This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - NEGERTIVS
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9
61
« on: November 18, 2010, 19:31 »
Repeating myself again ek0:
A player's connection and computer configuration should be his responsibility. Ofcourse it's the player's fault if he expects to play dota with videocard drivers from '94 and a 64k isdn or an 8 euro/month crappy ADSL conn and then drops. A bad connection or bad equipment is a players own fault.
Now I'm not even opposed to giving a warn for a first offense, shit happens. The rules don't say anywhere that a disconnect is a valid reason for leaving. So it all comes down to interpretation of a rule that is not vague at all: players must not leave. Even though this player might not leave deliberately, he is still a leaver, and he is still responsible for ruining the game for nine other people. So let's look at the two options we have for dealing with this kind of leaver:
Option 1: The host or one of the other players whose game he just ruined have to take an extra 5 or more minutes (in addition to the 15 minutes it already cost them) to post a banrequest for him, sometimes even only for a warn.
Option 2: Have the leaver go through the trouble of requesting an unban, making him see that he in fact did ruin a game for 9 other people, and encouraging him to improve his connection, hardware, or configuration.
So would you rather make the host or one of the other players make a banrequest, thereby punishing them for this player's failure to have the adequate equipment? It's his own responsibility, if anyone should go through extra trouble, it's him. Also, what host or player would make an entire banrequest just for a warn? This way early leavers won't ever be punished at all, because who would bother?
Also: hotbbq said "threatening people for ban abuse bans", not actually banning them. Ofcourse having a rule against ban abuse is necessary and important. Threatening people with bans however is absolutely retarded and unneeded.
------------------------------------------------
@hotbarbecue: Ohhh so that's what a "contributor" is. Since you have zero actual content to contribute I shouldve known it was about cash. So if I spend like 10 euro's I'll get complete immunity from the rules and I can get people banned when they get annoyed as I spam them? Sounds like a good investment for trollin', which seems to be what you are doing. It also sounds like corruption. Please keep "yo momma" and your serbian insult dictionary, don't need either of them.
Half your post was not relevant, the other half has already been addressed in previous posts.
------------------------------------------------
Tracking ips? Baseless ban threats? Giving people rule immunity for money? Welcome to DPR Korea indeed.
62
« on: November 18, 2010, 16:58 »
Well I have to admit it's typically PD again.
Insert logical arguments ------> get manure in return at a 100% conversion rate. A well oiled machine. This statement isnt originally mine but it's just brilliant.
63
« on: November 18, 2010, 15:22 »
And another warn/ban for spamming methinks?
64
« on: November 18, 2010, 15:06 »
Ring ring! Anybody home up there? Who do I think I am? Someone with a valid complaint and/or a rule suggestion. Did you see the word suggestion? Im not telling anybody what to do. Do you think it's a good idea for the mods to run about randomly banning people because it suits them and threatening people? Because I dont. That's my opinion, I am entitled to it. Unless this forum is based in North Korea.
It's funny how all kinds of facilities have been provided to discuss and suggest changes to rules and/or provide feedback, but as soon as somebody comes along with an actual complaint or suggestion they are dismissed for the most ludicrous reasons. Especially "WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE" is a hilarious reaction to a complaint and suggestion about the rules in a forum meant to discuss and suggest rules.
Why not just remove the rules and feedback sections? At least then PD wouldnt be as hypocritical as it is now. Why even bother to try and make good suggestions for the community when all one gets is flame and retarded dismissions?
LOL seriously are you publicly threatening me? For what reason? Speaking out against all the obvious mod abuse and mod corruption around here? I think you have just proven my point! In about 95% of gaming communities you'd be in big trouble for making such a rediculous threat. But not here I guess. Are the standards here really that low?
Im thankful to the owner of this bot for providing it. It really is great. I would be thankful to you, if only youd actually do your job properly. But you dont. So no, I dont think I owe you any thanks. Sorry.
Aaand another ninja-ban threat. Well done. If this were any other gaming community you'd be demoted on the spot. I've checked some of this guy's posts and they all seem to be useless and offtopic one-liners. What exactly is it that this guy has that contributes? Bandwidth usage? Post statistics? If someone makes retarded and offtopic comments in a topic that I posted, I will call him a retard no matter who he is. Oh and I specifically remember a mod to have the following line in his signature: "calling someone a retard isnt an insult, it's a classification." and I agree.
You made some big promises with the new rules. Am I to understand that they will suck at least nearly as much as the ones in place now? Because I think at least we all unanimously agree that they are vague, absolute, incomplete and sometimes even completely illogical.
