[NA] Muki

[Nightingale]

I like how you equate me to a guy who was perma banned with a huge log of ill deeds.

My history consists of killing people who tw, tk, or m me when they received no damage....

You mods are horrible.  14h ban for that guy. 3 day ban for me.

Straight from the rules :

No intentional teamwounding/teamkilling during a round (teamkilling friends after a round ends is allowed, teamkilling random people is not)

No malicious griefing of teammates (kickspamming, blocking, etc.)This is a big one for you. Please look up anything you need to; to understand this rule.

No random kick/ban polls. Always specify reason before starting a poll

No leeching- NOT OK: Running around without no weapon. Not contributing is leeching, naked runners don't contribute. This point does not apply to Rageball, as long as you are actually playing the game.

There are multiple reasons why you are banned, Dueling teammates on DTV( LEECHING), Poll abuse( Kicking people for hitting M on you) No Malicious griefing of teammates (kicking people, Swinging in spawn- people get annoyed by that crap.) No intentional teamkilling/teamwounding during a round (Hitting people for hitting M on you, Killing people for Hitting M on you.)

If anything I think the ban time should be extended.

Armagedon got banned for team-killing.

Cap You got banned for the above.

Krynist got banned for dueling on DTV

Bicep got banned for Chat abuse (making another player say racist remarks.)

Last time I'll explain this to you.

[Jarold]

I like how you equate me to a guy who was perma banned with a huge log of ill deeds.

My history consists of killing people who tw, tk, or m me when they received no damage....

You mods are horrible.  14h ban for that guy. 3 day ban for me.

Actually I do believe you compared yourself to him first. 

LOL that is even worse then just running up to them and tk'ing em.

QQ.

[cap]

Ah, let us take another recent example.  A ban of ReesesPieces.

Mr. Shine:

Player    ReesesPieces
Banned by    Muki
Ban Date    31.03.2013 12:33:48
Scheduled Unban    02.04.2013 00:32:00

Muki is the admin who banned you so it's his call on whether to ban you early.  I checked history and noticed this is your 7th ban, so I don't know if that's going to factor in to his decisions or not.  I can shoot him a message about this though.

Muki:

Hello hello, sorry for the late response; Wasn't very nice for you to tk half of the team before you left last night, You were banned for 24hrs.
Since you seem to be sorry or just very persistent, ill shorten your ban by two hours.

So here is another repeat offender.  However, in his case, he tks multiple people and gets a 24h ban.  I tk one guy attacking the virgin, and I get a 3 day ban.  Can you explain that discrepancy?  Nothing in the rules state what I was doing was leeching - I was killing bots as they approached the virgin.  If I was leeching, why did I have about 50 kills at the time?

Rules are great, how about you enforce them equally?  Arma gets 14h for an intentional tk (repeat offender).  Reeces gest 24h for multiple intentional tks (repeat offender).  Cap gets 3 days for intentional tk on a person every agrees was a griefer (multiple offender).

[Krynist]

There are multiple reasons why you are banned, Dueling teammates on DTV( LEECHING), Poll abuse( Kicking people for hitting M on you) No Malicious griefing of teammates (kicking people, Swinging in spawn- people get annoyed by that crap.) No intentional teamkilling/teamwounding during a round (Hitting people for hitting M on you, Killing people for Hitting M on you.) 

Desire, no one is disputing that Cap was banned for team killing someone who was killing the V.  Yes, it is against the rules for him to defend the virgin from a teammate killing her, that is understood.  He should have allowed it to happen since no admin was present and no Vk was enabled, that is also understood.

The only thing he is bringing up, I'm pretty sure, is that he was banned for 3 days, due to his "ban history", because he killed a teammate killing the V.  Projectnemesis, someone with a FAR worse ban history, was banned for 14 hours, for running up and teamkilling me intentionally.  Not for "defending himself" as ANYONE on the server can, and have attested to.  For intentionally teamkilling someone, without reason, just after he was perma banned for the same thing.  There is little logic in this ruling.

Admins keep jumping in, disputing other points.  That is the point, friends.  Not that he shouldn't have been banned, as you guys love banning people all over the place for minor discretions, that's fine that you banned him.  And I'm not calling for a longer ban on Nemesis, as I don't agree with bans.  Just asking for a clarification (Which you were kind enough to give me in the past, about poll abuse) on this issue.

Also, you're asking for a longer ban, because he is discussing the ban?  Really?  You know what that reminds me of?

"Hey this guy's right, and speaking the truth.  He's a witch!  Burn him!"

Where does it list in the rules that if you discuss things on the forum in a civil manner, you are banned for questioning authority?  Seems dictator like to me, no?

