Disputes, High pardons etc..

[Feelgewd]

there are people who are open a dispute for TWC or want to get unbanned, they tell their story etc

i think it's unfair that there are not enough staff members to respond to them, for example

Player A: I want to dispute, offsite scammed for XX amount of 07 gold
Day 1-7: Only 2 staff members has responded to him, he has to try after 6 months.

Just an example for this person:
http://www.sythe.org/request-pardon/1634760-x-w0lf-x-requesting-high-pardon.html

^ he had 0 responce in 7 days. that is unfair

so my suggestion is, if somebody is making a dispute, high pardon. atleast 5 staff members should try to respond.

sorry for bad english

 

[Alex12345]

support this, sometimes i see disputes/pardon's, where they do(in my opinion) deserve a second chance, and made some bad choices, or a single bad choice, months or years ago.
they make the effort to pardon for something which could be quite minimal, and the thread gets ignored, and left for 7 days

 

[LoLSmurfin]

That does seem fair; the poor guy didn't get any personal opinions at all. I support, if staff can make it happen.

 

[Stickly]

If the staff aren't gonna support, they need to reason it at least. It shouldn't be 7 days, it should be until a certain amount of staff denies/responds.

 

[Alex12345]

If the staff aren't gonna support, they need to reason it at least. It shouldn't be 7 days, it should be until a certain amount of staff denies/responds.

this is a good idea, if they don't support it/choose to ignore it, they should post and give a reason for it, its not like theres a massive amount of disputes/pardons, it'd take a few minutes to answer them, or maybe give reasonings behind their decision

 

[Void kills]

If the staff aren't gonna support, they need to reason it at least. It shouldn't be 7 days, it should be until a certain amount of staff denies/responds.

This seems more reasonable than a set time, question is, how many staff need to deny?

 

[djweasel]

We know not all mods/admins will reply. Now how we decided to help this issue, since it was 7 days from when it was made would be denied. Now it's 7 days from the first reply from a mod then they are denied.

I agree not everyone gets dealt with right away, but we're not gonna get more mods just because of this.

 

[Syed]

tbh mods just want straightforward shit these days, nobody wants to dig or undo decisions made by other staff members

pretty pathetic all in all

 

Support. I think at least 5 staff should respond instead of 1 responding and then it sits there for 7 days.

 

I support, staff should at least say why/why not they do or do not support because some people are just left hanging with one "no support" and they have no idea what to do from there.
We don't need more staff, we just need more activity from the current ones.

 

[djweasel]

Again like I said we were dealing with the problem of 7 days from making to denying. Now it's 7 days from when the first mod posts. That way everyone gets a chance to get a reply at least.

I don't mind people asking me to check their pardons.

 

[BGlave]

I agree it does suck. My second pardon got no replies at all so I know how it feels. Something just needs to be changed about how the pardons function.

 

[AmitZ]

Just make it more than 7 days/etc... I don't see why if you don't get replies you get denied.. if the mods don't want to support they can simply say no

 

[Violent]

I think they should have more chances to prove their innocence.

 

[Alex12345]

is it possible to have some sort of mod quota(i know some mods have alot to do, but it doesn't take long)? like each mod reply to a dispute/pardon X amount of times per week/month? some mods i've never even seen post in the pardon/dispute section.

 

[Moes]

Agree with op. If I were a mod I would have given him a chance. We just lost another active member with 50 vouches who (if he speaks the truth) seems legit.

There are not that much pardons. Because of that it should be easy to give pardons at least a few opinions.

 

Yup, I agree it should be extended but I dont agree to 5 staff supports instead of 5 staff supports in 7days . But let's take a look from other perspective.
Player A pardons for offsite scamming
There are currently 19 mods, but Sythe and Matthew are rarely(or never?) involved in disputes so let's count it as 17
If 12 mods vote 'no' and rest doesnt vote at all, will it be in disputes section forever without archiving it? It'll make abit hassle in disputes forums :/
I'd suggest extending it to 2weeks for mods to post support/no support

 

[Heeatz]

is it possible to have some sort of mod quota(i know some mods have alot to do, but it doesn't take long)? like each mod reply to a dispute/pardon X amount of times per week/month? some mods i've never even seen post in the pardon/dispute section.

Wouldnt work. what if there were only a small amount of disputes?

 

[Alex12345]

Wouldnt work. what if there were only a small amount of disputes?

theres more then 5 pardons a month

 

[BGlave]

Giving it more time wouldn't work. It will just sit there longer with no answers.

What you need to do is change the way archiving pardons works.

Each pardon should have 2-3 votes before it's denied/moved.