Bridging the Gap

sunilvarma

Guest
Pluto, you are telling me that the CoMa has no influence over the rule in which players cannot discuss bans?

I was under the impression this wasn't an Innogames rule, and therefore could be changed by the CoMa.
 
This is also incorrect. Innogames has set the rules as well as what infraction gets x punishment. The CoMa cannot issue a notice to change these pre-set rules and regulations as Innogames has specifically set these SOP and SOG's to maintain a uniformity across all markets. All In Game Moderators, Senior Moderators, Server Administrators and The CoMa all follow the exact same set of guidelines.

Example: x player complains that a rule is unfair or why isn't X player perm banned.
Simple: These players received the punishment that we were instructed to give based on their specific infraction.
Looks like Sunvaar is right.. Again.. Like always..
 

Antz2013

Philosopher
Sorry for my absence,

InnoGames sets the policy and rules for all forums so that they are equally enforced regardless of which forum you are in. Even a small rule change can have large effects as it affects ALL of the servers.

The CM (Medi in our case) may have some sway in the interpretation but even her authority has limits.



1) If someone cheats then by all means make it known. Especially if there's a controversy surrounding them. I feel the mods bear the burden of proof in a contested ban. Hell I believe the mods should release a master player list with attached proof so those players can be black listed off premades.
We do have the burden of proof. Every ban we make needs to be backed by information from our Support Tools and those bans can be challenged by not only the players in appeals but by other mods who are tasked to review the bans. Banning in not something we take lightly.

As for publishing a list, it's not going to happen as this would be against the rules of player privacy



2) But that is players receiving different/special treatment.
The rules are enforced equally - if a rule violation requires a ban, then a ban is put in place. No special treatment there. Appeals are handled on a case by case basis.



4) It looks worse on the mods part to shut it down than to let it ride or directly answer questions. This has been a problem on both servers. Something questionable happens, maybe the mods are wrong, probably not though. Either way the issue gets big, then it gets shut down. This is where point 1 comes into play. Maybe its just better to alienate one cheating player than lose 100 more legitimate players. Which in the case of Lato, the #2 alliance almost entirely ghosted and quit Grepolis right before WW because someone got banned for botting.
First to have a meaningful conversation you would need to have both sides involved. A few issues with that:

1. Mods are not permitted to discuss player bans, so...
2. That leaves the player that was banned able to tell any story s/he wants, be it the truth or otherwise.
3. You are assuming that players would WANT their respective bans put on public display.
4. Even if Mods were permitted to join these discussions, their evidence is not....
5. And then there is the court of public forums, which is open to those who:
a) actually know what they are talking about
b) think they know what they are talking about
c) chime in just to be heard
d) are trolls looking to spice up the conversation... and offer nothing constructive​
and they are in no particular order.​
 

Oliver Clothesoff

Hekatonarch
We do have the burden of proof. Every ban we make needs to be backed by information from our Support Tools and those bans can be challenged by not only the players in appeals but by other mods who are tasked to review the bans. Banning in not something we take lightly.
Actually this is only a partial truth...

I have first hand knowledge on a player getting banned for circumstantial evidence. ie.. information not backed by your "tools"

In this case a player with a declared shared connection was banned and had the secondary account deleted. I know first hand the player truly did have his wife running the account. However the mods claimed that because the account was not logged into often or very long they "determined" that it was more than likely a case of multi accounting.

Again this is circumstantial evidence.. yet the account was banned. The mods in this case compared log in frequency and duration of an account with 150+ cities to an account that only had 5 cities. Additionally the player in question was able to provide reasons as to why the account was operated in the manner it was.

Mods claiming they have the burden of proof is a dream scenario. Many times bans are upheld just so the mods can save face or make a point. While the appeal process works for some (including myself) it is entirely subjective. Thats where the players have a problem. Thats why it is deemed unfair..
 
Actually this is only a partial truth...

