Revamping the restore process (commands only)

An interesting OOC conversation earlier tonight inspired me to post this.

—-

Brian is permed by Frank. Brian logs on an alt and uses the RPCTrial command.

Buffer 1: Inputs the name of his permed character (IE Brian)

-The mud will check the perm recordings (which we already have) and if a permer is found, it will automatically page their account. This won’t always happen (most noteably in the case of -some- space perms)

Buffer 2: Describe the perm (as per usual)

An RPC judge takes up the case. From here, things mostly proceed as usual. The judge interviews the permee and permer, collects logs, posts the case for the rest of the RPC to review.

When an RPC member votes, they are put into a buffer where they must explain why they voted the way they did.

—–

This is pretty similar to how the system works now and the biggest changes would be to the imm/RPC side of things, IE how cases are tracked and reviewed (IE right now, you can only submit 1 restore request per character. If you die twice, you have to submit a restore request on a different character).

“When an RPC member votes, they are put into a buffer where they must explain why they voted the way they did.”

100% definitely. The other stuff sounds good, too.

RE: RPC vote buffer – Good idea, with the exception of the disconnect-idle-timeout deal that happens when in a buffer and the problem that may cause. Make sure there’s a catch that doesn’t cast the vote until they /s in the buffer or somesuch.

When a permee is put into a buffer, give them a very obvious “THIS IS WHAT GOES IN THIS BUFFER” message, just for clarity. I know we’ll have it in helpfiles and such, but in this case I don’t think redundancy is bad.

Paging the permer account I’m for. Canned message, we need logs, we need a statement, gather your thinks.

When it checks for a permer, if it doesn’t see one, have it page a PR IMM (like me!) to try and figure it out… if the permee doesn’t have a good idea, anyway.

Fix review old to be chronological and maybe show imms the accounts involved (if possible) as well as the date of close.

I think you’ve removed the part of the buffer where they input the permer’s name/look-desc? Can you make it so RPC/IMMS sees permer name as found by your ‘pageacc the permer’ catch, and the permee see’s just ‘Permer’?

Yank out ‘Out of x cases, y have been dealt with.’ on the ‘review’ command, or reset it’s count. Tis radically inaccurate and pointless atm. If it -were- accurate, a useful metric I suppose.

Hardcode in the time the trial was submitted to the RPC can’t accidentally delete it out of the statement buffer.

Throw in something immside that just appends a little log line: ‘Character already restored after their death on .’ or some such so the RPC/PR/whomever may be concerned can see it. Mostly the RPC, imms can see all that stuff with showacc, or at least figure it out.

Thaaaaat’s… all I’ve got.

TL;DR: Why-you-voted-restore/deny buffer, good. Removing permer name buffer, good. Paging permer to contact RPC, good. Fix a few things to be more informational/streamlining for RPC!

CoffinC!

So long as only Imms and MAYBE fellow RPC can see the “Why I voted like I did” buffer, I’m cool with that. Allowing the permer or permee to see that will just open up a whole can of worms that does not need to be opened.

This goes back to that whole “transparency” argument. There will never be 100% transparency…and no matter how badly you think it will help relations, it won’t. People will find something else to formulate their jacked up conspiracy theories.

The one time I recall having to deal with this RPCTRIAL thing, it was way too confusing for me. The RPC member who answered me disliked me (I’m not jesting, I have the logs.) and his assistance was horrid. So I winded up botching the RPCtrial thing since it was my first time in a long time and then I wanted to edit it. For that I was also scolded by the same RPC member and afterwards told to send an email.

So my suggestion is to be specific with what you want and to make it simple. To give the chance to the permed person to edit their information should their link drop or they botch it.

As for seeing the reason why it was refused. It might help like in situations in the past 3-4 years when I was refused restore, I kept thinking I was right and the RPC wasn’t objective. It might help take care of that. Then again it might make you take things further. However having a PR Immortal reviewing cases to make sure no foulplay or OOC relations go into the voting will take care of that, so I agree with Kirash.