Remove/revamp the regulations on clans taking clan sits

[HtmlRoot 58]

Description: I am suggesting that either the rule for staff regarding taking sits of the same nameclan people be removed or modified to be less of a punishment on the user and more-so an effective policing tool for staff in nameclans. So if it were to be modified, make it so if a nameclan member makes a report then if any people in the same nameclan as the reportee are online and responsive they must utilize staff chat to ask if anybody is going to take that sit, clarifying its because of clan bias. If nobody responds within 2 minutes, repeat the same question and if there is still no response after 5 minutes, the nameclan staff member would take the sit. If a reported person is in a nameclan, a staff member would have to ABSOLUTELY ensure no one was available to take the report prior to trying to take it on themselves. They would utilize staff chat asking if anybody else was going to take the sit. They would do the first two messages in the same time interval, but then they would message any staff members responsive/available on discord. After two different attempts at getting a non-clan member to take the sit they would finally take it on themselves after 10 minutes of no luck from that point. I also believe staff should be MANDATED to document any sits like these with video recordings and whatnot so they can present it should they get reported for clan bias.

Reasoning: As it stands, there are a decent amount of nameclan server members actively playing. I know I haven't been back for awhile since my unban, but for as long as I've been back I have not once seen clan bias. Plus, the current rules for this scenario only serve to punish players for being in nameclans and thus they have to wait even longer for a report to be resolved. I have witnessed this firsthand, and it is not fun. Why should we have to devolve to forum reporting users for simple rule violations such as RDM, RDMx2, NLR, and so on. Forum submissions should be reserved for bigger chunks of user violations and this is just how it should be.

Additional Information: (I know the nameclan "rule" thing isnt literally a rule but it makes nameclan members simply go "i cant bro im in your nameclan" out of fear of being punished. this just clearly outlines what should happen to prevent that)

Edited March 30 by HtmlRoot

[NotDeadPool2 34]

Neutral +/-

 

It is a staff member's responsibility and integral duty to be unbiased, especially, whether documented or not, if they wish to keep their position on the team and with out at least some amount of guilt. I feel as if this will further complicate taking sits for large clans such as StS. Me being the only one apart of PR, I stick what I know works, and that's treating friends like friends when it's not a sit, and treating people like players (although be it friend or not) when in a non rp scenario. Look, I see the idea behind cutting down on potential corruption or being too lenient with particular person. I'm not exactly remorseful with that kind of dealing, maybe sympathetic and empathetic. If you mess up, you mess up. Take accountability. I may see it through that the player decides what happens or I may single handedly make the decision of punishment based on severity and evidence. I'd also like to hear what others think about this.

[HtmlRoot 58]

4 minutes ago, NotDeadPool2 said:

Neutral +/-

 

It is a staff member's responsibility and integral duty to be unbiased, especially, whether documented or not, if they wish to keep their position on the team and with out at least some amount of guilt. I feel as if this will further complicate taking sits for large clans such as StS. Me being the only one apart of PR, I stick what I know works, and that's treating friends like friends when it's not a sit, and treating people like players (although be it friend or not) when in a non rp scenario. Look, I see the idea behind cutting down on potential corruption or being too lenient with particular person. I'm not exactly remorseful with that kind of dealing, maybe sympathetic and empathetic. If you mess up, you mess up. Take accountability. I may see it through that the player decides what happens or I may single handedly make the decision of punishment based on severity and evidence. I'd also like to hear what others think about this.

I see why your standoffish about a hard - or +, but I have something to say about this:

 

There has been a stigma plaguing the staff team, in which clan members in staff feel too afraid to take fellow clan member sits even if nobody has taken the report after a ridiculous amount of time. If we outline whats okay and what isn't and how to go about it, or just outright denounce clan bias as being a thing then we can solve this punishing clan members for being clan members in that they have significantly higher wait times for getting their report resolved.

[NotDeadPool2 34]

4 minutes ago, HtmlRoot said:

I see why your standoffish about a hard - or +, but I have something to say about this:

 

There has been a stigma plaguing the staff team, in which clan members in staff feel too afraid to take fellow clan member sits even if nobody has taken the report after a ridiculous amount of time. If we outline whats okay and what isn't and how to go about it, or just outright denounce clan bias as being a thing then we can solve this punishing clan members for being clan members in that they have significantly higher wait times for getting their report resolved.

Standoffish is a harsh word to use when I am expressing views from both sides with out being dishearted. That's like saying I am being combative. Perhaps you could call me neutral and not completely sure about it. Rules outlining clan sits is not a bad idea. Perhaps supervision of one of other staff member.

[HtmlRoot 58]

26 minutes ago, NotDeadPool2 said:

Standoffish is a harsh word to use when I am expressing views from both sides with out being dishearted. That's like saying I am being combative. Perhaps you could call me neutral and not completely sure about it. Rules outlining clan sits is not a bad idea. Perhaps supervision of one of other staff member.

Supervision would bring too much extra into the situation, and it should only be necessary should a clan member in staff have multiple reports against them for bias.

