhaps eliminating them completely. Its intent was merely to peel back the virtual curtain, so to speak, and give everyone a good look at what we do and why, so that there can be no such misunderstandings. or at least to reduce the number of misunderstandings.
I'm really not sure how this thread went off on such a tangent, but I'd really prefer to see it steer back toward its true intent.