I have first hand knowledge on a player getting banned for circumstantial evidence. ie.. information not backed by your "tools"

In this case a player with a declared shared connection was banned and had the secondary account deleted. I know first hand the player truly did have his wife running the account. However the mods claimed that because the account was not logged into often or very long they "determined" that it was more than likely a case of multi accounting.

Again this is circumstantial evidence.. yet the account was banned. The mods in this case compared log in frequency and duration of an account with 150+ cities to an account that only had 5 cities. Additionally the player in question was able to provide reasons as to why the account was operated in the manner it was.

Mods claiming they have the burden of proof is a dream scenario. Many times bans are upheld just so the mods can save face or make a point. While the appeal process works for some (including myself) it is entirely subjective. Thats where the players have a problem. Thats why it is deemed unfair..

Would like to point out a point I made a while back, that there is no "universal" law to the rules. Every rule is at each MODs perspective and subjection and then action is taken. For example, Dingaling may not warrant a "lockout" if reported to one MOD, but to another MOD, that other MOD may say "yeah that breaks the rules" and then a "lockout" is issued..

There needs to be a universal law, not a subjection and matter of perspective law.
 

Antz2013

Philosopher
In regards to shared connections, if a player can adequately explain why our data shows them as multi-accounting then they should be unbanned. Having experienced the shared connection restrictions, I know they can be a pain. This being said, you have to remember there are a LOT of variables in our decision making process. There is no one way to decide on whether this person needs to be banned while that one does not. I lost count on how many players I almost banned for multi-accounting or sharing violations but at the last minute noticed that they had declared their sharing and suddenly what I was looking at made sense and no ban was actually warranted.

As for the Mods treatment of the rules being subjective, we try to rule that out as much as possible. For the vast majority of rule violations, they are very clear to us using the data we have.

Is the system 100% perfect, no and no system is. Will mistakes happen, yes which is why we take steps to minimize them. Do we take errors seriously, definitely.

On the flip side it is also not always the Mods that make the errors, players frequently misinterpret, misunderstand or plainly not knowing the rules are something we commonly encounter.
 
In regards to shared connections, if a player can adequately explain why our data shows them as multi-accounting then they should be unbanned. Having experienced the shared connection restrictions, I know they can be a pain. This being said, you have to remember there are a LOT of variables in our decision making process. There is no one way to decide on whether this person needs to be banned while that one does not. I lost count on how many players I almost banned for multi-accounting or sharing violations but at the last minute noticed that they had declared their sharing and suddenly what I was looking at made sense and no ban was actually warranted.

As for the Mods treatment of the rules being subjective, we try to rule that out as much as possible. For the vast majority of rule violations, they are very clear to us using the data we have.

Is the system 100% perfect, no and no system is. Will mistakes happen, yes which is why we take steps to minimize them. Do we take errors seriously, definitely.

On the flip side it is also not always the Mods that make the errors, players frequently misinterpret, misunderstand or plainly not knowing the rules are something we commonly encounter.

Antzy breaking da rules talking about banning lol :p

#Busted :D
 

Oliver Clothesoff

Hekatonarch
In regards to shared connections, if a player can adequately explain why our data shows them as multi-accounting then they should be unbanned. Having experienced the shared connection restrictions, I know they can be a pain. This being said, you have to remember there are a LOT of variables in our decision making process. There is no one way to decide on whether this person needs to be banned while that one does not. I lost count on how many players I almost banned for multi-accounting or sharing violations but at the last minute noticed that they had declared their sharing and suddenly what I was looking at made sense and no ban was actually warranted.
I agree that this is the case. Although I am pointing out some weaknesses in the system, I can at least acknowledge that for the most part the appeal system works.

What I was commenting on was the statement you made when you said that "Every ban we make needs to be backed by information from our Support Tools." A decision can either be circumstantial or supported by evidence. Not both. But in the case of bans or non-bans, as you have pointed out, decisions are made outside of what can be proven by evidence.

