Include In Game Incentive to use the Trial System

[mdb1023]

So a while back ToS became P2P due to the uncontrollable botting that was happening. And yeah, while I understand the reasons behind it, it probably wasn't the BEST way to get new players to join. The Trial System is actually a good way to sift through the seemingly endless piles of reports, it ultimately is, quite frankly, a waste of time for anyone to use. I don't know too many people who would rather devote their time to reading logs of shitty games than play the game instead, unless there's something in it for them.

The solution:
offer Town Points for participating. Not Merit Points, town Points.
Perhaps offer a unique skin for going through X amount of reports

Not only would this get more people using the System and getting through reports faster, it would also make it easier to find and ban the trolls and botters.

[Flavorable]

The problem with this is that people will just quick-vote reports without going through them and checking for validity just to score some quick Town Points. Most of the very active jurors that are around now barely even play the game anymore to begin with and like judging reports and hanging out with the "Trial Gang" on Discord a lot more.

Personally, I'd rather have the same amount of jurors, but they do their "job" well and enjoy it and rack up a (couple) hundred reports a day, than have a lot of jurors who try to rush through the system just to score points. And sure, a reward system in some form would be nice, but what about all the people who already own everything anyway? They still get nothing. Or all the people who've racked up thousands upon thousands of reports so far? They also get nothing.

If there were ever to be a reward system introduced, it'd take a lot of very specific planning, I'd imagine, to make it so it's not abusable and it's fair for everyone. And in the end, judging reports should be about wanting to make the community better to be a part of, not solely for rewards.

[MysticMismagius]

Personally, I'd rather have the same amount of jurors, but they do their "job" well and enjoy it and rack up a (couple) hundred reports a day, than have a lot of jurors who try to rush through the system just to score points.

This is all fine and well, except that it ignores the reality that Trial System simply doesn’t have enough jurors. Using the Astris bot from the Town of Salem Discord, a friend and I found that between us, 459 reports were filed in games that we played in. Of those reports, 358 of them (78%) were closed without judgement, meaning they sat in the queue for too long and never got so much as looked at by a juror. Trial system is criminally understaffed if almost four fifths of reports go this way. If there was some incentive to do reports, that number would be much smaller.

Also, let’s assume you’re right. Let’s assume a whole bunch of people come to Trial and rush through reports to get a prize. Is this really a bad thing? All the people who currently do Trial probably aren’t going to start rushing through reports because they already feel an intrinsic sense of reward by doing them, so they’ll do them the way they always do. As for the newcomers? If you put on a blindfold and do reports completely randomly, there’s a 50% chance that each report will be judged correctly. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than the way things currently are, where only 22% of reports are judged at all. And there is a stop-gap system for those that the newcomers get wrong. You can appeal for false guilties, and mods can overturn false innos.

TL:DR, nowhere near enough reports are getting judged, and an incentive is a decent way to fix that problem.

[LevinSnakesRise]

Personally, I'd rather have the same amount of jurors, but they do their "job" well and enjoy it and rack up a (couple) hundred reports a day, than have a lot of jurors who try to rush through the system just to score points.

This is all fine and well, except that it ignores the reality that Trial System simply doesn’t have enough jurors. Using the Astris bot from the Town of Salem Discord, a friend and I found that between us, 459 reports were filed in games that we played in. Of those reports, 358 of them (78%) were closed without judgement, meaning they sat in the queue for too long and never got so much as looked at by a juror.

Except that isn't at all how that works solely. Reports that are marked 'Without Judgement' doesn't mean they just sat in queue. lol. 4head.

[MysticMismagius]

Personally, I'd rather have the same amount of jurors, but they do their "job" well and enjoy it and rack up a (couple) hundred reports a day, than have a lot of jurors who try to rush through the system just to score points.

This is all fine and well, except that it ignores the reality that Trial System simply doesn’t have enough jurors. Using the Astris bot from the Town of Salem Discord, a friend and I found that between us, 459 reports were filed in games that we played in. Of those reports, 358 of them (78%) were closed without judgement, meaning they sat in the queue for too long and never got so much as looked at by a juror.

Except that isn't at all how that works solely. Reports that are marked 'Without Judgement' doesn't mean they just sat in queue, 4head lol

How else does a report get closed without judgement? The only other way that I've heard of is if a person gets reported multiple times in the same game and then gets guiltied for one of them, the other reports in that game get closed so the player doesn't get insta-banned for one game. And looking through the reports, I don't think a majority of the reports that were closed without judgement were done for that reason.

[LevinSnakesRise]

Personally, I'd rather have the same amount of jurors, but they do their "job" well and enjoy it and rack up a (couple) hundred reports a day, than have a lot of jurors who try to rush through the system just to score points.

This is all fine and well, except that it ignores the reality that Trial System simply doesn’t have enough jurors. Using the Astris bot from the Town of Salem Discord, a friend and I found that between us, 459 reports were filed in games that we played in. Of those reports, 358 of them (78%) were closed without judgement, meaning they sat in the queue for too long and never got so much as looked at by a juror.

Except that isn't at all how that works solely. Reports that are marked 'Without Judgement' doesn't mean they just sat in queue, 4head lol

How else does a report get closed without judgement? The only other way that I've heard of is if a person gets reported multiple times in the same game and then gets guiltied for one of them, the other reports in that game get closed so the player doesn't get insta-banned for one game. And looking through the reports, I don't think a majority of the reports that were closed without judgement were done for that reason.

That was the reason, that or a manual suspension/ban. Which all three happen more often that you'd think.

[MysticMismagius]

Personally, I'd rather have the same amount of jurors, but they do their "job" well and enjoy it and rack up a (couple) hundred reports a day, than have a lot of jurors who try to rush through the system just to score points.

