Everyone rest your vote in the No Violation area until you are ready to vote.
NCRAW / Alyssa - you don't vote just monitor. Or one of you can act as a the head juror and suggest who you want to add or remove, head juror can vote.
Also this wouldn't be in a forum this would be on the report page itself if the dev coded it.
For this let's say a mod needs 9 votes to make a decision instead of 13.
The only suggestion I see plausible for this going forward, is if the mods wanted a Jury in the future for hard reports and host them in secret like this, to be discussed. I just don't see it being coded.
i initially did no vio because of what superspooky was saying but they had enough time to retract and sinB asked for confirmation so he could shoot correctly but they didnt retract before the shot. just seems like trolling to me because they DID end up retracting and probably were just afk before they could retract in time? so I'd only give a note.
I feel like this would go like the VAR in football. It will definitely go wrong sometimes cuz if you look at how the percentages are, 1 vote could completely change the report and then if it's handled wrong we'll get the blame. So my conclusion: I like the system but I think there are still flaws that could be worked out.
MafiaGod, reading your comments you pretty much vio because she is a veteran player, rather then the report itself. You are not looking at the report itself you only mention things from the past. So you already handle the report wrong. Okay so she did GT in the past, that has very little to do with this report. She got viod for it in the past and you leave it and that. Sure, you can take it into account when you handle the report but yeah... don't let that decided the outcome rather then the violation itself. It is not isp, cuz then every other player in the game who talked way less should get an ISP vio according to you which it completely isn't. But ok you changed it to almost so you agree with my text on that part. Sure, she could have tried harder I agree with that but I don't think you should get viod for trying a strategy ( it was bad, I'll say that but a vio is overkill ) and it did lead to a loss for town but she did retract and reading the lines she said, it wasn't on purpose. It will never be a violation.
Flashbar says .... "Includes fake claims made for any other purpose than strategy"
Town moved too quickly for her to explain why she claimed, but in the little time she did have it didn't look like there was a serious attempt to justify herself, either. But not enough time = can't prove intention beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore no vio
A majority vote of Vio/Ban or a First Time Offense, Multiple or Major Offense, always gets looked at by a mod.
It would be the Head Juror's job to make sure the Juror's votes are taking it seriously by periodically checking games. If he notices a Juror being a noob about even games that should be violated in order to save friends over 5 times within 3 months they can demod the Juror as needed.
MafiaGod Total Reports 411 Reports Last Week 32 No Violations Voted For 200 Notes Voted For 109 Violations Voted For 102 Violations Voted For Last Week 4
(Bans would be rolled into Viotations. I am saying Violations are Warnings and Bans are Suspensions, we can reword that if need be to No Violation, Note // First Time Offense, Multiple or Major Offense, because some infractions even if a first time offense can be more severly dealt with.)
leb Total Reports 466 Reports Last Week 10 Violations Given 157 Violations Given Last Week 1 Total Actions 184 Actions Last Week 13 Actions without Reason 3
Top 10 Violation Given by leb
Top 10 Actions by leb
We would have the same thing but for Juror votes, to include a section that says Outcome Accuracy No Vios 80% 8/10 Vios 30% 3/10 Notes 70% 7/10 Bans 10% 1/10 Overall = 19 / 40 = 48%
Had she cared she may have been upset at her boy in blue being gunned down. Rather she "lol"ed it off. There's a clear contempt for the spirit of the game.
Maybe have a set of test questions to make sure your jurors are competent enough to even be jurors? We actually used to do that with mods at some point in the past.
Like, I am probably not right about this and I might change my mind to Note, not every Juror is going to have a 100% win right on this, which is good, but the majority should have it right.
Jury Mod Poll