65
« on: November 18, 2010, 12:53 »
Thanks domagoj, I've already pm'ed a mod asking if the topic can be reopened. I think it's just too childish for words to have a forum for discussion on rules, and then closing all topics with actual suggestions for what reason? I can only guess.
66
« on: November 18, 2010, 12:09 »
Since there have been numerous incidents, cases and conflicts between mods and players concerning "power abuse", I think it would be a good idea to put a new set of rules in place for the conduct of mods. The goals of these rules are: elimination of all the confusion about what mods are and are not allowed to do, providing mods with a clear guideline, and providing people with valid complaints the means to actually get something done about them. This is not an attack or allegation, so keep your flames at bay. I just want everybody's honest opinion of my proposed rules, and if you can think of suggestions they would be most welcome!
A small list of my proposed rules with a short explanation for each one:
* Mods are subject to the same rules of conduct as the players
Why: this is pretty much a no-brainer, and I think already used by precedent. But I just thought it should be mentioned so that it is absolutely clear. When mods play in a game, they qualify as players. Therefore they should not flame, leave, etcetera.
* Mods may not ban or unban without going through a banrequest procedure on the forum
- This ban or unbanrequest must be processed by another, impartial mod.
Why: this rule will end all ninja-banning and should save the mods from a lot of allegations. When a mod sees a rule being broken in a game that he/she is directly involved in, the mod no longer has the power to instantly ban or unban someone. The mod must go through the ban/unban request procedure that everybody has to go through. This to ensure that: ban policy is as unbiased as possible, mods are protected from allegations of banning unfairly, and the window of opportunity for "abuse" is as small as possible. It shouldnt be a ban mod's job to roam around the server and just ban people. Their job is to process banrequests. Ofcourse when they see a rule being broken, they can still easily get the rulebreaker banned. PD.eu chose to use this system of ban and unbanrequests. I don't see why ban mods should be above this system.
* Mods may not process a ban or unban request against themselves
- This ban or unbanrequest must be processed by another, impartial mod.
- Any defence must be made in public by the mod.
* Mods may not process a ban or unban request made by themselves
- This ban or unbanrequest must be processed by another, impartial mod.
- The prosecution must be made in public by the mod.
Why: these two rules are to insure an unbiased ban policy. Far too often Ive come across banrequests against a mod that were subsequently denied by the mod himself! Ofcourse this isnt fair to the person who made the request, and it takes away a chunk of the mod's credibility because he is denying a request for himself! So the goals of these rules are to protect the mods from allegations of unfair bans or denies, and to make it more fair for the person who thinks a mod has broken a rule and wants to see impartial justice. The mod may ofcourse present his defence or prosecution, but this must be done in public. Pm'ing the mod who is handling the case as to "settle this among friends" should be forbidden.
* Mods may never take control or ownership of a game or lobby, unless:
- The game owner leaves or drops
- The game owner specifically asks the mod to, or gives his permission
- The game owner is ruining the game with his conduct and is in violation of the rules. This must be supported by evidence.
Why: the rule to end all complaints from hosts that mods steal control of their games. When there is a lame host who is ruining the game, mods still have the right to take ownership from them. But they should be able to support that with evidence. A ban mod's job isnt to take control of games because the host forgot to !sd one player, or someone has a ping over 70. If a mod thinks the "bad host" rule applies, he/she should make a banrequest for that host, not mindlessly reap ownership away from the host for a difference in opinion, without clear evidence of rulebreaking.
* Mods may never threaten any player or host with a ban
- If a host or player is in violation of the rules, a banrequest should be posted
- Warning a host or player that their conduct is in violation of the rules is allowed, e.g. "What you are doing is against the rules" and "You know that you could be banned for this?" are allowed. "I will ban you" is not.
Why: Trying to host or play a game of dota and then suddenly being threatened with a ban, even though you have to your knowledge not broken any rules, is one of the most annoying and unsettling things that can happen on PD. I speak from personal experience here, and Im sure a lot of other players and hosts have had similar experiences. It's both indecent and unnecessary. Mods should still have the power to warn people who they think are breaking rules, but aggressively threatening to ban people should be considered intimidation and therefore forbidden. Mods have all the tools they need at their disposal to get rulebreakers banned, why threaten people?