[Krynist]

Thanks for taking the time to write an honest essay Ryden, I'm lifting the ban.  Hopefully you can enjoy c-RPG while following the rules from here on out!  I think you understand but I'll say it anyways; unban essays are usually a "last resort" of sorts when it comes to bans, so any further bans will likely either be long or permanent, and from that point you'd need to start from scratch with a new account if you wanted to continue to play c-RPG.

Welcome back!

Just wanting to highlight this.  ProjectNemesis obviously doesn't understand this, nor does Muki apparently.  I think what Mister Shine meant to say, is that coming back from an unban essay, if you do exactly what you were banned for initially, you'll just get a warning at first, then a 14 hour ban when the admin catches himself, and that's all.

[MrShine]

I don't appreciate my words being twisted and used against a fellow admin.  You would do well to note that I added qualifiers like "usually" and "likely", but by no means should it be considered written in stone.  Context & judgment calls will obviously come into effect.

Us admins try to be as internally consistent as possible, but there's always going to be slight differences between admins regarding length of bans, hot button issues, etc.  There aren't many hard rules about X ban = Y punishment, admin decisions concerning ban severity/length in my experience have been an organic thing that gets refined as time goes on.     

In the future if you have concerns about the length of a ban you're subject to, or you feel your ban was too long compared to other bans of similar caliber, there's an easy solution to avoid the problem: follow the server rules.  Do that and I guarantee you won't need to analyze & compare how different admins do their jobs.

[Phantasmal]

My biggest question is this. Krynist, you end the ban request with "fair enough" but then come here to Muki's thread to complain. Kind of contradictory, right?

Also, you're asking for a longer ban, because he is discussing the ban?  Really?  You know what that reminds me of?

"Hey this guy's right, and speaking the truth.  He's a witch!  Burn him!"

Where does it list in the rules that if you discuss things on the forum in a civil manner, you are banned for questioning authority?  Seems dictator like to me, no?

If you think Cap is discussing this in a civil manner, I would ask you to read his posts again. There is nothing "civil" about them, only a malicious tone. I think you also missed what Desire meant in the OP. The scenarios are:

1. According to Mr. Shine, Cap is a repeat offender. Desire might have banned him for a longer period of time given his history.

2. The more likely scenario is that Cap utterly fails to miss what he did wrong (which is shown by his repeated posts on this thread as well as his repeated bans over the last few months), illustrating that he has clearly not learned anything from this recent ban.

On a side note, ProjectNemesis was banned w/ an essay requirement for a malicious verbal assault on another player, not for TKing or TWing. They may have received a lighter ban because:

a) The circumstances are slightly ambiguous
b) They are not repeating what they were permabanned for (I am sure that, if he were to verbally assault you guys there would have been much stricter consequences).
c) He has been relatively good recently.

[cap]

Phantasmal, thanks for your input.  My previous bans have been for TK'ing people who wounded me (primarily archers who try to thread the needle when im fighting something 1v1, or choose to shoot me in the back when i have a train of 10+ bots in front of me) or hit M at the beginning of the round when they take no damage.

I no longer TK people for these things.  I've been forced to become an M key hero.  In the crpg world, being a bad/careless player is OK and is promoted.  So I just need to live with shitty teammates who constantly team wound by "accident" - which is just another word for not caring if they hit teammates.

My latest ban is for:
A) leeching.  No bans on record for leeching, and its bullshit that this one will count as leeching
B) killing a player everyone on the server confirmed was griefing, by teamwounding and hitting the virgin.  Numerous other people tk'd this same person. Polls were disabled and we did not want this player ruining our gaming experience.

Muki has ignored input from 4 people who were on the server at the time.  I don't think a 3 day ban was warranted in this case.

[Muki]

With ReesesPieces Half the team was a 4 v 4 (This inclues him) and yes I was present on the server at the time. No this teamkill happen at the start of the match, NA_1 sometimes has very low population in the early mornings

 

I no longer TK people for these things.  I've been forced to become an M key hero.  In the crpg world, being a bad/careless player is OK and is promoted.  So I just need to live with shitty teammates who constantly team wound by "accident" - which is just another word for not caring if they hit teammates.

Problem is you never "M key" any team wounds in the logs

Muki has ignored input from 4 people who were on the server at the time.  I don't think a 3 day ban was warranted in this case.

I took the input that was given to me by both parties than used/read what was provided to me by the logs to help get a better understanding of the situation.

B) killing a player everyone on the server confirmed was griefing, by teamwounding and hitting the virgin.  Numerous other people tk'd this same person. Polls were disabled and we did not want this player ruining our gaming experience.

I will quote myself to answer

You should know well in the system you can take screenshots as evidence.

Take Screenshots to back up your story which is a reason we ask players to take a screenshot of their logs, or the event taking place. If screenshots arn't your thing use fraps or whatever video recording device to get said event.

