Community Problems and possible solutions:
Toxic community, old toxic players makes uncomfortable and a
poisoned environment for new/returning players. The main problem we facing about Toxicity is something that has always
poisoning this community, toxicity has always been here, but right now with
the low amount of players we have and low new players we get, it’s getting
worse and worse and it’s something we can’t understimate anymore. We need to enstabilish a new base for a new clean community, setting up new
standards and modify our policy about what we DEFINE “Toxic”, enforcing old
players to stick with new guidelines and assist NEW players on getting settled
in MCNR. The main objective for this will be to: - Clarify the situation among the Community, tell them that wind is changing. - Assure the community that Operations and Management is and always be
worried about the health of our community and take immediate actions on
individuals/groups who are constantly spreading toxicity. - Recreate a clean environment within the community which aims to
enstabilish a “launch-base” for the future of MCNR. - Restore respect and faith between community-staff. Possible solutions to the Toxicity:
in the above you have said that "new/returning players" – you know these are the same players who are also toxic and if you want your current player base to be friendly to newbies, this will be going to be hard since with our current vigilante feature all red are to be shoot on sight, including newbies, which kind of gets them bullied. if we get some sort of restriction on this vigilante there might be a chance, but it will make rules complicated, and i have also noticed that our newbies always play in pair with their friends so they don't really prefer talking/playing with others; they prefer to play with the ones they already know about
and for respect and other parts, our community are very softies; they would report people for "fuck", "mf", "gay", or anything. why? they felt offended; this had already happened in the past. We had tried the respect thing, which actually ruined the server and increased the number of reports for dumb reasons (ok this same response is good enough for all of toxic part)
Chat filter:
Implement a Discord and Server filter that prevents players to even send
text that contains words that are considered “toxic” and/or that can start
situations that can escalate into a non-stop insult chain. This is a list that
will contain a lot of words, so it requires time to acknowledge a full list of
potential dangerous and toxic words, categorize it and implement this
system on MCNR platforms. This also comes with potential scenarios that may give the opposite effect
we aim to achieve:
Possible Positive Outcomes:
1. Immediate reduction of visible toxicity
Toxic words/messages are blocked or censored → the chat looks cleaner. Neutral or new players perceive a less hostile environment. 2. Normalization of civil language
Over time, people get used to avoiding certain terms. Even borderline players may stop using them for convenience. 3. Support tool for moderation
Mods don’t need to scan every single message → the filter acts as a first layer
of defense.
It can log attempts and highlight repeat offenders. Possible Neutral/Mixed Outcomes:
1 Toxic players adapt (workarounds)
They find creative ways to bypass the filter (spacing, numbers, slang, memes). Toxicity doesn’t disappear, it just changes form. 2 Humor and “playing with the filter” Some might trigger the filter on purpose as a joke. Could turn into an inside joke, sometimes fun rather than harmful. 3 Collateral blocking of non-toxic messages
Certain borderline words may get filtered even when used innocently. Leads to frustration or miscommunication. Possible Negative Outcomes:
1 Perception of censorship and rebellion
Toxic players (and sometimes neutral ones) complain that “you can’t say
anything here.” Can fuel backlash and loss of members who dislike restrictions. 2 Shift to indirect toxicity
Since they can’t insult openly, toxic players use:
heavy sarcasm, social exclusion, subtle digs the filter won’t catch
3 Toxicity becomes less obvious but still present. Reduced engagement
Risk of empty chat or migration to unmoderated spaces (private Discords, Telegram groups, etc.).
Summary:
A filter improves public perception and cuts down visible toxicity. But it doesn’t solve the root problem — toxic players can adapt or shift tactics. Best used as a support tool, alongside clear rules and active moderation, not
as the only solution. Also there is another way for using a filter:
Applying the filter only to toxic players as a temporary punishment:
Pros
Targets toxic players only, not the whole community. Softer than a mute/ban but still annoying. Can encourage better behavior. Cons
Some may see it as humiliation → more resentment. Toxic players might bypass it (slang, misspellings). Requires mod effort to manage.
In short: it’s a useful middle-ground punishment, but should be part of an
escalation (warning → filter → mute → 1w/m ban)
Chat filter is unique because it acts as a targeted, temporary tool to reduce
toxicity without punishing the whole community. Applied to offenders based
on behavior, it encourages better communication, prevents harmful messages
from spreading, and supports staff moderation, all while allowing players to
stay engaged and part of the community.”
It’s important to note that the toxicity problem is not to be dealt with
massive bans expecially when the playerbase is low, instead we have to find
a more “political way” to ensure fairness and transparency, treat everyone
the same but also we show that we care about players who has been here
for years even in struggle time.
To restore faith between community and staff i’ve brainstorming my
self and come with this idea
Spokemans
While it’s true that we expect that our staff team stick to the rules at 1000%,
it’s also true that community doesn’t have faith on us, this because of
situations happened in the past involving ex staff members which have screwd
up the faith between Community and Staff team. So in my opinion we should let the community to elect one player as their
Spokemans
What Spokeman does in practice?
