Update to our Game Moderation Strategy

[Bеаn]

12 hours ago, _raffaele_ said:

3/4 users argued

You being a key player - lets not forget. In fact, I'd even go as far as saying you started most arguments. 

35 minutes ago, Leon Baker said:

As about the report message, this has been brought up and got fixed, the report messages should have up-to-date quote of the rule 1.4 from now on.

No, it hasn't been fixed. There's still no indication as to whether the ban is permanent or temporary. All you need to add is one line: "This user's ban is temporary | permanent ".  

[Leon Baker]

5 minutes ago, Bеаn said:

No, it hasn't been fixed. There's still no indication as to whether the ban is permanent or temporary. All you need to add is one line: "This user's ban is temporary | permanent ".  

 

I thought they meant the outdated message where we were quoting the old version of the rule 1.4 related to how long one should keep the evidence available. If you are reporting someone for non 2.1 violation, you have to keep the evidence available for 3 months from the date when the ban gets issued (when the report gets accepted basically). I mean, you as a reporter should be aware whether you are reporting someone for 2.1 or any other violation, so that's why we don't indicate whether the evidence has to be kept temporarily or permanently. Hopefully this makes it more clear now.

[Foobrother]

58 minutes ago, Leon Baker said:

It was brought up internally. Why there should have been a survey or anything similar? We do not conduct a survey for every change we deem necessary

Of course I don't expect this single change to have its survey! I was wondering if that was part of a recent survey or some discussion somewhere where people proposed or were proposed this idea.

So it was purely internal and was following the logic to allow players to hide their bans.

OK. That's a logical answer. Fine. Doesn't go into the right direction from my point of view but I understand. Thx

 

58 minutes ago, Leon Baker said:

Provide me with at least one strong, valid argument on why you should have access to that, other than reporters boosting their ego and getting self-satisfaction after seeing someone banned for a long period of time.

I don't know if you have noticed (I'm sure you did), but I (and other players) don't have a great amount of trust in TMP strategy and its willingness to keep punishing as much as before bad players. Not seeing if a player I reported has been banned correctly isn't going to give me more trust into TMP. Maybe that's a weak benefit and it can be ignored for you. But for me that's again a step towards arcade culture and a step away from simulation. (I can already hear people wondering why I'm saying that, but I can't be bothered explaining as I'm sure most know what I'm talking about).

To resume the benefit (on top of helping to find mistakes) for me is Trust. If I see punishments properly applied I trust TMP is maintaining a good discipline on reports.

 

58 minutes ago, Leon Baker said:

If we apply your logic, we should remove the ability for the players to keep their punishment history private, so that you could benefit from it? This makes no sense for me.

It makes no sense to you and you don't see any benefit in doing that.

But I do and I would indeed love to have 100% of players with their ban history visible to everyone. Because I believe it would show the evolution of players over time and give some shame to some who wouldn't be able to hide that they have been trolling for years and have tones of bans. Because many claim they only received bans due to mistakes and it wasn't their fault etc...

I'm sure it would refrain some from continuing to drive badly.

Also, I'm not sure if that's possible at the moment, but VTC managers would probably love to see for which offenses some of their members or applicants got banned! Again this would probably oblige some player to have more discipline on the road!

 

But, from what I've seen over the last years, I don't think TMP is willing to force bad players to have a better discipline. Instead it's slowly becoming some sort of GTA/Arcade world with racing events.

 

58 minutes ago, Leon Baker said:

That is a good point considering these changes. I have shared this idea within the Management.

I'll give you another one in the same logic: remove any mention of bans/kick in the rules and replace it with "We will evaluate reports using internal rules we won't mention here. And we will decide of a punishment or not which will be decided internally. Only us and the reported player will know the outcome." You're welcome!

 

 

Finally, even if it took some time,  I just wanted to thank you for taking the time to provide clear and logical answers instead of directly rejecting my comments/questions like some. Even if, again, they don't go in the right direction in my opinion.

 

[Bеаn]

10 minutes ago, Leon Baker said:

I thought they meant the outdated message where we were quoting the old version of the rule 1.4 related to how long one should keep the evidence available. If you are reporting someone for non 2.1 violation, you have to keep the evidence available for 3 months from the date when the ban gets issued (when the report gets accepted basically). I mean, you as a reporter should be aware whether you are reporting someone for 2.1 or any other violation, so that's why we don't indicate whether the evidence has to be kept temporarily or permanently. Hopefully this makes it more clear now.

