Yea, except those who don't vote are not going to vote no to the troll because they don't vote, remember?
Then because you're not counting them.. And because the two trolls convinced only 1 other person to vote kick that comm.. (or if no one else votes at all) They win every time.
Servers have been disabling the vote kick, as mentioned, for the abuse and griefing that occurs. Consider that thoroughly when you advocate for making it exponentially easier to do so.
Requiring half the amount of people to convince than currently, combined with not counting non votes is just clearing the way for non administrated servers (the only time votes are needed) to be trolled further.
If it weren't for these trolls (which obviously occur) I'd be on board.. But that's not the case
Simple way to counter that, vote will only go through if more than half of the people in the game vote. (so 51% of people in the game voting and 75% of votes for a kick)
how about we drop the votes required to a majority +2 and all absentee votes are automatically counted as no? wouldn't that solve the issue? so if you have an afker, you need to convince your entire team and like two opposing team players to kick. I don't like the idea of people being able to kick with as few as 1 vote if nobody is paying attention. I've been witness to vote spamming too.
Here's an interesting question. If there are enough trolls in a server to stop any votes passing to kick them. Are they really the trolls? Or are you the troll as you are the minority trying to ruin THEIR fun. Same goes for passing votes.
So I don't see why this would be an issue.
From my experience 2 or 3 people is plenty to shut down a vote on even the largest servers because there are always some AFKs and some people that don't vote
We're talking about not counting no vote as a no though... My statement was just to show why this can't be a bad thing no matter what trolls are in the game.
Holy crap, a thread by Amb that has 20 agrees instead of 20 disagrees and several flags for abuse and spam. I must have gotten lost in my regular universe and ventured into OPPOSITE LAND :P
Seriously though. It's a good idea. Runs into a few issues with the player switching teams or going to readyroom or spec that would need to be ironed out first. Perhaps whoever's team the person is in when the vote is first cast should apply, so if they switch teams or to rr/spec it is still the original team voting on them. Also, both teams should be able to vote on spectators or people in the readyroom as long as they are there when the vote is first cast. That's how I'd do it anyway.
Not voting really should be a nonvote, as opposed to a veto, if people dont gaf enough to vote, really, their lack of voting should NOT be counted. its stooped.
Holy crap, a thread by Amb that has 20 agrees instead of 20 disagrees and several flags for abuse and spam. I must have gotten lost in my regular universe and ventured into OPPOSITE LAND :P
It's 2014, what was not cool last year is now cool and vice versa.
If it weren't for these trolls (which obviously occur) I'd be on board.. But that's not the case
The whole point of having a vote kick system is to get rid of the unwanted player such as the trolls and I'm sure the majority of people in this thread agrees that the system is broken and needs to be fixed.
And did you ever consider that they would use this system to their advantage?
Have you not seen this already occur despite the difficulty in getting votes to pass??
And in the Presidential election today, fewer people voted than did not, so we have no winner. Oh you want to vote again? Sorry. You voted too recently - try again in four years.
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
@bestprofilename Great example... I know how you meant for that to work for your argument, but you really couldn't have picked a better example that disagrees with your point.
Just look at our political system and government today, are they an example of proper use and proper functioning? ..Didn't we just about shut down some weeks ago.. ? Don't corporations pay for political agendas so that they may lobby bills that line their own pockets? Do you believe these are exemplary results of a system that doesn't count non participation?
The poor state of things are exactly what occurs if you make it easy for the few to be uncontested by non participation.
Its a double edged sword.. its easier change, whether beneficial or not.
I agree counting the non voters, in moments when beneficial change is desired, is highly annoying..
But I shudder to imagine what occurs if you make what is difficult to troll - yet still occurs! - incredibly easy..
Especially considering the majority of those who are non voters are just non vets who don't see what is on their own screen .. rookies that said trolls would prey on worse than they already do by just joining rookie servers and constantly voting to get the map changed, round reset, or commander kicked .. without opposition.
This all being said, I do however agree that the current % required for change may be too high.
Or are you the troll as you are the minority trying to ruin THEIR fun.
What?.. :-L "minority" no longer applies.. ?
mi·nor·i·ty
məˈnôrətē
noun
1.
the smaller number or part, esp. a number that is less than half the whole number.
And if you are not counting the "whole" / those that did not participate - then what exactly are you a smaller part of?
