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.

 

[Insurgent oreo]

- Support

New player joining the server and accidentally doing something that he does not know is agaisnt the rules [Especially SL clarrifications since they are never written down but only told] and that will make players stop playing the server since it would look to complicated for them,etc

 

[Kevin Ki]

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

Support if this was part of it.

We can literally just have notes on them to say "This person got this verbal warn for this. They now understand this rule."
That way you can't just say "lol i didn't know I couldn't shoot the guy minding his own buisness to arm D-Class!"

 

[Man of Culture]

Support if this was part of it.

We can literally just have notes on them to say "This person got this verbal warn for this. They now understand this rule."
That way you can't just say "lol i didn't know I couldn't shoot the guy minding his own buisness to arm D-Class!"

Isnt the point of a verbal warn to tell someone “you broke a rule but im giving you a chance and not doing anything about it just dont do it again”
And then you log it somewhere when that may as well just be a normal warn? Like tf is the point of a verbal if you log it.

 

[Prplex]

-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

Gonna be honest I don't think that's nearly a high enough level, and some stuff is more specific or niche so they still might not know. And again if they've got vip they could get that up to 2x as fast

 

[Bill Nye The Guy]

-support this is some high profile ??? activity
the entire point of a verbal is not to punish someone because what they did was really small or a geniune fault with reason behind it; changing all verbals to real warns would make the server feel a lot more strict which wouldn't be nice for new players

 

[Mr Apple]

-Support

 

[Bob "Gustav" Smith]

HUGE - SUPPORT
no you stink

 

[Kevin Ki]

Isnt the point of a verbal warn to tell someone “you broke a rule but im giving you a chance and not doing anything about it just dont do it again”
And then you log it somewhere when that may as well just be a normal warn? Like tf is the point of a verbal if you log it.

Because it's not giving them a strike. Just letting others know "Hey, they KNOW this rule." Because I've seen multiple times people who know there's a rule getting into sits for the same thing over and over just to slide by saying "Well I didn't know". If you just leave a note they can't do that. They're not getting a strike. Just having it marked this rule was clarified already for them.

 

[Hollyleaf]

-support Everything that I was thinking has been said already.

 

['Blue']

-Support​

 

[stealthyxd]

its quite simple, dont breake the rules. if they fail to read the rules the probebly arent fit on the server?

 

[Skittles]

While it's a thing that can't really be changed with a suggestion and they shouldn't be removed altogether, I think that the frequency and circumstances of which they are given in practice should be looked at. I've seen very high level players given verbals for the most basic rulebreaks, or people who very clearly know they are breaking a rule and know what they are doing receiving a verbal. If you want to say "make a complaint about the verbal" I have in the past, and been told that no action will be taken as it's up to moderator discretion.

 

[conspiracycarl]

-support
You clearly have never gotten a warning before lol

 

[Rev. Doofster Runner]

- Support

Some issues have verbals, some don't, and verbals themselves are (in my eyes) for situations that's aren't obvious rule breaks or blatent minging.

Removing verbals will simply give the Network the rep of "hardass" to the Gmod Community as a whole I feel. While yes I understand the frustration of obvious minges getting away with a verbal because of a silver tongue, what is eligible for a verbal and isn't, whether through standard or rule, is already set.

In the end this decision is more of an NL one, as it'd have to affect the network, not just the SCP branch.

 

[Kevin Ki]

- Support

Some issues have verbals, some don't, and verbals themselves are (in my eyes) for situations that's aren't obvious rule breaks or blatent minging.

Removing verbals will simply give the Network the rep of "hardass" to the Gmod Community as a whole I feel. While yes I understand the frustration of obvious minges getting away with a verbal because of a silver tongue, what is eligible for a verbal and isn't, whether through standard or rule, is already set.

In the end this decision is more of an NL one, as it'd have to affect the network, not just the SCP branch.

Well tbh it's not even needing a silver tougne but a lazy mod. I've seen people RDM, then be emoting during a sit not giving a shit and mods be like "Well, seems like a oopsie~ no warn~".

I get not wanting to be "that server" where every ass scratch is a warn, but in the same time, I feel like some people just come here, do shit like arm d-class, info breach on surface, RDM, etc, and are like, lvl 180 and will be like "Aww I didn't know man." And slip by because the mod doesn't wanna go through the warn process and just wants to do as many tickets as possible, or they're friends with the person and not wanna warn their buddy. (Which I understand. It's a game. No one says "Oh boy paperwork!")

 

[Rev. Doofster Runner]

Well tbh it's not even needing a silver tougne but a lazy mod. I've seen people RDM, then be emoting during a sit not giving a shit and mods be like "Well, seems like a oopsie~ no warn~".

I get not wanting to be "that server" where every ass scratch is a warn, but in the same time, I feel like some people just come here, do shit like arm d-class, info breach on surface, RDM, etc, and are like, lvl 180 and will be like "Aww I didn't know man." And slip by because the mod doesn't wanna go through the warn process and just wants to do as many tickets as possible, or they're friends with the person and not wanna warn their buddy. (Which I understand. It's a game. No one says "Oh boy paperwork!")

I do agree that someone refusing to do their job of warning if required is lazy and they probably shouldn't be staff if that is the case. The point I was making was more for lower issues for players who don't have a history of warns or are fresh to the server (level 1-10 with none to only a few prior connections).

I stand by my statement that Verbal's should stay, but more context should be given to what is and isn't eligible for them.

 

[Pupper]

-support
While I understand the concerns of minges claiming to just have not known about a rule, there are geniune accidents that happen often, also staff have to warn people for certain rule breaks (idk if i have a up to date link to the staff handbook on punishment guidelines) and I think it's already a well balanced system.

Edit
I'd like to add that high level players do get noticed in sits like 4 of my warnings are because the mod says
"you are level ___ you should've known" even if it was miscommunication or a mistake

 

[SamPaval]

Gonna be honest I don't think that's nearly a high enough level, and some stuff is more specific or niche so they still might not know. And again if they've got vip they could get that up to 2x as fast

At that level. U have access to level 2 and almost to a level 3 jobs. So u should be well informed by the rules at that point

 

[Pupper]

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

it takes like 2-3 days to get level 15 as a new player MAX lols nobody plays gmod to read the rules

 

[Kevin Ki]

I do agree that someone refusing to do their job of warning if required is lazy and they probably shouldn't be staff if that is the case. The point I was making was more for lower issues for players who don't have a history of warns or are fresh to the server (level 1-10 with none to only a few prior connections).

I stand by my statement that Verbal's should stay, but more context should be given to what is and isn't eligible for them.

Absolutely agree. There's SOME rules that are clarification that you wouldn't instantly know unless you fine comb rules or can be accidentally broken (not allowed to enter D-Block unless code 2, fear rp works with gun out in 2 v 1, no cyanide with gag.) But there's also rules like no arming D-Class, no releasing D-Class without reason, no going to surface to info breach, NLR to kill a dc or disguised, that are genuinely so obvious that saying "Woops, I didn't know~" wouldn't be viable. I think there should be a branch of rules that are so obvious you can't just give verbal.