Allow the ability for any report moderators to read appeals rather than the mod who issues the ban.

[Ethan pickle]

As it currently stands, when a ban is issued the moderator who issued the ban is the moderator who also reads the appeal. I feel like with this system it can be very biased as the moderator may just decline the appeal even though the ban may be a false one. Allowing the ability for any report moderators to read the appeal will remove any form of unfair moderation on appeals.

[Samderali]

Hello, first of all, I wish you a good evening. 

 

• There is a Feedback System to prevent the situation you mentioned from occurring. If you think that the penalty was imposed unfairly and your objection is rejected, you can use this system.

 

I hope what I wrote helped and your problem was solved. If you need help you can contact me!

 

 

 

Good Evening,

Kind regards,

Samderali.

[Donii.]

Hi @Ethan pickle,

 

I appreciate that you have concerns regarding this system however, I'd like to provide you a better insight into how we would deal with an appeal.

 

We review the user's explanation, then review the evidence and provide a response based upon the review outcome. If upon reviewing the evidence we realise that we have made a mistake, we are happy to amend the punishment and allow the user back in-game; it's not a case of being biased as we have to ensure we are only issuing punishments if they are valid. We recognise our mistakes and are happy to learn from them.

 

As mentioned above, if you feel that after your appeal has been dealt with and the outcome is still not correct in your view, then you have the right to create a feedback ticket for a further review. You can create feedback tickets here.

 

To gain additional information regarding the ban appeal system, I recommend taking a read of our [how to use the Ban Appeal System & FAQ](https://truckersmp.com/knowledge-base/article/1).

 

Many thanks,

Donii.

[Interstate Nomad]

12 hours ago, Donii. said:

Hi @Ethan pickle,

 

I appreciate that you have concerns regarding this system however, I'd like to provide you a better insight into how we would deal with an appeal.

 

We review the user's explanation, then review the evidence and provide a response based upon the review outcome. If upon reviewing the evidence we realise that we have made a mistake, we are happy to amend the punishment and allow the user back in-game; it's not a case of being biased as we have to ensure we are only issuing punishments if they are valid. We recognise our mistakes and are happy to learn from them.

 

As mentioned above, if you feel that after your appeal has been dealt with and the outcome is still not correct in your view, then you have the right to create a feedback ticket for a further review. You can create feedback tickets here.

 

To gain additional information regarding the ban appeal system, I recommend taking a read of our [how to use the Ban Appeal System & FAQ](https://truckersmp.com/knowledge-base/article/1).

 

Many thanks,

Donii.

 

Having the same moderator who issued the punishment also decide on the ban appeal could introduce a potential bias in the process.

This is because the original moderator might have a personal stake in upholding their initial decision, which could influence his/ her judgment during the appeal process.

Even if the moderator genuinely believes in the correctness of his/ her initial decision, his/ herr involvement in both stages creates a situation where his/ her objectivity may be compromised.

[Be4rdy]

5 hours ago, blabberbeak said:

 

Having the same moderator who issued the punishment also decide on the ban appeal could introduce a potential bias in the process.

This is because the original moderator might have a personal stake in upholding their initial decision, which could influence his/ her judgment during the appeal process.

Even if the moderator genuinely believes in the correctness of his/ her initial decision, his/ herr involvement in both stages creates a situation where his/ her objectivity may be compromised.

This, and i know theres some out there who are like that. some people like to get too friendly with mods for these reasons.

[ClownMP]

There is clearly favortism going around for people in TMP team im not gona argue with anyone about it cus it exist and you are 100% correct in statement alone that if the same person that bans u reads the report has chance of bias i can nor confirm or deny only make sense to have another person insight on such cases and for the matter feedback tickets you are limited to 2 feedback tickets when you are limted to 10 reports how does that represent fair accurate for me to get my stuff solved out cause of the teams inability to preform at grater task.

(This, and i know theres some out there who are like that. some people like to get too friendly with mods for these reasons.) yea 100% is thats why favortism got introduced cus when you got stump sucking going around for u why wouldnt u feel obligated to act less agressive if that person ever came across ur desk compared someone that u dont care about or know
 

[jess.thetrain]

I disagree. The moderator who banned an individual has the best insight into that ban, and knows the most about that ban and it's context (as they issued it). Therefore it just makes sense that the appeal goes to them because they know what influenced them to make that ban.

