This topic contains 16 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  PeanutsRevenge 9 years, 10 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #6266

    apache64d
    Participant

    Alright, I think it is a good time to update about some of the events u (might) weren’t aware of.
    You already know that One and xox were banned due to cheating.
    U (might) don’t know that few others were also banned becuse of the same reason.
    Those are the players that were recently banned:
    1. Pam/Raven/Roflmao/Doug
    2. cpn/Davidshek.
    3. graphite (if it wasn’t known from other posts..).
    All of them lost their stats (v41.1) too.

    One thing for the ones that says “why me? what about the ones that realy cheat and nver got banned?”
    Got a name? got complaint? PLS, write a pm to one of the admins at the admins’ list. That’s one of the reason we r here for. to help. We can’t help u if u don’t help us..

    #49215

    PeanutsRevenge
    Participant

    @apache64d wrote:

    Got a name? got complaint? PLS, write a pm to one of the admins at the admins’ list. That’s one of the reason we r here for. to help. We can’t help u if u don’t help us..

    Thanks for the update, however, I believe that the players wouldnt need to start pointing fingers (which could easily give us a bad name amoungst the admins if we point too much, no matter how strongly we believe we are right) if there were more admins about on the servers.

    I have just had a look through the game admin list and I have only played / seen log in just over half of them.
    Many of the meetings have been short and rare, with only a few having to, seemingly do all the work as they are on reasonably often.

    Although (before you jump down my throat) it is not my place to tell you guys how to act / run yourselves, would it not be advisable to update the admins by inviting new people to join the ranks and politely ask (maybe give a lil shove to the stubborn) the dead wood to step aside (so it doesnt seem like half the community are admins).

    Every organisation has a reshuffle from time to time.

    You have said
    “We have giudlines and we go acording to them. I can tell that those guidelines are being updated pretty often.”

    So surely there will be people that will not agree with those guidelines or be slow to adopt them.

    #49216

    Saddistic Fungus
    Participant

    One Cheated? How was this?
    He seemed an honest player to me

    I havnt been around for a while… (on forums i mean) so i didnt know this sorry if its obvious.

    #49217

    Rommel
    Participant

    It appears that one of his “buddies” may have dropped a dime on him.
    @Saddistic Fungus wrote:

    One Cheated? How was this?
    He seemed an honest player to me

    I havnt been around for a while… (on forums i mean) so i didnt know this sorry if its obvious.

    Yes, yes, he seemed ok to me too but that’s not the point. The players, don’t know what he did because it’s a secret. I’m sticking my neck out here but I’ll tell you what I know. Although you may not believe these charges, I’m positive that he is quilty of all of these actions on at least one occassion and several of them he did with regularity.

    1. Playing with the water turned off
    2. Adjusting the brightness on his monitor
    3. Playing full screen
    4. Turning off the sound
    5. Setting the game to skip all turns and running to the bathroom
    6. Using the A key to auto aim
    7. Looking at the radar screen to judge distance
    8. Killing a wounded player

    It’s very sad that some of the top players have resorted to such tatics just to be competitive but I’m afraid it’s all true. ALL TRUE !!!

    #49218

    Jurily
    Participant

    @rommel wrote:

    6. Using the A key to auto aim

    Ah, so he WAS using an aimbot… he deserved it then. 😛

    (Seriously. I’ve seen him play in 41.2. Whooping our asses every single time while still whining about how bad he was… even Peanut remarked something along the lines of “man, I wish I could shoot as bad as you”. I’m not going to believe he was a cheater short of a confession and an audit of his machine :P)

    #49219

    Rommel
    Participant

    Hi apache64d:
    @apache64d wrote:


    Got a name? got complaint? PLS, write a pm to one of the admins at the admins’ list. That’s one of the reason we r here for. to help. We can’t help u if u don’t help us..

    Yes – Rommel
    No – Only a few questions

    From the recent posts between you and TheOne, it appears there is, or was, some type of communication problem that prevents all of the admins from being involved in the complaint resolution process. Considering that we have 21 Administrators listed:

    Are any Administrators on in-active status?
    How many votes out of 21 are required to enact a ban?
    Do all votes have the same weight?
    Is there a way to be sure that we don’t send a complaint to someone on sabbatical?

    Thanks for helping me, to help you, to help me. 😛

    I must go destroy the world now. Krieg ohne Hass

    Sincerely,

    Generalfeldmarschall Erwin J. E. Rommel

    #49220

    apache64d
    Participant

    At least half of the admins voted in that poll.
    Every vote is a vote. No more, no less.
    Yes, there are some admins MIA and it is a problem sometimes that some are barely online (here or in game) and few were last seen monthes ago. Thats why we have more admins then ever. Why those that MIA or barely/never online aren’t “fired” from the admins group? don’t ask me…I’ve asked that question 2.
    It needs to big mayjority for a ban and indeed it was a very big mayjority for banning One.