[Krynist]

I don't appreciate my words being twisted and used against a fellow admin.  You would do well to note that I added qualifiers like "usually" and "likely", but by no means should it be considered written in stone.  Context & judgment calls will obviously come into effect.

You will note I said "I think what mister Shine meant to say" which is not "Mister shine said" or "Mister shine implied" so, there's your qualifying word friend.

I understand that admins all read the same rules, and I understand that admins interpret those rules in their own manner, and carry out bans based on those interpretations.  Some admins would have banned Nemesis for 14 days, not 14 hours, but that is what it is.

My biggest question is this. Krynist, you end the ban request with "fair enough" but then come here to Muki's thread to complain.

Not once have I ever complained about myself being banned, sir.  Also, with a locked thread, this would be the place to continue a discussion regarding an admin's decisions, no?  So I'd thank you to move on, thanks.

2. The more likely scenario is that Cap utterly fails to miss what he did wrong (which is shown by his repeated posts on this thread as well as his repeated bans over the last few months), illustrating that he has clearly not learned anything from this recent ban.

Let's look at that statement.  If he utterly failed to miss what he did wrong, he would continue doing what he did to get banned, right?  He was banned for TKing people who would hit M when they receive little to no dmg from him, and he would TK archers for taking stupid, high risk low reward shots and killing him, and he was banned for poll abuse when he tried to kick desire for banning me for poll abuse.

This time he was banned for killing a person who killed the virgin, when there was no VK enabled and no admin present. Should he have? Due to your rules no, he should have let the guy kill V repeatedly.  Lesson learned, but get your facts straight.  Tking someone who killed the V is a bit different from running over and attacking a random teammate and hitting them 13 times to kill them with them not attacking back or blocking ever.  Just saying.

On a side note, ProjectNemesis was banned w/ an essay requirement for a malicious verbal assault on another player, not for TKing or TWing. They may have received a lighter ban because:

a) The circumstances are slightly ambiguous
b) They are not repeating what they were permabanned for (I am sure that, if he were to verbally assault you guys there would have been much stricter consequences).
c) He has been relatively good recently.

A) You're right.  The SS of him TWing me 8 times (that I captured) and me not doing a thing back and him killing me, then admitting to TKing me in chat, that's pretty ambiguous.
B) Kinda the same point brought up with Cap.  If it's fair for Nemesis to not receive a long ban based on his ban history being for different things, why would it not be fair for Cap? Also, the verbal assault in the ban thread, yea that happened dude.  Totally not called for.
C) Has he now?  Has he really?  He charges me in DTV out of no where, takes forever to kill me (IE if it was a rage attack, after the 5th / 6th hit landed, most people back off, but he was intent on killing me) and to top it off, after killing me, he says How do I take a SS? I want to ban these two.  THEN he goes onto the forums and proceeds to attack Cap's character and sense of who he is, and slander his name, calling for a ban for ... what? Muki doesn't even know.  He had stated, I don't even know what he's talking about.

This is annoying and going on and on but getting no where.  Bottom line?  You admins are OK with interpreting the rule book however you see fit, and doing whatever you feel like with little to no recourse.  We the people would appreciate more of a sense of structure, a sense of fairness.  We understand ban's can't be concrete and set in stone, where X ban = Y punishment, obviously.  But the ban happy, kiss my ring style we have going on now seems strange to me.  I realize I'm just one person and by no means speak for anyone else, but I'm pretty sure people would agree that we could use less bans, more judgement calls, and more of a sense of fairness.  You say you are a part of the community too?  Act like it.

[Phantasmal]

Cap got banned for TWing and TKing in the last month. Please explain why TKing Jerry is not against the rules. If he TWs the Virgin, take screens or head to NA_1 to get an admin. Do not revenge TK someone. There were other ways available to handle the situation without breaking the rules.

A) Your SS only shows one incident from your perspective. This is one of the few photo evidences offered throughout the thread. Your other one is not viewable by the way because it is linked to a private account. All that is presented is hearsay from other players and information from the logs (TWs are not reported in logs unless reported by an individual, meaning you have to M them for it to be in the logs). In fact, ProjectNemesis did M you:

[19:17:06] msg,LeRoiHeenok reported Krynist for teamwounding. Penalty: [1/5]

[19:17:20] msg,LeRoiHeenok reported Cap for teamwounding. Penalty: [2/5]

The situation is ambiguous because no one offers up a lot of photo evidence and there is a lot of hearsay. It is slightly unclear to see who provoked who.

B) I wonder if you read the chat logs from ProjectNemesis' permaban. He may have been mean to you on the forums (who is not a dick on the internet?), but he was downright malicious in the logs concerning his permaban (enough to make players in the siege server uncomfortable).

