SUGGESTION | ALLOWING PLAYERS TO VOID SITUATIONS + RANT

[ximoc]

I respect each and every one of the people mentioned in this post, half of this is ranting, and the other half is genuine reporting and feedback. I mean no harm by posting this, however, if you feel this is a 'personal attack' then you may be part of this problem.

IGN:
ximoc
(multiple people have helped me with this feedback post, I'm just the one voicing their opinions)

DATE:
7/22/22 | 22/7/22

WHAT YOU WANT TO SUGGEST OR MENTION:
My ultimate goal for this feedback post is to allow players (for up to a determined amount of time) to be able to void agreed-upon situations on their own, without the involvement of staff as long as the majority of both parties agree to voiding said situation.

An example of this feature being used is if let’s say both parties in a situation FailRP and both parties agree to void it, but you aren’t allowed to void situations without staff approval, and it becomes too late to void the situation because, as an example, “KPD got involved”. Players should be allowed to void their own situations without having a third party (in this example, KPD) have an influence on it, especially if they weren’t even meant to be there in the first place. This example caters specifically to GangRP, which ties into this suggestion below, but there are other situations outside of GangRP where this can affect players and their characters.
​

---

The reason why I'm making this post is that time and time again, I've seen and participated in situations where OOC agreed upon RP has been overturned because of KPD. Even if the reasonings for these overturns were easily avoidable mistakes, like miscommunication, in this case, the reason for the overturn is because "KPD got involved". This reasoning has been used for most situations for which their reasonings for vetoing a void come from typically these two main sources; the in-game check they receive from bail money or a pure lack of interest from the overall situation that doesn't directly affect their character. When I find myself RP'ing with police officers, I find a lot of disinterest and stubbornness, it makes it discouraging in a way. This ties in with staff members as well. With all due respect, I appreciate the staff team for what they do, but it kind of looks like half the time, they just care about what benefits them and their characters.

Tying into the original purpose of this post, a planned and OOC agreed-upon situation was ruined due to miscommunication, where it was agreed that police would not be called in character, and they showed up anyway, but how does this tie into the purpose of the post? Both parties (not including the KPD and staff) and everyone in them agreed to void the situation, even willing to redo it considering all of the OOC confusion. There was genuine proof of this miscommunication, even being in a call with a staff member as we explained the story to them, only for our void to be overturned because "KPD got involved". Does it really seem that hard to scrap the bail log and just give the weapons back? Why does the KPD have an outstanding impact on situations that never involved them in the first place? If the original participants are willing to void the situation, especially when there was a clear amount of rule-breaking and/or miscommunication, why can't KPD and staff do the same?

I find it discouraging as a GangRPer that my character's actions and character development, along with the members of my gang, are influenced by OOC decisions and excuses by KPD and staff members affiliated with them, even when there is clear evidence that the situation NEEDS to be voided. Putting this rule in place would make me more willing to involve KPD in events, and it should make other people too. I get that some staff has to deal with these things 20 times a day, but why not try and find the source, then? Instead of being lazy and just saying "fuck it" and voiding it, try and find the reason as to why you're getting so many reports of KPD misconduct. I can't speak for other players, but I'm not the only person that agrees with this.

I want to be able to get onto the server and be able to do what my character does without having to worry about KPD influencing the hell out of my actions. I will admit that there was poor planning on the event side of things in this case, but there was actual evidence of pure miscommunication with both parties, and I'll provide proof of that below. I've spoken to ex-KPD about this before, actually as I'm writing this, and they agree with me. It isn't fair to GangRPers and other players that voidable situations, that need to be voided might I add, are being overturned because KPD and their higher-ups (or whoever is in charge) refuse to do something about it. You guys are staff members, you spent hours writing your applications and forming bonds with other staff just to get your role. It would be put to waste if stuff like this keeps happening and it's being left unchecked.

I don't blame the officers in the KPD, but rather some of the staff members that are the puppet masters of roleplay situations. Unless they are considered the IC third party of a situation, they should not have the entitlement to decide our characters' fate through out-of-character means-- especially if they are only given one side of the story and/or weren't there themselves.