As we have stated numerous times, the reported reason may not always be the actual reason for the ban. This means that you could report someone for hacking when, in fact, they may not have been hacking but might have violated one or several other rules. You might believe that you need to maintain evidence for a longer duration than is actually necessary.

[_raffaele_]

32 minutes ago, Bеаn said:

You being a key player - lets not forget. In fact, I'd even go as far as saying you started most arguments. 

 

When you don't have answers, what you are left with is to throw random accusations to keep arguing as you usually do, especially against TMP, now it has become predictable and it's just baiting; a game that has become boring,

 

 

12 minutes ago, Bеаn said:

As we have stated numerous times, the reported reason may not always be the actual reason for the ban.

 

They can just update the reason in the report if they can, or write it in the comment they usually leave when they issue the ban,

Unless you suffer from obsessive compulsive disorder, i doubt anyone checks every report they have made to delete the "expired" ones, i think a 90% of players or more keep the evidence forever anyway,

 

You don't need to know the length of the ban,

 

It doesn't seem complicated to me

 

 

[Bеаn]

12 minutes ago, _raffaele_ said:

What you are left with is to throw random accusations, as you usually do, especially against TMP, it has now become predictable, just baiting; a game that has become boring,

Alright, Mr Instigator. Think whatever you want to think. Enjoy Raffalele's world; I, however, prefer to stay in the real world. You claim not to like us or our discussions, yet you consistently enter our conversations and provoke. After provoking, you then try to label us as the arguers. Talk about pot calling the kettle black. 
 

12 minutes ago, _raffaele_ said:

They can just update the reason in the report if they can, or write it in the comment they usually leave when they issue the ban,

Unless you suffer from obsessive compulsive disorder, i doubt anyone checks every report they have made to delete the "expired" ones,

 

If someone's evidence is offline when it should be online, there is a likelihood that they will report it. Your solution is essentially the same as mine, so I don't see any reason not to allow mine. I'd say an automated way of indicating the ban's classification is preferable to requiring staff to include it in their comments.

Two ways of implementing my request are as follows: 

Not asking for both, asking for one or the other. 

[_raffaele_]

10 minutes ago, Bеаn said:

Alright, Mr Instigator....

 

Another bait, boring and ignored

 

10 minutes ago, Bеаn said:

Your solution is essentially the same as mine, so I don't see any reason not to allow mine.

 

It's not the same thing, you don't need to know if it's "temporary" when you know the reason for the ban, you already know

[Bеаn]

8 minutes ago, _raffaele_ said:

It's not the same thing, you don't need to know if it's temporary when you can know the reason for the ban

Lord help us. So, here's your proposed idea: make admins correct the report reason and/or require them to state the ban reason in their comments. However, my request is the much simpler idea of just having a simple indication automatically present in the box at the bottom of the page. This would be a straightforward change and would take very little development time. Whereas your change would require updating templates and providing additional instructions to every report mod and game mod. Mine seems to be the most logical and the most time-efficient. All you've come up with are roundabout ways of achieving what could be done more easily with what I've requested from the start. There's no point in trying to change your mind, as you're fixated on disagreeing with and opposing whatever we say, regardless of its merit. Therefore, this will be my last response to you. Thanks for all the arguments you've instigated; it's been fascinating. Also, a little reminder, you were the one to start arguing with me, not the other way around.

I wish you all the best, 
Bean

[_raffaele_]

7 minutes ago, Bеаn said:

Whereas your change would require updating templates and providing additional instructions to every report mod and game mod.

 

They always give you the answer/outcome by message in the report, which is not a new thing,

 

 

7 minutes ago, Bеаn said:

Mine seems to be the most logical and the most time-efficient

 

It is just repetition that is not needed, as long as there is a reason in the report, you are asking to repeat 2 times the same thing,

I am positive/think that most of the reasons chosen in the reports are consistent with the evidence

[Leon Baker]

1 hour ago, Bеаn said:

As we have stated numerous times, the reported reason may not always be the actual reason for the ban. This means that you could report someone for hacking when, in fact, they may not have been hacking but might have violated one or several other rules. You might believe that you need to maintain evidence for a longer duration than is actually necessary.