If you believe a moderator is biased in the appeal outcome, there is always the feedback system where you can speak with Game Moderation Management.

[Lowlander]

I can see both sides of this. While it is true that you think there might be bias involved, or there might be the potential for bias, I think it is a good idea for the ban to be reviewed by the admin who placed it. Having moderated elsewhere myself, I can say that it is very hard to judge/review a ban that you have not placed yourself, as the person who actually placed the ban has the most insight in the situation. There's also the feedback ticket you can make if you still think the decision/outcome is unfair.

I'd also like to add that I feel that there's a lot of bad faith going around at times, when it comes to the moderation team. Do keep in mind they're all volunteers and also human, and mistakes happen. I think we should not cultivate a mentality where the moderation team is suspected/accused of favouritism, without proof. And if you have issues in regards to favouritism, again, make a feedback ticket. Game Moderation Management will look into it. 

 

I have twice made a GMM ticket so far (not in regards to suspected favouritism, but something completely unrelated) and they've always been handled professionally. 

 

(This is my opinion and experience)

[Tyler.]

Personal opinion, and the way I have always worked in the past..

 

Banning staff member should be allowed to remove the ban if they feel they have made a mistake.

 

When it comes to rejecting an appeal, the first staff member should mark it as 'pending' then, a second staff member should review the evidence and then make a decision. Not a 'chosen' staff member, but anyone who comes to that appeal first so it is not biased in any way.

[Anthony]

I'd like to pop my views on this here as I see it has gained some interest recently.

The reason the Moderator who issued the ban handles the appeal, is purely down to them having the most experience and know the context with that situation (especially if it relates to a live, in-game ban), so they can give their reasoning as to why they issued a ban in that case, if you are genuinely confused as to why you have been banned.

Again, many people have suggested the Feedback System we have in place. Now you may think I am biased, but I'm a very outspoken member of the TruckersMP Team and I can say the Feedback System is extremely fair and Managers that review your tickets about ban appeals do so with an open mind. You must also understand that all our work is reviewed by Game Moderator Leaders (this is public information) and if they find anything that seems unfair, incorrect or biased, then they have the ability to help and guide Moderators to see it from a different perspective.

If we make a mistake with your ban and sometimes it happens as we are only human, we will happily remove your ban. The last thing we want to do is punish you for something you did not do.

Having your appeals go into a 'waiting' list to be reviewed by other Moderators will only cause a backlog, similar to how our Web Reporting System can have extreme backlogs at times (although recently it has been managed quite well with the increased recruitment!). There are also a lot of other issues that I could mention, but a lot of it is to do with internal processes so I am unable to share this here. 

[seireinosyukufuku]

If you have been banned for deceptive behavior, please send feedback to an experienced game moderation manager.

Feedback can be reported on the MP website.

The manager manages the leader. Report  moderator and game moderators are managed by the game moderator leader.

So, when you submit feedback, the game moderation manager can review your feedback through the reporting system, so that the moderator doesn't have to read the appeal.

The moderator will watch a few seconds of video before and after the player breaks the rules to make a fair decision on whether it is appropriate or not. So, if you give a false ban, the moderator will get feedback from the leader and use it as a lesson to avoid making mistakes in the future.

[ClownMP]

1 hour ago, Anthony said:

I'd like to pop my views on this here as I see it has gained some interest recently.

The reason the Moderator who issued the ban handles the appeal, is purely down to them having the most experience and know the context with that situation (especially if it relates to a live, in-game ban), so they can give their reasoning as to why they issued a ban in that case, if you are genuinely confused as to why you have been banned.

Again, many people have suggested the Feedback System we have in place. Now you may think I am biased, but I'm a very outspoken member of the TruckersMP Team and I can say the Feedback System is extremely fair and Managers that review your tickets about ban appeals do so with an open mind. You must also understand that all our work is reviewed by Game Moderator Leaders (this is public information) and if they find anything that seems unfair, incorrect or biased, then they have the ability to help and guide Moderators to see it from a different perspective.

If we make a mistake with your ban and sometimes it happens as we are only human, we will happily remove your ban. The last thing we want to do is punish you for something you did not do.

