TOPIC: [SSRP] Demotion system.

Server Name
SSRP / The Forums.

Suggestion Title
Make some adjustments to rule section 2.9 for clarification and improvement.

Changes
The demote system as of currently, doesnt really work, how it can be used is defined differently by different staff members and everyone seems to have their own opinion. It gets abused alot and will usually do more harm than good.

I am suggesting that we replace
With
This would make the demote system what it was always meant to be; a way for the user to contain a problem until the staff member gets there.

Additional Notes
This is simply my suggestion on how it could be done, however i do feel that we need some clarification on how this system should be used if nothing else.

what it means is if they are not breaking rules but are not doing there jobs then you make an f1 then you demote them

It is true, that the system is at the moment probably making more trouble than it is helping.
I agree with Gems's post about the system. The rule needs some adjustments as it is a powerful system which is getting abused a lot.
"2.9 Demote System - You can not demote people who have broken a Server rule. ( Make a F1 )"
The rule about the demotion system just clearifies, that you cannot demote for rulebreak, but not for what reason you actually are able to demote.
The only other clear cases are for the godfather and the radio manager as both have a reason they can be demoted for described in their job description.

Its to complicated its fine the way it is and it is not that hard to cancel a vote you can do it in like a half second if you have it copied

I like this suggestion, although it can cause a lot of trouble. More than it's worth.

I can see why you'd want it. But it would waste staff's time. Take for example a sit with the demoter and the demoted

Staff: Ok, so whats the problem here

Demoted: I was demoted for no reason.

Demoter: There was a valid reason here is proof. Or the Demoter says something like. "Oh darnit forgot to get proof"

Of course there are other ways of getting evidence but that's what would most likely happen

You should get a list of diffrent reasons to demote someone for such as AFK etc. Then under it will be a warning saying: Warning if you demote a player for a false reason you will be punished!

I was about to suggest it gems!, While creating my guide I saw there is no rule for randomly demoting players!

Anyhow

They will demote someone for a RDM and then the staff still have to deal with it so why not just cut the middle man out ( the demote ) and go straight to making a F1?

don't demote for being AFK? What if the Miner job is full of AFK's? What do you do just sit until they time out or idk? I have no idea what your logic is here Gems.

And Richard every single rule that you think should be listed, they count it as common sense....

The rule is fine as it is.
Also, as Zax pointed, no demotion for AFK's? Well damn, that's one of the reasons I find most valid to demote someone for, since they are not doing their RP Job. If they are then fine, like AFK shopowners, no problem with that. But if f.x. an AFK miner has been killed and is just standing at spawn, wouldn't you find it fair if that player was demoted so another one could activily use the job?

RedPowder wrote:
Agreed. I believe the rule is fine as it is.

It seems like it'll cause more trouble for the staff then it is worth. Call me old-school but I like the system we have now, plain and simple!

@Redpowder
Staff members would only need to deal with the demotion if its complained about, but a demotion for "RDM" would be invalid since the demoted could still shoot people as a citizen.

But to answer your question; It would allow a user to contain rule breakers if the waiting times are long.

FX:
Player X gets randomly arrested by player Y. X gathers evidence and makes a staff request. However before a staff member responds X gets arrested again, five minutes have now passed so he makes a demote request for Y to prevent him from continuing.

I am trying to put the responsibility on the demoting player rather than the one being demoted, it doesnt really seem fair that someone should need to prove himself innocent to preserve his job.

@Zax
The job limit is there to encourage buying vip, allowing demotions for being afk contradicts that mentality. Neither does the common user have the discretion to handle this kind of tool.

RedPowder wrote:
basically true why make two jobs when the F1 makes it a single easy to handle job

x