If you report someone for 2.1 but the user does not get banned for 2.1, the person who reviews the report will leave a comment there with an explanation. That has been one of the procedures on how we handle such reports for a long time now, so we find that sufficient. Reporters will only need to pay attention to the report comment. Usually, it is not that hard to notice that the comment contains additional sentence or two when comparing to the default message we use.

 

As for the indicator you have talked about and showed, feel free to suggest that officially through the suggestion category on forum.

[Bеаn]

12 minutes ago, Leon Baker said:

If you report someone for 2.1 but the user does not get banned for 2.1, the person who reviews the report will leave a comment there with an explanation. That has been one of the procedures on how we handle such reports for a long time now, so we find that sufficient. Reporters will only need to pay attention to the report comment. Usually, it is not that hard to notice that the comment contains additional sentence or two when comparing to the default message we use.

I've never seen that, and have done said thing in the past, but sure. Because that's far easier than just having an automated message at the bottom of the page. 
 

15 minutes ago, Leon Baker said:

As for the indicator you have talked about and showed, feel free to suggest that officially through the suggestion category on forum.

What's the point? I'll probably just be given the same responses as before. 

On a sidenote, I appreciate you actually taking the time to answer and explain. If you or another member of staff had taken the same approach before, things would've never become so heated.  

 

[_raffaele_]

7 hours ago, Bеаn said:

I've never seen that

 

7 hours ago, Bеаn said:

What's the point? I'll probably just be given the same responses as before. 

 

[Leon Baker]

14 hours ago, Bеаn said:

I've never seen that, and have done said thing in the past, but sure. Because that's far easier than just having an automated message at the bottom of the page.

 

Considering you have never reported anyone for 2.1, this is why you have never seen that.

 

14 hours ago, Bеаn said:

What's the point? I'll probably just be given the same responses as before. 

 

There always is a point in making suggestions officially through that category. We are currently working on an improved internal procedure to review the suggestions we receive across all of the platforms, which will improve the waiting time as well as ensure each suggestion gets reviewed properly by several departments instead of one (or none considering we got some from 2015 ).

 

15 hours ago, Bеаn said:

On a sidenote, I appreciate you actually taking the time to answer and explain. If you or another member of staff had taken the same approach before, things would've never become so heated.  

 

We are always open to answer questions, as long as the questions are asked in an appropriate manner. I am not a fan of conversations where I have to think how to word everything I write, so that it does not get twisted against me or the team. Some people can't stop, even when they get answers to their questions, simply because they wanted an answer that would match with their opinion

 

7 hours ago, _raffaele_ said:

 

If you are not interested in engaging in a conversation I would suggest stop with these provoking messages, we both know it won't get anywhere. If you wanted to laugh at their message, you could always use "haha" reaction.

[Bеаn]

18 hours ago, Leon Baker said:

Considering you have never reported anyone for 2.1, this is why you have never seen that.

I've known several people within the community who have and not been told. Just because I haven't seen it via my own reports doesn't mean I haven't seen it. That's not to say it doesn't happen; I just haven't seen it with my own two eyes.
 

18 hours ago, Leon Baker said:

There always is a point in making suggestions officially through that category. We are currently working on an improved internal procedure to review the suggestions we receive across all of the platforms, which will improve the waiting time as well as ensure each suggestion gets reviewed properly by several departments instead of one (or none considering we got some from 2015 ).

If you say so. Making a suggestion, in my view, won't get me anywhere and would probably, based on feedback from certain users here, lead to more arguments.

 

18 hours ago, Leon Baker said:

We are always open to answer questions, as long as the questions are asked in an appropriate manner. I am not a fan of conversations where I have to think how to word everything I write, so that it does not get twisted against me or the team. Some people can't stop, even when they get answers to their questions, simply because they wanted an answer that would match with their opinion

I don't think I've "twisted" anything you've said. I believe, all things aside, I've been pretty respectful and tried to engage with you in the best way I can muster. After the initial burst of unhappiness from myself subsided (i.e., my moving on post), most of my attention has been on trying to get an answer to something that wasn't an opinion but a simple request.  