TLDR; 6 simple rules to make sure that all mods conduct themselves fairly. They are not complicated, they are not unreasonable, they are not too demanding. I think any mod who acts with the goodwill that is expected from a mod anyway should have no problems conforming to these rules. These rules will not only guarantee that the mods act like they should be acting anyway, but also protect the mods from unbased allegations and loss of credibility in the future. Suggestions and discussion are most welcome, flames, retarded one-liners, and wall-syndrome are not.
Regards.
67
« on: November 18, 2010, 10:10 »
In continuation of http://playdota.eu/forum/index.php/topic,30874.0.html, which was closed (for a retarded reason), I would like to reply to night_must_fall: Negertivs, dont flame others if u find their post inconvenient, so ur officially warned for that.
Also your lack of respect towards the staff wont be neglected anymore, and not just the staff but towards any user here, especially contributors. All of your accusations were dismissed ,u have got ur answer , case closed.
On topic, i said in one of my previous posts , that i will ban every single host that bans without logic. No further explanation is needed here. This will be locked soon.
I didnt find any official warning in my inbox yet, perhaps you should look into that, its a great opportunity to pump up your e-penis! My lack of respect for YOU and SOME members of the staff/contributors/whatever can be easily explained: you don't deserve it. You can't force people to respect you, just like you can't force people to vote !rmk. You tried making people "respect" you nonetheless, by acting like a jackass in lobbies, whispering people with veiled threats, and being extremely biased in your ban policy (banning my brother for whisper harassing, while it was in fact YOU harassing me, is another perfect example of this). It didn't work out so well, did it? I think the vast majority of the community already knows your true colours, but unfortunately the people who have the power to actually do something against it, or at least investigate properly, choose to turn a blind eye. "Bans without logic"? In my OP I clearly explained why this ban made perfect sense to me, and I think I have made a good case for at least considering a change in the rules. That was the point of the post. I specifically said that it wasnt an unban request. You don't rule this bot by divine right, there is a rules forum to complain and make suggestions about the rules. I did. "ban without logic joo argument invalid, lock" is not a good justification for closing this topic. And you know it. You just want to silence people so you can be merrily on your way to your next power abuse incident. Just because YOU disagree with ME doesnt give you the right to silence me, have me banned for "insulting" or otherwise. As a mod you should know this. Maybe it's time you learned. PerverzniUm pm'ed me that he was banned for "insulting" by making a one line post in the previous topic. Don't you think this "hotbarbeque" character deserves at least a warn for spamming no less than 3 times in that same topic? Another example of a biased ban policy.
68
« on: November 18, 2010, 08:24 »
Actually Fnelleh was whispering him because he was sitting next to me on LAN and saw me being threatened via whisper by this night_must_fail character. This incident took place a small while ago, and since the PD.eu moderation has a long standing tradition of recruiting complete morons and ignoring power abuse allegations completly, I decided to drop it, because talking to you people is like talking to a braindamaged chinese wall.
I saw him in the lobby, there was a minor discussion with my dutch friends, who asked me that I kick him. After I did, I got shitty whispers like "amg wat joo call me huh" "mi ban joo" etc. night_must_fail has acted like this before so I wasnt really surprised, all I whispered back was something like "please leave me alone on whisper". Ofcourse nicht_must_fail's e-penis wasnt satisfied after such an anti-climax and he went looking for an excuse to ban my brother, who replied only because he was like "dude this is just too much, who does this moron think he is". Ofcourse there is no real evidence of this, since I decided not to pursue the matter, making this discussion rather pointless in itself. But hey, just another incident to add to night_must_fall's already impressive collection of abuse.
Oh and I see my impassionate argument for relieving pressure on gamehosts has been closed with no reason provided. Superb moderation work!
69
« on: November 17, 2010, 15:16 »
Is this wikipedia?
How is this obvious pants-on-head retard a "Contributor" if all he ever does is post retarded one-liners like this one? Another example of how bad the PD.eu staff recruiting policy is.
70
« on: November 17, 2010, 14:33 »
Actually I'm always accomodating when connection problems arise for a player ingame. I don't ban people who clearly lag out mid-game. Shit happens. I don't think I've ever seen you in any game of mine, so what makes you such an expert on me? Seems the one making brainless comments here is in fact you. So enjoy your fail. @Zerind oh herp derp is your name Oliver Twist? Because apparently you cant resist twisting my words. I didnt lie, those are really the only rules on leaving. It's true there are footnotes about the severity of the punishments, but those don't qualify as excuses for leaving, do they? You'll still have broken the rule, but your punishment is less severe. By the way there is no footnote or clause of ANY kind that would get you pardoned for disconnecting. So admins are consistently breaking their own rules by unbanning people who disconnect. This is not about whether this ban is technically valid or not. Because it is.