Basically the Spokemans is a figure within the Community, not part of the staff
team without any authority over players or staff team. His job consists on speaking with the community, understaningd their feelings, collect information on what is going wrong, why the community is toxic, why
everyone hates the staff team by providing us messages/screenshots/clips or
proofs that may help us on understandin what is wrong and how to fix the
ipotetic issue, the Spokeman will have a certain “priority” when he come to
talk to management as he speak for the community and cannot be queued for
too long. Basically we are giving the Community to choose two of them to be part of “something” that inspire trust,faith and transparency between community
and staff. Key Points of the Spokemans
- Bridge between players and staff: communicates community concerns, feedback, and suggestions. - No moderation authority: can’t ban, mute, or change anything directly. - People who feel mistreated by the staff can contact the Spokeman which will
evaluate the situation and may advice them to report or explain them why
they are wrong and its pointless to appeal/report. - The Spokemans is not part of the staff team and have no staff
power/cmds/authority. Benefits
- Builds trust
- Players feel there’s someone who understands them and listens. - Reduces drama & misunderstandings
- Miscommunication between players and staff is filtered and clarified. - Encourages accountability
- Staff know a neutral community representative is observing discussions and
can highlight concerns respectfully. - If there something wrong community can always highlight the matter to the
Spokeman which will collect diverse toughts and forward it to the
management formally, and a response will be given within a max of 7 days, this wil engage the community in a positive way renstabilishing faith. It’s a volunteer role and Spokeman will receive a monthly paid to keep them
motivated.
Expected Pros
Builds trust between staff and community
Players feel heard and represented. Improves transparency
Staff decisions, rule changes, and moderation actions can be explained
clearly to the community by their representative. Reduces drama and miscommunication
Prevents rumors, speculation, and “mob mentality” toward staff. Encourages accountability
Staff know someone neutral is monitoring concerns and can bring issues
to attention. Provides structured feedback
Community opinions, suggestions, and complaints are collected and
summarized systematically. Protects staff from harassment
The spokesperson can filter feedback, so staff don’t have to respond to
toxic or repetitive messages directly. Neutral mediator for disputes
Can clarify misunderstandings between players and staff. No risk of abuse of power
Spokesperson has no moderation authority, so cannot ban, mute, or give
unfair advantages. Optional advisory role
Can be consulted by staff for feedback on rule changes, events, or
community initiatives. Promotes positive culture
Shows the community that staff care about their voice and are open to
dialogue.
Cons / Risks
Potential bias we need always elections every 3/6 months
Spokesperson may favor certain groups of players or have personal
relationships, will be removed in case it happens. Limited authority
Cannot directly enforce decisions; some players may ignore their guidance. Extra workload
Collecting, summarizing, and communicating feedback can be time- consuming. Community may expect spokesperson to “fix everything,” leading to
frustration if staff decisions don’t align, but thats happens nothing we can
do or force to not happen. Possible manipulation
Players may try to flood or pressure the spokesperson to influence
outcomes. Dependence on staff cooperation
If staff ignore spokesperson reports or advice, trust can worsen instead of
improve. Selection challenges
Choosing a fair, trusted spokesperson can be controversial. Messages filtered through one/two person may unintentionally
misrepresent some feedback. Risk of burnout
If the role is demanding, a volunteer spokesperson may become
overwhelmed, reducing effectiveness. Summary
High impact on trust and communication with very low risk of abuse (because
they have no moderation powers). Key risks are bias, over-expectations, and reliance on staff cooperation. Mitigation strategies: term rotation, clear role description, structured
feedback process, and staff commitment to listen.
1. Purpose
Serve as a neutral bridge between community members and staff. Collect, summarize, and communicate community feedback
Explain staff decisions and rule changes back to the community. Promote transparency and accountability without holding moderation power
2. Selection process
Eligibility:
Active and respected community members (forum, Discord, or game). Demonstrated fairness and positive behavior history. Players who want to be elected need to fix their behaviour if they want the
chance to
Method:
Elected by community vote or appointed by operations management after
vetting. Optional: mix of staff-selected and community-elected representatives for
balance.
Term:
3–5 months to avoid burnout and reduce bias. Rotation ensures fresh perspectives and fairness. Workflow
Community submits concerns via a Spokeman
Spokesperson reviews and organizes feedback (removing spam/toxicity). Spokesperson submits a summary report to staff on a scheduled basis. Staff respond or take action. Spokesperson communicates staff explanations back to the community. Repeat weekly/biweekly; keep logs for transparency. Custom Role on discord and forum to highlight the community
representatives
He’s not part of staff so reports on him have to be dealt as a regular players. Community spokesperson system is unique because it establishes a neutral, non-staff bridge between players and staff. Unlike traditional moderation or
oversight structures, this role cannot enforce rules or punish members, but
instead ensures transparency, accountability, and fair communication. By
giving players a trusted voice and a structured way to provide feedback, it
fosters trust and collaboration, reduces misunderstandings, and strengthens
the overall health of the community. We believe it’s a low-risk, high-impact
approach worth trying. This is also can be adjusted accordingly as i may have missed some points
and can be a strong base to build and perfecting the real meaning of this
suggestion which aims to enstabilish a fair relationship between community
and staff team. You may think im crazy, but you asked for something out of ordinary.
