Vogue Ban Discussion

A place for threads related to tournaments and the like, and things related too.

Moderator: Light

Locked
dinobro
Average Program
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 12:45 pm

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by dinobro »

But again, I just asked to stop calling it "community's ruling" as it's not. You're getting way ahead of yourself puting your words into my mouth.
As for your main point, I would gladly read your counter arguments, since you said you "could go ahead" but never did.
Don't compare real life to a game, it's a little silly :) But yeah, jury is usually neutral to defendant and any possible bias eliminates them from conducting the ruling.
So yes, I still gave you logical, real arguments why your system is flawed, and I'm not even talking about Vogue's case anymore.

As for kyle, I think I am doing something, I'm voicing my opinion.

User avatar
wap
Round Winner
Posts: 286
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:02 am

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by wap »

i'm out

dinobro
Average Program
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 12:45 pm

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by dinobro »

That's quite disappointing, since you were rather confident in yourself saying how easily you could "destroy" my arguments :)
Not nice Wappy. But it's okay, you will get there at some point. Just stay in school, don't take drugs and it will be fine!

Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4188
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by Word »

You still haven't said why you'd prefer direct over indirect democracy (many people making mostly uninformed decisions vs. few people, who are assumed to have the best for everyone in mind, making informed decisions).

User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6303
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by sinewav »

dinobro, the system we use for making decisions has stood the test of time. As others have mentioned, it is totally impractical to have an open poll where anyone can make dozens of fake forum accounts to sway a vote. Team Leaders represent their team's wish. There is no way to guarantee a Team Leader isn't corrupt, but I can't see why any team would tolerate a TL that acted outside of their wishes.
dinobro wrote:You're ignoring the fact that entire process is flawed from the beginning to the end. Like, hell, sum of months people voted for is 98, divide that by 11 votes it gives 8,9 months. So, the most logical way would be to ban a person for 9 months, not 12. It doesn't make sense, and of course, most people will argue it does simply because person who was vote conducted against rub a lot of people wrong on a personal level.
bro, seeing as you haven't been around here very long, I'll point out that we use median values, not mode, when determining the result of a non-binary vote. We have been doing it this way for years because that represents the community's wishes more accurately.

If you can think of a better system, please share it with us. We are always open to improvement. Of course, your suggestion can't simply be "someone should do this long, complicated, time-consuming activity" because if you wouldn't do it yourself, every time, then don't expect anyone else to volunteer. Speaking of which, I organized a raw community vote for the Tronnies one year. It took hours of work. You want to spend hours doing administrative stuff for Ladle? Cool, you can take over for me and kyle. Thanks.

dinobro
Average Program
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 12:45 pm

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by dinobro »

Oh, I think the size of our community allows us to have more direct type of democracy. Main reason, everyone gets an actual, not influenced vote. It's one thing to vote by yourself, other being in a group that your vote can be influenced by. For example, you vote differently than you really think not to get ostracized by your teammates/teamleader, especially in small, knit communities where everyone knows everyone and there are tensions between certain people. It forces you to choose one over another which completely ruins the purpose of democratic vote.
I also don't think gathering votes would be that much harder than getting votes from team leaders. It's just a matter of number of votes that come, being a bit more aware of who votes and that's all. If someone thinks it's that much of a drag, is obviously not cut to be responsible for that role.

But, all that is secondary point to my opinion of current system which seems to be very illogical and incorrect. And really, not surprise since he was quickly sketched out after some people were really vocal about first punishment not being harsh enough.

EDIT: As I saw sine's post after I submitted mine:
I know that you don't use mode, which for me is a mistake. I don't know who taught you that median would represent group's wishes more accurately, but it's quite wrong. But that's beyond the point as I don't agree with validity of your system in the first place.

