We should have a collaboration of 100 mods. Players who we all know and mods trust/choose. They should be able to mass vote on reports outcomes. NV, Note, Warning, Suspension. This would make the mod's jobs easier. They just have to pay attention the reports that come up Warning or Suspension.
Each report must be voted on by at least 13 of the 100 jurors before a Mod can see the Jury Mod Verdict Stats on the report.
That's so obviously not going to work, i'm quite amazed at how no one sees it.
Before I explain why, let me lay out the premise of a report. Player A reports Player B because Player A believes Player B broke the rules and deserves a violation for it.
Now what you are proposing is a jury of "your average daily EM players" which more or less overlaps with the mass of people filing reports in the first place. And where you can see this going horribly wrong is that on average 60-70% of reports end up being No-vio's despite the report-filer believing that the other person is at fault. That just goes to show that the "average daily EM player" knows the rules enough to obey them to some extent, but definitely not enough to apply them. In other words this will run wild and uncontrollable in no time.
Where this falls short of the actual mod system is mods communicate with each other much more personally and extensively, rules are explained and understood much more thoroughly and there is some sort of accountability, because there are people higher up the food chain who you report to.
I meant to say the comments so far on here are not supportive enough to get the system start going. Mods' opposition to this is one big factor as well. Actually if mods aren't supporting it's hard to implement it. ~_~
I don't think the majority are against it at all. If I told you that tomorrow I could have this system up and going and I have 300 potential names that will rotate out of the 100, would anyone say "No, I don't want to try it?" Nope. 80% of this site would be like, "Make me a Jury Mod." Loud voices just don't think it would work or help.
It is slowly not becoming one. This won't be coded. If anyone codes this, there is going to be a crap ton of questions as to why the rest of the crap here that needs to be fixed isn't being fixed and they waste time on this. Like, go fix the mentorship program, or the roles input coding, or fffs bring back a really good wiki even.
Rolls eyes, role mods have the power to do things, but are told not to. At least I was as a Role Mod. One of the things to prove that you can mod, is NOT abusing the power when you have it.
There will always be reports, input and output is the engine of the report system. Sometimes I get on and it is cleaned up. The mods are not short handed just because they have 61 reports. 400+ reports is a problem, not 100.
Sometimes I think there are just people who want to be right in their defense and their voice is the loudest. This literally won't happen because no one would code it. We once had a stat anaylsist here on epic who created vote sites and could code this easily. He is so gone now, that was back in 2010.
Would this have problems, hell yes, would this add a level of fun for a lot of people, hell yes yes!
If mods lose trust in a juror, they ax them. If a juror's stats fall below 30% then ax them. What I mean by that is if Guru66 keeps just voting for Violation, and he doesn't guess what the mod would does vote within 30% of the time, then he loses his Juror mod status. Juror Mods with a 85% or better rate, ability to give time to the site, and good standing can be considered for modship in the future. So many people want to become mods, I think that people will take it seriously if they see a chance. The mods don't even have to talk to the jurors, they just consider the stats. 100 is a great number, you will always have enough people active to gain an adequate % with that many people. I would also make it so that only the head juror and the admins can see what the juror mod % is.
Have a current mod be head of it, like your head mentor, or appeals mod, "head juror" or "magistrate." They, an admin, and the appeals mod could choose the 100.
If there is a +55% vio-ban, the mod can have a mod thread and ask the jurors why if there is something they missed.
Don't think of this system as affecting comp reports as much as it would red heart reports, or no brainer site reports or easy comp reports. I mean it could and would work affectively, if they did it right.
