Ninjad Loot

Q u o t e:
I've suggested in the past that a confirmation window be provided when loot is distributed. "Loot [Piece A] to Ioller?" Yes/No. The question is posed to the raid, players can opt out of confirming. Votes are tallied, if majority disagrees with it, they are provided the option to choose another recipient. This makes it so a given person cannot give a piece of loot to themselves or a buddy without having to go through the raid first.

I'm not a developer, so I can only speculate regarding why such a system would not have been implemented. I do have some questions though.

May I ask what happens when half of your raid is composed of conspiring players who loot all the items to their own people? Who do you report? How do you prevent it? What is your recourse? Is the system 'working as intended' in such a scenario? If the votes are 'private' then how long does it take to even notice that it's happening. If they are public, does this create a conflict?

Perhaps, you simply refrain from entering a raid with a group with 50%+ members of a single guild? What if they aren't guild members, but merely a group of players who conspire in advance. How do you track that - do you see who votes on what? Could that possibly generate ill will or harassment? Again, what is your recourse? Who is responsible?

What if the other members of the raid have simply decided that they don't like you, possibly because of your character name, or your guild's reputation, or even mistaken identity. Maybe as the result of an entirely spurious 'ninja' post on your realm forums (there is a reason why we delete those and prohibit players from calling one another out via the forums). You play well and contribute, you are polite and personable, and yet they vote loot away from you. Also acceptable?

Do you really believe that this system would create less of a burden for our support staff, and improve looting for your fellow players?

Q u o t e:
If you are under Master Loot Option : No roll are required at all (so no roll window appears) and only the Master Looter is allowed to decides who get what.

The Master Looter is assumed to have purview over loot. However, in light of the fact that Master Loot has become the looting method of choice for pug raids (something largely unheard of before Wrath of the Lich King), we amended our policies to make them better for the players participating in them. Many thousands of players raid and distribute loot according to the Master Looter system without incident ever day. We implemented the following policy to ensure that these runs continue as smoothly as possible, and I rather wish it would be linked in each of these discussions:

Everybody Loots: Group Gear and You
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=24401854554&sid=1

I would also like to clarify that, in situations where /roll is an agreed upon method of distributing loot, it is wholly valid.

Q u o t e:
I see your claim, I raise you a Thehurricane.

Your move.

"I would also like to clarify that, in situations where /roll is an agreed upon method of distributing loot, it is wholly valid."

The above was rather missing from the scenario in question.

Q u o t e:
Perhaps I'm out of line, but I'd like to throw the kitty a counter-question. How many times do you guys deal with tickets that an entire group of people was responsible for theft, rather than an individual?

Normally, I'm not able to answer a question regarding how much our petition queue is consumed by a specific issue. While the answer in this case is 'none', that is only because, under our current systems, it is impossible for a group to be responsible for 'theft' to begin with. Instead, either loot distribution is handled in a no fault automated fashion, or is subject to investigation because an individual is responsible.

Groups are frequently responsible for all kinds of other mischief, however.

Q u o t e:
The perceived anonymity in the situation fuels a thief's ability to do what they've been doing.

See my sig =). Under a system where individual votes determine where loot is assigned, this sense of anonymity would only be exacerbated.

Q u o t e:
The system is put into place to take an individual's ability to victimize a PUG raid away.

There are systems and policies in place to address an individual's role in distributing loot within a pick up group. You can read them in our new policies, linked in my previous post.

Would this not simply empower a group of players (rather than an accountable individual) to victimize another group of players or an individual, in a way that removes the perpetrators' individual accountability? You seem to infer that there will be social consequences - but how can there be such consequences when it becomes difficult to identify who is truly at fault?

You seem passionate about this change though, and perhaps our Development staff will see the merits in it. I merely wished to point out that a seemingly 'simple' solution is often anything but and often raises issues of its own.

Regardless, I wish you luck on our Suggestions forum.