HOW WILL THIS BENEFIT THE SERVER/COMMUNITY?:
I may sound like I spend my entire life on SRP and I have no social connections out of it, but it actually pisses me off seeing hours of dedicated character development and writing, not just my own but others, going to waste because of, this phrase you're going see a lot, "the KPD got involved". It's an overused excuse and an obvious one used as disguising pure laziness.


Benefits of this feature include:

- Encouraging player-to-player discussion, as well as making room for players to be more independent, and less dependent on staff for answers.

- Staff members are less stressed, and are given more time to figure out more important situations.

- KPD is not as blamed for situations that have 'gone wrong.'

- OOC arguments between staff and players are less frequent, and staff isn't forced to work with half-truth stories to choose what's voided and what's not.

- Situations, where the majority chooses to void, won't be overturned because an arrested officer (or the third party) chooses to do so.


Of course, there's gonna be players who don't want to comply and feel the need to be on top, and no one likes the idea of their character being killed/arrested, therefore in situations of in-compliance staff will need to get involved, but this feature will only benefit the community as I truly don't see any cons.

I encourage people viewing this thread to reply with their own opinions, I'll try to respond to every comment.

EDIT: Made a less vague reasoning for my post, I posted this when it was three in the morning for me sorry lol​

 

[BearDucky]

Neutral

Neutral because I honestly don’t understand one word but that’s because I’m not good at reading.

 

[robinzee]

+1.

I do not understand the intricacies of the situation you are describing in this post in particular as I was neither part of the scenario nor am I KPD, but I agree with the fact that, if there is a consensus among the players, the situation should be able to be voided, just as there can be dynamics & story created between characters without actually roleplaying out a situation.

The only question you leave hanging in the air is "what happens when there is no consensus?", which, I'd like to add to your post, is obviously when staff get involved.

Thank you for this suggestion, xim.

EDIT: Perhaps the post could be retitled, as it seems a bit misleading, frankly.

 

[Toto]

I respect each and every one of the people mentioned in this post, half of this is ranting, and the other half is genuine reporting and feedback. I mean no harm by posting this, however, if you feel this is a 'personal attack' then you may be part of this problem.

IGN:
ximoc
(multiple people have helped me with this feedback post, I'm just the one voicing their opinions)

DATE:
7/22/22 | 22/7/22

WHAT YOU WANT TO SUGGEST OR MENTION:
My ultimate goal for this feedback post is to allow players (for up to a determined amount of time) to void OOC agreed-upon situations on their own, without the involvement of staff, and in this particular matter, KPD.

The reason why I'm making this post is that time and time again, I've seen and participated in situations where OOC agreed upon RP has been overturned because of KPD. Even if the reasonings for these overturns were easily avoidable mistakes, like miscommunication, in this case, the reason for the overturn is because "KPD got involved". This reasoning has been used for most situations for which their reasonings for vetoing a void come from typically these two main sources; the in-game check they receive from bail money or a pure lack of interest from the overall situation that doesn't directly affect their character. When I find myself RP'ing with police officers, I find a lot of disinterest and stubbornness, it makes it discouraging in a way. This ties in with staff members as well. With all due respect, I appreciate the staff team for what they do, but it kind of looks like half the time, they just care about what benefits them and their characters.

Tying into the original purpose of this post, a planned and OOC agreed-upon situation was ruined due to miscommunication, where it was agreed that police would not be called in character, and they showed up anyway, but how does this tie into the purpose of the post? Both parties (not including the KPD and staff) and everyone in them agreed to void the situation, even willing to redo it considering all of the OOC confusion. There was genuine proof of this miscommunication, even being in a call with a staff member as we explained the story to them, only for our void to be overturned because "KPD got involved". Does it really seem that hard to scrap the bail log and just give the weapons back? Why does the KPD have an outstanding impact on situations that never involved them in the first place? If the original participants are willing to void the situation, especially when there was a clear amount of rule-breaking and/or miscommunication, why can't KPD and staff do the same?

I find it discouraging as a GangRPer that my character's actions and character development, along with the members of my gang, are influenced by OOC decisions and excuses by KPD and staff members affiliated with them, even when there is clear evidence that the situation NEEDS to be voided. Putting this rule in place would make me more willing to involve KPD in events, and it should make other people too. I get that some staff has to deal with these things 20 times a day, but why not try and find the source, then? Instead of being lazy and just saying "fuck it" and voiding it, try and find the reason as to why you're getting so many reports of KPD misconduct. I can't speak for other players, but I'm not the only person that agrees with this.