Things only got as heated as they did because of provocation, and we all know who lit the fire there. Yet somehow, they get support and upvotes. How that works, I'll never know. I personally tried to move things on, but a certain person saw an opportunity to aggravate the situation, thus leading to all discussion going out the window, and an argument with no clear victor emerging. I can't help but see that because we had the opposing view on most things, we were labelled as the "conspiracy theorists, trolls, baiters." Labels that were supported and encouraged by members of staff. Yet, if we had done the reverse and labelled members of staff the same, chances are, we would've been "punished" like naughty school children.

I'd also like to highlight the praise I gave to the other changes. Praise that seems to have been overlooked. 

Once again, thanks for engaging and replying. 

[Foobrother]

2 hours ago, Leon Baker said:

We are always open to answer questions, as long as the questions are asked in an appropriate manner. 

What do you mean by "appropriate manner" (or "non-appropriate manner")?

 

2 hours ago, Leon Baker said:

I am not a fan of conversations where I have to think how to word everything I write, so that it does not get twisted against me or the team. Some people can't stop, even when they get answers to their questions, simply because they wanted an answer that would match with their opinion

I think I'm part of the persons you're pointing at here.

Lets take a very basic and simple example to show you why I'm not always accepting people's answer.

For the sake of the example, lets assume you are right and I'm wrong in the end:

3*2+2
we all know the result is 8. But lets assume I'm thinking it's 12!

I'm posting a message asking TMP why they are using 8 instead of 12 and say for me 3*4 = 12 not 8.

If someone provides me an answer like:

• "No it's 8, there is no fault. Trust me."
• or "You are wrong, I don't know how you can image it's 12"
• or "We have done our calculation internally and we think 8 is the right logical total"
• (I'm also ignoring the trolls providing provocative answers like "You understand nothing " or "You have no clue of what you're talking about!").

I'm not going to be happy and will continue to argue with:

• "Why are you saying it's 8?"
• "If you do 2+2 you get 4 and if you do 3*4 you get 12"

I would expect someone to logically reply something like: "In mathematics you multiply first then you add. It's 3*2 first which is 6, plus 2, which is 8 in total. That's why we used 8, because 12 isn't correct." and eventually add some source (if relevant) to prove what he/she says.

 

That's why the discussions are so long. Many people are not taking the time to provide an answer with logical arguments. And they only get more questions from us (because we don't see the logic in the answer). + some trolls adding more mess (probably because they find it fun)

 

Hope this little (and funny) example shows where I'm coming from (and some others I think)?

 

 

[Leon Baker]

1 hour ago, Foobrother said:

What do you mean by "appropriate manner" (or "non-appropriate manner")?

 

If one got a question, they should ask it directly instead of coming up with million different theories and assumptions. I have not seen questions being asked properly to be able to answer them, most of the comments I have read under that other topic were just theories and arguments between people. In this topic, you asked direct questions and received direct answers, that's how it should be done if the goal is getting answers.

 

1 hour ago, Foobrother said:

Hope this little (and funny) example shows where I'm coming from (and some others I think)?

 

Yeah, I completely understand and agree on that. This is why we primarily prefer using feedback system for such instances. That helps with avoiding unnecessary drama between people and plus, that helps with ensuring the question gets answered by people who know the subject and the question does not get lost or ignored.

 

Now that y'all got answers to the questions I hope this topic is closed now, unless you have any additional questions on this matter.

[Foobrother]

18 minutes ago, Leon Baker said:

If one got a question, they should ask it directly instead of coming up with million different theories and assumptions. I have not seen questions being asked properly to be able to answer them, most of the comments I have read under that other topic were just theories and arguments between people. In this topic, you asked direct questions and received direct answers, that's how it should be done if the goal is getting answers.

I see what you mean. Unfortunately that's what you get with Forum discussions: one person asks a question, then others give their idea/opinion on what could be the answer (because they don't know the answer either) and you get a bunch of posts with assumptions and theories until someone comes with the information, arguments and logical answers I was talking about in my previous post.

 

18 minutes ago, Leon Baker said:

Yeah, I completely understand and agree on that. This is why we primarily prefer using feedback system for such instances. That helps with avoiding unnecessary drama between people and plus, that helps with ensuring the question gets answered by people who know the subject and the question does not get lost or ignored.

 

Now that y'all got answers to the questions I hope this topic is closed now, unless you have any additional questions on this matter.

