I don't want to get into a situation where drivers' notes are for public consumption. I can't imagine anything worse than someone using CTRA notes as leverage in an argument against a driver's character.

I'm working on the web-based reporting function at the moment. While I understand that people want to know that "something's done about this terrible driver", I'm really cautious about relaying the action taken. 'Open | In process | Actioned' should be adequate. The mission is to ensure good driving on the servers over all, and anything more than a 3-stage report summary tends towards the witch hunt we're looking to avoid.

I'm not saying no, I'm just saying that there's got to be a REALLY good reason to give more info than that. We already frequently receive whinges from drivers being penalised without opening the floodgates to complaints from reporters that the penalty issued wasn't harsh enough.

e: Or TOO harsh, as happened once.

Quote from SamH :

I don't want to get into a situation where drivers' notes are for public consumption. I can't imagine anything worse than someone using CTRA notes as leverage in an argument against a driver's character.

I'm working on the web-based reporting function at the moment. While I understand that people want to know that "something's done about this terrible driver", I'm really cautious about relaying the action taken. 'Open | In process | Actioned' should be adequate. The mission is to ensure good driving on the servers over all, and anything more than a 3-stage report summary tends towards the witch hunt we're looking to avoid.

I'm not saying no, I'm just saying that there's got to be a REALLY good reason to give more info than that. We already frequently receive whinges from drivers being penalised without opening the floodgates to complaints from reporters that the penalty issued wasn't harsh enough.

e: Or TOO harsh, as happened once.

Makes sense.

When a report has been 'actioned' I would still be interested in getting more information when no action was taken against the reportee:

so if action was taken - from a gentle verbal warning to a 99 year ban, then 'Action Taken' is fine.
but if no action was taken, its good to have a reason:

the reporter got it totally wrong
there wasn't clear enough intent
the incident was not severe enough
the reporter was as much at fault
the reportee was given benefit of doubt etc.
we're sick of so many reports of minor incidents
etc.

cheers

Col

Quote from col :

if no action was taken, its good to have a reason:

the reporter got it totally wrong
there wasn't clear enough intent
the incident was not severe enough
the reporter was as much at fault
the reportee was given benefit of doubt etc.
we're sick of so many reports of minor incidents
etc.

Totally agree! Although, quite honestly, it's rare that we receive reports that don't stand on their own merit and thus don't result in any action from us. Even if the only action is to add a note and send an admin caution to the reported driver, there's very rarely nothing that needs doing. You guys are really on the ball, and it's very rare that we receive meaningless reports.

I received one this morning, actually, which definitely suggests a complete disregard for other drivers. However, because there's only one corner with the reported driver being anywhere near anyone else in the replay, I immediately replied to the reporter asking for more replays to substantiate the complaint. I believe the guy when he says that this driver is bullish on the track and constantly gets past people by gently taking them out, but we've got to substantiate all actions that we take with evidence/proof "beyond reasonable doubt".