I want to be able to get onto the server and be able to do what my character does without having to worry about KPD influencing the hell out of my actions. I will admit that there was poor planning on the event side of things in this case, but there was actual evidence of pure miscommunication with both parties, and I'll provide proof of that below. I've spoken to ex-KPD about this before, actually as I'm writing this, and they agree with me. It isn't fair to GangRPers and other players that voidable situations, that need to be voided might I add, are being overturned because KPD and their higher-ups (or whoever is in charge) refuse to do something about it. You guys are staff members, you spent hours writing your applications and forming bonds with other staff just to get your role. It would be put to waste if stuff like this keeps happening and it's being left unchecked.

I don't blame the officers in the KPD, but rather some of the staff members that are the puppet masters of roleplay situations. Unless they are considered the IC third party of a situation, they should not have the entitlement to decide our characters' fate through out-of-character means-- especially if they are only given one side of the story and/or weren't there themselves.

HOW WILL THIS BENEFIT THE SERVER/COMMUNITY?:
I may sound like I spend my entire life on SRP and I have no social connections out of it, but it actually pisses me off seeing hours of dedicated character development and writing, not just my own but others, going to waste because of, this phrase you're going see a lot, "the KPD got involved". It's an overused excuse and an obvious one used as disguising pure laziness.


Benefits of this feature include:

- Encouraging player-to-player discussion, as well as making room for players to be more independent, and less dependent on staff for answers.

- Staff members are less stressed, and are given more time to figure out more important situations.

- KPD are not as blamed for situations that have 'gone wrong.'

- OOC arguments between staff and players are less frequent, and staff aren't forced to work with half-truth stories to choose what's voided and what's not.


Of course, there's gonna be players who don't want to comply and feel the need to be on top, and no one likes the idea of their character being killed/arrested, therefore in situations of in-compliance staff will need to get involved, but this feature will only benefit the community as I truly don't see any cons.

I encourage people viewing this thread to reply with their own opinions, I'll try to respond to every comment.​

Bit vague what exactly you want added as you've only really explained what frustrates you (I.E a problem and not a word to paper solution). Maybe add a sentence saying the exact rule you want and how it would be enforced in the suggestion

 

[Yonio]

Does it really seem that hard to scrap the bail log and just give the weapons back? Why does the KPD have an outstanding impact on situations that never involved them in the first place? If the original participants are willing to void the situation, especially when there was a clear amount of rule-breaking and/or miscommunication, why can't KPD and staff do the same

I'm not really going to pick a side in this feedback since, as Toto stated, there isn't really a proposal but rather a complaint in regards to a situation that took place recently. From a staff member's point of view, we generally discourage voiding / redoing situations once a considerable amount of stuff has happened. This applies to KPD and GangRP equally. Let's say, I mug three weapons from you, and those three weapons were sold to other people before we find out that the whole situation should be voided because there were no initial perms to do this.

When it comes to KPD, we're coming into no man's land. While it is true that you can make OOC deals in regards to staging situations, you can't expect EVERYONE in the server to comply with it. You can't just force the entire server to do something, mainly because you can't get everyone to agree on something (that's partially why OOC-consented situations were not allowed several months ago), but my point here is that staff will generally veto a void when a lot of stuff has happened (e.g. weapons were burnt, logs were made, apartments were raided), and if we were to void it, a lot of stuff would be reminded. It is not just a "bail log". There is a lot of police work behind each arrest, thus why we discourage voiding situations and, if anything, ask the arresting officer if they're fine with voiding it

 

[NoZinth]

Couldn't disagree more, the entire point of KPD is adding risk, stopping KPD from interfering in OOC agreed upon situations removes practically any and all forms of risk, The entire premise of the police is that anyone is able to call them for help & assistance, there's a chance in every scenario that things can go wrong, if you're planning an event that's going to happen and you'd intentionally like the police to not be involved in the slightest, contact Yonio OOCly, potentially make it a flash event, there's plenty more you could do, try and make things more subtle if you're having a large event with several weapons involved.

