1. Welcome to the Brawl website! Feel free to look around our forums. Join our growing community by typing /register in-game!

Brawl's Efficiency

Discussion in 'Discussion' started by tallscot, May 22, 2020.

?

yeah?

  1. yeah

    70.0%
  2. nah

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. with tweaks

    30.0%
  1. tallscot

    tallscot sceptiiiiiii

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2013
    Messages:
    6,411
    Ratings:
    +1,570
    i was requested to make another textbook of a thread so here goes

    To put it simply, Brawl's staff team and server as a whole is extremely, and I mean EXTREMELY outdated. Within the last year (starting last July), I stopped focusing on Brawl to focus and staff two other very large servers (won't name because idk if mentioning names is considered advertisement). From spending my time on there, and then looking back at Brawl, I'm not going to sugarcoat things, it's just honestly sad. I'm not trying to say that this server is trash or anything, because I've been here since 2012 so obviously I've found it fun enough to stick around (that + my friends), but things are just ran SO slow here and it's honestly unbelievable.

    [STAFF]

    For starters, there is NO reason a staff application should remain pending for 2+ weeks. There have been instances where a staff app would remain up for MONTHS. For example, TheTitaniumTitan's Wild West application in 2017. Made in April, accepted in JULY. That's unbelievable. Although this was a while back, there are still so many instances of applications taking 3+ weeks to get resolved. This did get a bit better for WarZ specifically (because the server was in desperate need of staff for the amount of players it was receiving), but it's gone back to the point where it takes forever. I don't understand the reasoning behind this, but it could be that there is only one staff manager. In my opinion, and from my experience working for other servers, there should never only be one person managing who gets hired. Multiple admins should be working the applications, and it should be WEEKLY. As for a staff manager as a whole, there definitely should be one (for current staff, promotions/demotions, etc), but the resolving of staff applications needs to be made more efficient. At the VERY MOST, it should take no more than 2 weeks for a staff application to be denied or accepted. That's plenty of time to gather information on a potential applicant and decide overall whether or not they're fit to staff. As well as this, the hiring of staff needs to be a lot more thought out. There have been MANY staff who were accepted when they absolutely should not have been. For example, oobuck. AURailing. oobuck was completely inactive on all platforms and had contributed little to nothing to the community (nothing against him, he's chill as a person) and was still accepted. AURailing had a very recent history of teaming with perm banned players when he applied and was still given staff. And then continued to team with perm banned players WHILE staff. None of these people were demoted. Both of them resigned. They were allowed to continue being staff when oobuck never played and AURailing continued to mess up over and over and over again, leaking alts, teaming with cheaters/permed players, etc. Originally this server was way too strict in terms of hiring staff, but there's also a thing called being too lenient. There needs to be a "3 strikes and you're out" protocol implemented into the staff team, because it's completely ridiculous that Railing was allowed to remain for such an extended period of time. Same with other current staff, who I won't name. The only people that should be accepting applications for servers are people who are familiar with that server and it's community. For example, Ritzy is the only admin who has played WarZ and is familiar with it, he's the only one who should be handling WarZ applications. Overall, Minesheep as a staff manager should only be managing current staff, promotions/demotions, etc. Hiring of players should be managed and resolved by admins who are very familiar with the gamemode the player applied for. And again, all of this should only take 1-2 weeks.

    Along with staff applications being slow, the promotion system/staff team as a whole needs a rework, which includes ranks/perms. As it is right now, getting promoted takes FOREVER, which is only a detriment to the server and community. Here's the rework I've planned out (excluding the hiring of trial JMODs, which I mentioned above):

    Trial JMOD --> Global JMOD
    The promotion of a Trial JMOD to a Global JMOD should be solely based off playtime, them doing their job correctly as a whole, as well as a basic understanding of the other Brawl servers. If they do their job correctly and they're active in game as well as on other platforms such as Discord, and they understand the other servers, they should get Global within 1-2 weeks. As for perm changes, Global JMOD should not have access to /alt. There is no reason for them to have access to this command and all it does is give people more chance to abuse because of how easy the rank is to access.

    Global JMOD --> Mod
    If a Global passes the hack test, and they are active and do their job correctly, they should be given Mod. If they repeatedly make mistakes and are repeatedly talked to by higher ups/the staff manager, they should remain Global regardless of their hack test results until they get better. For example, if a Global has a history of screwing up such as leaking alts, teaming with permed players, etc., then they should not be given Mod even if they ace their hack test.

