- This topic has 30 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
IMO you gave the admins too much power. You know why I feel this of course, but I’ll go ahead and elaborate for all to read. To be able to ban someone for hacking without any demo’s is ridiculous. I’ve read through the demo’s threads and I see that it’s a collaboration of people who carefully exam the gameplay of the player in question in light of what he/she is thought to have done. Also with demos you can change the model type so that you yourself can see through walls and get a good feel for whether or not said player is actually looking at something through them. When you have one admin spec a player in game and then ban them permanently without any grounds for appeal or anything other admins can look at to give their opinion on the subject, that is not only asking for abuse(which is not what I think happened in my case), but is also asking for a lot of mistakenly banned players. What if the admin missed something, like footsteps, an ally seeing them on radar, a place a player repeatedly goes everyround, or just a common spot that players like to go. I think that was the whole reason you had the demo system, because even admins make mistakes. However this new system either assumes they don’t, or just doesn’t care about losing active players in the server. Either way I enjoyed playing in the wcu server, obviously since I played there so much. I could always count having a friend online in there to play with, even if was at 2 in the morning, and I’ll see all of you at the Feb. 28th? wcu lan to redeem myself and win on lan =].
p.s. this is not meant as a flame but as constructive criticism
<3 lawlrence (Blue Power Ranger)
Correction, only the Council Leader may make a judgment call and not be forced to post demos. All regular admins must take a demo if they ban someone permanently, and it must be posted within 24 hours of the ban.
If he runs the server, I don’t see a problem with giving his that discretionary power. There are about 4 people total that have that privilege: The club president and vice president, webmaster, and council leader. Anyone else would have to post demos. Also even the council leader’s decision can be overturned by the president, vice president, and webmaster, so he does not have absolute power.
The founders of the club were very careful to make sure that was the case.
Also sorry I beat you at posting Nickname
MasterP said:
Stay on topic please and don’t feed the trolls.You wanted feedback and that’s exactly what this is. If you think I’m trolling I feel bad for you because your ignoring important feedback. Were you hoping for posts like “I think you are the bestest admin evar!! And I dun want you to ever leave <333?” Seeing as you wrote of the only critical post of you as trolling that’s what I’m gonna guess.
So if someone get’s banned and there is no demo or proof, how can anyone know if that decision should be overturned or not. Seems like an unbalanced system imo. Will you overturn his decision if I do the same thing I did online at the lan feb 28th? Seems like the only way to prove I don’t hack is to play at wcu a lan since there is no evidence that can be disputed and MasterP isn’t giving me any chances to defend myself or other people to defend me.
I want feedback on ME. Not a long, drawn out discussion over a policy I didn’t write or have any control over.
Sorry you got caught. Derailing other threads won’t help you.
You are using the new powers that have been given to you so it does have to do with you. You could have chosen to provide a demo even though it was not required is something you should get from this thread.
Real mature. You show how much you deserve CL.
edit: for people who do not know, this thread was originally a feedback thread for MasterP(started by himself) but when I posted criticism he renamed it moved the first several posts.
lawlrence said:
Real mature. You show how much you deserve CL.edit: for people who do not know, this thread was originally a feedback thread for MasterP(started by himself) but when I posted criticism he renamed it moved the first several posts.
Get over yourself. It wasn’t me that split the topic. Since you couldn’t move it to another thread the webmaster moved it for you.
Once again I remind you that this is a COMPLETELY different issue as I had nothing to do with the rules that govern CLs nor do I have any control over the amount of power we are given. To claim that I would give myself power and then target the playerbase unjustly proves that you really don’t know me or how I run the server. It’s a shame the dispite how long you and your clan have played here, only a small handful of you really have a firm grasp or understanding of how things are governed within the server, club, and executive hierarchy.
If you have a complaint about the way the club is run, then take that complaint to the appropriate people. Mindlessly droning on and on to me or about me won’t get you anywhere because I don’t have the power to make the change you want.
And now that this is it’s own topic, let me explain things. The CL has the final say for a good reason. If rQ owned it’s own server, would you expect the guy who pays the bill every month and runs the backend of the server to not have a final say over what happens on his server? Sure there are checks and balances but without being overridden he would have control over how things were run. The server owner/operator is understood to be knowledgeable about and have sound judgement in how they run their server. Considering the fact that the server is still populated and that we have had almost no admin abuse complaints since I took over as CL, I would say the server is being run fairly well.