You and those that agree with you are a smaller part of the server (or the ones that care enough to have a say) if a vote you call to kick a "troll" fails. In THIS server, the majority is of that which you call "trolls" but since they are the majority, they really aren't trolling the game, they ARE the game. YOU are the guy on the sidelines telling them they're wrong and should leave when you are clearly out numbered.
You. Are. The minority.
EDIT: The only veto to this is an admin. Even if the whole server is against what the admin is requesting, the admin is right in this case, though he's going to kill his own server.
SamusDroidColoradoJoin Date: 2013-05-13Member: 185219Members, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Gold, Subnautica Playtester, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
edited January 2014
Yes except the presidential election vote never fails to choose a president. It's so incredibly easy to make correct. You just set a minimum amount of votes required for the alternate vote method of yes/no > 90% to be checked, else it requires half the server. Easy. Obviously you would not count 3 yes 1 no as a passed vote, that would just be stupid. http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/133823/should-not-voting-be-counted-as-a-no-vote
Few good tips about the current voting system, if kick is enabled and before you start the vote by giving people the heads up about why you about to kick the person, usually when I ask Mr.X are you afk? No response (in some time) I'm going to vote kick Mr.X because he is afk, start vote.
I've noticed if people just start a vote kick with no reason, or if there was a reason but being on the other team you have no idea what is going on, it hardly ever passes.
SamusDroidColoradoJoin Date: 2013-05-13Member: 185219Members, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Gold, Subnautica Playtester, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
And BTW, I am talking specifically map votes NOT kick votes. Making them different requirements, idk, maybe, it would be better than the current vote system. It's the only time I have problems with it. Making them all how I propose, maybe.
Obviously you would not count 3 yes 1 no as a passed vote, that would just be stupid.
Yes, thank you.. that was largely my issue with it.
You and @auron2 both have a good idea there.
That would ensure at least some modest amount of participation from "the whole" is required for a change to occur.
edit: this means though that non voters still have participation though, so votes will still be difficult to pull off.. just marginally better than they are now. (edge case afks and that 1 or 2 votes that would have helped no longer will occur)
I'm tired of reading all the horse you know what (pun intended). This is how simple it is:
- Not voting shouldn't = veto, if you don't vote then that's your problem. Eg, "2 yes" vs "1 no" in a 24p full server should still pass, if you have 22 ppl in ur server who don't GAF enough to vote then that's just too dam bad.
- you can only vote kick players on your own team, players on the opposite team/RR/spec are not included in the vote pool in this case. (CS GO has already implemented this)
I'm tired of reading all the horse you know what (pun intended). This is how simple it is:
- Not voting shouldn't = veto, if you don't vote then that's your problem. Eg, "2 yes" vs "1 no" in a 24p full server should still pass, if you have 22 ppl in ur server who don't GAF enough to vote then that's just too dam bad.
- you can only vote kick players on your own team, players on the opposite team/RR/spec are not included in the vote pool in this case. (CS GO has already implemented this)
just because you say it like some kind of tough guy, doesn't make it right. saying it louder and more emphatically may get you heard, but it won't hide the stupid in your stance. kicking players shouldn't be easy.
People like you is the reason why we have 5-6 AFKers sitting in RR all the time. We can't get rid off them because they count as 5-6 veto vote with their AFKing/not voting. Maybe this is exactly what UWE wants, to make the ns2 community appear to be really alive, with lots of full servers (filled with AFKers).
@bestprofilename Great example... I know how you meant for that to work for your argument, but you really couldn't have picked a better example that disagrees with your point.
Just look at our political system and government today, are they an example of proper use and proper functioning? ..Didn't we just about shut down some weeks ago.. ? Don't corporations pay for political agendas so that they may lobby bills that line their own pockets? Do you believe these are exemplary results of a system that doesn't count non participation?
The poor state of things are exactly what occurs if you make it easy for the few to be uncontested by non participation.
Its a double edged sword.. its easier change, whether beneficial or not.
I agree counting the non voters, in moments when beneficial change is desired, is highly annoying..
But I shudder to imagine what occurs if you make what is difficult to troll - yet still occurs! - incredibly easy..
Especially considering the majority of those who are non voters are just non vets who don't see what is on their own screen .. rookies that said trolls would prey on worse than they already do by just joining rookie servers and constantly voting to get the map changed, round reset, or commander kicked .. without opposition.