[Sam Nella 5]

-

I don't realistically foresee removing the policy being a positive change. The current system works fine. Clan bias is absolutely a thing and is something that I have personally been subjected to. 

Your suggestion with allowing these sits to take place contingent on a recording is a decent idea in theory, however in practice it does not solve the problem of showing/not showing bias. When a user reports sit bias it is rarely going to be based off of solely the events pertinent to that sit; rather it will likely be based on the days/weeks of interactions prior to the sit. Conflicts of interest are never a good idea and we should definitely not be enabling them unless absolutely necessary.

 

 

The current policy is:

You may not handle reports directly involving yourself or a member of your party unless there are no other active staff online.
You should attempt to call for additional staff via the #requests channel in the DarkRP Staff Discord server, or via the admin @ chat.)

 

If you are able to conduct a sit completely non-partisan, then great. I do not have faith that everyone can.

If your suggestion is just adding clarification to when we are allowed to take our own sits, I am in support of that. Removal is a recipe for disaster.

 

 

[ChrisRid 900]

Neutral

 

2 hours ago, NotDeadPool2 said:

It is a staff member's responsibility and integral duty to be unbiased, especially, whether documented or not, if they wish to keep their position on the team

This summarises my position on the subject of clan bias, I think NotDeadPool is spot-on here.

 

Bias is actually more of a subjective issue, rather than a blanket problem. From what I've seen you're either susceptible to bias, or you're not. Those who are susceptible will continue to act the same and demonstrate bias in all scenarios, and it's not limited to their clan friends. Luckily though, the administration team / management team have always had a nack for quickly identifying those who might sway, and any reports they handle (be it clans, friends, enemy's, or otherwise) will almost certainly be spectated. On the other hand, there are certain players who we know will maintain integrity despite being in a clan, and we know that even when nobody is looking they will always make the right decisions. So while I'm not a fan of clans for various reasons, I don't think adding rules specifically about clan-bias actually helps to target the root cause of the problem.

 

3 hours ago, HtmlRoot said:

After two different attempts at getting a non-clan member to take the sit they would finally take it on themselves after 10 minutes of no luck from that point

Just as a side note, I think 10 minutes is way too long to claim a report in any case

[AlexConway 1,149]

Adding/"Revamping" this rule is moot since a large part of this suggestion is assuming bias is more likely to occur to people who you share a nameclan with, which is not the case. Most staff will always have preconscious bias for their friends (clanmates or otherwise), MANY of them are able to put this aside and look objectively. Very few cannot, so on the very few cases - If you feel the sit was handled incorrectly or with bias, report it on the forums. The sit resolution message prompts you to do so.

[HtmlRoot 58]

1 hour ago, AlexConway said:

Adding this rule is moot since a large part of this suggestion is assuming bias is more likely to occur to people who you share a nameclan with, which is not the case. Most staff will always have preconscious bias for their friends (clanmates or otherwise), MANY of them are able to put this aside and look objectively. Very few cannot, so on the very few cases - If you feel the sit was handled incorrectly or with bias, report it on the forums. The sit resolution message prompts you to do so.

All you've said is very much true, however this doesn't address the fact that now more often then before moderators always immediately say no to taking another clan mates sit, even if it might appear that no one else is taking it after a prolonged period of time. If It could be at least addressed to staff in some way without making it a guideline then it could go a long way to fixing the gap in the reporting system that's been here for a bit.

1 hour ago, ChrisRid said:

Just as a side note, I think 10 minutes is way too long to claim a report in any case

This is true, however I've seen reports take 30+ minutes to be claimed before. I might've gave a tad bit too much head room for the whole idea, but its just an idea.

2 hours ago, Sam Nella said:

If your suggestion is just adding clarification to when we are allowed to take our own sits, I am in support of that. Removal is a recipe for disaster.

Basically, it is. It would clarify that clan members apart of staff may take sits of fellow clan members whether reportee or reporter under very certain parameters.

[Errol 107]

I used to take more clan sits before since I felt if no one else was going to take it I might as well, but lately it feels like I get the stink eye if I accept any StS sits (since I'm in it obviously). I do understand that the rule exists for edge cases where bias can rear its ugly head, but I just don't want to feel compelled to let a sit just rot away because it'd seem in bad form to accept that sit even if any other active non-clan related staff are busy or AFK.

 

-1 to an outright removal, but +1 to revamping or at least making it super clear to the userbase when it's acceptable.

[Omnipotent 20]

-1

I personally am really against this in terms of its outright removal. Clan users generally stick up for each other (obviously) and I don't see the amount of honest gmod dark rp players outweighing the dishonest. 

Like @Errol said

+1 For some kind of revamp, many players in staff and reg are clan members and I could see it causing issues for enforcement esp late at night or early in the day.

Edited March 31 by Omnipotent

[HtmlRoot 58]

I think everyone is of the consensus that a revamp/clarification is needed or at the very least would be nice. If this suggestion is accepted for the revamp part I believe it will be the best option out of what I've proposed.