C) Refer to A. It is not like he got off freely, he was still banned. You have to realize that no admin was present to witness the situation. Imagine if you were an admin in this situation, do you think you would be able to wade through all the "evidence" to make the right call (if one even exists)? Muki did what they thought was the right choice, and handled every infraction they found in the logs as well as in your SS.

Personally I believe you are making a big deal over one incident. Since I have been here I have only seen one or two admin bans that I felt were unjustified.

[cap]

Cap got banned for TWing and TKing in the last month. Please explain why TKing Jerry is not against the rules. If he TWs the Virgin, take screens or head to NA_1 to get an admin. Do not revenge TK someone. There were other ways available to handle the situation without breaking the rules.

A) Your SS only shows one incident from your perspective. This is one of the few photo evidences offered throughout the thread. Your other one is not viewable by the way because it is linked to a private account. All that is presented is hearsay from other players and information from the logs (TWs are not reported in logs unless reported by an individual, meaning you have to M them for it to be in the logs). In fact, ProjectNemesis did M you:

[19:17:06] msg,LeRoiHeenok reported Krynist for teamwounding. Penalty: [1/5]

[19:17:20] msg,LeRoiHeenok reported Cap for teamwounding. Penalty: [2/5]

The situation is ambiguous because no one offers up a lot of photo evidence and there is a lot of hearsay. It is slightly unclear to see who provoked who.

B) I wonder if you read the chat logs from ProjectNemesis' permaban. He may have been mean to you on the forums (who is not a dick on the internet?), but he was downright malicious in the logs concerning his permaban (enough to make players in the siege server uncomfortable).

C) Refer to A. It is not like he got off freely, he was still banned. You have to realize that no admin was present to witness the situation. Imagine if you were an admin in this situation, do you think you would be able to wade through all the "evidence" to make the right call (if one even exists)? Muki did what they thought was the right choice, and handled every infraction they found in the logs as well as in your SS.

Personally I believe you are making a big deal over one incident. Since I have been here I have only seen one or two admin bans that I felt were unjustified.

Why are you "contributing"?  You weren't there, and you are not the admin in charge of the ban.  Krynist kicked rageboy, who reported him.  A minute or so later, rageboy repeatedly hits and then kills krynist as you can clearly see in the screenshot.  Rageboy was wearing a cloth robe.  1 or 2 hits from krynist would kill him (which didn't happen because krynist did not attack back).

For someone who M'd krynist when he got kicked, its a little odd that he didn't M him when he was being "attacked" by krynist.  Don't you think?  This explanation perfectly matches the logs and screenshots that were submitted.

[MrShine]

You will note I said "I think what mister Shine meant to say" which is not "Mister shine said" or "Mister shine implied" so, there's your qualifying word friend.

Well if it wasn't understood before I want to make sure it's understood now: context & judgment calls will come into play.

This is annoying and going on and on but getting no where.  Bottom line?  You admins are OK with interpreting the rule book however you see fit, and doing whatever you feel like with little to no recourse.  We the people would appreciate more of a sense of structure, a sense of fairness.  We understand ban's can't be concrete and set in stone, where X ban = Y punishment, obviously.  But the ban happy, kiss my ring style we have going on now seems strange to me.  I realize I'm just one person and by no means speak for anyone else, but I'm pretty sure people would agree that we could use less bans, more judgement calls, and more of a sense of fairness.  You say you are a part of the community too?  Act like it.

You say Muki "interprets the rule book/[does] whatever [he] feels like with no recourse".  What rules did Muki break?  None, he's only guilty of banning you for a length of time you disapprove of.

You say you don't like the 'ban-happy' attitude, calling for less bans & more judgment call, but at the same time you're clearly unhappy that Projectnemesis wasn't banned for longer than 14 hours.

Let's cut the bullshit; you're here because you broke the rules and aren't happy with how long a time-out you received.  You're correct that you don't speak for the community, mostly because the majority of the community follows the rules & aren't put in this situation.  If someone is disrupting the server in the future, you should try to find an admin or (next best) take screenshots & report on the forums.

There really isn't much left to say.

[cap]

Shine, Krynist isn't complaining about his ban (as hes stated numerous times).  Rather, hes trying to understand why I was banned for nearly 4 days, whereas projectnemesis received a 14h ban.

The "explanation" is that I have a history, yet I've never been permabanned like nemesis.  The ban lengths are capricious at best.

[MrShine]

I'm not Muki so I don't know the exact reasons.  I did take a look at the logs, and saw that you systematically tk'd/ encouraged others to tk Jerry for many rounds.  Continuous prevention of someone from participating is IMO more severe than a single TK, which could account for the difference between the bans. 

Side note: I do see what Jerry was doing, and understand your desire to stop him, but as mentioned before two wrongs don't make a right, and the better course of action from you would have been to try to find an admin or submit a ban request.