As was said.. making rules, the evaluation system, and punishments more uniform is the key to a happier consumer base (in this matter at least). I realize that mods for the most part are people too. They have opinions and feelings. They make mistakes, or even go out on a limb for people. But in reality mods are like judges. The need to try to be impartial and consistent. A standard should be put in from the top and enforced down to the most basic mod function. Of course easier sad than done, but it is the consensus of the community that this really isnt a priority amongst mods.
 
As was said.. making rules, the evaluation system, and punishments more uniform is the key to a happier consumer base (in this matter at least). I realize that mods for the most part are people too. They have opinions and feelings. They make mistakes, or even go out on a limb for people. But in reality mods are like judges. The need to try to be impartial and consistent. A standard should be put in from the top and enforced down to the most basic mod function. Of course easier sad than done, but it is the consensus of the community that this really isnt a priority amongst mods.
I have been saying this for how long now??

Dot, Pluto, & Antz, we all had this same discussion in the Oropos meet and greet.
 

Oliver Clothesoff

Hekatonarch
I've been saying it for a while too.. maybe the better part of 3 years.. 3 different CoMa's too haha

Thats the point of all the angst. People feel theres a problem and from the outside looking in, it doesnt seem like theres a whole lot being done to address it.
 

Antz2013

Philosopher
In essence, you are right. We are the judges and we do try to be as impartial and consistent as possible. Is it easy, no but we do try.

In US (I can't speak for other servers), we are training mods to back what they say, so if a ban is in place, as seniors, we want to see why that ban was in place and not just some of the time, but all of the time.

Thats the point of all the angst. People feel theres a problem and from the outside looking in, it doesnt seem like theres a whole lot being done to address it.
There is a definite problem with that statement. Looking from the outside in, will not help you. Between the issues of privacy and confidentiality, you are not going to see enough to glean any real information. Not to sound like a recruiter, but if you are truly wanting to see the inner workings, there is only one way. Sign up for the Support Team. Only then we can show you why we need to work the way we do. (Almost sounds like a cult...
)

However, in reality the truest test will be shown through time. There will always be contested bans, there will always be players accusing Mods of misconduct, or the Mods did this or the Mods did that. That is a given in any group of people. We can only do the best we can given the tools that we have within the established protocols that we follow.
 

Slayer94

Taxiarch
the only things i wanna see changed is the gold trading used to be you joined a world to try an play to the end now 25% plus of players who join are just there to see how much gold they can get out of the server without buying it.


also the end game has been discussed alot but i havent seen anything much about if wonders will be changed at all or not

PS the bandit camp is cool in all but wanting me to pay 100 BP every time i want a farming village on another island is kind of rediculus
 

Pluto

Citizen
The cult is the best. If you can handle being the bad guy/gal lol.. don't get me wrong I hate being the bad guy but I love the job at times too. Sometimes the ban button can be the last thing you want to do but policy forces your hand. other times its like a celebration that all your hard work is finally paying off. Then the actual support side of the job. there are days when you can close a ticket in minutes with a happy player, other times you want to pull your hair out. I would consider moderation a high stress job depending how serious you take it or how far you excel in the position. . It can be pressing and I will tell you this job is not for the faint or the players with a soft heart.. the community.. yess ..the community... all of you don't cut us any slack, yet we play side by side with many of you in complete transparency.

oh and no. there is no paycheck.. lol
 
Pluto have we played against/with each other before?

Slayer: That's why only fighters get the good stuff babes. ;)

#WarGame

And quit acting like you don't gold trade yourself.
 

Pluto

Citizen
I cant tell you! The nice part about moderation.. Transparency


Really though, I dont have access to a world here and there cause I do enjoy playing as well. Isnt this why we are all here, complimenting or complaining..
 
Last edited:

sunilvarma

Guest
I cant tell you! The nice part about moderation.. Transparency


Really though, I dont have access to a world here and there cause I do enjoy playing as well. Isnt this why we are all here, complimenting or complaining..
This is the worst part about moderation :)

Players can't know why they are banned so they make up reasons and claim their innocence etc.. Makes the player base hate and mistrust the moderators and Inno. Also results in many players quitting the game or stop spending money on it.