What are your opinions on admins being bias. For example, a few people I know think that Blackdog show's a lot of bias towards people in his clan, hence the hashtag #fumukubias.
I want something done about this bias tbh, so do a lot of people. Also, to add onto this, something needs to be done about staff and their friends. They get treated better when they're talking over voice chat with them, @ calls will be responded to faster and what they want will be done quicker.
We send @ calls and have to wait atleast 5-10mins, people like Barkles do it a fair bit.
I think there are people who enjoying minging about and playing the victim card when they get called out or receive punishment rather than just owning up to their actions. They seem to then view this as a staff member is 'out to get them' and has a bias when they get treated differently from a player that works to improve the community as opposed to tearing it down. I really can't tell if the reaction is a ploy or they're just generally that stupid.
If you treat staff like crap do you honestly expect them to try to help you right away? Trying to be edgy on the forums or in-game just ends up looking immature and staff will most likely treat you as such. Their job is to keep the server clean, not be your babysitter.
I saw the recent PR with '#fumukubias' and even when I was an admin I would have never given a ban or blacklist for the actions recorded, and I'm not in or associated with any clans.
There are plenty of people that have some growing up to do. Owning up to your actions is far more mature than crying wolf.
What are your opinions on admins being bias. For example, a few people I know think that Blackdog show's a lot of bias towards people in his clan, hence the hashtag #fumukubias.
Whether you'd like to believe it or not, HR are aware of and are constantly monitoring potential bias within the staff team, and step in where needed when it's identified that there may be an element of bias. Bias is always considered for amongst a lot of the processes already in place and without revealing too much details, the consideration for bias and "favourable selection" is always kept in mind.
I want something done about this bias tbh, so do a lot of people. Also, to add onto this, something needs to be done about staff and their friends. They get treated better when they're talking over voice chat with them, @ calls will be responded to faster and what they want will be done quicker.
[i]We send @ calls and have to wait atleast 5-10mins, people like Barkles do it a fair bit.
Again, HR is monitoring bias. To address the whole @ calls being responded to faster part, the @ call system isn't particularly responsive for staff without the use of a specific command which enables an alert of sorts, which not all staff are aware of. This command helps us recognise a call coming in, however can tend to be quite loud, so it's use is quite rare.
Of course, not all @ calls are the same and can vary in response time. We get calls as simple as a quick revive or getting someone out of a wall from where they're stuck. Other calls however such as CDM, FearRP and other violations require extensive investigation to ensure that the right person is always caught, and that staff are aware of the full extent of the situation. It really does vary, and majority of the time when someone says something over voice to a member of staff, it's generally something quite simple.
(Feb 24, 2018, 05:32 PM)Nightmare Wrote: [ -> ]What are your opinions on admins being bias. For example, a few people I know think that Blackdog show's a lot of bias towards people in his clan, hence the hashtag #fumukubias.
Whether you'd like to believe it or not, HR are aware of and are constantly monitoring potential bias within the staff team, and step in where needed when it's identified that there may be an element of bias. Bias is always considered for amongst a lot of the processes already in place and without revealing too much details, the consideration for bias and "favourable selection" is always kept in mind.
I want something done about this bias tbh, so do a lot of people. Also, to add onto this, something needs to be done about staff and their friends. They get treated better when they're talking over voice chat with them, @ calls will be responded to faster and what they want will be done quicker.
[i]We send @ calls and have to wait atleast 5-10mins, people like Barkles do it a fair bit.
Again, HR is monitoring bias. To address the whole @ calls being responded to faster part, the @ call system isn't particularly responsive for staff without the use of a specific command which enables an alert of sorts, which not all staff are aware of. This command helps us recognise a call coming in, however can tend to be quite loud, so it's use is quite rare.
Of course, not all @ calls are the same and can vary in response time. We get calls as simple as a quick revive or getting someone out of a wall from where they're stuck. Other calls however such as CDM, FearRP and other violations require extensive investigation to ensure that the right person is always caught, and that staff are aware of the full extent of the situation. It really does vary, and majority of the time when someone says something over voice to a member of staff, it's generally something quite simple.
[/i]
What is actually being done about it? Because I've seen no change. Yes it may be monitored but can we get a staff warning system? Something to show what they've done wrong?
