[NA] MrShine

[slimpyman]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

well put. generally, in all my riff-raff, thats all that needed to be said +1

[MrShine]

but on all else, check the logs. the dude tked me after a few punches.    if you have to embrace the rules, do so without prejudice.   I know i have gotten banned in the past for being the reciever of multiple tw's, and the time i reciprocate, they make a ban thread and get me banned.

I did check the logs, and there wasn't any instance of him TKing you.  I did however see another instance of you teamwounding:

[21:58:59] chat,,Leander_Mcnelly,all,stop
[21:59:06] chat,,SoW_Baggie_SLimPY_MB,all,shush
[21:59:16] chat,,Leander_Mcnelly,all,i have shitty armor that actually hurts lol
[21:59:44] msg,Leander_Mcnelly reported SoW_Baggie_SLimPY_MB for teamwounding. Penalty: [2/5]
[21:59:49] chat,,Leander_Mcnelly,all,douche
[21:59:53] chat,,SoW_Baggie_SLimPY_MB,team,lol i lived
[21:59:58] chat,,SoW_Baggie_SLimPY_MB,all,shutup idiot

^ This is someone asking you nicely to stop, even if it was punching.  Same with the situation with this other fellow who submitted a ban request, if someone starts reporting your attacks - even if they are weak punches - it's on you to respect their wishes and lay off.   It doesn't matter if they are well known or 'no names', everyone has the same right to play the game without being harassed.

It's also worth noting that regardless of what someone else is doing, it's never 'ok' to teamwound back.  Even if you're the one getting caught in situations where both sides are guilty of doing something, it's still your responsibility NOT to retaliate.  Two wrongs don't make a right, etc.

im nearly 30 years old. i dont have time to make ban threads, and i grew up on an internet where you dealt with matters on your own...  not be the one who says, "wait till your father gets home!", and let someone else deal with the issue.

I agree with this attitude, and I do appreciate letting most things go - IMO the ban section should only be used for extreme cases after a player has exhausted other means of resolution.  However taking matters into your own hands shouldn't be to teamwound back

Good luck with your move!

[DUKE DICKBUTT]

Shine, I feel your ban of Waffle and Yolo was unjust.  As a current FCC leader, I will tell you no FCC leaders were present.  So you can't really say he went against our leadership to build one.  I generally trust Ascalon's opinion in all things Strategus, but they were not leeching.  Yolo did not perform well, but Waffle performed as well as any other.  I've been told it was a grueling attack and the lack of leadership made it particularly difficult.  Also, there is currently no rule against building siege equipment, especially in the one place it's supposed to be built.  I have seen only one admin warning in a Strat battle about building catapults and that was roughly a week ago.  There is no guarantee that either of the accused was at that strat battle and saw, and there has been no official posts temporarily banning using construction equipment.  Plus there is always the fact that the issue could be fixed at any time, since the devs themselves have not even public ally acknowledged it or given a time frame of when it will be fixed.  Yes, admins know catapults are broken, but are not really sharing that information in highly visible areas.  One pink message when you are not on is not sufficient warning.  Furthermore, there is no such thing as wasting equipment in this battle.  We move our armies with the expectation that siege equipment can be fixed at time, and furthermore we are attacking as force 5 times our size.  Your wasting equipment argument is invalid, and any smart commander will waste equipment when loss is guaranteed.  PS.  This is my army, though I was not present for the battle.

I personally feel like neither individual should be banned, but at least according to your reasoning I think you should reduce Waffle's ban to 24 hours and Yolo's to 48.

[MrShine]

You're welcome to disagree, but I think it was the right call.

Shine, I feel your ban of Waffle and Yolo was unjust.  As a current FCC leader, I will tell you no FCC leaders were present.

Matey appears to have been there, and he confirmed they were told to stop b/c they can crash people.  Is he not an FCC leader?

Also:
[15:21:37] chat,,Havelle_of_Frisia,all,dont build a catapult
[15:52:43] chat,,FARTLORD_PISS,team,we didnt want them to build the catapult

Others didn't want them to either apparently, and it sounds like in TS there were requests for them not to as well, although I can't confirm that.

