TOPIC: [SSRP] Verbal Warnings

So earlier today Windows dealt with an F1 of mine. (thanks for that <3) In the end, he gave the person a so called "Verbal Warning," a verdict that I agree with and that I am used to from TTT.

This got me thinking, though. On TTT it is already rather difficult to track verbal warnings - if the moderator that gave it to the user leaves then nobody knows that that player was warned before. Now I am not SSRP staff but I can only imagine this being a lot worse on this gamemode. That's why I thought of this system to track verbal warnings! (if this already exists then delete the post please)

Server Name:SSRP

Suggestion Title: Verbal Warnings can be handed out officialy by Staff

How would it benefit the server: If another staff member deals with an F1 against the same person they can easily see whether that person has already been verbally warned.

Potential Issues/Exploits: None that I can think of.

Additional notes: "Verbal" warnings will be added to the F6 menu and stay for 12 hours after which they'll be deleted. It can help staff members to see whether a player has already been pointed to be more careful/reread the rules by another staff member.

This is a REALLY good idea

Why don't you just warn them :/

If it really matters put (Verbal Warning) in brackets

DEADMONSTOR wrote: Have you ever been staff on other servers than DR Dead? On TTT we often get players that are new and that RDMed someone "by accident" or that "misclicked." Whether or not these stories are true doesn't matter, that's for the Staff member to decide.

I always think people deserve a second chance. If they were unsure of the rules before I'd point those out to them, rather than straight up warn them.

Raeker wrote:
Yes longer then you. What I was trying to say is why should a whole new system be created when you could use the exisiting one. Putting VERBEL or something would indicate that they were verbally warned. Also I don't think these should go as you could just wait out the time and get another verbel

DEADMONSTOR wrote: But using an actual warning as a verbal warning would still count as an actual warning, which is what it's not supposed to do. Just because you put [verbal] or something similar next to the warn doesn't mean it suddenly no longer counts.

So it's basically an normal warning that will disapear after 12 hours and doesn't affect the 3 warnings kick?

Raeker wrote:
If I saw the verbel on their rapsheet. I would take it as a verbel warning. Only problem that I and see if the auto banning/kicking

A warning is a warning. A "verbal" warning is when you give the player a chance not to do it again. You're supposed to watch over the player a bit and see if they're going to break the rule again or not, meaning if they learned their lesson or not.

This ain't needed IMO.

Gamersfunhouse wrote: Yes. Though obviously the time is up for debate, it could also be longer or shorter. It should also be ignored during meetings.
Coutinroy wrote: Basically, you're right - if you'd watch over the player and pay as much attention as possible to what they're doing then this would not be needed.

Only it does not always work out that way. Maybe the staff member is in a rush or maybe he forgot. Maybe the player leaves and comes back 15 minutes later or maybe the player doesn't do anything bad for 30 minutes and coincidentaly break the rules shortly after the staff member drops the case.

It might not be needed because there are other solutions, but that doesn't mean it can't be helpful. Also, if you do look after the verbally warned player then you're 'wasting' time that could be spent on dealing with more F1's.

Theres a reason its called a verbal warning

Defeats the whole purpose of a verbal warning if its just like anyother warning.

Verbal warnings are to enforce the rule upon the user without punishing them so you can be sure they wont break it again, If you would like a punishment to be logged just warn them, a warning by itself is a warning to the user not to break the rules or suffer a ban.

I've actually been wanting to revamp the warning system in game for a while now. Remove the auto punishment system for warning so staff can be more free in the punishments they issue depending on the situation. As well as restructure the warn command to be either a full warning(what they are now) or a verbal warning. Both would be recorded in rapsheet for staff to view. My view of a verbal warning is that it is the lowest form of punishment posible on the server, ment to be used when staff don't want the interaction to be viewed a seriously as a warning(doesnt count agenst you going for staff ei). But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be documented like the rest of the punishments are. That way staff would have an easier job of viewing the progression of their rule breaks and all of the staff atempts at intervention. Also we wouldn't have people in the meetings saying "well I think I gave him a verbal warning for that before".

EMP wrote: This was basically exactly what I meant! Thank you for taking the time to respond (all of you)!

A verbal warning is not a punishment. A verbal is used to make someone aware of a mistake and make them read the rules. You cant go to meetings and say oh i gave this guy a verbal, because it wont be taken as a punishment.

EMP wrote:
Well this sounds good but it kinda takes out the verbal part out of it. Saying it's verbal meaning it is actually verbal. Just remove the auto-punishments so warnings can be issued for rulebreak. If a staff member sees the player is continuously breaking sever rules they'll ask an Admin+ to ban the user for a few hours or more, depending on the rules broken or their severity.

Coutinroy wrote: But why are you so set on keeping the system we currently have? Adding this "Verbal Warning" system makes everybody's lives' easier. Okay, so the meaning of the word "verbal" dissapears the moment you do that, but why does that matter?

Do we want the Enlish language to make sense or do we want a system that works?

Maybe create a new kind of warn? In the same sense of a "Pre-warn", same effect as a verbal, but end verbals and create something that could be documented and would lead to a serious warning if the person is rulebreaking again, since people are having a hard time diggesting the "verbal non-verbal" part of it.

ie: "It's your first time, so I'll give you a pre-warn. If you are called again to a sit by me or another staff, you will get a warning for this."

(I know this is an SSRP suggestion, but since i am familiar with warnings from TTT i will just leave my opinion here)

I will have to agree with EMP and Raeker on this one. I have thought about this idea before but forgot to suggest it . Anyways, verbal warnings should be documented. Yesterday i thought 3 people were ghosting on TTT (I couldn't be 100% sure cause i couldn't check the death scene since it has been removed :/) . I talked to them, they were lying at first saying that they are not talking anywhere else other than in game. Then 1 of them came to me and admited that they were talking on Skype. But said that they were not really ghosting. So i gave all 3 of them a Verbal. From the moment i left the server i have no idea what they did. They could have been caught again by another staff and they could have lied again and got once again another verbal. If my verbal warning was documented, then the other staff members would see that i suspected them for Ghosting and would warn them that time. All in all the Verbals are not a punishment, but if a staff member verbally warns a user, tells him to check the rules again, the user says ok but he never does it and the staff member who will join 1 hour later catch him breaking the same rule and gives him another verbal... that person can evade many warnings like that.

This is not a bad idea at all. It would be nice if it was added in the future and will help many staff members.

One last time. Verbal Warnings ARE NOT PUNISHMENTS! They do not count as punishments and they shouldnt be brough up in meetings as its not a punishment. If you want to punish someone then warn them dont give them a verbal.