Kick Mechanic = Natural Selection Grief Tool

The Kick Mechanic is necessary to prevent people from holding an instance hostage or disrupting the group. Yes, it is abused at times, but atm there is really nothing that can be done about it. Your best option is to make friends and make a group with them to get things done. Personally, I have an alliance chat tab that I use to make groups with 3 or 4 leagues, so I rarely have issues finding a group.

I suggest you read the first line of the OP again...

So he said "removed or fixed".

He still gave plenty of suggestions to fix it.

So he did say removed. I addressed both the removed and fixed parts in my response to the OP so what exactly was the point in your 1st reply? And your second for that matter?

I quoted your post in my first reply. You stated that you weren't sure if anything could be improved upon. I pointed out that it could be improved, the OP even gave ideas that could improve it.

Yes, completely unnecessarily quoted me since you were wrong about him mentioning anything about removal. Whether it can be improved is arguable, some of his suggestions could cause more/different problems. My 1st response to the thread made compete sense there was no need to quote it, keep it on topic.

It was on topic. I'm sorry you got all butt hurt over me quoting your post and pointing out your inaccurate evaluation of his post, which turns out only half of your post was inaccurate, but wrong nonetheless. The difference between you and I is, I clearly have no issues with being proven wrong...it is after all how we evolve as a species...learning from our mistakes, admitting we are wrong when we were sure we were right, and then opening our minds to new possibilities.

You on the other hand, seem to get very defensive when something is pointed out to you that you were incorrect about. Even to a point, that you insist that somebody "stays on topic" even though they were very much indeed staying on topic. It was a placate, but a failed placate attempt on your part. Wanna get snooty? By all means, my man, have at it....I'm on a roll tonight.

Two things - First?

Yes, we need a Kick function, period. Could it be improved from a developer standpoint? Possibly. I think suggesting a kick limit per week or a giant timer is a bad idea, simply because that's going to lead to bad blood. You have to let people make that call themselves - even if it's the wrong one - and understand that almost no one is actually 100% in the category where they've never used or participated in an ill-intentioned or poorly justified kick.

Also, two sides to every story being the case : I'm sure that not every tale of the 'completely maligned and misunderstood player getting kicked by a mean old league full of people' is as one-sided as these claims paint them to be.

I do agree with the suggestion made here :

And this brings me to my second point.

At the moment, we can improve it via means of better personal decision making.

A leaguemate of mine wanted to kick someone from a run the other day simply because our other friend (another League member) had just logged on after we began the alert (Intergang, before the Vault so zero Bosses finished yet) - admittedly, the guy he was suggesting we kick was underpowered, but still. When he put it to a vote, I voted no and told him 'dude, we're not kicking him for doing nothing because we're not gonna be those ***holes'. It's not like his reason for wanting to kick the guy was even all that malicious or evil intentioned, but still...

It wasn't a situation like 'this dude got into the group and sucked so hard we wiped four times killing the Prisoners' and it wasn't like 'this dude got into the group and immediately told everyone to eat a dick', so we went with sportsmanship - 20 minutes later, we're done with the Alert, he got his stuff, we got ours, parted ways, and had our League member in the group after that.

So we should make the attempt to deal with the hand that we're dealt, basically - if we can stop kicking for frivolous reasons it goes a long way towards building a good understanding of teamwork and contributes to the overall well-being of the community as a whole.

By the same token, sometimes you run into players who are literally just horrible at what they do, and they become offensive and dismissive if you point it out. I'm willing to work with an underperforming player who is willing to take suggestion or play ball : you don't need insane numbers to be a useful group contributor, but you DO have to be a group contributor.

Sometimes people are just ****** and uncooperative or bluntly offensive from the get-go. Get into a group sometime with a dude who sends you a tell commenting on how nice your *** is and see how long it takes for you to kick him. You really wanna make it difficult to deal with that? So it's not like kick is a purposeless tool and for all its obvious potential for abuse, it has some potential to immediately rectify absolutely unacceptable behavior that would otherwise continue ad nauseum.

He actually suggested removing it before he suggesting fixing it. Literally out of the gate in his first sentence.

As others have said, the kick function is needed. What I think we need is a major overhaul to the ignore function. If you put someone on ignore then the game shouldn't group you with them, ever. If they got into the queue first then it makes you wait until the next one, if you got into the queue first then they have to wait longer for their group. They can't invite you to a group or join a group that you are already in and you can't join a group that they are already in. This will have two effects. People who are absolute tossers to people constantly will find it increasingly difficult to get groups for content, eventually finding themselves without anyone to play with. People who are overly sensitive and don't play well with others (and put everyone on ignore) will eventually find the same thing and hopefully adjust their outlook.

