November 8, 2004 at 7:27 pm #13300
Hey!! 😕 ! But i say,what i will not make anymore problems WITH LANGUAGE.
I say,what will play without use chat forever,just give me unblock to play with peoples….
JUST give me chance,you already know my IP and IF i make one more contravention just BAN ME AGAIN and forever,ok?I will be like bot on server,who just play with peoples,i promise 🙂November 9, 2004 at 3:22 am #13301
My 8 year old son loves the game, and likes to watch me play online – a few times I’ve had to shut it off due to excessive foul language (I have no idea who it was anymore). I appreciate the rules being enforced – the language was getting increasingly worse (not limited to on player), and I’d like to think that I can allow my son to be in the room when I play.
Gavin: Perhaps we could have a console command to stop the display of messages on the screen? That would be a simple solution to allow me to play with my son watching when the language gets a bit bad.
Looks like he listened cbx:
“Added: Players can be muted via the talk dialog”November 9, 2004 at 9:31 pm #13302
Worshipful G. Camp,so will i be unloked?Im already banned for 4 days,so can i begin to play now or it is impossible by some reason?November 12, 2004 at 4:06 pm #13303
I am still banned…Looks like nobody hear me here…Ok,i dont need your ranks,i can show my rank at work on every server.But i dont understand one thing-what problem to unlock me now?I was banned for a week and lose my rank,this is not enough to give me chance to begin play anew?GCamp why you dont answer my quetions?November 12, 2004 at 6:41 pm #13304
I am still banned…Looks like nobody hear me here…Ok,i dont need your ranks,i can show my rank at work on every server.But i dont understand one thing-what problem to unlock me now?I was banned for a week and lose my rank,this is not enough to give me chance to begin play anew?GCamp why you dont answer my quetions?
I am still in two minds, firstly you caused a lot of grief for everyone on the server, but secondly you are still here. To be honest I am not sure what to do!
Part of the problem is that some people still seem to be glad that you are banned and I don’t want to cause them any more grief if you were to misbehave again.
What say the people of the forum? yes or no.
(Nos can be sent as private messages if people want anonymity).November 12, 2004 at 7:14 pm #13305
I say one more chance. Any further digressions result in a permanent, never to be revisited again. Then he will be used as a good example to others. Sometimes, society needs one person to be singled out to make a point. Others “generally” fall into line once the consequences are made obvious. (I’m trying not to think how the mafia use this tactic too… 😉 )
So, yeah, one more chance only.
But I still think a moderator-type function would be good – sliencing, temporary banning, permanent banning etc.
PooleeNovember 12, 2004 at 8:03 pm #13306
I don’t want to cause them any more grief if you were to misbehave again.
You can dont worry about that.I promised to be absolutely silent at the server,no more problems from me…
Thx Poolee for support this idea 🙂November 12, 2004 at 8:13 pm #13307
Sure give him one more chance but if he does it again, throw him out for good because quite frankly I’m tired of seeing his whining posts on the forums.November 13, 2004 at 1:41 am #13308
She / He caused too much trouble. (not sure of Mokelok’s gender).
She’ll / He’ll double log again. To put a decoy or “second hitter” in. See footnote.
I’m going to ride the fence a bit here. If the people that think Mokelok should be given a second chance want to monitor (“police”) Mok’s activity then the honus should be on them to have the ban made permenant when this person gets out of hand.
I think She / He will change their nickname to start abusing people again. Mokelok has started up servers on a few occasions. One of which the Bots were prefixed with [Mokelok is always champion Bot] James (Or something along that order).
If She / He is happy just playing the game… let her / him start servers… The fact is, almost Everyone that knows Mokelok more than likely, will not join in on those servers. That in itself reflects the way people feel about Mokelok.
She / He has game skills I will admit that!
Mokelok is however, inept in having social skills. I’m not sure if Mokelok can walk the streets of Odessa Ukraine and say the things to the people there that were said to us. Well maybe Mok can for a NY minute. I’m sure they have dark alleys in Odessa… 8)
Re: Double logging, Mr. Camp I was wondering if V38 will resolve the issue. Many players are of the opinion that a person NN (bin laden) has been double logging to bring in either a decoy or second hitter NN (saddam). I don’t think that anyone who loves the game should be dis-allowed from logging in on 2 servers, (If they have the talent to play 2 games independently). I do think it’s a bit unfair if they double log on the same one. That was the other “unfair” tactic that Mokelok used.November 13, 2004 at 2:23 am #13309
give him the one chance.
(going with “he”)November 13, 2004 at 5:53 am #13310
Well if he does change his name and starts the abuse again then Gavin can simply compare the IP’s used to see if it’s him or not.November 13, 2004 at 6:12 am #13311
Well if he does change his name and starts the abuse again then Gavin can simply compare the IP’s used to see if it’s him or not.
Unfortunately, the IP address is not a foolproof way to determine who someone is. Almost all standard accounts with ISP’s the world over give you random IP addresses each time you connect. You could do a whois on the IP address and see if it comes from the same ISP, but that’s a lot of extra work to track down and identify someone.
The idea I posted somewhere was to put something on their computer somewhere that they won’t find easily that identifies them. That could then be used to block them. I believe moderators are also a good way to enforce good behaviour.
Another 2 cents worth from the Poolster 😛November 13, 2004 at 6:17 am #13312
One problem I see with limiting connections per IP is that it’s possible that multiple players from the same address could be a bunch of people behind a NAT box (LAN party, WiFi hotspot, etc.)…November 13, 2004 at 6:52 am #13313
I’d say give him one more chance. (going with “he” only because I hate to think that “she” would use the language that was used. 😯 )
Go ahead. Let him play. He seems sincere. 🙄 😉
just my $1.05November 13, 2004 at 3:00 pm #13314
@Crispy Critter wrote:
One problem I see with limiting connections per IP is that it’s possible that multiple players from the same address could be a bunch of people behind a NAT box (LAN party, WiFi hotspot, etc.)…
Yeah that is the reason that I allow people from the same IP. Although I guess I could have it as a server option.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.