    #49221

    Rommel
    Participant

    Hi apache64d:

    Thank you, it seems we are reading from the same book even if we sometimes find ourselves on different pages – Good. 😉
    @apache64d wrote:

    At least half of the admins voted in that poll.
    Every vote is a vote. No more, no less.
    Yes, there are some admins MIA and it is a problem sometimes that some are barely online (here or in game) and few were last seen monthes ago. Thats why we have more admins then ever. Why those that MIA or barely/never online aren’t “fired” from the admins group? don’t ask me…I’ve asked that question 2.

    Half is too low for a quorum on issues of this magnitude – Not Good
    One person one vote – Good
    Admins MIA – Not good

    I wasn’t advocating firing anyone, but I’m not surprised that you are. 😉 I was just trying to point out that it would be nice if there was a list of admins that are active to ensure that no one sends a complaint, or even worse, a plea for help, to an admin that isn’t active.

    @apache64d wrote:

    It needs to big mayjority for a ban and indeed it was a very big mayjority for banning One.

    Ok, by what you said:

    At least 11 admins voted.
    Over half voted for the ban.
    A big majority was desired and in the case of TheOne you got that.

    It appears that a simple majority was or could have been deemed sufficient in some of the other cases. If so, a ban could be effected with as few as 6 out of 21 voting for a ban – Not good.

    Perhaps enacting a ban should require a super majority of at least 75 percent of those voting and that all should be required to cast a ballot, unless on “approved leave.”

    If you can’t muster more support than a simple majority then emotion may have more weight than the evidence – Not good.

    If some of the admins are reluctant to vote, maybe a straight up Yes or No vote is too restrictive. If so, perhaps undecided should be allowed.

    All in all, in spite of my adversarial stance at times, I’m generally pleased pleased with the way things are handled. You seem to be one of the more active admins and although we don’t always agree, I honestly do appreciate the fact that you always seem to be watching and participating and respect your sense of dedication.

    To the other ACTIVE admins: Thanks for keeping apache on a short chain and not letting him ban us all. 😛

    To the INACTIVE admins: You better watch out, I think apache wants your scalps. 😯

    Rommel

    #49222

    Deathbal
    Participant

    @rommel wrote:

    1. Playing with the water turned off
    2. Adjusting the brightness on his monitor
    3. Playing full screen
    4. Turning off the sound
    5. Setting the game to skip all turns and running to the bathroom
    6. Using the A key to auto aim
    7. Looking at the radar screen to judge distance
    8. Killing a wounded player

    It’s very sad that some of the top players have resorted to such tatics just to be competitive but I’m afraid it’s all true. ALL TRUE !!!

    I am guilty of numbers 3, 5, 6 and an occasional 8.

    #49223

    Mcb Lover
    Participant

    oh crap….im quilty by all points….if i get in bathroom once it counting?

    #49224

    BigBear
    Participant

    @ everyone in general and Rommel in particular (as a response to his post)
    You make many good points (you seem to think the same way I do about these things mostly that is 😉 :P).

    A few notes:
    * Qualified majority is defined from 60%, we use 67% or 2/3 of the votes.

    * As for firing/replacing ppl, the only way an admin can loose their status is if they resign or Gavin kicks them out.

    * Having other options than yes/no is useless. It would just delay the decision. If you are not sure, then you vote no. A very simple rule that should ensure that we have a majority concensus if a ban is to take place. I believe that is along the lines of what beyond all reasonable doubt is about.

    * Regarding the “low percentage” of admins voting I have a comment as well. I realize that you are drawing conclusions from the information you have, but when you don’t have the full picture it becomes a bit speculative imo. And before you ask, the answer is no! There is a reason that there is a private admin forum. At no point in time will there be full disclosure of what/how/why we do what we do. This might be a PR problem with some issues, but otherwise there would be no way for the group to funcion doing what we are supposed to do.

    * The voting procedure is a rather new addition to the way the admins work. It used to be up to each admin to use their best judgement in order to administrate bans for cheating. No proof needed. In fact in terms of official rules of the servers this is still the case. Whatever opinion you may have on how we run our business, we do try to improve and serve the community to the best of our ability in a fair and sensible fashion.

    #49225

    Rommel
    Participant

    Hi Big Bear:

    @bigbear wrote:

    @ everyone in general and Rommel in particular (as a response to his post)
    You make many good points (you seem to think the same way I do about these things mostly that is 😉 :P).