I don't know if you actually read my post, but I said that your previous system made much more sense and was actually working. Despite if it's Liz or Wap being accused the result will be the same for them both, by operating on raw rules of the system.
While in your system it's not. You really have to ask yourself one simple question - is current system allowing bias towards certain people (positive or negative) altering the finish result of a trail? It is. And that's unacceptable for any kind of punishment system.
And before some another brilliant mind compare this to a murder trial - please be reasonable and compare it so something more of it's scale, like something from code of petty offences where punishments are usually fixed or do not vary in such tremendous way.

User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6303
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by sinewav »

dinobro wrote:I don't know who taught you that median would represent group's wishes more accurately, but it's quite wrong.
You know who told us? We told us, after trial and error and many, many discussions of how to accurately represent the wishes of this community. So, don't think you know better than the community that governs itself well. There is a reason Ladle has been played for nearly 8 years. We have policies and an infrastructure that works.
dinobro wrote:If someone thinks it's that much of a drag, is obviously not cut to be responsible for that role.
Are you volunteering? If not, then you know where the door is.
dinobro wrote:You really have to ask yourself one simple question - is current system allowing bias towards certain people (positive or negative) altering the finish result of a trail?
Please show us one system, anywhere in the world, throughout all of history, that is free of bias and is also a viable model for this community.

Personally, I liked the original warnings & penalties system. But if a system leaves people with a sense that justice has not been served, then changes must be made. The vocal minority are saying a year-long ban is too harsh. It's your job to present something better. Get to work.
dinobro wrote:Don't compare real life to a game, it's a little silly
None of what we are discussing is a game. Rules and relationships are not a game. This is real life.
dinobro wrote:But yeah, jury is usually neutral to defendant and any possible bias eliminates them from conducting the ruling.
Idealism. There is no possibility of a neutral jury in a community this small.

Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4188
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by Word »

sinewav wrote:
dinobro wrote:But yeah, jury is usually neutral to defendant and any possible bias eliminates them from conducting the ruling.
Idealism. There is no possibility of a neutral jury in a community this small.
Plus, why would anyone even assume that if we had more voters, they were less biased towards Lizmatic than the team leaders themselves? I don't know about you, but if I was going to get banned, I'd prefer a small, reasonable council over the angry mob to decide my fate. What makes you think more voters are automatically more favorable towards her, of all people? I guess the probability to get sanctioned in the worst way possible increases with the number of people participating (then we can do the whole thing like the ice bucket challenge and its likes already...).

dinobro
Average Program
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 12:45 pm

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by dinobro »

If you are willing to trust me with that role, I don't see why not. Of course, if you were serious ;)

Word, stop connecting those two issues together. I have never said that more complex voting will get more accurate results, no idea where did you get that from. Whole voting model was a complete side topic and has no connotation to my original point - the current punishment system sucks. And no Sine, it's not idealism. I just freaking told you that arbitrary system as you had previously was much more logical and better than this current abomination. The fact that you can't come with something perfect doesn't mean you need to settle for shit.

User avatar
Soul
Match Winner
Posts: 449
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:45 pm

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by Soul »

your mom is flawed, dinobro
Chief Justice of the Armagetron Advanced Judicial System.
---------------
Notable Bans Issued:
Vogue - 12 month ban(x2)
Lucifer - 1 Day

User avatar
takburger
Match Winner
Posts: 600
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by takburger »

dinobro wrote:If you are willing to trust me with that role, I don't see why not.
Sure, let the guy who always stood up against everyone for Liz be the referee of Liz's trial. No bias for sure...

While Sine is nice to Liz in General section of this forum and tough here. It makes more sense to assume that he is fair.

Ps: about wap denying your request to argue on every point, you can well re read all those pages, all the arguments to counter you have previously been made.