I generally trust Ascalon's opinion in all things Strategus, but they were not leeching.  Yolo did not perform well, but Waffle performed as well as any other.  I've been told it was a grueling attack and the lack of leadership made it particularly difficult.

They may not have been leeching the whole round, but the fact they were hiding & building their catapult (twice) for a substantial period of time is pretty clear.  Basically, while others were participating in the fight (even a losing one) they were off building something they knew they shouldn't and weren't actively participating.

  Also, there is currently no rule against building siege equipment, especially in the one place it's supposed to be built.  I have seen only one admin warning in a Strat battle about building catapults and that was roughly a week ago.  There is no guarantee that either of the accused was at that strat battle and saw, and there has been no official posts temporarily banning using construction equipment.  Plus there is always the fact that the issue could be fixed at any time, since the devs themselves have not even public ally acknowledged it or given a time frame of when it will be fixed.  Yes, admins know catapults are broken, but are not really sharing that information in highly visible areas.  One pink message when you are not on is not sufficient warning.

I do agree there hasn't been an "official official" word anywhere, but I don't think that means this doesn't deserve a ban.

1) admins have been periodically warning people before battles begin (you knew it as do others)..while not written in stone anywhere it's going through the community by word of mouth that this is not allowed for the time being

2) they were warned not to do it by their faction in this specific battle

3) they knew what it would do if they built one:
[15:18:45] chat,,EggoWaffle,all,well if we build one now there is a chance that it will be a super good wall glitch
[15:27:57] chat,,EggoWaffle,all,go out with a BANG
[15:28:01] chat,,EggoWaffle,all,ik
[15:28:08] chat,,EggoWaffle,all,crash the server or some shit

4) Common sense rule: even if it isn't explicitly stated, if you know something could glitch things, and crash things... probably not a good idea to actively pursue it.

All of the above tell me that how the information has been given to people is irrelevant; they HAD the information, they KNEW what it would do, they were TOLD not to do it... and they did it anyways. 

[DUKE DICKBUTT]

common sense rules

The common sense thing to do would be to actually make an official temporary rule and enforce it from this point forward until it is fixed, not to make your own rule, not tell anyone and then enforce it selectively and retroactively.

Edit:  also common sense rule would be for everyone to use WSE2 because it is the only good change made in the last 9 months.  As a bonus side effect, you won't crash when catapults are made.  Hell, I'd say get rid of the option to not use it.  Maybe change the default setting to be less demanding, since those who are running worse rigs are for whatever reason afraid to change the settings.

[Rhekimos]

The common sense thing to do would be to actually make an official temporary rule and enforce it from this point forward until it is fixed, not to make your own rule, not tell anyone and then enforce it selectively and retroactively.

Without delving too deeply into this particular instance, the common sense rule is really a nonsense rule because someone can use common sense to justify anything.

[MrShine]

The common sense thing to do would be to actually make an official temporary rule and enforce it from this point forward until it is fixed, not to make your own rule, not tell anyone and then enforce it selectively and retroactively.

How the catapult bug rule should be passed along to players is irrelevant to this situation; Yoloswaggins_TKoV and EggoWaffle both knew the rule, as did the people leading the battle.  You're arguing a separate issue, which is admins/developers/someone should make an official announcement. 

It would be different if this was an accident, or if they were trying to build a catapult to use it the correct way and only after realized it was bugged.  But that's clearly NOT what happened, so it's a moot issue.

[DUKE DICKBUTT]

How the catapult bug rule should be passed along to players is irrelevant to this situation; Yoloswaggins_TKoV and EggoWaffle both knew the rule, as did the people leading the battle.  You're arguing a separate issue, which is admins/developers/someone should make an official announcement. 

Are you now saying its a rule?  Can you prove they were at the one battle where an admin said anything not to build catapults?  I mean, how hard is it for an admin to make a forum post.  I just don't get it, the devs and admins have such a hard time writing three sentences and posting a thread.  Is it the expectation that you should gain knowledge through osmosis?