    Mod --> Senior Mod
    This would be a significant change. As it is right now, Senior Mods are "Managers" of their respective server. I believe this needs to change. SMOD should not be given out to so few people, there should not only be one SMOD per server. SMOD should ultimately be reverted back to the way it was in 2014, before the whole manager system, to where it's just a Mod with more perms. The reason for this, is that a LOT of issues are only able to be handled by Snr Mod+, and there are so few of these ranks as it is because there's only "one per server". For Mods to be promoted to Senior, they would need to be EXTREMELY active, be constantly contributing to the server with ideas as well as working to implement them rather than just playing the game and staffing, and do their job correctly. They would also need an extensive knowledge of all Brawl servers, rather than just basic knowledge.

    Senior Mod --> Jr. Admin/(Server) Manager
    Rather than having SMODs be the manager for each server (to where there's only 1 per server), a new rank could be implemented which would be called Junior Admin, or [Server] Manager (for example, War Manager/WarZ Manager, etc). This would emphasize that this player manages the specific server, which includes events, ideas and implementation of them, overall keeping the server alive with fresh content. Overall, this rank would be an Admin for their specific server and would focus on that server rather than all of them (which is what Mods/SMODs would be doing). This would only be given to people who know all there is to know about their specific gamemode, who constantly contribute to the server, who are extremely active on all platforms INCLUDING the forums, and who do their job 100% correctly with no faults.

    Jr. Admin/(Server) Manager --> Admin
    Admin would remain the exact same as it is now. In order for Server Managers to get promoted to Admin, they would need to know everything there is to know about ALL gamemodes on Brawl, rather than just their specific server. This is essentially promoting a server manager to a manager of something else, such as staff (like minesheep), perm bans/bans (Ritzy), etc.


    [PROTOCOL]

    Staff protocol as a whole right now is also very outdated. This goes for everything: chat offenses, physical offenses such as hacking, etc.

    CRV
    As it is right now, if you get 30 punishments from chat offenses across all of your accounts within 8 months, you get CRV'd (Continuous Rule Violations), which is a ban on all accounts that received punishment. This needs to be HEAVILY reworked. In general, a CRV isn't just chat offenses, temp-bans/kicks also apply to a CRV. If somebody continuously gets kicked/temp-banned for physical ****, such as ridealongs, glitching, etc, and a lot of the 30 punishments is from that, then they should be perm banned. But if the majority of the punishments are from chat offenses, they should receive nothing but a perm mute (IP-mute). There is no reason to permanently ban somebody off of the server on all accounts that received punishment just for chat offenses (excluding cases of threats). However, in order for this perm-mute change to be implemented, the mute command needs to be reworked in itself. As of right now, if you're muted, you are still able to /msg people, which completely defeats the purpose of the mute, ESPECIALLY because you are able to be muted BECAUSE of messaging people. This needs to be changed, to where if you are muted, you are unable to use ANY form of communication in game, whether that be /msg, team chat, etc. Along with all of this, the CRV in itself is inconsistent as hell. There are SEVERAL people who are over 30 punishments within the last 8 months who have not been CRV'd. Out of the 9 people someone I talk to has checked (won't name), 5 of them qualify for a CRV and yet have not received one. This is still being looked into, so there are bound to be more. The reason I bring this up, the reason the CRV is so inconsistent as it is right now, is because there's no automation for it whatsoever. Considering how impactful this system is, the fact that it can result in a full ban of MULTIPLE accounts, means that there NEEDS to be automation for it because it NEEDS to be consistent. There needs to be a form of automation that will either:
    a) notify staff when a player has qualified for a CRV (30 punishments across accounts)
    b) automatically CRV the player when the 30th punishment across accounts within 8 months was reached

    Chat Offenses
    As of right now, chat offenses and what qualifies for punishment is also inconsistent within the staff team. In general, some staff will punish for something that another staff wouldn't. There needs to be a set protocol for what's allowed and what's not in chat, so there's no confusion or any false punishment that could contribute to a CRV. I'm not sure if this is already implemented or already a requirement, but staff should be required to take a screenshot of every instance that they are required to punish somebody, whether that be a soft warn, etc (assuming that a way of tracking everything that somebody has been punished for in chat is not implemented). This would eliminate any chance of a false punishment going unresolved, should it occur.