Staff are there for a reason, as stated in the post, they’ve gone through alot to get where they are, both through actually in character roleplay experience and out of character involvement in the community too, Staff serve a purpose to help mediate situations and settle disputes. If given an answer by a staff member, then that’s the answer that should be accepted. The suggestion of allowing players to void situations comes with a plethora of issues, relating to instantly voiding keybinds, voiding things if things don’t go their way, potentially even paying people Yen or OOCly money to agree to void a situation because they don’t want their character to get arrested/ majored.



-1

 

[ximoc]

Couldn't disagree more, the entire point of KPD is adding risk, stopping KPD from interfering in OOC agreed upon situations removes practically any and all forms of risk, The entire premise of the police is that anyone is able to call them for help & assistance, there's a chance in every scenario that things can go wrong, if you're planning an event that's going to happen and you'd intentionally like the police to not be involved in the slightest, contact Yonio OOCly, potentially make it a flash event, there's plenty more you could do, try and make things more subtle if you're having a large event with several weapons involved.

Staff are there for a reason, as stated in the post, they’ve gone through alot to get where they are, both through actually in character roleplay experience and out of character involvement in the community too, Staff serve a purpose to help mediate situations and settle disputes. If given an answer by a staff member, then that’s the answer that should be accepted. The suggestion of allowing players to void situations comes with a plethora of issues, relating to instantly voiding keybinds, voiding things if things don’t go their way, potentially even paying people Yen or OOCly money to agree to void a situation because they don’t want their character to get arrested/ majored.



-1

I agree with both points, but however, I still feel like outside of GangRP there have been situations where KPD influence and lack of disinterest ruined RP. I'm not totally blaming everything on them in this post, I admitted there were faults on my side, but there are benefits outside of just GangRP if players were allowed to void their own situations. KPD happened to be the subject for the original reason for this post though. It's a simple feature, maybe I just worded it weird.

Half of the reports going to staff are about voiding situations, and most players are competent enough to see their own wrong-doings and be able to agree to things. My points still stands, however. In my opinion, the benefits of a feature like this being added overrule any cons I've thought of thus far.

 

[ximoc]

I'm not really going to pick a side in this feedback since, as Toto stated, there isn't really a proposal but rather a complaint in regards to a situation that took place recently. From a staff member's point of view, we generally discourage voiding / redoing situations once a considerable amount of stuff has happened. This applies to KPD and GangRP equally. Let's say, I mug three weapons from you, and those three weapons were sold to other people before we find out that the whole situation should be voided because there were no initial perms to do this.

When it comes to KPD, we're coming into no man's land. While it is true that you can make OOC deals in regards to staging situations, you can't expect EVERYONE in the server to comply with it. You can't just force the entire server to do something, mainly because you can't get everyone to agree on something (that's partially why OOC-consented situations were not allowed several months ago), but my point here is that staff will generally veto a void when a lot of stuff has happened (e.g. weapons were burnt, logs were made, apartments were raided), and if we were to void it, a lot of stuff would be reminded. It is not just a "bail log". There is a lot of police work behind each arrest, thus why we discourage voiding situations and, if anything, ask the arresting officer if they're fine with voiding it

I updated the post a bit, I posted it when it was late for me, sorry.

I do however still find it unfair that one arresting police officer's word overpowers 10+ people's word and opinion, that's why I want to make it majority-based. Things like this, especially when it comes to the arrest or killing of a character, can be serious, and a sort-of democracy for voiding situations is important. One police officer's word should not be chosen over a majority, especially if it's them not wanting to void it, and not having a proper reason as to why they don't want to, and this is usually the case. I've been GangRPing since December of 2020, and the majority of KPD-involved situations I participated in weren't voided (despite there being OOC reasoning as to why it needs to be voided) because one police officer's word was more important over 20+ people.

 

[ximoc]

Bit vague what exactly you want added as you've only really explained what frustrates you (I.E a problem and not a word to paper solution). Maybe add a sentence saying the exact rule you want and how it would be enforced in the suggestion

I updated my post.

 

[kengan]

Couldn't disagree more, the entire point of KPD is adding risk, stopping KPD from interfering in OOC agreed upon situations removes practically any and all forms of risk, The entire premise of the police is that anyone is able to call them for help & assistance, there's a chance in every scenario that things can go wrong, if you're planning an event that's going to happen and you'd intentionally like the police to not be involved in the slightest, contact Yonio OOCly, potentially make it a flash event, there's plenty more you could do, try and make things more subtle if you're having a large event with several weapons involved.