These are legitimate questions, by the way.

[Muki]

Are you now saying its a rule?  Can you prove they were at the one battle where an admin said anything not to build catapults?  I mean, how hard is it for an admin to make a forum post.  I just don't get it, the devs and admins have such a hard time writing three sentences and posting a thread.  Is it the expectation that you should gain knowledge through osmosis?

These are legitimate questions, by the way.

It's a rule due to this

"first rule of em all: common sense"
    ~ chadz
No exploiting of any kind
    NOT OK: Using a bug to gain undeserved benefits

It's common sense that you don't use an exploit (Flying walls) to gain undeserved benefit(s) (Murdering/Crashing Half the enemy team), or attempt to "crash" the server

[MrShine]

Are you now saying its a rule?  Can you prove they were at the one battle where an admin said anything not to build catapults?  I mean, how hard is it for an admin to make a forum post.  I just don't get it, the devs and admins have such a hard time writing three sentences and posting a thread.  Is it the expectation that you should gain knowledge through osmosis?

These are legitimate questions, by the way.

They are legitimate questions, but they are questions that aren't relevant to the topic, and I have no control over.  What I know is the devs have been told the problem, but I don't know where the devs are with the fixes, nor am I in a position to make new rules (I just enforce them).

But like I said before it's irrelevant if those two were a part of the battle and explicitly heard that this is a new temporary rule: they were told to stop, they knew the consequences of what they were doing would cause crashes and glitches, and they continued.

[MrShine]

/bump back to the first page (suck it PTX!)

[Ganner]

/bump back to the first page (suck it PTX!)

Bad form sir, your goal should be to be the last non locked admin thread.

[Miley]

(click to show/hide)

Miley has a little history of delaying rounds in ban history, but a single round of 16 seconds at the end (when it looks like the round is pretty much over anyways) isn't enough to give a ban.

If I would have been on the server:
- I probably would have asked Miley to please join the fight
- Miley would have raged at badmins
- Miley probably would then have gone to fight.

If it would happen more than one round or for longer, then I think it would be ban worthy, but for now I'm letting Miley off with a warning because there isn't enough evidence otherwise (I know we talked a little about this in irc so hopefully this isn't too much of a surprise ) 

Locking thread.

What is the little history? Idiot Muki banning me for supposed delaying when I wasn't because he's a bad admin? And then FROYO banning me on the basis of not even being there and not having sufficient information in the screenshots?

If you asked me to join the fight I would have argued it IF YOU WERE WRONG. WHAT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND. AFAIK you never warned me so don't even lie about letting me off with a warning you power hungry gilipollas.

[MrShine]

(click to show/hide)

Miley has a little history of delaying rounds in ban history, but a single round of 16 seconds at the end (when it looks like the round is pretty much over anyways) isn't enough to give a ban.

If I would have been on the server:
- I probably would have asked Miley to please join the fight
- Miley would have raged at badmins
- Miley probably would then have gone to fight.

If it would happen more than one round or for longer, then I think it would be ban worthy, but for now I'm letting Miley off with a warning because there isn't enough evidence otherwise (I know we talked a little about this in irc so hopefully this isn't too much of a surprise ) 

Locking thread.

What is the little history? Idiot Muki banning me for supposed delaying when I wasn't because he's a bad admin? And then FROYO banning me on the basis of not even being there and not having sufficient information in the screenshots?

If you asked me to join the fight I would have argued it IF YOU WERE WRONG. WHAT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND. AFAIK you never warned me so don't even lie about letting me off with a warning you power hungry gilipollas.

I wasn't there, but I said I'm letting you off with a warning because I chose not to ban you in the ban thread, I never said (or meant to say) that I gave you a warning in game for your actions, I'm just saying that I probably would have if I was there.

But at least you still have the rage part down, so it's almost like I was there now.  Thanks for making it feel more authentic.

[Jack1]

Shine, I'll give you two gum rappers and a half eaten apple if you temp ban some particular people. Don't pass this deal up man....

The offer is still on the table.