    Game Offenses (Cheating/Glitching)
    Although punishments for these types of offenses are not necessarily inconsistent, they ARE inefficient. The main thing I'll be talking about is X-Ray. From what I've seen, there are absolutely no measures being taken to prevent X-Ray. There was an instance where action WAS taken, and staff were able to accurately detect when somebody was X-Raying (WITHOUT screenshare), but it was never taken advantage of and now people have been able to freely X-Ray without any punishment. One huge reason for this is because abusing f3 + a is allowed, which is RIDICULOUS. Abusing f3 + a in order to see through walls and spot players, is literally the EXACT SAME THING as using X-Ray. It's xray without a client, and allowing it just gives players who DO xray an excuse for how they're "not". "It was just f3+a". Disallowing this would make it so much easier to tell when somebody is actually xraying or not, if you aren't going to implement screenshare or even try to prevent people from using it. Along with this, staff members need to actually start actively trying to prevent people from cheating/glitching. Which means responding to /report's or /support when they occur. There are so many instances where I or somebody else /report's a player who is blatantly cheating, and it's never responded to even with other staff online. And if it IS responded to, we're never notified, which I will get into next.


    [SUPPORT]

    The support system on this server is also very outdated. As of now, if you have an issue, all you can do is either PM a staff member on discord (where 80% of the time, from my experience, you don't get a response), or you create a thread in the Q&A section on the forums. The Q&A section can take DAYS to get a response, and PMing staff on discord does not even guarantee you a response. There needs to be a ticket system implemented into the server discords, where a player can create a ticket in a bot channel which would open up a private text channel with just him and all the staff on the server. They would explain their issue or request, etc., and it would be seen by all staff, rather than having to PM them each one by one hoping for a response. The issue would get resolved quickly as everybody is more active on discord, and then the ticket would be closed. If the issue in the ticket requires somebody higher up, such as an SMOD/Admin, the original staff member handling it would simply ping the rank role which would notify somebody with the proper rank to handle it. However, for the most part, it would be JMODs/Mods handling the tickets (with only one staff member handling each ticket, rather than having multiple people give input).


    mk that's about it, these changes would 100% benefit the server as well as its community. feel free to leave feedback
    @Ritzy @SoCool21 @xxMineSheepxx @Lord_Roke @Usp45 @Havai
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
    #1 tallscot, May 22, 2020
    Last edited: May 22, 2020
  2. Usp45

    Usp45 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    Messages:
    5,728
    Ratings:
    +1,012
    I agree with all of this, especially when it comes to staff reworks. It feels like there is constantly a lack of staff members with sufficient powers to help you in a lot of situations, and consequently it usually falls on one person to be responsible for half the community's issues which is just a horrible, inefficient system that I'm baffled is able to even keep the network as a whole running.

    Expanding on what you said in your post, I think that no chat offenses (asides from DOX, swat threats, etc.) should result in any form of a ban, because the problems that abusing chat presents can be solved through lengthy mutes (1+ months) while still retaining players (this is, obviously, especially relevant to WarZ).

    I also think that Brawl should seriously reconsider their "consistent" policy towards different servers. The fact of the matter is that (for example) CTF and WarZ are just extremely different and as such have different needs regarding server policies. Although it may seem like having a consistent set of rules for all servers is most fair, considering the sheer disparity between individual servers it is clear that a "consistent" policy is insufficient for accommodating different servers and their playerbases.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. Yorei

    Yorei Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,187
    Ratings:
    +737
    CRV is, needless to say, a rushed protocol.
    30 mutes for saying 'ez', which some staff do mute for, = ban across all accounts of which those 30 mutes span.
    30 punishments consisting of major threats, harassment, bug/glitch abusing and racism amounts to the exact same punishment. That makes no sense at all. Brawl should be making use of a permanent mute option.

    Another thing that is really slow is the support processes: appeals, reports and direct contact with staff.

    Anyone that is permbanned that hasn't alted in 6+ months should be considered for a straight server-wide unban without having to appeal.
    For example, if I got permbanned on WarZ for hacking and I'm really gone for 6 months (no alting), there should just be an automatic unban of all linked accounts (as long as they don't overlap with another ban reason). This would be better because of the general annoyance of having to appeal, and worrying about all your other accounts and if they are even going to accept you. The appeal system is largely outdated considering that the communication method between the appealing and the staff is just pathetic. You submit the appeal and just hope the "right" staff member takes a look at it. Even then, it can take days or even weeks to make meaningful progress in an appeal.

    Reports are also hit and miss. First of all, /chatreport has a few flaws.
    Some of the chatreport reasons are just inconsistent. 'ez' can be considered flame by some staff and not by others. 'n-word-but-not-the-bad-one', taken largely out of context, is often considered "racism" - which is ridiculous tbh. Yet, people don't get muted for saying chink and whatnot.
    There also shouldn't be any delay to /chatreporting if it's against different players.

    /support is almost useless. There's a 95% chance nobody will get on unless it is spammed. And then, you'll just get warned and your issue will be thrown under the bus lol.

