Declined [JB] Trusted Rank or Timer to Join Blu Team (1 Viewer)

[Sammy Slamma Jamma]

Hi, it gets to a point where people are tired of being completely helpless when there's over an hour plus of mass freekill and no response. It gets very frustrating. I feel like there should be a trusted rank. I've seen some servers do this, (although it's through donations which I think is a bad idea). Basically, it's someone who is not necessarily an admin but can call for a votekick/voteban in case of issues. Most plugins i've seen have a supermajority (66%+ yes votes) which then leads to the person being voted against being banned/kicked/gagged etc. Usually the durations are short, like an hour or two, but it provides the community with some relief. People can apply for it and get accepted, allowing them to create votes against players - or it can be given by senior admins to players who they believe they can trust.

The other Idea is a timer to join blu team. I like this because it prevents new players from instantly joining blu team and mass freekilling/breaking rules because they don't understand them. This greatly increases the time that these accounts would need to play on the server before joining blu team so they can understand the rules and also not create alts to MFK as quickly. I am less open to this idea because I love that panda allows anyone to join blu team, it's very welcoming to returning jailbreak players such as myself. However, the time played on server doesn't need to be too long (30mins-1 hour).

 

[BritishMafia]

not sure how I feel about this, on one hand it would be amazing for us to be able to do something against mfkers when no admins might be online, but at the same time sometimes people arn't admins for reasons.
It is very creative however and I think it might be a good idea. just dont give it to solely donators, red^ was a donator, and uhhhh we still make memes about him.

 

[Sammy Slamma Jamma]

not sure how I feel about this, on one hand it would be amazing for us to be able to do something against mfkers when no admins might be online, but at the same time sometimes people arn't admins for reasons.
It is very creative however and I think it might be a good idea. just dont give it to solely donators, red^ was a donator, and uhhhh we still make memes about him.

maybe a !votekick or !voteban then?

 

[ait]

Temporary ban vote from blue team initiated by donors only, it's probably a safe bet to add another role that's above donator rank but below trial-admin rank. I'm pretty sure PB had this for donors and some cs2 jb communities has it. It's a proven thing that works.

Edit: Turning on FF and killing the guard works, just make sure you time it right before reds kill each other. I'm pretty sure the mfker today killed the warden lol

 

[CutePyro0]

Temporary ban vote from blue team initiated by donors only, it's probably a safe bet to add another role that's above donator rank but below trial-admin rank. I'm pretty sure PB had this for donors and some cs2 jb communities has it. It's a proven thing that works.

Edit: Turning on FF and killing the guard works, just make sure you time it right before reds kill each other. I'm pretty sure the mfker today killed the warden lol

this would be abused to hell if anyone could make these votes people would litterally use it to ban blues they just don't like

 

[ait]

this would be abused to hell if anyone could make these votes people would litterally use it to ban blues they just don't like

already a proven thing that works and it cost like 20 bucks for the role in a csgo community with 51k members. Make few amount of active people an mini-mod with only voting perm

 

[Valen]

ten billionth suggestion for this sort of thing that is denied each time

it isnt a good idea

 

[Bananawastaken]

but can call for a votekick/voteban in case of issues.

I dont like this because not only are these votes easily dodged, you guys arent staff for a reason, we have a system implemented for a reason and doing something like this for a problem which will never be fully solved is kinda bad.

The other Idea is a timer to join blu team.

I think this is cool but the community has voted against it in the past, maybe this time will be different.

Created a poll.

 

[Eagle_attack]

The playtime poll is the best, but an hour is not alot….people who are new will join blue not knowing the rules , it should be a Day play time ( before they join blue)

 

[Bananawastaken]

it should be a Day play time ( before they join blue)

if that option wins we will do a vote for the exact value

 

[soirb]

It would be so cool to be able to fight against the MFK'ers.... But at the same time all of these suggestions kind of suck. (Let me explain)

Allow Donors to do voteban/teamban​

This would just let anyone ban people they don't like, and as the admin said, you aren't staff for a reason. Letting anyone who gives a few bucks have power to create votes ban or kick people is INCREDIBLY irresponsible, and probably wouldn't work. We have staff for a reason. Just report them.

Create a trusted role for people so they can do voteban/teamban​

A bit better than donors, but its still flawed. It could work, but who would be chosen to be "trusted", and who gets the say? Is there a poll between admins deciding if they get it? I'd want more info before straight up voting for a new feature to be put in place. And at the same time, you can just report them on the forums and get them banned anyways, and the call admin feature works too. If no admin is on I guess this could work, but I just want more info.

Implement minimum playtime for blue (time will be voted on)​

This idea is one of the better ones, but if someone came from another server and wanted to play Blu and were told "Sorry, you haven't played on our server long enough. Play longer to get this.", it would look pretty bad. Sorry, you cant play this team since you just started playing, try playing more often to gain this perk. I don't like this idea, it discourages new players from trying Blu and just makes them have to wait.

This is all just my opinion, but I'd like to see what 'yall think.

 

[Eagle_attack]

Sorry, you haven't played on our server long enough. Play longer to get this.", it would look pretty bad. Sorry, you cant play this team since you just started playing, try playing more often to gain this perk. I don't like this idea, it discourages new players from trying Blu and just makes them have to wait.

I think its better then getting instantly guardbanned because you dont know what the rules are

 

[Valen]

respectfully, I don't think some of yall understand just how community changing this can be. There are a large amount of players from other communities that just like to play blu and join panda to do that. This effectively will be turning away portions of potential players.
Do those players know all of our rules? no, but they don't need a guardban or timer to figure them out. We really shouldn't do this.

