Back to Topic Index
How are we going to do this?
By George on 15/06/2009
Ok well Bto has been on my ass (hi bto 
) to get this 3 Strike System up and running.
Here is the basic idea:
) to get this 3 Strike System up and running.Here is the basic idea:
| QUOTE (Gorgemaster) |
At the moment we are doing nothing about the people who constantly avoid signing up for Megaraids, wars and so on. So I propose the introduction of: The Three Strike System It's simple: You fail to sign up for a MEGARAID or a WAR and you are on one strike. You fail to sign up for a second time you are on a second strike. You fail to sign up for a THIRD time and you are on the THIRD and FINAL strike. The Consequences of the Strikes: Strike 1: You receive a pm on the forums reminding you that it is mandatory to sign up for Megaraids and Wars. The PM outlines that if it happens again you will receive the Strike Two Punishment. Strike 2: You receive 20% warn. End of. Strike 3: You are removed from the clan. Remember: This is only for NON-SIGNED UP PEOPLE. It will exclude Emeritus. For those who skip raids (Ie: online at the time of raid, but don't attend) they will be taken immediately to STRIKE TWO - 20% warn. (We already have been doing this) We need to take a stance on this. If you can't be bothered to post on a topic.. then why are you here? This will all be kept in a post here in Level Four/Level Three I will be in charge of it, so that you don't have to spend the time on it. Therefore- time is not an issue for this, the only issue is whether it will be too radical.... |
So I messaged Robbie, asking if there was any way in which we could have the system graphically represented on the forums and he sent back the following:
| QUOTE (Robbiethe2nd) |
| I will see about implementing it; but I have a couple of changes: First off, when you have either no, or one strike against you, it doesn't show up. You would have three boxes, and while the first strike would be counted in the database, it wouldn't be a visible blemish on your record. After all - It is a warning, isn't it? Second, I shall add a "last missed" date - When you get a strike, that date gets set to the current date. When that date is over two months old, the strike gets removed. Of cource, if you had a strike for one month, and got a second one, the counter is reset, and its now two months from the -new- date before it gets removed. If you have more than one strike when you get one removed, it sets your counter back one month; essentially making it so that any strikes are removed after one month, assuming you have good attendance. |
Now Robbie has still got a few more weeks of classes and so I cannot expect him to even start thinking about this until the summer when hopefully we can sort out a system!
Anyway.
For now we should find a way of doing it MANUALLY (ie: in a forum post) until such a time that we get a proper system in place
So I put to you a number of questions:
1. How are we going to do this on the forums
2. What are we going to use the system for... (non-raid signups or people who sign up as a YES but don't come or... etc..
3. Should we make it a 4 strike system? The jump from strike 2 (20% warn) to 3rd strike (kicked from the clan) is very steep. So make it 4 strikes? the 3rd strike would be a suspension and then the 4th would be kicked from the clan.
4. Have you got any suggestions on how this could be even more epic?
K THERE BTO
THIS TOPIC WILL NOT BE NEGLECTED
~George
By Kyle on 15/06/2009
1.level 3 sticky
2.Blatant raid skippers and people who don't sign up for wars
3.Yes, 4 strike system
4.No
ja dat
2.Blatant raid skippers and people who don't sign up for wars
3.Yes, 4 strike system
4.No
ja dat
By Back to Own on 15/06/2009
Sorry for the long delay.
1.We're going to have to do it manually until we can have the real system in place.
We'll have a sticky in lvl 3 with the names of people who havent signed up, and the people who havent attended. I could manage it if you need help since my workloads pretty light atm.
2. I think that we may need to implement this to major raids/wars ACTIVITY wise too, instead of JUST signups. If you miss a major war and signup its fine, but you'll get a verbal warning to attend the other ones. If it continues, then warning levels will be handed out. This makes sure we ONLY punish the ones that are continuously missing major fights.
So basically, signups, and activity in major raids/wars.
3. This just came up to me now, but do we NEED a new strike system? I know I wanted a strike system, but why dont we just use the current warning system? ATM, the warning levels are only for behavior. Could we implement the warning level system instead of creating an entire new one?
4. The 2 month strike expire period sounds like a good idea to me. However, we also need to express the importance of signups. Make sure members know that there is a signup.
1.We're going to have to do it manually until we can have the real system in place.
We'll have a sticky in lvl 3 with the names of people who havent signed up, and the people who havent attended. I could manage it if you need help since my workloads pretty light atm.
2. I think that we may need to implement this to major raids/wars ACTIVITY wise too, instead of JUST signups. If you miss a major war and signup its fine, but you'll get a verbal warning to attend the other ones. If it continues, then warning levels will be handed out. This makes sure we ONLY punish the ones that are continuously missing major fights.
So basically, signups, and activity in major raids/wars.
3. This just came up to me now, but do we NEED a new strike system? I know I wanted a strike system, but why dont we just use the current warning system? ATM, the warning levels are only for behavior. Could we implement the warning level system instead of creating an entire new one?
4. The 2 month strike expire period sounds like a good idea to me. However, we also need to express the importance of signups. Make sure members know that there is a signup.
By DZ on 16/06/2009
Either put it on a sticky in here (level 3) or a new sub-forum where we log them by each member getting their own topic as soon as they receive the first strike.
Use it for the people who don't sign up, skip raids & wars, and those WHO SIGN UP AS YES AND DO NOT SHOW UP. I'm aware things can pop - up so we're not going to be too unjust enforcing this, but if it happens more than once then I think they should be punished. We can send forum PMs the first time we notice it and explain to them that if they know they cannot make it anyway to notify us on the signup topic.
I like the idea of the jumping straight to the 2nd strike, but yeah it is a bit much especially for a clan like WG who are not 100% war and raiding based. I guess 4 strikes would be OK.
Use it for the people who don't sign up, skip raids & wars, and those WHO SIGN UP AS YES AND DO NOT SHOW UP. I'm aware things can pop - up so we're not going to be too unjust enforcing this, but if it happens more than once then I think they should be punished. We can send forum PMs the first time we notice it and explain to them that if they know they cannot make it anyway to notify us on the signup topic.
I like the idea of the jumping straight to the 2nd strike, but yeah it is a bit much especially for a clan like WG who are not 100% war and raiding based. I guess 4 strikes would be OK.
By Indivi2you on 16/06/2009
Only for signing up is retarded. People can always just say no or yes...
We have to do it for event skippers, non signups, and yes signups who dont come.
and yeah, make it 4 strikes.
We have to do it for event skippers, non signups, and yes signups who dont come.
and yeah, make it 4 strikes.
By George on 16/06/2009
The whole point of bringing this in was because it would be a strike system that would NOT measure behaviour in any way and therefore the current forum warning system can stay in place exclusively for behaviour and therefore by definition it *should* be more effective for controlling behaviour...
By Back to Own on 21/06/2009
So:
Any other things we need to discuss? We gotta get this thing out soon so I can start making mandatories.
Any other things we need to discuss? We gotta get this thing out soon so I can start making mandatories.
By George on 21/06/2009
Um.. I don't think so.
Post if you encounter any problems whilst writing it
Post if you encounter any problems whilst writing it
By David on 25/06/2009
Agree with Saad. We have to use it for event skippers, people who say they will be there and aren´t and people who don´t sign up consistently.
I think we should keep a three strike system. Warn levels for the first strike, 3 day suspension for second strike with corresponding warn percentage and then third strike a ban with a two week wait before the person can reapply.
I think we should keep a three strike system. Warn levels for the first strike, 3 day suspension for second strike with corresponding warn percentage and then third strike a ban with a two week wait before the person can reapply.
Back to Topic Index