    Reporting on WarZ is a nightmare. Cross-teaming reports take AT LEAST 5 days, and then it's not even worth following up with it since its not even a long punishment. You don't get any loot back, they don't lose ****. The protocol itself isn't that bad and it doesn't seem rushed even if it was, but the enforcement of it is just poor to say the least.

    1.) One of my cross-teaming reports got denied because I couldn't see 6 nametags.
    "Okay, let me just team with 5 different people and let me just hold echest so no other team can get access for free, but I'll tp in the entire 5man team whenever they please. Oh let me just shift around the corner the entire time but since I'm in f5 mode, I'll relay all this information about the enemy team to you guys, and also watch behind for you! They'll never catch me I'm shifted! Oh and if you all die, I'll clutch the enemy team and make up some bull**** excuse as to how I 3rd partied!"
    My team was killed by at least one member of both parties (party of 5, and a party of 1) but it STILL wasn't enough proof. The protocol should be changed that you CANNOT, under any circumstances, fight with a team with 5 players online and on the same server. Literally no excuse.

    2.) One of my cross-teaming reports that blatantly exposes the team has been up for almost a week and still hasn't been looked at. Messaged 5 different staff members on Discord - no response. Brawl.com/report - still no response. Report response times are really slow considering how clear and concise some reports may be.

    At this rate, MOD+ should not be allowed to leisurely play until their main server's reports that they can do are resolved. They applied to volunteer for this role, you are giving them a free rank 24/7 and more for doing this, start having a backbone and really manage the staff. Right now, it seems that a lot of them do whatever they please and with low effort.

    Point #2 above also outlines one of the biggest issues - the direct contact with staff issue. There's just no reasonable avenue of reaching staff now that TS isn't a thing. Support channels are never looked at by anyone other than JMODs, forums aren't a major staff requirement anymore, the ingame /support and /report are just useless unless it is a blatant hack like speed or fly.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    #3 Yorei, May 23, 2020 at 12:13 AM
    Last edited: May 23, 2020 at 12:19 AM
  4. dalt0n

    dalt0n Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2015
    Messages:
    217
    Ratings:
    +55
    I agree with almost everything here, the one thing that most concerns me is how easy it is to go from Global JMOD > Mod from the hack test. Especially if you have specific staff members with multiple outside complaints, it seems as if everything is kept so behind closed doors and the problems should be addressed with some sort of light onto the community. The leaking alts thing seems to have died down but then again I haven't played in a bit so I have no idea. But again, not everyone is the same and you shouldn't be afraid to promote and demote based on past experience and also past problems. The problem with brawl mostly lies in staffing choices and the inability for the members of the staff team to keep us in the light instead of being left in the dark all the time. @Ritzy has done a good job on helping and I really appreciate it, but outsider staff members shouldn't have a say into what goes where into WarZ being the top revenue generating server on Brawl. If you are not on for at least 15 hours a week, your input into what passes and doesn't pass shouldn't be even looked at.

    Also regarding staff applications being up for weeks to months at a time is ridiculous, it's not hard to keep an eye on someone for 1-2 weeks after they apply and giving them either the deny or letting them get a chance at the role. This isn't Hypixel, your life isn't on the line and you guys shouldn't be so scared to promote and demote. This isn't life or death this is a real tight nit community and most input given about staff members in the wrong is correct. We don't lie about staff being abusive because we want people as staff and to help us but if someone is a problem its quite often mentioned but ignored which really curves the community in a bitter way in which we stop caring about what goes on or what we do on the server which is probably the reason so many people decided to blink on alts or xray with no consequences.

    Hopefully some staff members read this and actually take into account what I'm trying to say even though I'm a pretty toxic member. @SoCool21 @chickenputty @xxMineSheepxx
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Lord_Roke

    Lord_Roke Forums Watchdog

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    7,570
    Ratings:
    +3,185
    Doing a quick survey, I looked at the last 5 staff applications: They were accepted within 6, 17, 20, 8 and 7 days, averaging out to a neat 11.6 days, so a bit more than one and a half weeks. I believe this is a perfectly acceptable time, as we need to give players and staff members time to voice their opinion, discuss brought up issues internally, and get approval from various staff members. Promotions are also often done in small waves of 2-4 JMods, so that occasionally adds a few days. Overall, I believe @xxMineSheepxx does an exceptional job of taking care of staff applications (far better than I ever did).

    I am not really involved in the process of staff applications, so I can only give my general view: You are free to voice any concerns you have on the staff application itself or privately towards a staff member; however, please understand that it is up to our discretion to decide how to handle such concerns.