Staff are there for a reason, as stated in the post, they’ve gone through alot to get where they are, both through actually in character roleplay experience and out of character involvement in the community too, Staff serve a purpose to help mediate situations and settle disputes. If given an answer by a staff member, then that’s the answer that should be accepted. The suggestion of allowing players to void situations comes with a plethora of issues, relating to instantly voiding keybinds, voiding things if things don’t go their way, potentially even paying people Yen or OOCly money to agree to void a situation because they don’t want their character to get arrested/ majored.



-1

That entire situation was to create risk, it was an OOCly Agreed situation with both the ICly Victim and Guilty. We do not need Yonio OOCly to have a small roleplay interaction with eachother to make it a "flash event". The entirety of this server is to have fun and roleplay. The players mainly involved both agreed and consented to this rule to create roleplay. There is plenty more we could do but sometimes plenty more is not what people want, in this case it was definitely not wanted.

 

[ximoc]

That entire situation was to create risk, it was an OOCly Agreed situation with both the ICly Victim and Guilty. We do not need Yonio OOCly to have a small roleplay interaction with eachother to make it a "flash event". The entirety of this server is to have fun and roleplay. The players mainly involved both agreed and consented to this rule to create roleplay. There is plenty more we could do but sometimes plenty more is not what people want, in this case it was definitely not wanted.

Couldn't have said it better.

 

[TheNoseyNick]

I think personally people already use them secretly. Voiding needing staff shouldn't be a thing if both parties agree that's just giving staff the ability to control the flow of rp however they please. Although I trust some of them, I would rather have it placed in the hand of the beholder.

 

[ximoc]

I think personally people already use them secretly. Voiding needing staff shouldn't be a thing if both parties agree that's just giving staff the ability to control the flow of rp however they please. Although I trust some of them, I would rather have it placed in the hand of the beholder.

Thank you for your feedback, I agree with this as well. If there is genuine FailRP and staff have to get involved that is different, but if the only problem was poor communication (in this case it was) it should be up to the parties involved if the situation gets voided.

also, cool youtube channel

 

[TheNoseyNick]

Thank you for your feedback, I agree with this as well. If there is genuine FailRP and staff have to get involved that is different, but if the only problem was poor communication (in this case it was) it should be up to the parties involved if the situation gets voided.

also, cool youtube channel

Lmfao thank you

 

[NoZinth]

That entire situation was to create risk, it was an OOCly Agreed situation with both the ICly Victim and Guilty. We do not need Yonio OOCly to have a small roleplay interaction with eachother to make it a "flash event". The entirety of this server is to have fun and roleplay. The players mainly involved both agreed and consented to this rule to create roleplay. There is plenty more we could do but sometimes plenty more is not what people want, in this case it was definitely not wanted.

If the entire situations purpose was to create risk, all factors should be considered. Not simply disallowing someone else's aspect of roleplay (KPD). You are unable to control the aspects of others actions outside of those agreeing to the situation (The other players of SRP) when you refer to "people" I assume you mean those who were directly involved in the conflict that weren't KPD. Aim to be more inclusive in future, potentially this could be a lesson to do more intense scenarios in less risky areas, away from the public eye. Relating to asking Yonio OOCly, it was in relation to both parties not wanting KPD involved, if you don't want KPD to interfere, ask them OOCly.

 

[kengan]

If the entire situations purpose was to create risk, all factors should be considered. Not simply disallowing someone else's aspect of roleplay (KPD). You are unable to control the aspects of others actions outside of those agreeing to the situation (The other players of SRP) when you refer to "people" I assume you mean those who were directly involved in the conflict that weren't KPD. Aim to be more inclusive in future, potentially this could be a lesson to do more intense scenarios in less risky areas, away from the public eye. Relating to asking Yonio OOCly, it was in relation to both parties not wanting KPD involved, if you don't want KPD to interfere, ask them OOC

They're not disallowing the aspect, the situation was agreed upon however there was miscommunication so without the consent, they ultimately had no permissions to do anything. Everyone in that situation (including the victims) wanted a void to happen. Do not assume or say anything else when you do not know the whole situation

