banned sprays

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 45 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #82657
    Bitey
    Spectator

    Then someone went around the policy I had in place. Surprise Surprise.

    #82664
    MasterP
    Spectator

    Bitey said:

    Then someone went around the policy I had in place. Surprise Surprise.

    Did you not notice the public vote on it? You posted in it and it was pretty clear how split the community was.

     

    If you made a policy you sure as hell didn’t tell anyone about it.

    #82668
    YahooEarth
    Spectator

    Citan001 said:

    that is fine yahoo but maybe its time we go back and look at those rules maybe its time for a change?

     

    If it’s not broke…

    #82707
    Bitey
    Spectator

    Ban them [ 19 ] ** [59.38%]

    Allow them [ 13 ] ** [40.62%]

     

    That is the votes I see, so unless someone did not go by the vote then they should have been banned, which is exactly what I said. If there would have been a different vote I would have said something about it.

    #82711
    Citan001
    Spectator

    YahooEarth said:

    If it’s not broke…

     

    It is broke yahoo because I have seen EVERY admin aside from you tell people not to spray animated sprays even if they were not of bombs or ct/ts.

    #82715
    YahooEarth
    Spectator

    Citan001 said:

    It is broke yahoo because I have seen EVERY admin aside from you tell people not to spray animated sprays even if they were not of bombs or ct/ts.

     

    Well that would not be the rule being broke, that would be admins NOT knowing the rules of the server. So that seems more like broke admins…but you tell me?

    #82716
    Citan001
    Spectator

    YahooEarth said:

    Well that would not be the rule being broke, that would be admins NOT knowing the rules of the server. So that seems more like broke admins…but you tell me?

     

    I disagree if admins are enforcing a rule that does not exist then maybe its time to go back and look at the situation and maybe make a rule. look at the vote so far. It looks like people want em banned.

    #82724
    MasterP
    Spectator

    Bitey said:

    Ban them [ 19 ] ** [59.38%]

    Allow them [ 13 ] ** [40.62%]

     

    That is the votes I see, so unless someone did not go by the vote then they should have been banned, which is exactly what I said. If there would have been a different vote I would have said something about it.

    That’s not the overwhelming majority we typically require when making policy change. Hell we require more than that to start a mapvote.

    #82727
    Bitey
    Spectator

    When we vote majority wins, there is no percentage, that is how it is done in the meetings and how I thought all votes should be done. So I thought it was done and the sprays were not allowed, when I played I warned and kicked people for spraying them. Again as far as I am concerned they should not be allowed I stressed that when I made my original post in that thread. So back to the original concern it was MY policy to not allow them, obviously someone didn’t listen to me, that or my opinion didn’t matter.

    #82741
    MasterP
    Spectator

    Bitey said:

    Again as far as I am concerned they should not be allowed I stressed that when I made my original post in that thread. So back to the original concern it was MY policy to not allow them, obviously someone didn’t listen to me, that or my opinion didn’t matter.

    It was a public vote. If you wanted to override the vote and force your own policy you should have said so.

     

    A simple majority win is what got us Zblock. Remember that one?

    #82742
    Citan001
    Spectator

    What poll was that? The other poll like 1 thread down is like 16 to 9 people or something like that….Maybe we need to get a new official vote and see how it plays out?

    #82744
    MasterP
    Spectator

    Citan001 said:

    What poll was that? The other poll like 1 thread down is like 16 to 9 people or something like that….Maybe we need to get a new official vote and see how it plays out?

    He’s talking about the one last semester where it went like 19/13 in favor or banning.

    #82747
    Citan001
    Spectator

    MasterP said:

    He’s talking about the one last semester where it went like 19/13 in favor or banning.

     

    oh see I never saw that one I was just going off of the one bananarchy put up.

    #82749
    Bitey
    Spectator

    MasterP said:

    It was a public vote. If you wanted to override the vote and force your own policy you should have said so.

     

    A simple majority win is what got us Zblock. Remember that one?

     

    Granted, zBlock was fail for our server, I thought I did make it clear that I didn’t want it. If that was not the case then I apologize and will try to be more clear about what I say in future cases.

    #82752
    MasterP
    Spectator

    Bitey said:

    Granted, zBlock was fail for our server, I thought I did make it clear that I didn’t want it. If that was not the case then I apologize and will try to be more clear about what I say in future cases.

    You gave your opinion along with everyone else and didn’t say anything about setting the policy.

     

    To be honest though, after overriding me on zblock I can’t imagine how *edited*ed I would have been if you’d have done it again on this.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 45 total)
  • The forum ‘Counter-Strike: Source Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.