stand united with allers against bad admins

[cup457]

Yeah I've had to work hard but it's finally paying off

you are the worst poster in this forum

[DrTaco]

Call me when Daruvian makes a thread about you, otherwise you're just riding Ganner's coat tails, pathetically pleading with shit memes to be noticed by the community.

You can return to being some guy no one's ever heard of next week when this blows over.

We can't be that angry with him, really. He can hardly think straight with his face full of Ganner's dick.

[WITCHCRAFT]

You can return to being some guy no one's ever heard of next week when this blows over.

lol if you think everyone will drop the subject / action will be taken in a single week.

[Supreme_Leader]

[WITCHCRAFT]

I think the level of autistic rage I've seen in this thread has already guaranteed me a spot in the CRPG history books. I'd like to give a warm thanks to everyone who made my dream a reality.

We will break the fingers of your scribes. We will cut the tongues of your courtly musicians and poets. We will burn your library. We will topple your statues.

None shall sing of your deeds. No record of your existence shall remain. We will erase you.

-a victorious Mayan warlord

[Sir_Wonka]

0 multiplied by 0 is still 0

So 0x0 =0. But what if u take 0 and +3. That =3. Take 3 and divide it by 3 and u get 1. Take 3 ones and make a triangle. Illuminati?

[Goretooth]

Strange we haven't see a wall of quotes to grace this thread from Canary filled with long winded paragraphs that go nowhere for many lines ahead. Masking problems with irrelevant information is the canary way to admin.

[Jona]

I think the level of autistic rage I've seen in this thread has already guaranteed me a spot in the CRPG history books. I'd like to give a warm thanks to everyone who made my dream a reality.

I dont even know your in-game name. No one cares about forum names. You ain't being remembered for shit, son.

[kooktar]

Apparently he was suicide leeching. That is on the assumption that charging the enemy swinging your weapon is considered suicide.
However, what is beyond me is that it is only Allers being banned. Apparently because of his ban history.
But let us assume that this ban is just. This, however, does not justify other people not being punished at all for doing the exact same thing.

So either 50% of all other people have to be punished as well, or Allers has to be unbanned. To me only the latter makes sense. Having the responsible admin/s write an apology for having done the wrong thing would be too much to ask, since 50% of them are probably somewhat mentally challenged anyway.

This ban is once again perfect proof of how broken this system is. Admins are corrupt and retarded as fuck. Players who harm the community more than anything else walk free while people who do a minor offence get a lifetime sentence.

chadz, you probably won't read this, but if you expect any of us to actually spend money on your new game you gotta do something about the current situation. Reevaluate what admins deserve to keep their powers, because many of the current ones do not deserve them at all.
I personally do not want to spend money on a game in which the most power hungry people get powers to permban people. And I assume many others think alike.

People in the 'in crowd' do not get punished/banned due to their lack of 'ban history' for breaking the same exact rules. A nice quote from an NA admin regarding the resolution to a deserved ban against a forum celebrity: (http://forum.melee.org/na-(official)/ban-baby_mae/msg846694/#msg846694)

After viewing the logs and the screenshot you submitted, I am going to let this go with a warning. I was not there, but the information from the logs seems questionable. As another point, Mae has no previous ban record (meaning that they are not a known troll). Locking thread, please direct any criticisms to http://forum.melee.org/game-admin-feedback/(na)-phantasmal/.

When people break the rules why are bans not distributed equally? If they were, referencing the 'history of bans' would not be such a crock of shit, and would be an accurate historic piece of statistics to base a judgement like this off of. So I beg to question the admin staff, how can you use a 'ban history' as a sticking point, or sole reason to justify your actions, when bans, and tracking them, is  complete horse shit?

[Canary]

Strange we haven't see a wall of quotes to grace this thread from Canary filled with long winded paragraphs that go nowhere for many lines ahead. Masking problems with irrelevant information is the canary way to admin.

Better to try and share my perspective than to say nothing and leave people hanging.

When people break the rules why are bans given equally? Thus the history of bans being an accurate historic piece of statistics to base a judgement like this off of? So I beg to question the admin staff, how can you use a 'ban history' as a sticking point, or sole reason to justify your actions?

You might as well ask "why ban anyone in the first place?" If someone gets punished multiple times, especially if it's for the same thing, and punishment doesn't escalate (or, theoretically, isn't issued in the first place) then we're essentially allowing someone we know is going to break the rules continue to do so unhindered. It's not a flawless system, of course, because of oversights and kicks and warnings not being recorded. Ban history is primarily taken into account when considering the duration of a punishment. Conversely, if whatever "crime" is very grievous, a long ban may be given to a first time offender. Similarly, if someone is doing something that isn't okay but is relatively mild and doesn't normally net anyone a ban they may only be given a warning (or mute or kick) even if they do have a history of bans (with exceptions: see below).

In the case of allers, it was concluded that he broke the rule he was accused of breaking. His ban history came to bear on the permanence of his ban, since he's had multiple accounts permbanned already and has already received an essay ban - after an incident where one of his accounts was permbanned for exploiting QML on an empty server. After all of this, a smaller punishment could not have been considered with respect to the way permbans are handled. It wouldn't have been fair to the other people who have received permanent bans. 

