I had an idea for consideration. You know how eBay started the rating system with reviews and stars that enabled their users to gauge the trust of people they would interact with?
I wonder if craftymyner could devise a similar system to track how people respond to tpa requests.
It would have to compare how often a person who invited a tpa ended up dead or griefed. And it would have to allow for getting killed by an alt.
I'm not sure how delayed griefing might be handled if at all.
It could change the way people play if they had some way to recognize cooperative players who really are willing to help.

Hm, that's actually really interesting... Although I feel like some members would mess with the ratings and mess up results.

@NerdieBirdieYT Hm, that's actually really interesting... Although I feel like some members would mess with the ratings and mess up results.

There will always be those. I think some people who work up a high trust rating might be tempted to preserve it. And for the ones that do suddenly turn rogue, it just makes for a more interesting story to tell the grandkids.

Maybe for the tpa kills, test for someone getting another kill within 5 minutes or something after they do a tpa? Not sure if that would be easy though

Also maybe to help a little bit with raiding is test for how many times someone has used Tnt, because that is not used for much other than griefing.

@CraftyMyner I feel like this is a cool idea, but it also would require a ton of work and command blocks to make it happen, how would we track tpa kills, and even harder, griefing?

My vision is that a person who accepts a tpa request gets an option to rate the transaction similar to how eBay handles it. Maybe they could even rate the entire experience 1 to 10 to help show how helpful the rated person was overall.
The person who initiated the tpa should get the option to rate the experience if they end up dead.
This system might be best at identifying people who might or might not not tpa kill. It would take more thought to find a way to identify follow on griefing. In fact that part may be untraceable.

Maybe players could be rated from 1-5 and could only be rated once per person every month by typing in chat "Rate (Player) 5" That number could be averaged out and then each player could look at each other's ratings by typing "rate?" or "rate (player)?" You could implement that rating on TPA but honestly, I don't think it has to.

@CraftyMyner I think it's just too difficult to implement it in a way it would not be completely thrown off by trolls and not take a huge amount of system requirements.

When would you get to rate the player? Could you rate them at any time? Could you rate them more than once? How would you track which players have teleported to which players? A player could just use an alt to do the raiding and griefing, or wait until the player's ability to rate has timed out?

I can't speak to system requirements, but as far as when the rating should become available, maybe as soon as the connection has been broken by one of the parties using tp or warp to leave the area and up to an hour later?
Of course scammers will immediately look for ways to exploit the system. Right now there is no system. I just wanted to throw the half baked idea out there and see if it stuck.

Automated system would be resource heavy.
Player reliant system would see abuse.
So, how about something in the middle and have a rating committee (I would say mods/helpers fit the profile) with system that players can query to see rating result but inputs are only made by committee member?
It wouldn't be as extensive as one being discussed, but I think it'd cover the basics.
We could supplement this system with forum posted player reviews/recommendation which could be reviewed by staff and reflected on the rating.
Just a thought. I needed distraction from piles of work.

I gave this more thought instead of working...
The rating system could work something like this:

I am not too familiar with command blocks or coding in general but...
I assume it can be programmed to store a number attribute to each player ign without killing Crafty.
And setting that initial number to 50, I presume, is still easy enough.
Also, I presume that setting a function to add or subtract a point on command would still be
forgivable.
Finally, setting another function (such as rating?) that displays the number or, better yet, a title associated with that number(see below) for the person querying( like the existing kd? prompt), is also presumed not much of heavy work.

So with that said, a Fresh non-rated status would be at 50(0 if commandblock can retain negative number).
A committee member could endorse/denounce a player 1 point each time a deed worth rating, such as assisting/hunting down a new player, is observed.
The resulting number would be a player's current standing, and will be displayed in title only to make it more intuitive.

Here's the example of title and associated rating range:
>79 Saint
70~79 Crafty's Approved
60~69 The Good
50~59 Good?
50 No standing
40~49 Bad?
30~39 The Bad
20~29 Crafty's Damned
<29 Evil

Again, really not feeling like working today...

I would love to see this in game, this idea reminds me of MCMMO even thought they are pretty different

Hm, I find this really fascinating, I think there are multiple ways around the methods of doing it, but the spammy part could be a problem unless there was a Rating book ... (i.e. tpa system ) click the person name and they have an assigned number of whatever linked to a trigger and you can enter 1 - 5 (which doesn't show in chat to everyone to avoid spam , but it would be a pretty big undertaking especially considering crafty is the only one who could implement something along those lines, ( meaning the whole project, not just the book part ) and pretty sure as his image states he has posted before says, he has a lot on his plate :D
on top of that the extra resources it would use, i think he mentioned above.
all and all hope to see something like this come to pass one day, with the big cheese being so busy
just got to take it one slice at the time , very fine idea though really enjoyed reading about it and people's thoughts of different things to add to it or try to pitch ways of doing it, I enjoy ideas !

i,e, one thought I had this is obviously not the case just a way I could see this system being very helpful if there was not a scamming rule, or a trading post .then it would kind of help make the idea more of a necessity/useful in that regard.