 

[Mehgend]

Proud of all our donators for not voting for the option to give them super powers

But, my opinion on this is against this changing at all.
Most people connect to just play guard. People from WL and any other JB server to play guard. More often than not a simple “hey panda rules are weird and different and you can’t do X” solves it instantly.

if they have no idea what they’re doing, then a “hey switch to RED and learn the ropes buddy” might work.
Being toxic and screaming at them for not knowing what baiting means doesn’t help the situation and might result in them acting in poor taste.
If they’re still doing stuff wrong. Call an admin and/or report them. Someone might respond to the call, but sometimes we’re busy or whatever. Getting OBS replay buffer or medal or that GeForce thing running and reporting will do wonders. I just done personally see a need for any of these

 

[Nergal Nergalton]

Implementing a voteban option would inevitably lead to it getting abused to try and get rid of BLUs the players don't like, regardless of whether or not it gets restricted to donor or "trusted rank" only.

 

[CutePyro0]

Allow Donors to do voteban/teamban​

This would just let anyone ban people they don't like, and as the admin said, you aren't staff for a reason. Letting anyone who gives a few bucks have power to create votes ban or kick people is INCREDIBLY irresponsible, and probably wouldn't work. We have staff for a reason. Just report them.

I Agree with soirb here as both red^ and Bugs were both donators and both wanted to destroy the server so they most certainly would have just banned everyone on the server.

they is also the matter of logs and punishment stack tracking that people seem to forget,
when you get punished in some way (mute/gag/teamban/warning/serverban) it gets logged and will get stacked (increase in punishment) each time a new offense is commited.

If the vote ban system was added would these player bans also be counted in the logs and stacks because if so that would be horrendous for the staff to sort out when dealing with players due to players most likey making fake or stupid ban reasons
for example:

vote to ban sweepy
reason: didn't say hawk tuah

Create a trusted role for people so they can do voteban/teamban​

A bit better than donors, but its still flawed. It could work, but who would be chosen to be "trusted", and who gets the say? Is there a poll between admins deciding if they get it? I'd want more info before straight up voting for a new feature to be put in place. And at the same time, you can just report them on the forums and get them banned anyways, and the call admin feature works too. If no admin is on I guess this could work, but I just want more info.

would have to agree with sorb here they is possible only 1 non admin that could be given this power at this time i know of and that would be semi-colon my reasoning is simple they handle the play test and have earned that trust.

Implement minimum playtime for blue (time will be voted on)​

This idea is one of the better ones, but if someone came from another server and wanted to play Blu and were told "Sorry, you haven't played on our server long enough. Play longer to get this.", it would look pretty bad. Sorry, you cant play this team since you just started playing, try playing more often to gain this perk. I don't like this idea, it discourages new players from trying Blu and just makes them have to wait.

Again i agree with sorb here I don't like the idea of saying "nope you can't play sorry" however depending on what time this is set at i do not see an issue that would cause me to vote agaisn't this being added
i have seen the admins response to this which i also agree with and normally these warnings are given to new players even when they 1st offend (accidently freekilling , baiting , micspam/soundboard) this is particularly noticeable by @Musisphaera however they are players of late who have joined the server and simply do not listen and or get argumentative when given this information leading to reds getting fustrated with that user.

it's suggested by @Eagle_attack that this timer is set to 1 day played on the server this i think is a understandable time as it teaches them the basics of panda and also states they understand our rules which hopefully leads to them being a fun/good blue and not a blue who MFK and says he never read the rules thinking that excuses the behaviour. the time is also pritty simple to meet as if you are going to be a regular you likely will be playing more than 1 day on the server


overrall the only option i can support in regards to a change is to vote

Implement minimum playtime for blue​

 

[Musisphaera]

Not gonna write out an essay but here's my view:

The first 2 options:

• Allow donors to kick/ban only
  Hard disagree. Most have already said it's abusive nature but I want to add that sometimes persons won't even go through with the vote
  If 40% of regular players and 60% of non-regulars are on, then you know how the voting goes.
• Trusted role
  While a good idea on paper, it has flaws. Especially if trust is broken.

Regarding minimum playtime: Sure if you never joined Panda but have experience on other servers it may be weird, but Panda's ruling is different than other servers. It may give them a sense of attention to the rules here.
And the admins have their own life outside of JB too. They can't babysit the server 24/7.
Call me unorthodox, but combining this all I'm in favour of a minimum playtime system.

 

[cilantro]

i don't usually comment on suggestions but this one is seriously a drastic change to the server, echoing what Valen said here:

There are a large amount of players from other communities that just like to play blu and join panda to do that. This effectively will be turning away portions of potential players.

lots of players have lots of jb experience from other communities, and they will be put off from joining if there is a blu timer. additionally with the new vpn restrictions, mfk/rule breaking is probably at an all time low compared to the past, making this change even less necessary.

finally, what happens when there is no one with enough time wanting to play blu on the server? there are a fair amount of times when only a small amount of people want to play blu, and if potential blu players are restricted due to time limitations then it might genuinely kill the server if a regular is not on to play blu.

i really urge people to think deeply about this and if its worth the potential consequences this might cause, new potential regulars might be completely turned off from panda and never join back again because they might become annoyed with this time restriction.

 

[soirb]

respectfully, I don't think some of yall understand just how community changing this can be. There are a large amount of players from other communities that just like to play blu and join panda to do that. This effectively will be turning away portions of potential players.
Do those players know all of our rules? no, but they don't need a guardban or timer to figure them out. We really shouldn't do this.

This is exactly what I'm trying to explain. Restricting the ability to play a part of the game to people who might already know is a horrible look for us. We can literally just help by explaining our rules instead of making them wait and wait and wait before they even get to play, and it's especially worse if they already have the general idea and only need a few changes.

It's the best idea out of the three, but god damn does it still have flaws.

Personally, I'm voting to not change it at all.

 

[Valen]

im watching this poll like the fall of Rome