That sounds moreso of a question for HR.
Tagging and .
(Feb 24, 2018, 05:44 PM)Nightmare Wrote: [ -> ]That sounds moreso of a question for HR.
Tagging and .
Thank you, because this needs to be answered.
On the subject of @ calls.
Yes, the requests for help from someone who is already talking to you on teamspeak will normally be responded to faster. I think this is completely normal, such is the difference between hearing someone (you won't miss it most of the time) and seeing a @ call in chat. In any case, the difference between response times here is really not significant enough to bring up anyhow. When you say it takes 5-10 minutes to get a response to an @ call, from experience there are many different reasons why that would be:
If it's a report of another player breaking the rules, the members of staff investigating may be looking into logs and staff tools and potentially even talking to the player you've reported. The whole situation may be concluded already before you are aware of it (and you may not be contacted at all). The members of staff may spectate the situation and find that no rule violations are taking place. Sometimes the staff members are busy roleplaying or doing something else. If it's a call you make to request assistance for yourself, don't expect a staff member to drop everything they are doing to come set your model ASAP (or similar).
In regards to bias, all plausible reports of bias are investigated by me and/or Enzyme. If someone is found to have neglected or abused their position due to bias, they are (depending on severity of course) warned, and if found to be a reoccurring issue, actions may be taken. If you believe bias is a serious issue, you can help address it by giving HR specific examples (and preferably evidence) about actions which you believe have displayed bias, instead of vaguely saying on the forums/discord that "X and Y are biased" and writing #fumukubias on random threads, which often happens.
If a staff member is looking through but hasn't actually tped to the player yet why don't they use the "A staff member is responding to you" command.
(Feb 24, 2018, 06:52 PM)Quest Wrote: [ -> ]"Overlewd"
If a staff member is looking through but hasn't actually tped to the player yet why don't they use the "A staff member is responding to you" command.
-snip- misread on toilet
There is bias in the staff team and there is bias in this community. However, from what I've seen on staff, it doesn't affect their decision making.
When someone is getting punished, 9/10 they're gonna get mad. And what do mad people do? Make irrational connections.
FUMUKU is a good example as it's the most targeted. BD does his job well and does it with a purpose. He tries to have most situations IC, and if they aren't, tries to not hit the person in trouble too hard unless it was their purpose to be a dick. The only time people seem to think he is bias is when he brings attention to problems where his clan members get in trouble for. But here's the thing. They come to him about these issues before hand. The only people who give him these issues are his clan members. So all it is is timing.
I feel bias does effect SOME staff member (Including mods) and it needs to be addressed with more evidence. All we players can do is gather evidence and hand it to HR.
And the @ calls. The timing doesn't matter. When I was staff, it was hard to get hard calls done in 5 minutes. And sometimes I wouldn't contact the caller. I'd just handle the call and get back to RPing. Don't bash on the timing by staff. It's one thing to complain about the time they spend on getting to your @ calls, it's another if they answer none.
(Feb 24, 2018, 06:46 PM)Overlewd Wrote: [ -> ]On the subject of @ calls.
Yes, the requests for help from someone who is already talking to you on teamspeak will normally be responded to faster. I think this is completely normal, such is the difference between hearing someone (you won't miss it most of the time) and seeing a @ call in chat. In any case, the difference between response times here is really not significant enough to bring up anyhow. When you say it takes 5-10 minutes to get a response to an @ call, from experience there are many different reasons why that would be:
If it's a report of another player breaking the rules, the members of staff investigating may be looking into logs and staff tools and potentially even talking to the player you've reported. The whole situation may be concluded already before you are aware of it (and you may not be contacted at all). The members of staff may spectate the situation and find that no rule violations are taking place. Sometimes the staff members are busy roleplaying or doing something else. If it's a call you make to request assistance for yourself, don't expect a staff member to drop everything they are doing to come set your model ASAP (or similar).
In regards to bias, all plausible reports of bias are investigated by me and/or Enzyme. If someone is found to have neglected or abused their position due to bias, they are (depending on severity of course) warned, and if found to be a reoccurring issue, actions may be taken. If you believe bias is a serious issue, you can help address it by giving HR specific examples (and preferably evidence) about actions which you believe have displayed bias, instead of vaguely saying on the forums/discord that "X and Y are biased" and writing #fumukubias on random threads, which often happens.