/me is out.
Image

Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4188
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by Word »

I have never said that more complex voting will get more accurate results, no idea where did you get that from
Oh, I think the size of our community allows us to have more direct type of democracy. Main reason, everyone gets an actual, not influenced vote. It's one thing to vote by yourself, other being in a group that your vote can be influenced by. For example, you vote differently than you really think not to get ostracized by your teammates/teamleader, especially in small, knit communities where everyone knows everyone and there are tensions between certain people. It forces you to choose one over another which completely ruins the purpose of democratic vote.
You think that some kind of popular vote would make the result less biased, to which I replied that it probably won't, even if one takes into account what you said afterwards. The pressure of making a decision for a group you depend on makes you think about your vote. If you are a random player who doesn't know Liz or has no real knowledge of what she did (and even ask others how they voted, they'll most likely tell you the same), you should not have a vote - because you're just noise. Another point that hasn't been brought up yet: How many of the ladle participants are younger than 18? Do you think they all have the best of the tournament or the most balanced way to treat Lizmatic in mind? Granted, the same applies for some of the more mature community members, but picking just the most relevant, experienced people of the tournament (as far as that can be measured...) makes the decision more reasonable in my opinion. They are the people who deserve to have a say who can play on their teams and in their servers because they put their effort in that. If their players disagree and want to show that their opinion matters, they simply have to become more relevant to the tournament.
Last edited by Word on Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6303
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by sinewav »

dinobro wrote:The fact that you can't come with something perfect doesn't mean you need to settle for shit.
Except that everyone thought the previous system was shit. Can you convince us otherwise? As I said, I liked how the old system worked, but it was overly complicated and too lenient and the punishments (like losing team leader status) were no deterrent.

epsy
Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 2006
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:02 pm
Location: paris
Contact:

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by epsy »

Woohoo! You've convinced me to drag my mouth into this!
dinobro wrote:Just FYI:
You all talk of how "it's not us, it's community ruling!". It's not. You only take votes from team leaders and ignoring voice of all the players, spectators and other, as you called them, ladle enthusiasts. So yeah, letting team leaders who might have interest in getting rid of someone (banning a good player to increase their clan chances in next ladle perhaps?) do all the ruling.
So please, stop overusing "community". Community as a whole has no say in the matter. All the rules are enforced by biased people with their own interests. I'm not saying you're all vicious and biased, but can you vouch for everyone else? If you think you can, you're incredibly silly. It's nothing like a jury. Jury, people who decide of the guilt, should be unbiased towards the accused person and have no personal interest in conducting a punishment. As Lowkey said, you DON'T EVEN HAVE an appeal process...
You're correct that it is far from equivalent to a trial as held after a crime. One such trial would determine what the state should do, perhaps keep the culprit away from society for a while. Therefore representatives are selected for the whole society, and therefore they are meant to be unbiased toward any party in trial.

With Ladle trials, the highest penalty is to keep someone away from Ladle participants on Ladle day. Who better than Ladle participants is there to answer the question "Do we keep this person away from Ladle participants?"

As for the appeal process, it has already been said in this thread a process would be made as it becomes needed. Also, if the appeal is about the punishment rather than the facts, the least that could be done first would be an apology. The chronology of all this is also absurd:

11 Jul - Vogue is banned 1 Ladle for playing on two teams
14 Aug - Vogue is banned 12 Ladles after circumventing her ban and impersonating someone
04 Sep - Vogue gloats that she would circumvent her ban during that Ladle
09 Sep - Vogue asks [what if people were against that ban]? (while saying she hasn't had the desire to play Ladle)

Oh OK, she hasn't had the desire to play. Oh wait, what's that on September 4th? Why would you say that if you had no desire to play?

dinobro
Average Program
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 12:45 pm

Re: Vogue Ban Discussion

Post by dinobro »

I'm sorry, but seeing some people responses in this forum, I will rather step back. I will gladly respond via PMs, but seeing as some people are on a monkey throwing poop (Wink wink Soul) level I actually lost motivation to post.

PS. the fact there is a "bro" in my nickname doesn't mean I'm a guy.

Cheers!

Locked