 

[ximoc]

If the entire situations purpose was to create risk, all factors should be considered. Not simply disallowing someone else's aspect of roleplay (KPD). You are unable to control the aspects of others actions outside of those agreeing to the situation (The other players of SRP) when you refer to "people" I assume you mean those who were directly involved in the conflict that weren't KPD. Aim to be more inclusive in future, potentially this could be a lesson to do more intense scenarios in less risky areas, away from the public eye. Relating to asking Yonio OOCly, it was in relation to both parties not wanting KPD involved, if you don't want KPD to interfere, ask them OOCly.

We weren't disallowing actions or RP if it was something that everyone involved agreed to. Nobody within the parties involved said they were not okay with not calling KPD, it was a miscommunication that led to them being called. If you want, feel free to DM me and I'll explain what happened. NIKO#9715, but please refrain from making assumptions, and if I didn't want KPD involved, why would I message them. . .

I also shouldn't have to message the KPD asking for approval to not include them anyways??

 

[ximoc]

+1.

I do not understand the intricacies of the situation you are describing in this post in particular as I was neither part of the scenario nor am I KPD, but I agree with the fact that, if there is a consensus among the players, the situation should be able to be voided, just as there can be dynamics & story created between characters without actually roleplaying out a situation.

The only question you leave hanging in the air is "what happens when there is no consensus?", which, I'd like to add to your post, is obviously when staff get involved.

Thank you for this suggestion, xim.

EDIT: Perhaps the post could be retitled, as it seems a bit misleading, frankly.

It would be hard to regulate if voids are proper or not, but staff say that they feel like they're overworked and stressed, but don't put trust in players to do things themselves. Enforcing this feature would be hard, but it also isn't hard to report someone if they do try to void something with unfair terms. Instead of saying "oh because one person misused this feature, nobody can use it" instead, figure out who is misusing it, and find a work-around. People already use "/it void" in secret, might as well just make it a feature for people to use.

 

[needle]

+1 on independence within the community but i can speak for how difficult situations were to void (as part of the KPD party) two years ago. i dont know how relevant that is to the conversation now, i mean, it really wasn't that much to of a fuss and it definitely happened but we didn't like it. i dont imagine that much has changed.
all that denying this suggestion/argument does for the matter is keep things the same. there will be a mass of players always complaining about the same issue, but we're somewhat mature here and there's nothing stopping staff members from giving their decision on it if there is no consensus

 

[NoZinth]

I also shouldn't have to message the KPD asking for approval to not include them anyways??

I'm not sure I understand this part, If you're specifically looking to avoid anyone calling KPD/EMS, work to be more discreet, avoiding additional unnecessary risk to avoid the need for rules to be changed.

We weren't disallowing actions or RP if it was something that everyone involved agreed to. Nobody within the parties involved said they were not okay with not calling KPD, it was a miscommunication that led to them being called. If you want, feel free to DM me and I'll explain what happened. NIKO#9715, but please refrain from making assumptions, and if I didn't want KPD involved, why would I message them. . .

Nobody is making assumptions here, It's merely going from what has been posted, If you're purposely having an RP scenario between two parties and wouldn't like a certain party to call their gang members over, you'd contact them and ask for them not to, right? It's a similar concept with KPD, you'd contact them specifically mentioning that this is a small event for lore purposes, and would like if it could operate without risk of KPD getting involved in it so you have freedom of roleplay to do what you'd like, doing this beforehand would completely avoid the need to change these rules, as Staff's opinions are to be respected and are as unbiased as possible.

They're not disallowing the aspect, the situation was agreed upon however there was miscommunication so without the consent, they ultimately had no permissions to do anything. Everyone in that situation (including the victims) wanted a void to happen. Do not assume or say anything else when you do not know the whole situation

Relating to "disallowing the aspect" The decision was made for both parties not to call any emergency services, and when they were indeed called by either a third party or the victim, and arrived on scene it resulted in arrests, both of the original parties that initially agreed to it wanted to void the situation, however after KPD was involved they became an additional factor in voiding it, as it requires all parties to want the consent, and if they say no, and so does the staff member(s) Then unfortunately I believe that their statements must be respected.