@ MasterP, I’ll repeat, just because you dont’ have to provide demos doesn’t mean you shouldn’t. Relevant. Also I’m not sure how I’m supposed to know the innerworkings of the club if I don’t go to wcu and I’m not allowed to the lans. So yes I will make mistakes about who makes what rules and who’s in charge of what. If that’s sad to you then maybe you should post a thread explaining all of it so that people will know.
@Liam, I hate you =/
lawlrence said:
@ MasterP, I’ll repeat, just because you dont’ have to provide demos doesn’t mean you shouldn’t. Relevant. Also I’m not sure how I’m supposed to know the innerworkings of the club if I don’t go to wcu and I’m not allowed to the lans. So yes I will make mistakes about who makes what rules and who’s in charge of what. If that’s sad to you then maybe you should post a thread explaining all of it so that people will know.@Liam, I hate you =/
@Lawlrence, I don’t care?
lawlrence said:
@ MasterP, I’ll repeat, just because you dont’ have to provide demos doesn’t mean you shouldn’t. Relevant. Also I’m not sure how I’m supposed to know the innerworkings of the club if I don’t go to wcu and I’m not allowed to the lans. So yes I will make mistakes about who makes what rules and who’s in charge of what. If that’s sad to you then maybe you should post a thread explaining all of it so that people will know.The club constitution is on the website for all to see.
whats with this new no demo rule?
i thought that was crucial
i side with lawlrence on grounds that no demo = no ban…show me the demo or proof of walls and i’ll be game
also i think this thread being renamed to mock a player is immature
rainefardreamer said:
whats with this new no demo rule?i thought that was crucial
i side with lawlrence on grounds that no demo = no ban…show me the demo or proof of walls and i’ll be game
also i think this thread being renamed to mock a player is immature
Read sir.
Game Server Admins, ie, you, are required to produce demos.
The Executive Members can ban without a demo if they feel they have solid grounds. In that case, the banned may appeal it to the executive council, which he did. It’s being voted on.
rainefardreamer said:
whats with this new no demo rule?It was the COUNCIL LEADER does not need a demo to ban somebody.
if the council leader, or anyone had sole right to ban without demo that would imply that he is 1) capable of recognizing hax without fail and 2) implies that somehow the CL, or anyone of these positions, is more capable than the admins.
he’s an elected position, and while i’m sure he has skill, his infallibility is not something i believe in, everyone has a right to the full information put out there, in fact if you are so good at pointing out hax, i would post demos all the time, citing these as examples that we should all look at to improve ourselves as admins. as for him being more capable than the admins i dunno, but i think it’d be presumptuous and a tad arrogant to say that out of all the admins who regularly play here and watch people that we aren’t as good as watching for hax as you.
rainefardreamer said:
if the council leader, or anyone had sole right to ban without demo that would imply that he is 1) capable of recognizing hax without fail and 2) implies that somehow the CL, or anyone of these positions, is more capable than the admins.he’s an elected position, and while i’m sure he has skill, his infallibilityis not something i believe in, everyone has a right to the full information put out there, in fact if you are so good at pointing out hax, i would post demos all the time, citing these as examples that we should all look at to improve ourselves as admins. as for him being more capable than the admins i dunno, but i think it’d be presumptuous and a tad arrogant to say that out of all the admins who regularly play here and watch people that we aren’t as good as watching for hax as you.
Which is precisely why we have the option in to allow those bans to be appealed to the executive council.
so it’s being discussed?
that’s cool. so what do you discuss? whether you think the guy is hacking? i would think that a discussion would be most useful if there was something for them to look at. Memory, at least mine, isn’t really good enough and carries individual bias from perception.
but whatever, it’s in the super-secret executive level so it’s not like us grunt admins who haven’t grinded enough to level up, or can’t due to regulations achieve a position in the executive level
This is what I get from this:
1. lawlrence has been in trouble in the past for mic spamming and has already had words with execs.. this means that both him and the execs are already hating each other.
2. this also means that lawlrence has been in trouble before
3. lawlrence did derail the thread.
4. It was right to move the thread
5. It was wrong to rename it in such a demeaning way.
6. lawlrence does show a lack of respect for select admins.
7. Master P cannot help rules that are already in place.
8. Even though there are checks and balances they don’t seem to be that balanced in this example.
I’m not defending lawlrence, because making direct attacks on execs is not the smartest thing to do… even if you do have a point however big or small it is.
It’s important for people to know that they should PM Master P if they have a problem. This saves a whole lot of bureaucratic bs because he is actually a nice guy.