Looking for this? My post was about how the current interpretations of the bad host rule put a lot of pressure on hosts. I think even a lobotomized monkey can see why. Instead of making the rule-breakers go through the trouble of getting themselves an unban/conversion to a warn, the hosts are now being made to play detective and make extra effort. I think actually making the rulebreaker go through extra trouble to get himself unbanned makes perfect sense and would be more fair to hosts. And it would decrease the amount of ludicrous "bad host" bans just like this one. Because yes it is ludicrous. AliRadicali argued this ages ago: "First of all, look at the countdown message: "Game starting in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0" Seems pretty obvious right? Secondly, if someone leaves before or during the countdown, the players can just stay in the lobby and !pub. As soon as the countdown is over, (I.E. loadscreen and beyond) the game has to be remade to play with equal teams." Ofcourse the game had started. But let's look at this from the perspective of the other nine players shall we? They were stuck in the game with little option but to !rmk and spend ANOTHER 10-15 minutes finding a new game, statwhoring, etc. So yes, Im of the opinion the game was ruined and the leaver should be punished. That's not unreasonable, right? Apparently you think that's "robotic", or whatever else you've called me in your cute ad-hominems. I didnt spend more than 7 minutes writing my OP, I just put the words down and read it once to see if it all made sense. Im so sorry that proper writing offends you! I'm all for a reasonable interpretation of the rules as long as they allow it. Right now theyre just too absolute and generic. I think it's important, especially in discussions about the rules and player-mod conflicts, to stick to them. Again, not unreasonable, right? If we dont, we might as well scrap the rules and leave everything at the whim of the mods, which would be retarded. Do you host a lot of games, Zerind? Because I do and the crap I get to deal with is just unbelievable. I've been threatened with banrequests for using the !sp command, which apparently "unbalanced the teams". I've had mods like night_must_fail give me threatening whispers because I kick them from the lobby on request. A particular highlight was the player A.L.I.E.N. who went zeus, stole mid from a teammate who had already claimed mid lane, then proceeded to farm all game long and killsteal excessively with his ulti, only emerging when the game had already been won 4v5 with guess what? A bloodstone. This player then subsequently got me banned for "flaming" and "bad host" because I called him an idiot for being a counterproductive, farming, killstealing ass, and urged him to go gank. Which one of us should really be banned? This is the shit hosts have to deal with every game, why not make it easier on them? Im terribly sorry that my post turned out to be this long and apparently so well written, but I felt I owed you a proper explanation. My bad.
71
« on: November 16, 2010, 23:13 »
Since you will try to write story again after my post let me remind you, that I have explain you last time that you can not know did someone plugged or not, on purpose. Since you were already banned for that, mybe you could write ban request instead of banning him like that.
This is not about whether this ban is technically valid or not. Because it is. The rest is answered in my previous post, paragraphs 5-7. Im not going to make this easy for you this time by playing kindergarten teacher and laying it all out in front of you again. Learn2read. Now I will repeat, night_must_fall did not do anything wrong nor did he abused his powers. I would ban you myself if I have saw that request before him, and not only me, every moderator would ban you cause of that.
Oh, so you know exactly where night_must_fall has been and what he's done, right? Should I take your word for it that he's a complete saint? Or maybe I should go with my own experiences (and those of no doubt many others) that all point out he's an agressive, arrogant turd. Threatening whispers, acting tough in lobbies, leaving games, ninja-bans, this man's got the lot. Obviously he's the best mod ever, right?  I have just explained why maybe, just MAYBE these rules need to be changed in my original post. Care to actually read it this time instead of defending your little admin buddy? Cheers. Or if you cant be bothered to reply again (which imo falls within a mod's responsibilities), then no loss at all, nothing has been gained by your first reply anyway. It appears that instead of reading my post and getting my point, you just saw your admin buddy being berrated in my last paragraph and threw it all on defending him from this "nerd rage spammer (Ive had a warn for spamming, you people do provide brilliant entertainment) nobody who crawled from under some rock". Im actually using terms people used as arguments in my previous posts. Hilarious.