This all being said, I do however agree that the current % required for change may be too high.
You couldn't have put a more terrible counter to a facetious joke.
I never said the political system was fine - I merely invoked one element of it that is superior to the one in which we use in NS2.
What has, for example "money in politics" got to do with my point? Absolutely nothing. How about the shutdown? Again - absolutely nothing. What you've essentially done is take my perfectly applicable analogy (that allowing non-voters to have such influence is ridiculous) and then said that I was trying to make an analogy with EVERYTHING in politics. I mean surely you see the flaw there?
i.e. you think that me saying something that works in politics means EVERYTHING works in politics.
That's like me being a mixed martial artist and trying to take a good technique from Karate and then you saying I am advocating taking EVERY MOVE from Karate.
I'm tired of reading all the horse you know what (pun intended). This is how simple it is:
- Not voting shouldn't = veto, if you don't vote then that's your problem. Eg, "2 yes" vs "1 no" in a 24p full server should still pass, if you have 22 ppl in ur server who don't GAF enough to vote then that's just too dam bad.
- you can only vote kick players on your own team, players on the opposite team/RR/spec are not included in the vote pool in this case. (CS GO has already implemented this)
This has given me a new idea. What about a third option: undecided.
Why do I say that? Well sometimes you just don't know if you should say yes or no. I mean is someone really trolling on the opposite team? Maybe this could be combined with someone else's idea which is that votekicks should apply only on the one team that wants to kick their teammate off.
Another example? Sometimes someone votes to change a map and quite frankly I cannot make my mind up - I really don't mind which map we play. So usually I don't vote for either. But let's say we have 20 people on the server and 9 vote yes, 0 vote no. If we had 2 or so vote neutrally, the map would get changed.
It's just a consideration that one might want to give more thought to - it should, if we fix the non-voters and the team-specific vote thing, be unnecessary.
People like you is the reason why we have 5-6 AFKers sitting in RR all the time. We can't get rid off them because they count as 5-6 veto vote with their AFKing/not voting. Maybe this is exactly what UWE wants, to make the ns2 community appear to be really alive, with lots of full servers (filled with AFKers).
please take your inchoate nerd indignation and stow it. I almost always vote for afk kicks, but nobody seems to call them for the readyroomers anyway.
also, how exactly does your high and mighty system fix rr vote kicking? hard coding arbitrary minimums is inelegant and inflexible. and I don't want a system that lets a couple people run roughshod over everyone else
just impose a simple majority, so you actually need to convince your team, and a couple other people. and adopt a handy afk kick program for something like 10 minutes of inactivity.
Eg, "2 yes" vs "1 no" in a 24p full server should still pass, if you have 22 ppl in ur server who don't GAF enough to vote then that's just too dam bad
No, no it shouldn't.
I'm having a hard time taking you serious with that stance..
Have you honestly not considered that the whole reason you made this thread was because of the difficulty in passing votes, SOLELY because of rookies who have such horrible screen awareness that they have 100 pres and still don't notice the flashing giant orange evolve icon that says to press B in the middle of their screen... ??
These are the the people who you mistakenly think don't GAF.
I've stood over quite literally thousands and thousands of people playing ns2 for the first time at 3 separate PAX events, even since Beta days.
Believe me.. They don't even see that vote.
"fuck em, then. Let them learn" you say?
It won't happen. They won't understand why their commander was kicked or ejected, or why the map keeps changing every 15 seconds.. And those who wish to abuse this system will specifically prey on rookie only servers because of this.
You are suggesting to openly allow mass abuse and griefing of rookie players because you are unable to convince the rest of the server to vote your way. Its a short sighted, selfish, and terrible idea... I'm sorry, but it just is.
Samus ' idea is a far better implementation.
I never said the political system was fine - I merely invoked one element of it that is superior to the one in which we use in NS2.
I think you missed my point.. :-p
My whole point was how that one element is actually far from superior, and is actually a major design flaw which allows the few to inappropriately make decisions for the whole that in actuality only benefit themselves.
My point was very much a perfect fit and analogy considering how the post above I just made, outlines exactly how that would occur in NS2, should it be implemented and mirror our own voting system.
But ya, I took your silly joke a bit too serious.. Hehe..