I would agree on the accuracy and efficiency aspect (to get the right answer quickly). However, this is a 1 to 1 private conversation that only benefits the person asking the question. I don't like that. I prefer the concept of Forum where everyone can provide his/her point of view and know the answer (which can be then be referenced/re-used into other conversations). Especially when they don't agree on the logic (like me with you for the benefit of hiding the bans info vs showing everything to everyone).

But if that's ok with the staff, in the future I'll send feedbacks and post the answer on the forum (as a new thread or to add some info into an existing one). Also, obviously if I don't get a reply in the coming days after posting my feedback question, I'll assume it got ignored and will post it on the forum.

 

I don't have any other question. But would let the thread open for a few days in case someone wants to add his/her point of view on things. Then if the thread is inactive for a few days or if it's just trolling without any new comment about the topic, it could be closed.

[poopingcorn]

>mfw im reading a huge wall of arguments in a truck game instead of doing something meaningful in my life

[If Its Itchy,Just Scratch]

TruckersMP is a Truck Game?? Based on the Area where you are Driving, it is a Lonleyness and Nice Scenery Simulator or a Player vs. Player Battle Arena with Multi Language Insulting Bonus!  

[Bеаn]

On 10/14/2023 at 4:24 PM, poopingcorn said:

im reading a huge wall of arguments in a truck game instead of doing something meaningful in my life

 

I can't see any arguments here. And, nobody is forcing you to read anything
 

[Signore_Derin]

I actually agree with what you said a little bit, for example, any player made a small mistake and had a small (LAG) problem and the players behind them were blown up because of the lag problem, then they immediately write such words. (I will report you, enjoy the ban, you watch what you do on yotube etc.) and some of them unfortunately swear. in my opinion, they should actually reduce the insult a lot and enjoy the simulation game, after all, this is a multiplayer, of course we will make small mistakes and we will have lag problems.

[Foobrother]

On 10/14/2023 at 4:24 PM, poopingcorn said:

>mfw im reading a huge wall of arguments in a truck game instead of doing something meaningful in my life

 

Forum discussions, depending on the topic, can involve fun exchanges but also arguments. If you're not comfortable with arguments, nobody is forcing you to read or participate to the arguments (some people just post their opinions or react on the topic/decisions/messages without trying to argue with others).

You can do whatever you want with your life. You can ignore problems or not find interesting to invest time replying, or not see any problem (from your point of view). Fine. We won't judge you for that. But, in the same way, please don't tell people what they should do or not in a message which has nothing to do with the topic ("Update to our Game Moderation Strategy"), especially if they don't break the forum's rules.

[poopingcorn]

11 hours ago, Foobrother said:

If you're not comfortable with arguments, nobody is forcing you to read or participate to the arguments (some people just post their opinions or react on the topic/decisions/messages without trying to argue with others).

You can do whatever you want with your life. You can ignore problems or not find interesting to invest time replying, or not see any problem (from your point of view). Fine. We won't judge you for that. But, in the same way, please don't tell people what they should do or not in a message which has nothing to do with the topic ("Update to our Game Moderation Strategy"), especially if they don't break the forum's rules.

It's alright, I just think it's funny to read the topic's replies, nothing else

[Foobrother]

9 hours ago, poopingcorn said:

It's alright, I just think it's funny to read the topic's replies, nothing else

I have to say as well that some exchanges, even if they are heated, can be funny to read! Especially when you are watching as a third person 

[Interstate Nomad]

On 10/15/2023 at 8:06 PM, Signore_Derin said:

I actually agree with what you said a little bit, for example, any player made a small mistake and had a small (LAG) problem and the players behind them were blown up because of the lag problem, then they immediately write such words. (I will report you, enjoy the ban, you watch what you do on yotube etc.) and some of them unfortunately swear. in my opinion, they should actually reduce the insult a lot and enjoy the simulation game, after all, this is a multiplayer, of course we will make small mistakes and we will have lag problems.

 

I agree that insults are unnecessary and unrewarding. But let's not forget that the TruckersMP team tolerates certain insults in their rules. This enables the start of an argument.

 

Your call to enjoy the simulation game instead of getting upset after an unintentionally caused incident disregards that the vicitim's game experience was negatively influenced. They have the right to be upset, and, depending on the situation, can take appropriate actions, for example, create a report.