Metsfanmax wrote:The MHs do a lot of work. C&A cases are just one small part of it. In cases where it is not clear what to do, the staff often do discuss the options with each other before coming to a decision. But in cases where there is more clear-cut abuse, it is undesirable to create added work by going through the formalities of the trial by jury suggestion
The cases Im stating are clear-cut abuse, and nothing is being done about them. I am a player that could care less about my score, but it still gets on my nerves to see a player knowing exactly what he is doing and knowing he willl get away with it. I stated and realize the work MHs put into this site, and I appreciate it, but is it not the duty they signed up for? Why not step up the enforcement on important aspects such as this(and leave the trolling/ratings abuse garbage to the regular routine) and further improve the site? This is why members are getting upset in general, because the site is not taking the little steps neccessary to make the games and site better. This is not a trial by jury, its a trial by carefully selected members(comparable to the Supreme Court). Hell, if we have to elect them to gain our approval to make these decisions, lets setup a vote. I just want some sort of common sense in the ruling rather than a clear-cut "here's what's right, here's what's wrong". There is simply too much room for interpretation, which for some reason our MH's are not allowed to interpret...
Otherwise, we might as well program automated MH's to look over cases if we arent going to put the member's perspectives into the cases. Obviously this and other examples raised are clearly seen as abuse among the public, yet we have to sit around and watch others abuse the scoring system at the expense of less-skilled players that are more than likely trying to enjoy themselves. And with a more subjective view, it will hopefully repel offenders as it doesnt allow them to bend around the rules if there is nothing set in stone. For every set of rules that CC sets up, there are a set of users that go as close as they can to breaking them without crossing that line. How aabout erasing that line so we dont have those situations. Seeing as abusers get away with these kinds of actions on a regular basis, I would rather be upset with a couple of rulings and have a few people busted for obvious abuse than continue to let all of these players go scott-free.
I'd much rather have a small minority of users that intentionally take advantage of details in the rules of the system than a large class of users who take advantage of newer users in perhaps less blatant style but with pretty much no way to penalize them. Plus, the system you mentioned is rather unfair to the accused, because that sort of subjectivity means that people who do similar things in similar circumstances might receive different results.[/quote]
In no way do I see anything in my suggestion that would all of a sudden make the majority of users take advantage of the scoring system. There is still the escalating punishment system in place, so those who truly did not understand the severity of setting up games that bait lower ranked players would not be instantly tossed from the site. But the majority of users that use these tactics realize EXACTLY what theyre doing, I personally guarantee it. If I wanted to raise my rank substantially in a few days, there have been enough examples of cheating that line that I know I could do it and completely get away with it, likely at the dissatisfaction of others trying to enjoy themselves.
There's a topic in GD regarding "Is CC declining?" that brings up these exact topics, and should mention how concrete rules just create new ways to take advantage of the current system. I agree there should be the set-in-stone rules of no multis, no farming NRs, etc. But there needs to be some way to punish the obvious "gross abuses" that the public sees on a regular basis, instead of throwing up our hands and saying its not on the rule page.
Im just trying to contribute to a Suggestion forum that is losing credibility in the eyes of the public on a regular basis, as we can see with "The Big One"
. Obviously people are not happy with the current system, so why not at least try something different? If it doesnt work out and there are glaring inconsistencies, it was at least an attempt to shift from the current inconsistencies and inactivity we see now.