Having your appeals go into a 'waiting' list to be reviewed by other Moderators will only cause a backlog, similar to how our Web Reporting System can have extreme backlogs at times (although recently it has been managed quite well with the increased recruitment!). There are also a lot of other issues that I could mention, but a lot of it is to do with internal processes so I am unable to share this here. 

first of i wanna start of by saying that makes sense to some exstent then why introduce to system that staff needs to apply video every time they ban a player? regardless what you say here it makes no sense ive been banned aint no secret by in game and out and in game context is i was fed a video couple hours after the ban to get understanding why i was banned i didnt need the person that banned me to exsplain it to be as for ur words for the backlog yea sure there will be 1 less person look  at this 1 ticket im sure that will create MASSIVE backlog surely the worst backlog we have seen thats sarcasm to btw just to make sure u understand you team large and you are telling me that - 1 person for that 1 specific ticket if we calculate across many other tickets u beleive that backlog be bigger? that makes no sense to me if you want u can elaborate on that 1 person less looking at the same ticket appeal will make a new massive backlog for feedback?

it doesnt hurt the system if i appeal and having someone differnt to look at the video that the person who banned me.

and yea i would call you very biased as none of what you said here absolutely make sense 

[Anthony]

6 minutes ago, ClownMP said:

first of i wanna start of by saying that makes sense to some exstent then why introduce to system that staff needs to apply video every time they ban a player? 

- We only need to upload evidence depending on the certain situation, such as a user requesting to see the evidence in a Ban Appeal. We aren't required to upload a video each time we issue a ban, but we are required to capture evidence in case it is requested.

 

 

8 minutes ago, ClownMP said:

 as for ur words for the backlog yea sure there will be 1 less person look  at this 1 ticket im sure that will create MASSIVE backlog surely the worst backlog we have seen thats sarcasm to btw just to make sure u understand you team large and you are telling me that - 1 person for that 1 specific ticket if we calculate across many other tickets u beleive that backlog be bigger? that makes no sense to me if you want u can elaborate on that 1 person less looking at the same ticket appeal will make a new massive backlog for feedback?

it doesnt hurt the system if i appeal and having someone differnt to look at the video that the person who banned me.

- Introducing a new requirement and system where a different Moderator will need to look at a ban appeal, after the original moderator has already gave their reasoning for the ban, would indeed delay the overall process. This would mean Moderators could be dealing with 2-3 times as many appeals as they normally would, which would increase the workload dramatically, especially as 75% of appeals (in my experience) are made unnecessarily anyway. If you disagree with a Moderators decision within your ban appeal, you can use the Feedback System as suggested already. 

I hope that makes more sense. I hope I read your comment correctly.

[ClownMP]

4 minutes ago, Anthony said:

- We only need to upload evidence depending on the certain situation, such as a user requesting to see the evidence in a Ban Appeal. We aren't required to upload a video each time we issue a ban, but we are required to capture evidence in case it is requested.

 

 

- Introducing a new requirement and system where a different Moderator will need to look at a ban appeal, after the original moderator has already gave their reasoning for the ban, would indeed delay the overall process. This would mean Moderators could be dealing with 2-3 times as many appeals as they normally would, which would increase the workload dramatically, especially as 75% of appeals (in my experience) are made unnecessarily anyway. If you disagree with a Moderators decision within your ban appeal, you can use the Feedback System as suggested already. 

I hope that makes more sense. I hope I read your comment correctly.

alright i see.

2nd or we can skip that feedback system and someone look at it right of way when i make the appeal there u go i found you corner cutter 
all this does is benefit hardest working TMP staffers to keep the community ''safe'' cus the more work he does is someone else to look at later rather then him banning 50 players 1 day means another 50 of the same people he has to deal with later cause no one else looked make sense to you now? 
cause from my understanding you make it sound like you made appeal talked to person that banned u and then requesting a 2nd opinion im not quite sure if thats why this thread was made in first place i pretty sure the idea was to cut the part where the one that banned me will look at my appeal

just like how many you choose to ban is that number x2 
instead of being choosing eaither to watch the appeals from others or choosing to watch the in game stuff 
 

[mth.]

Hello @Ethan pickle,

 

Your suggestion does not follow the required format. As it is over 30 days old, it will be automatically rejected.

 

Please feel free to submit it again using the correct format: https://forum.truckersmp.com/index.php?/announcement/234-read-before-posting-a-suggestion/

 

Thanks for your understanding.

[mth.]

// Rejected