Denied Remove verbal warnings

[Chad]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove: It will make it so staff will stop giving out verbal warnings as its easily abused.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?: I don't think so.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
Minges would actually get punished
People can't lie and just say they didn't know

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
It could get new players warned

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted: I think this should be accepted as majority of the time when I make sits the staff will just give them a verbal warning. My issue with this is there is no way to track if they have already been given a verbal warning before. In my opinion it is a flawed system and something should be done about it. I have had so many scenarios where the staff would just give them a verbal even though they're level 200 and obviously know the rules. Now for the negative for the suggestion maybe make it so if they're under level 50 the person can be given a verbal.

 

[Painter]

+/- support

As long as newer players are still given verbals. A bad introduction to the community if you get warned when you are level 2 and you didn't know what FearRP was.

 

[Dalton]

What if we log verbals with the thing they get a verbal for?

 

[Niox]

What if we log verbals with the thing they get a verbal for?

this would be dank

 

[Glazzing]

What if we log verbals with the thing they get a verbal for?

Ain't a verbal if it's logged..

 

[KingOfCommon]

+support
For some cases verbals can be useful if context is required but I do not feel like verbals should be aloud for shut and closed cases (like talking as an scp that cannot talk) everyone is expected to read the rules when they join and if they dont they assume the risk of being given a physical warn

 

[Snake]

-support
While I get your thinking, verbal are more a way to teach the player and making them normal warnings where they are logged kinda defeats the purpose if you get warned for something you have no idea for. I also thing this is a bit of a blanket statement as there's lots of obscure or lesser known rules that might end up giving lots of people warnings if they're unaware of them. There's also the vip and xp boost system to consider so levels aren't really a good thing to go off when someone can get to double the level by forking out

 

[Sceptre]

+/- Neutral
+ Players will no longer only receive verbals
- New Players warned, less incentive to play
- Warns may become largely inflated

 

[moonyguru]

+support i think verbals should be only eligible up to a certain level

 

[Emilia Foddg]

-Support
I understand your reasoning, but I think your issue is more about competency of staff than it is anything to do with what they are and aren't allowed to do. This feels like it's treating a symptom rather than the issue itself, and is largely going to be unhelpful since there are genuine use cases for verbals. Like not just with things everyone else has said, but also consider changes to the rules and new rules. You expect everyone to just suddenly adapt overnight, especially if it's something big? No. People can make genuine mistakes and I think there are good-faith circumstances where a verbal can be applied. If people are not getting the appropriate punishment for their actions, then taking this tool away is pretty much only going to make things worse.

What would remedy your problem is just staff taking this into account and making sure everyone is handling sits and such correctly. You also have to understand that moderation overall is a big, slow-moving machine. There's been major things that have happened over the past few months and staff still have to adjust to resolve everything brought up by that, among everything else that they are doing. This is not something that can change overnight. But I don't think they're doing nothing.

At best, a middle-ground solution could just be to have a separate log for verbals, but that might just be unnecessary.

 

[Chad]

-support
While I get your thinking, verbal are more a way to teach the player and making them normal warnings where they are logged kinda defeats the purpose if you get warned for something you have no idea for. I also thing this is a bit of a blanket statement as there's lots of obscure or lesser known rules that might end up giving lots of people warnings if they're unaware of them. There's also the vip and xp boost system to consider so levels aren't really a good thing to go off when someone can get to double the level by forking out

I haven't really seen an issue where a verbal should be given typically its a very blatant rule break like RDM for example. It's not like the person is getting banned. They're simply being warned in which a warning should be a verbal. I don't see the purpose of a warning system if you can just get a verbal. All it does is help minges get away with ruining peoples experience and fun on the server.

-Support
I understand your reasoning, but I think your issue is more about competency of staff than it is anything to do with what they are and aren't allowed to do. This feels like it's treating a symptom rather than the issue itself, and is largely going to be unhelpful since there are genuine use cases for verbals. Like not just with things everyone else has said, but also consider changes to the rules and new rules. You expect everyone to just suddenly adapt overnight, especially if it's something big? No. People can make genuine mistakes and I think there are good-faith circumstances where a verbal can be applied. If people are not getting the appropriate punishment for their actions, then taking this tool away is pretty much only going to make things worse.

What would remedy your problem is just staff taking this into account and making sure everyone is handling sits and such correctly. You also have to understand that moderation overall is a big, slow-moving machine. There's been major things that have happened over the past few months and staff still have to adjust to resolve everything brought up by that, among everything else that they are doing. This is not something that can change overnight. But I don't think they're doing nothing.

At best, a middle-ground solution could just be to have a separate log for verbals, but that might just be unnecessary.

If they make a genuine mistake then they can appeal the warn etc. A warning should be treated as verbal as there is no real punishment all it does is help staff punish you if you're to mess up again. Lastly warnings also expire after around a month and just stay on your record.

 

[Emilia Foddg]

If they make a genuine mistake then they can appeal the warn etc.

appealing is for when it shouldn't have been given in the first place, not if it was like... they weren't properly aware, etc.

 

[SamPaval]

-support.

Verbal warnings most of the time aren't given out.

And it just hurts new players who are actually new to RP and how the server operates. Take a level 2 and he doesn't understand what fear rp is. But it doesn't ruin in major RP situations He would get a verbal.

If your like level 15+ I say verbal shouldnt be given out anymore as by that time u should be well informed on the rules

 

[Wolff]

+support
For some cases verbals can be useful if context is required but I do not feel like verbals should be aloud for shut and closed cases (like talking as an scp that cannot talk) everyone is expected to read the rules when they join and if they dont they assume the risk of being given a physical warn

 

[socalphunk]

+support
The level 200 that just called the O5 by their name don’t need a verbal

 

[ERaven]

+/- support

As long as newer players are still given verbals. A bad introduction to the community if you get warned when you are level 2 and you didn't know what FearRP was.

I very much agree,
I was given 2 rdm warns about 20 mins after joining the server for the first time, aside from the fact that one of the warns was false, it would have been so much better for the staff member to explain the server dynamics rather than just jailing me and moving on.

 

[The Guardian]

- Support

Verbals have their place and time. I do like the idea of logging it as an internal list for staff to reference, but it not be an official thing on the player's record. IE, applications shouldn't ask for a person's verbal warns.

This also means if specific staff are giving out verbals when they shouldn't, other staff can look into it.

 

[Scopes]

-Support

Reasons above.

 

[tgibby99]

+support
A lot of people will abuse the verbal warnings they get, implementing this will help with people lying and intentionally breaking server rules

 

[Archangel]

This suggestion is completely up to SSL/NL in their own meetings, if you want to bring this suggestion to their attention then go directly to one of them and do so.