    Thanks, I hope that dosen’t make you feel too creepy. 😉

    @bigbear wrote:

    A few notes:
    * Qualified majority is defined from 60%, we use 67% or 2/3 of the votes.

    * As for firing/replacing ppl, the only way an admin can loose their status is if they resign or Gavin kicks them out.

    * Having other options than yes/no is useless. It would just delay the decision. If you are not sure, then you vote no. A very simple rule that should ensure that we have a majority concensus if a ban is to take place. I believe that is along the lines of what beyond all reasonable doubt is about.

    The undecided was suggested to allow a means of extending the discovery period in the event that someone should create a situation where a vote is required a little too hastily. The evidence seems convincing but is insufficient for conviction. So yes you are correct, 😉 it could be used to delay a vote at least once, that was the intent. In effect, a way to extend a temporary ban and prevent a rush to judgement in the heat of the moment.

    @bigbear wrote:

    * Regarding the “low percentage” of admins voting I have a comment as well. I realize that you are drawing conclusions from the information you have, but when you don’t have the full picture it becomes a bit speculative imo. And before you ask, the answer is no! There is a reason that there is a private admin forum. At no point in time will there be full disclosure of what/how/why we do what we do. This might be a PR problem with some issues, but otherwise there would be no way for the group to funcion doing what we are supposed to do.

    I’d ask anyway now that you’ve said no, if I could just figure out what it is I’m supposed to be asking. 😉 Speculative? Ya reckon? 😛 You toss us a riddle and don’t expect us to be speculative? What and how you folks do things seems to be getting adaquately covered lately (IMO) but as noted, things are in a state of flux. PM the question to me, I feel like I’ve let you down. 😉

    @bigbear wrote:

    * The voting procedure is a rather new addition to the way the admins work. It used to be up to each admin to use their best judgement in order to administrate bans for cheating. No proof needed. In fact in terms of official rules of the servers this is still the case. Whatever opinion you may have on how we run our business, we do try to improve and serve the community to the best of our ability in a fair and sensible fashion.

    Hopefully a temporary ban will remain available to each of you and no one will abuse it. The group policy is a good thing for longer bans though and I appluade the groups willingness to consider and embrace a few changes.

    Rommel

    #49226

    pastor of muppets
    Participant

    Ok I have 2 cents that I want to spen so I will spend it here. I um *cough cough* ag *cough cough* agree with everything *damn I feel sick* that Rom says.

    #49227

    BigBear
    Participant

    @rommel wrote:

    Thanks, I hope that dosen’t make you feel too creepy. 😉

    Heh! Don’t you worry about that!

    @rommel wrote:

    The undecided was suggested to allow a means of extending the discovery period in the event that someone should create a situation where a vote is required a little too hastily. The evidence seems convincing but is insufficient for conviction. So yes you are correct, 😉 it could be used to delay a vote at least once, that was the intent. In effect, a way to extend a temporary ban and prevent a rush to judgement in the heat of the moment.

    The whole deal of bring the errand up, discussing and then finally voting is not exactly insta banning now is it? It’s not like these things are decided in 5 mins on a whim you know.

    @rommel wrote:

    I’d ask anyway now that you’ve said no, if I could just figure out what it is I’m supposed to be asking. 😉 Speculative? Ya reckon? 😛 You toss us a riddle and don’t expect us to be speculative? What and how you folks do things seems to be getting adaquately covered lately (IMO) but as noted, things are in a state of flux. PM the question to me, I feel like I’ve let you down. 😉

    I just meant that there is a limit to how much that is posted in the private forums can be relayed to the public ones. I really don’t mind anyone asking about it though, since the line is hard to draw and has to be decided on on a per case basis. I hope that was a more clear explanation. 😉 😛

    @rommel wrote:

    Hopefully a temporary ban will remain available to each of you and no one will abuse it. The group policy is a good thing for longer bans though and I appluade the groups willingness to consider and embrace a few changes.

    Temp bans initiated by a single person never went away. Voting is only used for long term bans like you would get for cheating for example. The only exception I can think of is grave racist remarks (we’ve had a few of those in game as I recall) that will lead to an instant long term ban without any further deliberation when encountered.

    #49228

    Rommel
    Participant

    Poor baby … Come here … Kiss kiss kiss.
    @pastor of muppets wrote:

    Ok I have 2 cents that I want to spen so I will spend it here. I um *cough cough* ag *cough cough* agree with everything *damn I feel sick* that Rom says.

    Now then, all better?

    Good, now be a good boy and go play.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.