    If a player is already a staff member, that is of course a different topic. If they are breaking any rules, please report them to the staff manager and we will take appropriate action.

    We have used a 3 strikes system several years by now; additionally, it is far easier to get demoted during the trial period. But please keep in mind that strikes or demotion reasons are not publicly discussed, just like we usually do not discuss punishments reasons or appeals.

    Ever since the server manager system was introduced years ago, it has been protocol for the staff manager to ask the server manager about their opinion on an applicant for their server. I do not recall a situation were a staff member was accepted without the approval of the respective server manager.

    The advantage of having a single staff manager take care of all applications is fairness; the same requirements are applied to all applicants equally - something you rightfully pointed out as a problem below with "chat offenses".

    Trial JMods are automatically promoted to global JMod after 2-4 weeks unless the broke a rule or similar - in such cases, the trial time might be extended. I believe 2-4 weeks are superior to 1-2 weeks as it allows us to accept potentially less fit candidates and give them a chance with this longer trial. 1-2 weeks would also barely give the new staff member give time to read up on protocol and get some experience.

    The command /alt was already changed for JMods as suggested here.

    All of this is already being done. Global JMods are promoted to Mod if they pass the hack test, unless they got a strike shortly before or similar.

    There is not only one SMod per server. We try to give every promoted SMod a specific role (listed here), but that can also be as a sub for an already filled role. We have promoted SMods in the past without a specific role in mind to reward exceptional performance.

    As explained above, server manager is only a role and not a requirement to become SMod. This role can be held by Mods, SMods and Admins equally. We separate between rank and role to have a more flexible system, especially with a smaller staff team.

    I am absolutely not happy with the current punishment for CRV and we are already looking into reworking it. However, CRV was always meant as a blanket to cover those few players who are resilient to learning anything from the punishments they get. We can separate between between perm-mutes and bans, but defining which punishments get which would be quite the task as CRV covers so many different offenses and punishments.

    Being able to /msg players while being muted was a bug which was fixed a few days ago by @Paul .

    To quote myself:

    Adding onto this, automatically detecting 30+ punishments ACROSS accounts is far more work and inaccurate due to shared accounts, dynamic IPs and such.

    There is a nearly infinite amount of potentially rule-violating messages a player can send. It it therefore impossible to have a "set protocol" for all of these. We provide definitions and various examples in the handbook and otherwise rely on the staff members to decide from there. For especially questionable cases, they can always discuss them with other staff members and often do. If you have a specific example which was repeatedly treated different by staff members, please point it out.

    While I think taking screenshots would be too much of a hassle (not taking them, more storing and organizing them), this is a good idea. We will look into automatically storing the chat context of a warning as already happens with chatreports.

    I am not sure which action you are referring to. Could you please elaborate?

    We have always had the stance that we are not going to explicitly punish for bugs which are part of Minecraft itself. However, we also never accepted them as an excuse in an appeal. If you abuse F3+A or the minecart bug, where you can see through blocks, and you get banned for Xray, you can not get out of it using this excuse.

    There is the /support command in-game which you can use to contact all online staff members and - hopefully - get a quick reply.

    This is a decent idea and we will also look into implementing it. However, that should not replace the systems we have in place for purchase issues, appeals and reports.


    To summarize: We already actively do most of what you suggest and have been doing some of it for months and years. You brought up two ideas I like - warning context and ticket system - and will look into.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Admin Honor Admin Honor x 1
  6. SoCool21

    SoCool21 7 Year McPvPer

    Joined:
    May 17, 2015
    Messages:
    5,962
    Ratings:
    +2,402
    Sorry for not making a super in-depth response to everything and addressing every point you've made here. I've given a quick summary of my thoughts on all this including things I'd like to see changed. I've tried to address the main points.


    Staff Applicants:
    Obviously, the quicker we can make an informed decision on staff applications, the better. I don't really know how MineSheep finds information about staff applicants and I don't really get involved with staff management, so it's hard for me to comment on why it takes us so long.

    I'm going to look into getting the tools and methods we use to get information on staff applicants available to more staff, at least SMod+. I think MineSheep is doing a fine job at the moment, but obviously, no-one is doing a perfect job and "we're doing fine as is" isn't a reason to avoid improving.


    Staff Demotions: In short, we really need more transparency about stuff like this. Personally, I never saw any evidence to suggest AURailing leaked anything or broke any rules. However, even as an SMod I didn't really know what was going on with this. However, we can't be so transparent that we throw staff members under the bus when they make mistakes.

