Staff Handbook Suggestion

[ViperKimg]

What you want to see? -  I want to see a new rule added to the staff handbook saying all sits must be conducted with all players present.

Why should we add it? -  I've been getting a lot of unfair sits lately where I get brought to a sit and the person who reported me just asks the admin "Hey where are you in teamspeak/discord?" and then the admin and player reporting me go into a discord/teamspeak room and have a conversation and I'm left there for 5 minutes just watching both of them look around but I can't hear anything they are saying to each other, then the staff member comes back and just says "Okay, you are going to be receiving a warn today." Or, if I'm the one calling the sit, they'll do the same thing except the staff member will come back and say "Yeah, I can't warn him." Without even taking my side or allowing me to speak. I believe this is EXTREMELY unprofessional as well as unfair. Therefore, whether the sit is going to be held in-game, through teamspeak, or on discord, all members of the sit should be required to be present so that everyone can voice their own side.

What are the advantages of having this? - Less false warns/More correct warns

Who is it mainly for? - Everyone

Links to any content - N/A

[sull]

-suport i dont think we shoudl we do sometimes need to listen toboth sides of the sotry and we need to listen to them sepritly somethiimes bc we never know tha tone of tu to can be a ming and keep intrupting us or u could be geting a link and yah

[LuckyGoose]

Well i do see his point i do agree we should have all party's there when talking. But no matter what unless its clear as day and a staff member watches you breaking server rules is the only time we dont need both sides. But thats not really how we should handle it is talk to both party's or even inform the victim on what happen.

[Jayden]

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

Edited December 21, 2019 by Jayden

[Hannah]

6 minutes ago, Jayden said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

 

[Ender]

9 hours ago, Hannah King said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

 

[~ vσxιs ~]

22 hours ago, Jayden said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

 

[Nimo]

22 hours ago, Jayden said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

 

[Masterson]

Going along with what Jayden said.

I myself also took a report where the person had evedince. So I went into a call. Saw the evedince, talked to the rule breaker, and a verbal was gone. 

However if a staff member dosen't give you or the other person a chance to speak. You could always make a report on them.

[Torty]

3 hours ago, Masterson said:

Going along with what Jayden said.

I myself also took a report where the person had evedince. So I went into a call. Saw the evedince, talked to the rule breaker, and a verbal was gone. 

However if a staff member dosen't give you or the other person a chance to speak. You could always make a report on them.

Hey how’s it going the reason we don’t make reports about stuff like this when a staff member doesn’t let us give us our side, it’s because we don’t have enough evidence, let me explain, if me or someone else makes a staff report and I say this staff member was not letting me say my side and I don’t have evidence, I see this happen a lot not just twords me but the staff member will just say I don’t remember this or it was obvious so I warned you, then it gets denied.                                         What I think about this: think it should just be in training too hear both sides even when evidence is provided just too see if there might be a slight arguement

[Aaron Faustin]

On 12/21/2019 at 4:01 PM, Jayden said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

I agree with this, Both players do not NECESSARILY need to hear eachothers side, However with this being said i do believe that the person getting reported should ALWAYS have a full understanding of why the report was called, evidence of the rulebreaking, etc before a punishment is handed out. (Unless they're being super mingy) The only thing i would have an issue with is if someone was punished without being told what they did and having the chance to defend themselves vocally with the staff member.

[th3]

I mean it’s already in the handbook.

[Mervin]

Well any staff doing that is in the wrong and should be reported to the correct superior. Its biased and not okay  

[Pooders]

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

[Will]

On 12/21/2019 at 5:01 PM, Jayden said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

Couldn't have said it better, Jayden.

[Pvp_Savage6767]

On 12/24/2019 at 12:36 AM, Will (WTLM2013) said:

 

On 12/21/2019 at 5:01 PM, Jayden said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

Nice job Jayden! 

[𝙁𝙧𝙚𝙚𝙯𝙚]

Staff should already be doing this,

If both sides are not heared, report them.

Believe this is already a rule like Th3 stated

[Noah Jimes]

On 12/21/2019 at 5:01 PM, Jayden said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

110% couldn’t have said it better my self

[Burboon boi]

On 12/21/2019 at 3:01 PM, Jayden said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

Most of the time when i go into a call its to see the video evidence they have.

[utetwo]

 

 

 

 

 

 

4

 

 

 

 

 

3

On 12/21/2019 at 4:01 PM, Jayden said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

People should be allowed to give their sides of the story, but sometimes you have to separate the members of the sit for the sake of order.

[Cornthecanadian]

On 12/21/2019 at 5:01 PM, Jayden said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

 

[Ender]

On 12/21/2019 at 5:01 PM, Jayden said:

-support

I truly don't think an entire rule for that is necessary. If a discord/teamspeak call takes place to discuss evidence or whatever it may be, the staff member should know by default that they need to hear both sides when they return in-game anyway. Instead of adding an entire rule, maybe this should be emphasized by a higher ranking staff member of the staff team so that whoever has already made the mistake of going straight to punishment, can change their ways.

I had this same situation yesterday. I answered a report and before bringing whoever was reported, I had the victim show me the evidence first. The evidence showed that the reported player did in fact break a rule, but I still ended up bringing him to the sit in order to hear his side. No way would I have gone straight to warning them.

 

[Friendly Steve]

This should already be known to the staff member, if you feel like your sit was treated unfairly please post a warn appeal.