Rejected Voices and their inability to punish users.

[pisxel]

Heya, I didn't see any posts that suggested the same thing I am, so I decided to post. I think Voices should be able to warn. My main reason for this is because in large rooms from what I've seen, when there aren't any staff on it can be chaos if a Global Staff isn't in the room or it takes a bit for a Global Staff member to get in.
For me and others I know this is Tournaments, an Official room that can peak at 650 players, though chat isn't very active compared to smaller rooms.
This can create a perfect situation for anyone who wants to create chaos by flooding / spamming the chat, being very NSFW, and/or anything else that often results in at least a mute if not a ban. The most a voice can do when this happens is try to get a Global Driver and up and 'warn' the player(s) not to continue. If voices were able to 'officially warn' via /warn, it could prevent more situations like this and possibly discourage others from doing the same.

I know that there are a lot of counter arguments but I just wanted to post this here.

 

[Cassiopeia]

voice is just a rank to mark users as better than most, to mark them as an example of good users, and sometimes as a test run for authority. Punishing is left to staff because sometimes voices aren't trustworthy. This would just lend itself to issues, imo.

 

[pisxel]

voice is just a rank to mark users as better than most, to mark them as an example of good users, and sometimes as a test run for authority. Punishing is left to staff because sometimes voices aren't trustworthy. This would just lend itself to issues, imo.

Ah yeah that might be an issue with that, thanks for the feedback.

 

[The Official Glyx]

While this does depend upon your stance on "minimodding", I'd still say it's a bit redundant, since it's not necessarily difficult to just highlight a user and do !rules. If it's for something truly egregious that would normally warrant an instant mute or ban, it shouldn't be too hard to signal to the proper staff that can handle the situation either by highlighting them to get their attention or filing a help ticket for global staff.

 

[pisxel]

While this does depend upon your stance on "minimodding", I'd still say it's a bit redundant, since it's not necessarily difficult to just highlight a user and do !rules. If it's for something truly egregious that would normally warrant an instant mute or ban, it shouldn't be too hard to signal to the proper staff that can handle the situation either by highlighting them to get their attention or filing a help ticket for global staff.

Ah right, yeah that makes sense. Thanks for the feedback
Edit: now that I look back it does in fact seem a bit redundant, especially when help tickets exist. mb

 

[HoeenHero]

Just warning feels a bit redundant, someone could just spam and ignore the warnings without any consequence. If we added mutes, modlogs, ect it just turns into driver so this is redundant.

Regardless of the above, voice is not designed to be a moderation position/position with powers. Its meant to signify a "good user"/contributor in the room/globally. And it actually does server as a kind of auth test honestly. Having a rank next to their name can get to a number of good regular users heads causing them to misbehave.

Not a good idea for multiple reasons, thanks for the suggestion but I'm going to reject this.