Eg, "2 yes" vs "1 no" in a 24p full server should still pass, if you have 22 ppl in ur server who don't GAF enough to vote then that's just too dam bad
No, no it shouldn't.
I'm having a hard time taking you serious with that stance..
Have you honestly not considered that the whole reason you made this thread was because of the difficulty in passing votes, SOLELY because of rookies who have such horrible screen awareness that they have 100 pres and still don't notice the flashing giant orange evolve icon that says to press B in the middle of their screen... ??
These are the the people who you mistakenly think don't GAF.
I've stood over quite literally thousands and thousands of people playing ns2 for the first time at 3 separate PAX events, even since Beta days.
Believe me.. They don't even see that vote.
"fuck em, then. Let them learn" you say?
It won't happen. They won't understand why their commander was kicked or ejected, or why the map keeps changing every 15 seconds.. And those who wish to abuse this system will specifically prey on rookie only servers because of this.
You are suggesting to openly allow mass abuse and griefing of rookie players because you are unable to convince the rest of the server to vote your way. Its a short sighted, selfish, and terrible idea... I'm sorry, but it just is.
Samus ' idea is a far better implementation.
Agree completely. This is exactly the reason I have completely disabled vote kick.
People like you is the reason why we have 5-6 AFKers sitting in RR all the time. We can't get rid off them because they count as 5-6 veto vote with their AFKing/not voting. Maybe this is exactly what UWE wants, to make the ns2 community appear to be really alive, with lots of full servers (filled with AFKers).
If AFKers fluffing the player count is what UWE wanted they would add random drops and hats.
The best overall solution to this problem is to play on servers with active admins. Then start a thread trying to get an official AFK kicker implemented...
Comments
Simple way to counter that, vote will only go through if more than half of the people in the game vote. (so 51% of people in the game voting and 75% of votes for a kick)
Seriously though. It's a good idea. Runs into a few issues with the player switching teams or going to readyroom or spec that would need to be ironed out first. Perhaps whoever's team the person is in when the vote is first cast should apply, so if they switch teams or to rr/spec it is still the original team voting on them. Also, both teams should be able to vote on spectators or people in the readyroom as long as they are there when the vote is first cast. That's how I'd do it anyway.
Also, this:
It's 2014, what was not cool last year is now cool and vice versa.
mi·nor·i·ty
məˈnôrətē
noun
1.
the smaller number or part, esp. a number that is less than half the whole number.
And if you are not counting the "whole" / those that did not participate - then what exactly are you a smaller part of?
And did you ever consider that they would use this system to their advantage?
Have you not seen this already occur despite the difficulty in getting votes to pass??
I lolled!
Great example... I know how you meant for that to work for your argument, but you really couldn't have picked a better example that disagrees with your point.
Just look at our political system and government today, are they an example of proper use and proper functioning? ..Didn't we just about shut down some weeks ago.. ? Don't corporations pay for political agendas so that they may lobby bills that line their own pockets? Do you believe these are exemplary results of a system that doesn't count non participation?
The poor state of things are exactly what occurs if you make it easy for the few to be uncontested by non participation.
Its a double edged sword.. its easier change, whether beneficial or not.
I agree counting the non voters, in moments when beneficial change is desired, is highly annoying..
But I shudder to imagine what occurs if you make what is difficult to troll - yet still occurs! - incredibly easy..
Especially considering the majority of those who are non voters are just non vets who don't see what is on their own screen .. rookies that said trolls would prey on worse than they already do by just joining rookie servers and constantly voting to get the map changed, round reset, or commander kicked .. without opposition.
This all being said, I do however agree that the current % required for change may be too high.
You. Are. The minority.
EDIT: The only veto to this is an admin. Even if the whole server is against what the admin is requesting, the admin is right in this case, though he's going to kill his own server.
http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/133823/should-not-voting-be-counted-as-a-no-vote
I've noticed if people just start a vote kick with no reason, or if there was a reason but being on the other team you have no idea what is going on, it hardly ever passes.
You and @auron2 both have a good idea there.
That would ensure at least some modest amount of participation from "the whole" is required for a change to occur.
edit: this means though that non voters still have participation though, so votes will still be difficult to pull off.. just marginally better than they are now. (edge case afks and that 1 or 2 votes that would have helped no longer will occur)
B-)
- Not voting shouldn't = veto, if you don't vote then that's your problem. Eg, "2 yes" vs "1 no" in a 24p full server should still pass, if you have 22 ppl in ur server who don't GAF enough to vote then that's just too dam bad.
