Announcement: Updated Policy on Replacements

Forum Matches Discussion
#41

transparency is always better if at all possible
so please just think about the feasability of that

#42

I am in general for this rule.
But the moderators have to take account of the circumstances of the blacklist
Donā€™t blacklist someone when itā€™s clearly not his fault and/or write it down as (mistakenly blacklisted) or something like that.

7 Likes
#43

true ye
Host case reviews are probably more nuanced
Still i feel like itā€™s still possible to create a set of guidelines as to what would be likely to be considered an issue that fell on the shoulders of the host vs. what wouldnā€™t, based on past experiences

#44

I feel like that has high potential to lead to ā€˜well we didnā€™t explicitly say that DMing a random villager the name of the entire scumteam because you were annoyed that the scumteam was doing too well, then modkilling someone because you got into a fight in the Cookie Thread, warrants a blacklistā€™

1 Like
#45

def wouldnā€™t apply to everything, but would give some idea at least

#46

you could just say as a big disclaimer that it absolutely doesnā€™t apply to everything, and is just a set of tips on what to avoid based on what has happened in the past

#47

there is probably at least some information pertaining to past host complaint cases that is still private but doesnā€™t really need to be private anymore, that would help future hosts in terms of performing their duties more competently.

#48

(btw thx. I really like that replacements are taken seriously. I just trust that the moderation team uses these rules appropriately :+1: )

4 Likes
#49

(yes, of course not all cans are the fault of the host, nor is it possible to plausibly predict anything and everything that could possibly happen that would be)

regardless, itā€™s added transparency without any cost that i can currently see, which is good

#50

This is a good idea.

1 Like
#51

ay bruh wtf i jsut found out that jake was banned for posting nsfw wtf shit was wild when i was gone huh

3 Likes
#52

this was my only question

but it be fine

was there a reason this needed to be a thing

im not against it but I didnā€™t see replacements as a problem

besides maybe FoL 27

#53

RM4 was really bad with replacements, I think.

#54

trust me, when it gets bad, itā€™s bad.

when you have to search for repalcements for a lot of slots and just canā€™t fill all of them, it starts to get really difficult and you might even be forced to can game / modkill a slot that canā€™t be replaced.

BoTF4 had so many damn replacements and as a host it was a pain

#55

towncore slot replaced out, got mislynched
PoE slots replace out, get towncored

This Is Fineā„¢ļø

2 Likes
#56

also when someone constantly replaces out it means that they are using subs from the backup list that they probably cannot use again. Which means that if people replace out for an unforseen reason, there will be less subs to fill those slots and you will have to go to massping or even more drastic measures

this is a great policy

1 Like
#57

1 sub a 2 months seems kinda lenient tbh. I dont think you should ever be allowed to replace out just cuz ur triggered or annoyed or cba, which is like half of the replace outs

2 Likes
#58

Iā€™ve felt like doing that a few times but I donā€™t remember ever actually doing it lol

#59

Yeah same but it shouldnā€™t be allowed ever, even if you do have ur one sub out lol

#60

I think Iā€™ve subbed out of 3 or maybe 4 games in my 3 1/2 years being here - even tho I get pretty salty sometimes and wanna sub out I know thatā€™s a dick move.