Also, we could be a bit more mature than taunting people with such a thread name.
rainefardreamer said:
so it’s being discussed?that’s cool. so what do you discuss? whether you think the guy is hacking? i would think that a discussion would be most useful if there was something for them to look at. Memory, at least mine, isn’t really good enough and carries individual bias from perception.
but whatever, it’s in the super-secret executive level so it’s not like us grunt admins who haven’t grinded enough to level up, or can’t due to regulations achieve a position in the executive level
In the absence of a demo, other things such as his record on the server and prior bans are taken into consideration along with how they feel his gameplay was when they played him last. Believe it or not, every exec that’s voted so far has played with Lawlrence (except major, idk about him). You also have to consider the fact that this is not his first time being on the chopping block. Considering this is the fourth time he has been banned, yeah I think it’s safe to say the executive staff is familiar with him and what he brings to the server.
It’s “super secret” because it’s a discussion and vote amoung the executive staff. This is exactly what Lawlrence asked for when appealed the ban to the executive staff.
Soon regular admins will start getting perks for doing a good job but beyond that there’s nothing more you can do. None of the executive staff in office now created that rule. Also, it’s hard enough having executive members living off campus, there’s no way it would work it they lived hours away.
Lemm said:
I’m not defending lawlrence, because making direct attacks on execs is not the smartest thing to do… even if you do have a point however big or small it is.It’s important for people to know that they should PM Master P if they have a problem. This saves a whole lot of bureaucratic bs because he is actually a nice guy.
Feel free to defend him without fear of punishment or censorship, that’s not how we run the club. It’s quite possible to defend someone and not flame someone else while doing it, it’s just that no one has figured out how to in this thread so far.
I’m not some evil, maniacal, scheming, smacktard. Anyone who knows me or has played with me for longer an hour knows that bolded statement is true.
There should always be a demo to prove someone is hacking period. How many mistakes have yall made bout people hacking and then looked at the demo and said the person wasnt hacking lol. I can name a few rq people for that matter. They got banned and then yall looked at the demo and said nope they arent hacking. As for lawl he has been banned before but not for hacking till this time. So banning someone is just taking your word on it how can u do a vote bout someone hacking without the people voting not even being there to c him hack and just take ONE persons word for it.
Ohh and changing the thread and renaming it shows yalls mature level also would expect more of a mature level from the higher ups. Shouldnt yall set the high standards here?
not that any of you care what i think haha, but i agree, i dont care what position anyone has, you should still provide a demo if you are banning someone. if not, whats to stop you from banning people you just dont like? and how can the checks and balances work if all you are going by is personal accounts… with no tangible proof, there is no way a balance check can work, its just word of mouth. in the future, i think that every admin/council leader/ webmaster/ whoever should have to provide some evidence for the reasoning of a ban. if the process is going to be as fair as possible, the banned person should always be given a chance to have others review his case.
ammendments can be made to constitutions, and in this case i think it should (for future reference).
LuckySeven said:
How many mistakes have yall made bout people hacking and then looked at the demo and said the person wasnt hacking lol. I can name a few rq people for that matter. They got banned and then yall looked at the demo and said nope they arent hacking.Correction: there wasn’t enough to prove hacks without *ANY* doubt. On almost all the rQ bans it has been a split vote and on a handful there have actually been more people who felt they were cheating than not.
If we cleared out every ban we didn’t take a demo for, we’d have to delete about 3/4 of our very large ban file. Do you people really like blatant hackers so much that you’d force admins to let them back on the server and then let the ones who join stay until “proper evidence” is taken? I believe that would make us about the only server where admins would be able to see hackers and not take action.
it’s fairly easy to record a demo. if anyone was blatantly hacking (shaking screen, all head shots – the things we’ve all seen before) a 20 second demo will do and a ban can be made with the proper evidence. But, if it takes an hour of spectating to get proper evidence, then it obviously wasnt as blatant and should be brought up for discussion with the evidence at hand. it seems that numerous rounds were needed for the ban to be made, this imo means that you were personally debating the verdict in your head (sorry if this is a bad assumption). but anyways, if the conclusion is that hard to come across, more opinions are need.
again, i dont think giving anyone power to ban someone with no tangible evidence is a good idea. ive been playing here for almost 4 years and have a good feeling as the how the server should be ran. ive disagreed with bans in the past, but at least they were put up to votes with demos (i.e. sushi).
- The topic ‘Lawlrences Thread’ is closed to new replies.