[Gambet]

Originally Posted by Googi

It's "the best" in the same way that your Graal review was "official".

In no way are the two the same. You claim your method to be the best, while I just used the title in my review because I didn't want to think too much about a catchy title. In no way was mine egotistical, nor did it claim to be superior to any and all other reviews.

Originally Posted by Googi

I don't see many corrupt staff admit that they are corrupt.

You can tell if a staff member is corrupt by their actions.

Originally Posted by Googi

Creating their own tools of enforcement would be power abuse.

Which would also fall into the category of corruptivity, what's your point? If the staff member is corrupt, do you think they'd care?

Originally Posted by Googi

It's based on the premise that humans are inherently corruptable whereas NPCs are not, so it's always better to have an NPC script be in a position of enforcement rather than an actual human.

I must disagree with you. NPC's only do what you tell it to given a certain situation, but not all situations have the same scenario, and there are always different cases where a player didn't actually break any rules. NPC's can't think for themselves, thus where the problem would occur. Not many NPC's, if any at all, are 100% full-proof and work exactly as they were designed to, with no bugs, no flaws, and no room for improvement. Not to mention the fact that it takes a human to script the NPC in the first place.

Originally Posted by Googi

See above, doing so would be power abuse. This is technically another flaw in the system but scripters can already do this under the current system anyways.

Yes, they can, making your system no better than the current one.

Originally Posted by Googi

Want to give some reasons?

Do I want you to give me reasons on why a manager should not enforce any rules? Did you even read this statement at all?

So unixmad, being the manager of Graal and all, shouldn't enforce any of the Graal Online rules to its consumers?

I don't care what reasons you may have, just the idea is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Googi

It's there because it's relevant to proposal 5.

And proposal five was also ridiculous to begin with.

Originally Posted by Googi

The server manager would deal with rule infractions by GPs and only by GPs. Like I said though, this is the most contentious suggestion in the document.

Server managers should deal with rule infractions by any staff, not just GPs.

Originally Posted by Googi

Even in the worst case scenario, you'd have to kiss a lot more butts to get rule immunity than you have to in the current system. And players can always recall a GP if they think he's been corrupted.

I believe I'm not the only one in this thread to disagree with your proposal 5 *points @ Master Storm*.

Originally Posted by Googi

This would only be relevant if appointed GPs didn't have friends. This problem is largely dealt with by the fact that a player's fate is in the hands of multiple GPs rather than just one. Of course, it's still possible that a player might be good friends with most or all the GPs, but it's less likely than the player being friends with just one GP.

What do you think the GPs are for? If one GP jails someone, the person in jail can have their case reviewed by other GPs, and even the Chief if it gets to that point. There is no need for any help from the regular players.

Originally Posted by Googi

See proposal 1. The way to deal with profanity is to script yourself out.

The current word filters filter words that are not profane, but rather, have letters of profanity in them, but the meaning of the word is far from profane, thus making the word filter systems poorly done. As I stated above, NPCs only do what you tell them to do, they can't think for themselves.

Originally Posted by Googi

Unless you're counting the staff as players (in which case players are already doing all the work on almost all servers), I don't see how players are doing all the work in this system.

No, the staff are not regular players.

Originally Posted by Googi

Which is why you need countermeasures.

And your system does not supply them very effectively.

Originally Posted by Googi

Except that it has more room for abuse.

A lot of things have room for abuse. You can't always prevent it.

Originally Posted by Googi

They would (hypothetically) implement it out of recognition of the observation that players have statistically been better at detecting staff corruption than server managers.

Does that make it right? Certainly not. That just means that the server manager shouldn't be server manager.

Originally Posted by Googi

Except that it will lessen it.

No, it wouldn't. This would take too much work for very little outcome.

Originally Posted by Googi

I'm not talking about developer power abuse in this thread, but rather enforcement corruption. For developer power abuse a seperate system pertaining to developers would have to be created.

No, you're talking about a staff organization system. A staff organization system would require the organization of developemental staffs' rights.

Originally Posted by Googi

No, they're a team. Feel-good statements are meaningless.

I didn't say they weren't a team. And feel-good statements are far from meaningless. It's not a feel-good statement, but more of the truth. If you don't function as a family, which is ultimately a team itself, then you won't get much done without problems. Each person should look out for one another, as would a family. All of the weight on a specific subject should never be held by one person alone.

Originally Posted by Googi

Yes, obviously this system doesn't do anything about developers abusing FTP access, etc. because it's only designed to deal with enforcement corruption.

Enforcement corruption?

But I thought the title of the thread was about a staff organization system? I must have been mistaken

Quite humorous how you tend to change the topic of your thread when you see me disproving your points. As I stated before, your system is far from perfect, and definitely not "the best".