Answered / Added Change to the eyesore eviction process

[Neil]

- Username: NeilBuilder

- Suggestion Title: Change to the eyesore eviction process

- Elaborate (Why do you think it should be added, how will it improve the server, etc.): At the moment, when a property inspector reports a plot as an eyesore it is at the discretion of the property inspector reporting the plot. If the landowner and other players are against the report it practically means nothing. I propose that when a property inspector reports a plot as an eyesore they must attach a poll to it so the public can put their input on the report. After all, it's the public that has to look at eyesores, if the public doesn't see it as an eyesore then it shouldn't get evicted. The poll would have to get at least 60% of the voters to want the plot to get evicted. If less than 60% of voters want the plot evicted then the report will be invalid.

- Does this require the installation of a new plugin (Yes/No): No

- If you answered Yes on the previous question, please link the plugin (Leave blank if you answered No):

- Additional Information: If someone has a different way to change the eyesore eviction system feel free to reply with it. I feel that a lot of plots that get reported shouldn't be, I see others saying the same thing. This system would solve the problem by letting the public determine if it's an eyesore instead of the property inspector. Feel free to leave feedback, whether that be positive or negative. Also, if you can, vote on the poll.

 

[Kat]

That's interesting

 

[TBIWOG]

I like the idea Neil, I feel like some builds are not an eyesore in my eyes but are in others, and vice-versa

 

[ReaperEduardo]

Neil got question would be good in the public eye but what if someone wanted them evicted for plot and vote yes how would that outcome occur

 

[Neil]

Reaper,

The property inspector would still have to report the plot initially. It is unlikely that a large group of people would all vote for it to get evicted because they want to buy the piece of land. If over 60% of people vote for the plot to get evicted the landowner will still have 2 weeks to change the plot.

 

[CrackedAmoeba]

- Username: NeilBuilder

- Suggestion Title: Change to the eyesore eviction process

- Elaborate (Why do you think it should be added, how will it improve the server, etc.): At the moment, when a property inspector reports a plot as an eyesore it is at the discretion of the property inspector reporting the plot. If the landowner and other players are against the report it practically means nothing. I propose that when a property inspector reports a plot as an eyesore they must attach a poll to it so the public can put their input on the report. After all, it's the public that has to look at eyesores, if the public doesn't see it as an eyesore then it shouldn't get evicted. The poll would have to get at least 60% of the voters to want the plot to get evicted. If less than 60% of voters want the plot evicted then the report will be invalid.

- Does this require the installation of a new plugin (Yes/No): No

- If you answered Yes on the previous question, please link the plugin (Leave blank if you answered No):

- Additional Information: If someone has a different way to change the eyesore eviction system feel free to reply with it. I feel that a lot of plots that get reported shouldn't be, I see others saying the same thing. This system would solve the problem by letting the public determine if it's an eyesore instead of the property inspector. Feel free to leave feedback, whether that be positive or negative. Also, if you can, vote on the poll.

I like this idea a lot but I feel like constructors and/or someone like Lux should be allowed to veto any vote made by the public and use the poll as more information towards the decision making process. Good example of this was the netherack monstrosity that somehow lasted longer than a month in capital. Anyone with any taste in builds hated it but a lot of players defended it because of their allegiance towards the owner. A system that gives all the power to the players with no qualifications can and will be abused. A poll should be added but the vote should only be helpful info towards lux or constructors making the final decision.

 

[DoctorThunder7]

I think a simpler solution would just to have eyesores be approved by a constructor or the DoC minister before it gets vaulted. Property Inspectors could still report them here but before staff can remove the building a Constructor has to sign off on it. Not everything needs to be voted on and not everyone should be able to vote.

 

[A1phaSniper]

I think a simpler solution would just to have eyesores be approved by a constructor or the DoC minister before it gets vaulted. Property Inspectors could still report them here but before staff can remove the building a Constructor has to sign off on it. Not everything needs to be voted on and not everyone should be able to vote.

In my opinion, this is even worse. The main problem is that it's left up to the personal bias of the Property Inspector. One PI might not treat the building as an eyesore, but almost 2 years later another PI will. Having the most experienced builders sign off on buildings will most likely make the problem worse.

Not everything needs to be voted on and not everyone should be able to vote.

Also, what kind of non-democratic stuff is this?

 

[Neil]

I like this idea a lot but I feel like constructors and/or someone like Lux should be allowed to veto any vote made by the public and use the poll as more information towards the decision making process. Good example of this was the netherack monstrosity that somehow lasted longer than a month in capital. Anyone with any taste in builds hated it but a lot of players defended it because of their allegiance towards the owner. A system that gives all the power to the players with no qualifications can and will be abused. A poll should be added but the vote should only be helpful info towards lux or constructors making the final decision.

That could work. The poll could just be a suggestion for the DoC Minister. But, if the Minister frequently doesn't follow what the public voted on it can be used against them.

 

[DoctorThunder7]

In my opinion, this is even worse. The main problem is that it's left up to the personal bias of the Property Inspector. One PI might not treat the building as an eyesore, but almost 2 years later another PI will. Having the most experienced builders sign off on buildings will most likely make the problem worse.

Most of the time when it comes to both lack of progress builds and eyesore they are usually reported to a Property Inspector by another player. Eyesores are always a tough one to do due to there nature. Like people said it could be fine then but not now. Look at it this way. You have a bunch of decent buildings surrounding each other they all look fine. After some time most of the decent buildings get replaced with Beautiful buildings. That one remaining building went from look decent to being an eyesore surrounded by beautiful buildings. Now that can't explain all of the cases but it's a decent insight to how things were good then but don't pass now. Normally when you have experienced people they can share there insight into both improvements and the bare minimum to get by. So having the most experienced is actually a huge improvement over anyone else.

Also, what kind of non-democratic stuff is this?

Not everything needs to be voted on simple as that. Even in real life we don't vote on every little thing. Also not everyone in BC can build and some people have awful tastes when it comes to building. Also any vote in BC is a popularity contest.

 

[Fhlown]

Property Inspector protocol states what counts as an eyesore. I can also see how this can be heavily abused by people in favor of this person.