    Again, since I don't really get involved with staff management it's hard for me to comment on why there isn't more transparency. Obviously, we can't publicly expose staff since it would be hugely demotivating and staff are allowed to make mistakes. However, there has to be a way of doing it better than we are currently doing.

    As a disclaimer: this isn't to suggest I believe AURailing has done anything wrong. I have no reason to believe AURailing broke any staff rules. Though, the fact that AURailing's case hasn't been handled to the community's satisfaction means it's an area for improvement, regardless of if AURailing did nothing wrong.


    Staff Structure: I agree that it needs some changes. I don't agree with every observation you've made, but I do agree that we need a new rank between Mods and Managers. Our staff structure is very cramped at the moment and we have some confusing concepts, like Mod management, which I believe is a bandaid fix to the step up from Mod to SMod being so large.

    This is something I'm currently trying to get addressed. My concerns are being taken seriously by MineSheep, so it's definitely not something we're completely against.


    Protocol: As a whole, yes: our protocol is very outdated. It's badly documented, there's a lot of areas that haven't been reviewed in a very long time and some protocols like CRV have big flaws that need to be addressed.

    As documentation manager it's my job to fix the documentation, and I'll be doing that after I finish the news. After that, it'll be far easier to review all aspects of our protocol to make changes when necessary. I'm not in charge of protocol itself, just the documentation of it, but I'll be doing what I can to get community feedback and involvement when deciding on what needs to change.

    As well as just updating protocol, I also want there to be specific protocol for each management role. This should make everything far more consistent and far better for you guys.


    CRV: This protocol right now is so flawed that I don't think there's any 1 simple fix. Changing the lifetime ban to a lifetime mute isn't going to be enough to fix it, as it does nothing to stop ride-alongs and glitch abuse. Though, keeping the lifetime ban isn't a great idea because some people very rarely abuse glitches or ride-alongs. Then, people can get CRV'd for hackusating 30 times, whereas people who make threats need to make 30 threats before they're CRV'd.

    CRV needs an entire rework, and I plan on doing that when I have the time.


    Chat Offences: This is another issue caused by outdated protocol. I also agree with getting proof for every punishment, and I have some ideas for how punishments work on the backend to make this easier to do.


    Cheating/Glitching: The inconsistent punishments for cheating is caused by a lack of moderation. I have some ideas to motivate staff more to motivate them to moderate more, there are also some ideas to completely change how ghost client detection (including the detection of player x-ray) is done on Brawl.

    One involves no longer banning players off of video reviews and using a new system for dealing with suspected ghost client hackers entirely, and the other involves completely streamlining how video reviewing works to make it far more consistent and as accurate as video reviewing can possibly be with our current understanding of ghost clients and x-ray.

    F3+A is honestly something I would consider to be an x-ray glitch; something we already ban for. This needs to be clarified and I will work on getting this done as soon as possible.


    Support: Completely agreed with you, and this thread has given me some ideas.

    Each Discord should have a "#support-needed" channel. In Staff Discord, we should have a "#support-requests" channel. Doing !support <message> will bring up the message in #support-requests, and staff will react to that message with a designated emoji to indicate they're handling it, and then another designated emoji to indicate that they're done.

    Perhaps, another channel in Staff Discord called "#support-resolutions". Staff would do !supportfix <message> to say how the message was fixed. This would allow higher-ups to track how support requests are being handled.

    As well as just happening over Discord, the /support command should work the same way. We should increase punishments for abuse of the command. When you do /support <message>, you should get a message which says "You are going to send the following message to all staff: <message>. Abuse of this command is against the rules. Are you sure you want to send this message?" to deter players from abusing it.

    In protocol, we need to outline how staff should be handling common requests. It should also outline who should be handling which types of request. Obviously, a CTF JMod who has never played WarZ before shouldn't handle WarZ requests, except for very basic requests with copy & paste responses.

    This should essentially allow for a ticketing system without the need for any web development, which we don't have a lot of at the moment. We have devs familiar with Discord bots, so hopefully this can be done.

