Jump to content

`kei

  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by `kei

  1. Well, this thread is not about me but it should rather about the SGM behaviour with example draw from my case. Sjolnick did give me a very comprehensive explanation regarding why the SGM come up with such decision. It implies that the decision was made to the best of the observation that the SGM has on the case. But since I saw a clear difference between the SGM response and Sjolnick response, as well as a distinct difference in attitude, I am not fully convinced that the SGM was actually as careful as Sjolnick. Truly, the SGM was very short and concise on his comments, to the point that there was no elaboration on any explanation whatsoever. When you see one sentence for every decision, such as 'you did this at this time, so you are guilty' then it is apparently not convincing nor sound caring at all. The fact with calling madman a carry may not affect the decision outcome (if what Sjolnick explained to me is what the SGM actually conducted to reach his decision), but the decision outcome does not matter in the sense that we are discussing the SGM attitude to detect any problem. In this sense, a caring respondent would have studied the case well (prerequisite for the idealistic attitude that Sjolnick mentioned), but saying a madman is a carry, among many other weird questions, is what makes it suspicious that the SGM might have not been as careful as an the case Sjolnick told me. Anyhow, please forget about my decision outcome now, I have accepted the punishment because of exhaustion and also because of the belief that the decision-maker has tried his best (according to Sjolnick) to make a decision given the observation he had. But let's keep the RAP discussion of the SGM attitude going on!
  2. Thanks sjolnick for commenting on both this thread and sending me a very detailed and constructive explanation regarding the situation. Much to which I fully understand and in consensus with, there are a few things I remarked which justify my belief of my innocence. I have replied to them in our private message. My main point of argument is that playing poorly should not have been treated as intentionally feeding. Since the borderline between these two concepts is vague, there is a necessity for the participants (e.g: the RAP conductors) to be very specific and study the context well in order to determine the decision in a way that brings justice. On the points you mentioned here, could you please share with me your impression with the way the SGM has responded to my appeal? (Did you think that the SGM has refuted to any of the appeal points? Did you think he was constructive in helping the appellant see an alternative point of view? Did you think the SGM was treating the case carefully?) Personally, I did not think he was 'very careful' about what he said, nor was he trying to avoid 'conflict of interest'. From the context of the case I have a feeling that the SGM have not studied the case well, avoided giving any explanation nor refuting to any appeal points, the whole conversation was just like "you have done wrong and hence you are suspended, you don't need to know why". There was an instance of human error when one mentioned a hero was a 'carry' and pointed out that my GPM was higher than this carry, while in fact the hero was evidently not a carry role.
  3. Thank you @Manu311 I posted the conversation because `Shattered says he can't and wouldn't stop me, so I thought it is part of the transparency rule of HoN but I guess I was wrong. Is it allowed to link to a different social channel like Discord or something? Because I feel like people would not be able to see the case if they did not see the conversation. I personally think it is for the game's good rather than just for my own good.
  4. Really? I did not know there is such a rule. I just figure it is the era of transparency so I am disclosing all the information with the expectation that it is the same for everyone. All for the better common HoN for all of us.
  5. Hi everyone, this post was meant to raise community's thoughts on one of the current problems that some of us find unresolved within the management system, which is the lacking of coherent and ineffectiveness of the RAP system. For the sole purpose of example, I present here my personal experience in filing an appeal with one of the SGM. My personal argument is that the RAP system (both decision and appeal stages) works too mechanically, in other words, the decisions on whether a person is decided guilty or not depend entirely on if the GM has observed an action which was predetermined by him to be guilty. This mechanical process makes the whole RAP system inefficient for the set of cases where the situation require more observation than merely detecting an action which falls into the 'guilty' category. Thus, the RAP system and GM decision could clearly be wrong in such set of cases, which means the GM could clearly make a wrong decision, punishing an innocent player. And because the same mechanical-mindset applies to the appeal as well, the SGM would reject to consider any appealing cases if they found a predetermined 'guilty' action beforehand. Of course, my personal argument is simply my thought. There are always flaws and all. So I am seeking other people idea about this to see whether this is really a problem of the system, or it is only my incompatibility with the community's belief. In case it is really a problem with the RAP system, the community's opinion could perhaps be a motivation for the revision and improvement on the RAP system in the future. Also, for the same purpose of aligning myself with the community's point of view, I would like to ask the community's opinion. If a SGM humiliate you by calling you a liar but is unable to refute any of the points you mentioned in your appeal, do you think it is a socially acceptable situation (i.e: it's perfectly normal)? Is it a big deal to you? Do you think it is a justifiable reason to disable your appeal? I will present below the entire appeal case between me and SGM *censored* Did he do what was right? Should a SGM decision be final and no question asked? Should the appeal system be present at all?
×
×
  • Create New...