[kooktar]

In the case of allers, it was concluded that he broke the rule he was accused of breaking. His ban history came to bear on the permanence of his ban, since he's had multiple accounts permbanned already and has already received an essay ban - after an incident where one of his accounts was permbanned for exploiting QML on an empty server. After all of this, a smaller punishment could not have been considered with respect to the way permbans are handled. It wouldn't have been fair to the other people who have received permanent bans.

So because unfortunately permanent bans are a real thing, and have been issued to members of this community on a VIDEO GAME, is your justification to issue the harshest of penalties on such a minor infraction?

Leeching in general has no impact to the enjoyment of players, literally the balancer is broken as shit, and if anything that software and the coder behind it should be perma banned. Yet you let HX scrubs delay the game for 3 minutes round after round.

Over TWO THIRDS of this 'community' in which you 'enforce' 'rules' to protect say this decision is wrong. I personally hate Allers, yet I know if this happens to one person, it can happen to another.

The main problem with this is the Admin staff is judge jury and executioner. chadz wrote the rules. You guys enforce them AND interpret their meaning. This is definately not a balance of powers. The people that MAKE THIS GAME should be the able overturn decisions like permanently removing a member of the community.

You yourself have said he has had multiple permanently banned accounts, why was he not instantly re-permanently banned upon knowing IT WAS HIM? All this is, appears to be an attempt to troll a player out of looms, as it appears only permanent bans apply to a player's account, rather than the player? Honestly another reason the 'permanent ban' is complete horse shit.

[Jack1]

Better to try and share my perspective than to say nothing and leave people hanging.

You might as well ask "why ban anyone in the first place?" If someone gets punished multiple times, especially if it's for the same thing, and punishment doesn't escalate (or, theoretically, isn't issued in the first place) then we're essentially allowing someone we know is going to break the rules continue to do so unhindered. It's not a flawless system, of course, because of oversights and kicks and warnings not being recorded. Ban history is primarily taken into account when considering the duration of a punishment. Conversely, if whatever "crime" is very grievous, a long ban may be given to a first time offender. Similarly, if someone is doing something that isn't okay but is relatively mild and doesn't normally net anyone a ban they may only be given a warning (or mute or kick) even if they do have a history of bans (with exceptions: see below).

In the case of allers, it was concluded that he broke the rule he was accused of breaking. His ban history came to bear on the permanence of his ban, since he's had multiple accounts permbanned already and has already received an essay ban - after an incident where one of his accounts was permbanned for exploiting QML on an empty server. After all of this, a smaller punishment could not have been considered with respect to the way permbans are handled. It wouldn't have been fair to the other people who have received permanent bans.

you're still not answering the questions of half the community:

1. if allers gets banned for this why has half the community not been warned/banned for running in, swinging, then dyeing without blocking once?

2. Why does it seem like you keep brining up his track record instead of what he did.

quoting what I said from ganner's thread

That is the very definition of suicide leeching. Running at the enemy with no intent on fighting. Case closed, offense admitted in ban thread, appeal denied.

The thing about this ban is that it was not overturned into an unban. Unbans are ment for people who were banned and would like to make a case for themselves to the admins as to why they were unbanned. In the unban thread there were multiple people who said that they had seen him swinging and attempting to do damage to the other team. At the end of the thread (when it was locked) the above quote was posted and it was quite frustrating. Yes, the exact definition  of suicide leeching is running at the enemy with no intent of fighting, however, multiple people had said he had not done so and he nowhere in the quote you posted said he had no intention of swinging nor had given the hint. In the quote from allers that you posted he had said he had no intent on blocking.

[Switchtense]

First of all: I do not like Allers one bit, so I am not complaining cause we are best buds and stuff.
His ban history is quite immense so a major offence would definitely justify a perm ban.

Anyway, a quick recap: So Allers got banned for spawning with a weapon, running towards the enemy swinging his weapon at them and occasionally getting a kill, but also dying fairly quickly since he did not block, right?

So ban all the fuckers using rondel daggers and no armour/peasant armour already! They are not blocking and dying instantly when facing an enemy! But wait, they can't even block so they are not suiciding, thus they don't deserve a punishment.

Seriously what the fuck? So if Allers would have used a rondel he would be off the hook because he could not have blocked anyway?

If you would play a bit more you would see rondel my old friends dying in the beginning of the round on the daily. Yet they all happily run to their deaths while getting exp and gold shoved up their asses.


Allers was nothing but a pain for you, so you desperately tried to find a reason to get rid of him. Fair enough, but at least admit it and stop trying to justify the permban with bullshit reasons.

[Overdriven]

Ban is dumb.

I spend most of my lower levels as a peasant on various chars sprinting round the edge of the map sight seeing, avoiding conflict and charging in when theres only a few players left. By this standard I should have been banned long ago.

[Switchtense]

Ban is dumb.

I spend most of my lower levels as a peasant on various chars sprinting round the edge of the map sight seeing, avoiding conflict and charging in when theres only a few players left. By this standard I should have been banned long ago.

You have just spoken for estimatedly 75% of this community. The other 25% just charged in dying instantly.