This is all fine and well, except that it ignores the reality that Trial System simply doesn’t have enough jurors. Using the Astris bot from the Town of Salem Discord, a friend and I found that between us, 459 reports were filed in games that we played in. Of those reports, 358 of them (78%) were closed without judgement, meaning they sat in the queue for too long and never got so much as looked at by a juror.

Except that isn't at all how that works solely. Reports that are marked 'Without Judgement' doesn't mean they just sat in queue, 4head lol

How else does a report get closed without judgement? The only other way that I've heard of is if a person gets reported multiple times in the same game and then gets guiltied for one of them, the other reports in that game get closed so the player doesn't get insta-banned for one game. And looking through the reports, I don't think a majority of the reports that were closed without judgement were done for that reason.

That was the reason, that or a manual suspension/ban. Which all three happen more often that you'd think.

80% of the time more often? Somehow I don't believe that many reports can be explained by those two things...

[Flavorable]

Any person with multiple open reports (not only from the same game, but in general) has all their reports "closed without judgment" if one of the reports is found guilty.
This is what happens to most of the "closed without judgment" reports.

Not saying that we can't always use new jurors, obviously. But in my opinion, it should be done because people want to help out and better the community, not because they get "paid" to do it. Heck, Admins, Mods and Judges don't get paid either and we all put in the time. It's better to do something because you like doing it than just because you get something out of it.

[MysticMismagius]

Any person with multiple open reports (not only from the same game, but in general) has all their reports "closed without judgment" if one of the reports is found guilty.
This is what happens to most of the "closed without judgment" reports. Yeah that’s what Naru basically said, but I still don’t think this insta-ban prevention clause can explain 80% of reports getting closed without judgement. Even 40% is a stretch.

Not saying that we can't always use new jurors, obviously. But in my opinion, it should be done because people want to help out and better the community, not because they get "paid" to do it. Heck, Admins, Mods and Judges don't get paid either and we all put in the time. It's better to do something because you like doing it than just because you get something out of it.So how do you propose we encourage new jurors to come in and do reports?

[HereThereEverywhere]

Not saying that we can't always use new jurors, obviously. But in my opinion, it should be done because people want to help out and better the community, not because they get "paid" to do it. Heck, Admins, Mods and Judges don't get paid either and we all put in the time. It's better to do something because you like doing it than just because you get something out of it.

The quality of the work is what's important, not why people are doing the work. Especially when the "payment" is something for the game and not something that would actually cost, well, anything.

[Flavorable]

Not saying that we can't always use new jurors, obviously. But in my opinion, it should be done because people want to help out and better the community, not because they get "paid" to do it. Heck, Admins, Mods and Judges don't get paid either and we all put in the time. It's better to do something because you like doing it than just because you get something out of it.

The quality of the work is what's important, not why people are doing the work. Especially when the "payment" is something for the game and not something that would actually cost, well, anything.

Yes, but the quality is likely to drop unless a very good system is set in place, because if people just come in and start quick-voting just to get a bunch of payment, there is no quality left to speak of.

[MysticMismagius]

Not saying that we can't always use new jurors, obviously. But in my opinion, it should be done because people want to help out and better the community, not because they get "paid" to do it. Heck, Admins, Mods and Judges don't get paid either and we all put in the time. It's better to do something because you like doing it than just because you get something out of it.

The quality of the work is what's important, not why people are doing the work. Especially when the "payment" is something for the game and not something that would actually cost, well, anything.

Yes, but the quality is likely to drop unless a very good system is set in place, because if people just come in and start quick-voting just to get a bunch of payment, there is no quality left to speak of.

Basically every paid job ever disagrees with you. People who get paid to do things don’t work any less hard than people who don’t, and in fact sometimes work harder because their wage can be used as a leverage. If paid workers had “no quality to speak of” just because they got paid, then the current wage-labor system in most of the Western world wouldn’t exist.

[HereThereEverywhere]

Not saying that we can't always use new jurors, obviously. But in my opinion, it should be done because people want to help out and better the community, not because they get "paid" to do it. Heck, Admins, Mods and Judges don't get paid either and we all put in the time. It's better to do something because you like doing it than just because you get something out of it.

The quality of the work is what's important, not why people are doing the work. Especially when the "payment" is something for the game and not something that would actually cost, well, anything.

Yes, but the quality is likely to drop unless a very good system is set in place, because if people just come in and start quick-voting just to get a bunch of payment, there is no quality left to speak of.

Then the issue at hand is finding a good solution, since one can work - it doesn't even have to be very good, it just needs to be good enough.

[flairric66]

I do not see how this would be a good way to get new players to join either. Their incentive is that they get an already combative place within the community? Does not seem very likely to garner many new players, especially since they have to pay for the experience. It seems like you are making two different points here, but mashed them together into one point. I find that a major problem is the Trial System is flooded with either false, invalid, or non-reports. Then, the jurors have to go in and make another separate report for the person who actually did break the rules. I definitely do not think adding in new players to this already hectic environment will be of any benefit to anyone.

[mdb1023]

The problem with this is that people will just quick-vote reports without going through them and checking for validity just to score some quick Town Points

This is a fair point but surly there's a way to prevent that. Perhaps you only get rewarded if you voted the same way the juror does?

I didn't read the suggestion but:

If I was homeless, and a kid was buying food for a dinner party but all his friends bailed, and he decided to give the food to me just so it wouldn't go to waste (and not out of the goodness of his heart, just because he already bought the food and couldn't get a refund and whatever is better than wasting it). I wouldn't care in the slightest, I'd just take the goddamn food.

I'm not sure I understand the point you're trying to make here.

[TheRealChickenPatty]

@mdb1023,I think they are comparing the homeless situation to a TOS trial system with incentives,where even though the quality of the responses to the reports may not be as high,the community would still be grateful.