TOPIC: The current warning/ban system is broken.

If a user is blatantly breaking server rules such as RDMing, I've found that 9 times out of 10, they are given a verbal warning. A verbal warning means nothing. Only following a verbal warning from a staff member are you liable to an actual 'formal' warning. Why are there two types of warn? If you are warned, it should go on record. Techncially, if a different staff member handles 5 instances of rule-breaking from a user each time, a user could have one 'verbal' warning with each staff member and therefore no actual punishment. It's bonkers.

The rules that don't actually impact gameplay meanwhile are dealt with much more severely, such as even mentioning another gamemode on Garry's Mod. Why? The cases that ruin someones gameplay should be dealt with more severely... those are the things that stop people from playing on the server! A warn on its own barely means anything, so why water it down further? Of course the latter of my two points about abuse of power is a complicated matter in and of itself, but the stark contrast between the two just makes both seem more ridiculous.

Almost all staff don't like doing F1's and it's understandable. So why waste your time further by giving a non-punishment for a clear rule break, whilst give an actual punishment in cases where rules are misinterpreted or not actually written down? It's broken.

Punishments are less harsh than they used to be because the server is so low on players, that's the same reason alt accounts are allowed because it boosts the server numbers. Zarp needs all the players it can get, so punishing people too harshly usually is not the best course of action, unless you're in Jay House of course.

narexa wrote:
I understand this. These little events that have been running recently have no long-term impact on the server. There needs to be actual substantial changes and whatnot. But that aside, a warning is barely even a slap on the wrist. Only with multiple will you actually get any formal form of punishment. If you're afraid to even warn people, why have rules at all.

Justice wrote: At the end of the day it's up to the staff members to either warn or ban, they must follow the policies of course, you can't straight up ban somebody if they've never been warned for example, i can decide to warn you if i feel like it's necessary, i can decide to let you go or give you a verbal punishment if i feel like it's necessary.

Justice wrote:
Believe it or not, they're still convinced these events are bringing more players into the server and giving the server more substance. The lead team have never confronted the core issues of SSRP, rather just continued to accept changes that either take ages to get added or forgotten about, not to mention the endless cycle of boosterpack deals and the absolutely useless updates that don't address any of the problems the server has currently, rather just adds onto the problems.

But, don't speak about the issues the server have, all you'll get is "Apply for community council" which is hand picked by the lead team, and all you get is to vote on suggestions and a spreadsheet in which you can suggest things on there which tends to be absolutely dead.

ToBeHonest wrote:
If someone is breaking a rule that's blatantly listed as a rule,I feel like it's not insane to think there should be consistency on 'warning' a person for doing something they should know is wrong. If a moderator doesn't like warning people about rule breaking, what else could they possibly be doing, why would they apply for staff in the first place?

Justice wrote: If there's any staff on the server that doesn't warn somebody or doesn't want to when it's necessary you must report them if you witness the event happening, i'm not a wizard and i can't resolve everything man.
If any staff doesn't want to warn peoples because they're afraid, well i don't know what to say lol, why would you be afraid to warn anybody when you're a staff member

I completely agree that it is broken, A re-wrork is necessary

ToBeHonest wrote:
I'm not saying you should be the one to fix everything. What I'm saying is that a warning should be a warning. I have seen malicious users get off the hook far too many times and blatantly repeat rule-breaks purely because they go completely unpunished (yes, they get a 'verbal warning' but as established, this does not really mean anything).

Definitely. Consider this:

Player sets their name to something new and intentionally breaks a rule and is reported.
A random staff member who may have not dealt with them before, and obviously won't recognise their new name deals with the F1.
He sees that the player has no recent warnings and so gives him a "verbal warning".
Therefore the staff member - and anyone else - will have no record of the rule break, the user's name, or their SteamID.

Player sets their name to something new and intentionally breaks a rule and is reported.
A random staff member who may have not dealt with them before, and obviously won't recognise their new name deals with the F1.
He sees that the player has no recent warnings and so gives him a "verbal warning".
Therefore the staff member - and anyone else - will have no record of the rule break, the user's name, or their SteamID.

Player sets their name to something new and intentionally breaks a rule and is reported.
A random staff member who may have not dealt with them before, and obviously won't recognise their new name deals with the F1.
He sees that the player has no recent warnings and so gives him a "verbal warning".
Therefore the staff member - and anyone else - will have no record of the rule break, the user's name, or their SteamID.

Player sets their name to something new and intentionally breaks a rule and is reported.
A random staff member who may have not dealt with them before, and obviously won't recognise their new name deals with the F1.
He sees that the player has no recent warnings and so gives him a "verbal warning".
Therefore the staff member - and anyone else - will have no record of the rule break, the user's name, or their SteamID.

Player sets their name to something new and intentionally breaks a rule and is reported.
A random staff member who may have not dealt with them before, and obviously won't recognise their new name deals with the F1.
He sees that the player has no recent warnings and so gives him a "verbal warning".
Therefore the staff member - and anyone else - will have no record of the rule break, the user's name, or their SteamID.

etc.

Bunch of fucking softies nowadays

narexa wrote:
The community council is CERTAINLY not hand picked by the lead team, believe it or not I got it without a staff rank!

Jewce Man wrote:
You’re not remotely funny in any way.

Gody wrote: i figured that out after 10 of my friends blocked me for saying " what do you get from a pampered cow? Spoiled milk!!!"

Jewce Man wrote:
ttt humor

Nikoo wrote:
haha

Rapsheet notes!!!!!

Jim_Jam wrote:
TELL EM

How about we make verbal warn notes on a player's rapsheet that don't count towards anything but are just pointed out when a staff member is checking a player's rapsheet while handling an f1 so that multiple verbals are not given out by different staff members, So that punishment is given