    Please let me know if there's anything I've overlooked here and if not, I'll write up a proposal for this soon and I'll try and get it implemented.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Creative Creative x 1
  7. tallscot

    tallscot sceptiiiiiii

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2013
    Messages:
    6,411
    Ratings:
    +1,570
    From my experience, concerns voiced regarding a potential applicant are often not taken seriously. AURailing was caught teaming with a perm banned player literally the day he submitted his application if I remember correctly. This was when normal players could not comment on staff applications, so I messaged several staff members telling them about it. AURailing then proceeded to get accepted, and I was told he was "given a warning not to do it again". He THEN proceeded, during his time as staff, to do the exact same thing multiple times (teaming with the SAME perm banned player), as well as abusing /alts and leaking them in public chat. I reported the teaming with the perm banned players, and was told that "he was never given an official warning (for the first time he did it), an issue on our part, but he's no longer teaming with people he doesn't know". Was also told "his memory can be a bit fuzzy". Everything was reported, several videos and screenshots, and all he ever received was a warning. Overall, in terms of demotion and hiring, it's far too lenient right now.
    From experience, it doesn't take long whatsoever to gain staff experience/read up on protocol, if you ARE a fit applicant. In April, I became Helper on Complex, which had an extremely extensive protocol system (a lot larger than this server), and it literally took me 3 days to get 100% used to it. Was promoted to Trial-Mod 5 days later, and then promoted to Mod a week later then resigned due to personal reasons. If it takes 2 weeks for a Trial to get promoted to Global, that's fine. That's the most amount of time it should take for a good Trial JMOD to get promoted. However, dedicating 2-4+ weeks for TMODs in order to accept "potentially less fit candidates" should not be a thing. You guys should not be accepting "potentially less fit candidates", you should only be accepting players who you 100% know to be fit for the job after having extensive research done.
    I'm aware that it's only a "role", but Server Managers should not be held by any Mods, or anybody with insufficient perms rather. All that does is create more issues and make stuff take a lot longer than it needs to regarding the specific server they're managing. Creating an actual rank for this would make things a lot more efficient. An example of the tediousness of having lower-ranked players as Managers would be @JayOG on WarZ a couple years back iirc. Was a moderator but was basically WarZ manager, and didn't have any perms to do anything, so he was literally promoted to SMOD on WarZ only. This was a huge detriment to the server because little to nothing was getting done because Jay had little to no perms. A server manager should be able to do what they want with the server in order to better it, without it taking days just to get permission.
    If there is a "simple tool", it really needs work as well as the entire aspect of a CRV as a whole. Again, there are multiple people on the server with 40+ punishments across accounts within the last 8 months who have not been CRV'd and have continued to be punished. If this protocol is to be kept in place, it needs to be made more consistent to where it is known when somebody reaches 30 punishments across accounts.
    For example, on WarZ, players will say "ez" in chat after every kill. Sometimes they are warned, other times they are not depending on the staff member. It's considered flame/toxicity in chat, but I would say 50% of the time it's actually enforced.
    I'll PM you later when I have the time regarding this, don't believe it should be publicly mentioned.
    Whether or not it's a Minecraft glitch, it should be bannable if there are recordings of people using it (after the rule is implemented, ofc Not previous recordings). Pressing f3+a in order to see through walls is literally 100% the exact same thing as pressing a keybind to toggle your X-Ray. Literally no difference between the two, it's an X-Ray glitch and action needs to be taken because of how game-breaking it is.
    99% of the time, no staff responds to /support. This isn't just my experience either, most people I've talked to have had little to no success with that command.
    I appreciate the feedback!
     
  8. Usp45

    Usp45 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    Messages:
    5,728
    Ratings:
    +1,012
    This isn't directly in response to your post, but I also think that former staff should go through a brief trial phase (1 week) of JMOD in some form (trial or global) if they rejoin the staff team, and if they do fine that week then they get instantly promoted to their previous highest position. If they've already proven that they can handle, say MOD, then why would it take more than about a week to prove they can still handle it?
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  9. EmperorTrump45

    EmperorTrump45 Dank Memer

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2015
    Messages:
    2,765
    Ratings:
    +2,124
    Some former staff have done some questionable things which might be difficult to notice in only a week. The large majority haven't which, obviously, makes a sometimes lengthy application & trial mod process seem ridiculous. I'm thinking of 0racle in particular and maybe one or two other people who probably never should've been staff in the first place. This is particularly true if it hasn't been a long time since say, a certain staff member either quits or is demoted. In that regard you want to err on the side of caution but it's also an individual decision imo.
     
  10. Usp45

    Usp45 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    Messages:
    5,728
    Ratings:
    +1,012
    I'm referring to staff that resigned on good terms and were not demoted.
     
    #10 Usp45, May 24, 2020 at 12:06 AM
    Last edited: May 24, 2020 at 12:17 AM
  11. EmperorTrump45

    EmperorTrump45 Dank Memer

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2015
    Messages:
    2,765
    Ratings:
    +2,124
    Yes I'm including them too

     
  12. xGhale

    xGhale HG‘s Doom guy

    Joined:
    May 18, 2015
    Messages:
    2,887
    Ratings:
    +1,386
    Eh...no. Couple of former staff members who've done mad stuff or no stuff at all after being promoted. Plus, this kind of act will often infuriate other staff members or the community because of unfairness, be it genuine or percieved.
     