72
« on: November 16, 2010, 22:27 »
Just a nice quiet evening with a few enjoyable games of DotA, OR WAS IT? As I was hosting my next game, this popped up:  As you can see, I apparently "abused" the ban command, and this mod banned me for a whopping 14 days. Something to do with warns and the personal affection we have for one another (none whatsoever), Im sure. After some digging I found http://playdota.eu/forum/index.php/topic,30834.msg95094.html this topic. A player conveniently named "pussy" decided to join my game (it's details like this that keep me wondering if God might exist after all). He checked out alright, and off we were. Immediately after the loading was finished however, he left. The bot made no mention of whether this was intentional or not, so I banned him. Apparently that's "ban abuse" of the worst kind and makes me a very "bad" host! So (again) let's take a closer look at the rules for leaving. Player must not leave; Player must not unplug; That's it! That's all the rules have to say about leaving. There are no possible excuses for it, be it a disconnect, an intentional leave, or whatever. At the risk of repeating myself again, this guy ruined the game for nine other people. Even if it was a disconnect, he is still to blame. Either he has not provided himself an adequate internet connection, or he just has a crappy computer, possibly with outdated drivers or otherwise badly configured. But all those things are HIS responsibility. I've been playing dota for 3 years now and I have NEVER disconnected while loading. To be honest I find it hard to believe that so many people just "disconnect" when a game starts. It's a vague excuse and very abusable. As has been pointed out in a multitude of topics in the rules section, the footnote that people who leave "before the creeps spawn" because "the game hasnt started yet" get only a warn instead of a ban is just plain retarded, and I wont go into that any further right now (it's even highly likely that this isnt his first time "disconnecting", thus still warranting a ban). But what's even more retarded is that the host is being punished for this guy's failure to equip himself to play dota. I think it's highly viable to give a "pre-creep-spawn" leaver a preemptive ban. Firstly, the host cant know if he left intentionally or not. Secondly, the host cant know whether this is his first offense. Third points a charm, by making him go through the trouble of requesting an unban or conversion to a warn, he might be motivated to improve his equipment/configuration to make sure it doesnt happen again. If you want to play dota, you need to have the proper connection, hardware, and drivers. It's not an astronomical demand, the game is ancient. OR you can make the host go through extra trouble by making him write a ban request (for as little as a WARN), because a random player in his game can't even get his dota to work properly. Which option would be most logical and fair, eh? Ive always thought the ban abuse rule was devised to protect people from lame hosts who for example stack teams, then raise their stats and ban whoever dares to leave, or whatever. Hosts who have no intention of playing a fair dota game. Ive nearly always been a "good" and fair host. I always make sure every player has a decent ping, I never stack teams, I nearly always do the !sd-whoring dance, I always kick people with "bad stats" on request, and I always encourage people to !rmk when needed (and vote myself). But apparently it's necessary to punish me this harshly on a mere technicality. Why punish the one who ruined this game for nine other players, when you can nail the host? Great job on rule interpretations like these! To wrap this up: ofcourse night_must_fall took this opportunity to ban me. Ive already exposed him to be a thick, arrogant power abuser, who lacks the qualities that a mod needs. He might have a personal grudge against me, I dont know. But I do know he happily continues to abuse and threaten even now. After a few more incidents I decided to kick him on sight in lobbies. Very cheeky and threatening whispers I get from that, too. My brother was stupid enough to whisper him back and he was instantly ninja-banned for "whisper harassing". LOL. Why he still is a mod is completely beyond me. There must be an incredible shortage of mods. NB this is not an unban request.
73
« on: October 25, 2010, 22:24 »
Hmm, I didnt know something like this had been tried before. But if the amount of players on PD.eu has grown by much, maybe there will be a greater deal of interest this time. Maybe instead of making the tournament for clans, it could be made as a "mix-cup", where interested players sign up, captains are somehow assigned (or volunteer), and draft teams of 6 to 8 players?
Course you'd have to take it slow. Maybe it's a good idea to start by polling the community and seeing how many people and/or clans are really interested and willing to commit. And if and when it gets more serious, maybe it's also a good idea to recruit some people (a coder, a cup supervisor, whoever is needed).
Anyway thanks for your time and interest, I really hope it'll happen someday!
74
« on: October 25, 2010, 16:35 »
@[4h][MarceL]: yep, clanbase has very rigorous anti-cheat legislation. But let's not focus on the details, please discuss why you would or would not like the idea of an official playdota cup!
75
« on: October 25, 2010, 16:26 »
Since administrating every single game themselves will be too much of a burden on mods, I think a system with referees, recruited from the players themselves, could work. They would have to apply and be approved by the mods, and whenever there is a disagreement on whether a referee made a mistake, a clan would be able to appeal to the mods. Ofcourse the criteria for being a referee would have to be high.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9
|
WiKi
How To
Rules
Ban
Unban
LA Staff
Maps
Streams
Show Posts