- you can only vote kick players on your own team, players on the opposite team/RR/spec are not included in the vote pool in this case. (CS GO has already implemented this)
this is necessary to prevent trolls from abusing the voting system
/sarcasm off
just because you say it like some kind of tough guy, doesn't make it right. saying it louder and more emphatically may get you heard, but it won't hide the stupid in your stance. kicking players shouldn't be easy.
People like you is the reason why we have 5-6 AFKers sitting in RR all the time. We can't get rid off them because they count as 5-6 veto vote with their AFKing/not voting. Maybe this is exactly what UWE wants, to make the ns2 community appear to be really alive, with lots of full servers (filled with AFKers).
@IronHorse
You couldn't have put a more terrible counter to a facetious joke.
I never said the political system was fine - I merely invoked one element of it that is superior to the one in which we use in NS2.
What has, for example "money in politics" got to do with my point? Absolutely nothing. How about the shutdown? Again - absolutely nothing. What you've essentially done is take my perfectly applicable analogy (that allowing non-voters to have such influence is ridiculous) and then said that I was trying to make an analogy with EVERYTHING in politics. I mean surely you see the flaw there?
i.e. you think that me saying something that works in politics means EVERYTHING works in politics.
That's like me being a mixed martial artist and trying to take a good technique from Karate and then you saying I am advocating taking EVERY MOVE from Karate.
No, don't be silly. :P
This has given me a new idea. What about a third option: undecided.
Why do I say that? Well sometimes you just don't know if you should say yes or no. I mean is someone really trolling on the opposite team? Maybe this could be combined with someone else's idea which is that votekicks should apply only on the one team that wants to kick their teammate off.
Another example? Sometimes someone votes to change a map and quite frankly I cannot make my mind up - I really don't mind which map we play. So usually I don't vote for either. But let's say we have 20 people on the server and 9 vote yes, 0 vote no. If we had 2 or so vote neutrally, the map would get changed.
It's just a consideration that one might want to give more thought to - it should, if we fix the non-voters and the team-specific vote thing, be unnecessary.
please take your inchoate nerd indignation and stow it. I almost always vote for afk kicks, but nobody seems to call them for the readyroomers anyway.
also, how exactly does your high and mighty system fix rr vote kicking? hard coding arbitrary minimums is inelegant and inflexible. and I don't want a system that lets a couple people run roughshod over everyone else
just impose a simple majority, so you actually need to convince your team, and a couple other people. and adopt a handy afk kick program for something like 10 minutes of inactivity.
I'm having a hard time taking you serious with that stance..
Have you honestly not considered that the whole reason you made this thread was because of the difficulty in passing votes, SOLELY because of rookies who have such horrible screen awareness that they have 100 pres and still don't notice the flashing giant orange evolve icon that says to press B in the middle of their screen... ??
These are the the people who you mistakenly think don't GAF.
I've stood over quite literally thousands and thousands of people playing ns2 for the first time at 3 separate PAX events, even since Beta days.
Believe me.. They don't even see that vote.
"fuck em, then. Let them learn" you say?
It won't happen. They won't understand why their commander was kicked or ejected, or why the map keeps changing every 15 seconds.. And those who wish to abuse this system will specifically prey on rookie only servers because of this.
You are suggesting to openly allow mass abuse and griefing of rookie players because you are unable to convince the rest of the server to vote your way. Its a short sighted, selfish, and terrible idea... I'm sorry, but it just is.
Samus ' idea is a far better implementation.
My whole point was how that one element is actually far from superior, and is actually a major design flaw which allows the few to inappropriately make decisions for the whole that in actuality only benefit themselves.
My point was very much a perfect fit and analogy considering how the post above I just made, outlines exactly how that would occur in NS2, should it be implemented and mirror our own voting system.
But ya, I took your silly joke a bit too serious.. Hehe..
Agree completely. This is exactly the reason I have completely disabled vote kick.
Are you sure it's not quite complete enough?
Haha! nice catch. TYVM!
If AFKers fluffing the player count is what UWE wanted they would add random drops and hats.
The best overall solution to this problem is to play on servers with active admins. Then start a thread trying to get an official AFK kicker implemented...