This I like.

You're a little late in the conversation, we have already established that. Thanks though.

You can't expect people to live by your standards. Some people have no standards. It's great in theory, but unfortunately good decisions are not practiced with a great deal of the population of hot heads or "elitists" in the game.


Which is why I prefer the unanimous decision vote idea. Or at least increasing the number of players needed to kock, and a reason given for the kicker wanting the player gone. It's been discussed that a lot of people don't even know why they are kicking...they just...do. That calls for a new displayed reason pop-up box.

for every good player who gets kicked unfairly, i bet there's 2 crappy, not-listening, never-try players who get kicked as well. i'm totally against removing the mechanic altogether. i think more transparency on what's going on and why and by whom is good though.

i can't say i've never been in a group of absolute idiots and watched them one by one vote to kick everyone else in the alert until it was just me and them just because they click anything that comes up. granted these were 'run in and die' players but still funny.

People that say "just form your own group" apparently don't understand that if you are putting together a pug group, you can be kicked in the instance just like anyone else can. In fact, I was in a pug group yesterday and they kicked the guy who put the group together in Labyrinth because he was 109 - not because he wasn't playing well, hurting the group, etc...they simply kicked him because his CR was too low. That is just one example of how "easy" it is to ruin people's experience with the current kicking system. At the very least, the person getting kicked should be able to see the vote, and add those people to ignore that voted for the kick. Those players that kick should be flagged permanently (at least for the person kicked), so the guy that gets kicked knows not to ever get in a group with those individuals.

What a complete load of nonsense.

You trying to get into a argument with someone is on topic is it? OK. Seems like someone got defensive about being proven wrong, it certainly wasn't me.

My first post was half inaccurate (not sure how a valid opinion is inaccurate but w/e) was it? Even though you clearly misunderstood it, I'l enlighten you shall I...

I stated I wasn't sure if anything could be improved, did I? I'm pretty sure I said 'Not sure HOW MUCH what we have now can be improved upon'. Not being sure if anything can be improved and not being sure HOW MUCH something can be improved are two completely different things. You were also incorrect in saying you 'pointed out that it could be', you're 1st reply contained no such thing. I thought I'd side step this reply at the time since I already knew the kind of person I was dealing with but you forced my hand.

Seems like you failed to understand both parts of my post and not just the part you initially got wrong via failing to read the OP thoroughly. It's all well and good proving somebody wrong but not when you are in fact the one completely in the wrong yourself. All I said was to read the OP again, that is as far as it needed to go which was already too far as we've established, that is actually where the 'butt hurt' started and it wasn't coming from my end.

Now that we've proven beyond all reasonable doubt your complete and utter epic fail in your understanding and attempted belittlement of my first post, can we move on and STAY ON TOPIC or would you like to continue to derail the thread with your deluded argument? So much for that 'roll' you were on, smh.

Yes, yes you did. And I responded with the proper response to that, at the time I posted it. You are correct, when I was relying on memory to what you said, I did not quote you word for word. My response to your post was an accurate response, minus me saying he "never said to remove it".

You posted, that you weren't sure how much what we have now can be improved upon. My appropriate response was,

Which was indeed an appropriate response to what you said, the first part only being inaccurate.

The only thing you are correct about here, is that he did indeed suggest removing it in the header of his original post. Having admitting that, his post in itself was nothing more than suggestions to fix the current kick mechanics, and how he came to write the post to begin with, never once mentioning removing the kick function, other than the headliner of his post. So naturally, I didn't focus or even retain the memory of what the headliner said, because the body of the post had no mention of removing the function, which would have served as a reminder to what the Headliner said.

Why on Earth you got soooo upset about me quoting you, and pointing out that the OP gave plenty of suggestions on how to improve the system, I will never understand. You got defense extremely fast, which only got ugly quickly. A simple reminder that the OP did in fact have a mention of removing the function in his headliner would have sufficed, in which case, I have no issues being proven wrong, and I would have gladly stood corrected. After all, nobody is perfect...and I am the first to admit that I am not perfect.

This could have been a civil discussion...you should have never taken offense to me quoting you, but instead gave a simple correction.

I'm sure that was a cool story but you shouldn't really have wasted your time.

Then we obviously have nothing left to discuss.