But if it's been brought up several times over and over again, surely you'll look into it? Keep an eye on the accused staff member. I've seen bias from many staff members yet nothing done. This is where transparency comes into play. Is there a warning system, something we can look at, to prove what you're saying isn't just a bunch of shit
(Feb 24, 2018, 08:50 PM)IVNT Wrote: [ -> ] (Feb 24, 2018, 06:46 PM)Overlewd Wrote: [ -> ]On the subject of @ calls.
Yes, the requests for help from someone who is already talking to you on teamspeak will normally be responded to faster. I think this is completely normal, such is the difference between hearing someone (you won't miss it most of the time) and seeing a @ call in chat. In any case, the difference between response times here is really not significant enough to bring up anyhow. When you say it takes 5-10 minutes to get a response to an @ call, from experience there are many different reasons why that would be:
If it's a report of another player breaking the rules, the members of staff investigating may be looking into logs and staff tools and potentially even talking to the player you've reported. The whole situation may be concluded already before you are aware of it (and you may not be contacted at all). The members of staff may spectate the situation and find that no rule violations are taking place. Sometimes the staff members are busy roleplaying or doing something else. If it's a call you make to request assistance for yourself, don't expect a staff member to drop everything they are doing to come set your model ASAP (or similar).
In regards to bias, all plausible reports of bias are investigated by me and/or Enzyme. If someone is found to have neglected or abused their position due to bias, they are (depending on severity of course) warned, and if found to be a reoccurring issue, actions may be taken. If you believe bias is a serious issue, you can help address it by giving HR specific examples (and preferably evidence) about actions which you believe have displayed bias, instead of vaguely saying on the forums/discord that "X and Y are biased" and writing #fumukubias on random threads, which often happens.
But if it's been brought up several times over and over again, surely you'll look into it? Keep an eye on the accused staff member. I've seen bias from many staff members yet nothing done. This is where transparency comes into play. Is there a warning system, something we can look at, to prove what you're saying isn't just a bunch of shit
Making a public warning system like that is just a sure way to have witch hunts and generally cause conflict.
"Keep an eye on the accused staff member" - this would require me to come online at the same time as the staff member, and spend all my time observing them. This is utterly unrealistic because I would not have the time or the motivation for that, the staff member in question would obviously know what my intent was so it would be highly unlikely that there would be any useful outcome from it. Not a good way to support a feeling of mutual trust in the team. So basically would be a massive waste of time with a high chance of negative consequences and miniscule chance of positive consequences.
And no, you're just gonna have to believe me. It is in our (HR's) interest to have a staff team free of bias or other factors that may cause unfair or abusive conduct. However as I said, revealing HR notes is a recipe for disaster and witch hunts, and will likely cause much more harm than good. Once again, "I see lots of bias but nothing gets done" we need specific examples and evidence. You vaguely saying "I saw this staff member being biased a few times" with no further information is not useful in solving the problem in the slightest as we have nothing to go on even if we were to investigate it.
(Feb 24, 2018, 06:52 PM)Quest Wrote: [ -> ]
If a staff member is looking through but hasn't actually tped to the player yet why don't they use the "A staff member is responding to you" command.
Depends. It is a <<relatively>> new command so sometimes just forget. Sometimes it is best to observe without using it as if you do then the player might go "The admin is watching now" or something which often defeats the purpose and potentially needlessly disrupts the RP when no rule violations would have been found.
--Snip--
Edit: Wrong information given, there were props placed by an admin and not lamps
(Feb 24, 2018, 09:06 PM)Quest Wrote: [ -> ] It's not just about @ Calls.
It's about things like the lamps and lights given to people in a bias fashion.
9/10 times when I have an interesting RP that includes everyone and I ask for some lamps or lights I get ignored or just a "No" from a staff member.
But I'm not gonna name drop here but I saw a nightclub which was a place in the map that already had lights (all of the staff in the nightclub rp were in the same clan as the admin) and the admin placed lamps and lights in the building for them.
If I were to do that I'd never get given lamps or lights by them.
^Preach