  13. Usp45

    Usp45 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    Messages:
    5,728
    Ratings:
    +1,012
    Well then they were perfectly able of doing that before they resigned (on good terms), so why would this policy do anything to worsen that risk?
     
  14. xGhale

    xGhale HG‘s Doom guy

    Joined:
    May 18, 2015
    Messages:
    2,887
    Ratings:
    +1,386
    People can change - be it for better as you for example have (though not an ex-staffer) or for worse, far worse.
     
  15. Usp45

    Usp45 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    Messages:
    5,728
    Ratings:
    +1,012
    I get that, and I feel like I'm not getting my point across well.

    What I'm saying is that if you are, say, a mod, you are already relatively trusted. Let's say you resign on good terms due to time commitment issues. 6 months later, you come back and reapply. I don't think it's fair that you have to wait months upon months to regain your moderator position if you have already proven you can be trusted. The opposition to this seems to come from the side of "well that person might not be trusted anymore," but I'm pretty sure the week trial period would be sufficient to gauge if someone can still be given a higher position. After all, all the bad things they were capable of doing upon promotion with my proposed system would be the same things they were capable of doing X months ago.

    Of course, this wouldn't be a super structured system and would be subject to changes on an individual basis, but I just believe it's fundamentally backwards that mods can resign, come back a few months later, and have to wait another few months to get mod again--that's just inefficient.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  16. xGhale

    xGhale HG‘s Doom guy

    Joined:
    May 18, 2015
    Messages:
    2,887
    Ratings:
    +1,386
    A week...hmm. Even I can keep a facade up for a week Xd
     
  17. tallscot

    tallscot sceptiiiiiii

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2013
    Messages:
    6,411
    Ratings:
    +1,570
    The majority of staff or staff applicants put up a facade in order to get the rank. They fake a mature personality and then when they resign or get demoted their true colors show. If you were trusted as mod before and you did a good job, you shouldn't have to take a hack test that you already passed in order to get the rank again.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  18. spysuper

    spysuper Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2020
    Messages:
    8
    Ratings:
    +3
    change crv rules unban tanner
     
  19. AmbitionZ_

    AmbitionZ_ Highly Established Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2016
    Messages:
    383
    Ratings:
    +495
    I'm going to agree here. In the past, it has taken large amounts of time for people to be accepted/denied, and that shouldn't happen. But from what I've seen since Minesheep was staff manager, they've been more efficient.
    In my opinion, the problem might not be the amount of smods. It's the lack of recognition for hard working mods. That being said... the new staff system would allow smod to kind of be that recognition. The way smod is the current system, it is quite exclusive, and many people get stuck being mod for long amounts of time and often fade into inactivity or eventually resign. They felt like their hard work wasn't being acknowledged.
    Another thing to support this idea...
    A new system similar to the one suggested would actually make people feel like they're being recognized for their work, as opposed to them feeling stuck as a mod. I think that's the main problem with the current staff system, there isn't enough recognition for mods and at the moment, and as Tom said earlier in this thread, the step between mod and smod is a big one. A system such as the one suggested (maybe with some tweaks) could implement a more gradual shift from mod to server manager while also rewarding hard-working mods.
    This is a good idea, but it really needs to be based off the person, and with brawl's current system I'd say mod would have to be the highest they go back to. Any higher than that is a little too early in my opinion. If an admin resigns, they shouldn't be able to come back and get admin back in a week. Something like smod+ requires a lot of devotion and time into the server, and they need to show they are still willing to put that time in over the course of more than a week.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. tallscot

    tallscot sceptiiiiiii

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2013
    Messages:
    6,411
    Ratings:
    +1,570

    4:56

    @Lord_Roke @SoCool21 in no way should this be allowed. Obviously he shouldn't be penalized for the video as it's allowed currently (for whatever reason), but it's gamebreaking and it's gotten to the point where people are literally asking him to make callouts ("where are they?"). It's an X-Ray glitch, so it should be treated the same as X-Ray.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Brawl's Anti-Cheat (Lack thereof) and how can the community help. Capture the Flag Mar 27, 2018
Brawl's Next Big Move Suggestions / Ideas Dec 21, 2017
Idea Brawl's Best Idea Ever. MC-War Oct 13, 2017
Did McPvP Hurt Brawl's Growth? Discussion Jul 15, 2017
Brawl's Shooter Franchise Suggestions / Ideas May 4, 2017