Official Complaint Department Discussion Thread

[Rune 2783]

4 minutes ago, Junzou said:

 

On their own time, when they want.  They will sit out a round on our time, when we want, for breaking the rules.

 

Did your parents tell you "Go to your room... whenever you want," when you did something bad?  You were going to go there anyway for bed eventually.

 

This is the first time I've found your logic absolutely baffling. I understand a good portion of the server are probably children, but when you start treating everyone like that the reasoning becomes egregious. Trying to force people to stay in the server because they've made a mistake when they would rather leave, then punishing them for it because they didn't ask for permission is beyond stupid.

[UnknownLegend 5480]

44 minutes ago, Rune said:

 

This is the first time I've found your logic absolutely baffling. I understand a good portion of the server are probably children, but when you start treating everyone like that the reasoning becomes egregious. Trying to force people to stay in the server because they've made a mistake when they would rather leave, then punishing them for it because they didn't ask for permission is beyond stupid.

 

It's because TTT is a server/mod that's almost entirely about the rules.  The mod falls apart without enforcement. 

[Darren 272]

1 hour ago, Rune said:

 

This is the first time I've found your logic absolutely baffling. I understand a good portion of the server are probably children, but when you start treating everyone like that the reasoning becomes egregious. Trying to force people to stay in the server because they've made a mistake when they would rather leave, then punishing them for it because they didn't ask for permission is beyond stupid.

 

It happens quite frequently where a player hasn't broken a single rule for several hours but gets bored or just has to leave, and decides to make a grand exit by RDMing someone before disconnecting from the server. It's a cheap bit of fun at the expense of everyone else, and you don't immediately have to deal with the consequences, so why not? We currently only see this kind of behavior with non-regulars, because if a regular does it they will rack up enough bans for a perma pretty quick. If it were only slay-able, we'd get regular players choosing to make a grand exit whenever they got bored or had to leave. All they'd have to do is wait a minute for the next round to start and the slay to be applied before leaving so that it won't be waiting for them when they next choose to log in. Another slay can be applied after they leave, but postponing punishment does nobody any good. If a person chooses to try to avoid the consequences of breaking the rules, they should rightly receive a ban to their record. 

[Ironic 2278]

2 hours ago, Rune said:

 

This is the first time I've found your logic absolutely baffling. I understand a good portion of the server are probably children, but when you start treating everyone like that the reasoning becomes egregious. Trying to force people to stay in the server because they've made a mistake when they would rather leave, then punishing them for it because they didn't ask for permission is beyond stupid.

As Daren stated, most people who RDM and leave do it with the intention of "Well, I guess it's time for me to get off. Let me make a grand exit by RDMing someone, then leaving". I don't see how you can think this shouldn't be banable?

And so the reason we make this a general rule that anyone who RDMs and leaves, before waiting the full round will be banned, so there's no confusion about the rule. It makes it easier if we just have it black and white.

The reason we have it to where if they ask, we can allow them to leave, is that we know they are leaving with a good intention and not a "screw this I'm not taking this punishment!".

[Rune 2783]

I understand the reasoning, but it doesn't change my opinion in the fact that it's more of a power trip than anything. Personally, I don't see it as RDM and leaving when you take the slay and leave. Trying to keep them there perpetually for another 2-5 minutes when they want to leave after the fact is just dumb. The argument that a mod falls apart without enforcement is also egregious to the argument in lieu of banning people if they stay a round. Especially considering it did just fine when this wasn't a thing back when I played it.

 

If they RDM and leave in the same round; then sure, the day ban is warranted. That's how I always did it back in TTT custom on Gmod when I was an SO / Paidmin. Whether or not they stayed the duration of the round after the slay was irrelevant. I'm not going to try to control someone staying on a server they don't want to participate on. It's likely they're just going to go AFK regardless. I suppose times change, and it's just another reason I won't be coming back to Gmod TTT. I can think of several reasons why I think the rule in general is dumb, but it won't change the fact that we have differing opinions and it just so happens yours is the enforced rule.

Edited January 7, 2017 by Rune

[Darren 272]

2 hours ago, Rune said:

If they RDM and leave in the same round; then sure, the day ban is warranted.

 

I assume you think it's warranted because the person is obviously avoiding the consequences of breaking a rule?

 

Unless you can devise a way to tell whether a person who left during their slay round (without notifying the admins) did so to avoid punishment or simply because they needed/wanted to leave, then I don't really see how you can think it's a dumb rule. Because it's as impossible to make that differentiation in this scenario as it is in the seemingly clear-cut case where someone leaves immediately. I mean hey, that guy who left a millisecond after RDMing might've just needed to go, too.

 

The bottom line is this; if you break a rule and decide to leave before completion of a slay, then (unless otherwise notified) we have no cause to think it's for any other reason than to avoid the slay. 

 

Edit: We almost never pay attention if someone leaves well into their slay-round anyways. Pretty much all the bans are people who either leave before their slay, or immediately after it takes effect. It's usually a case of "What!? I was slain!? Screw this server!!! <Disconnected by user>". If there's a small minority of people who just happen to need to leave right after breaking a rule, and don't have time to tell an admin, all I can say is: tough for them. 

Edited January 7, 2017 by Darren

[Rune 2783]

2 hours ago, Darren said:

The bottom line is this; if you break a rule and decide to leave before completion of a slay, then (unless otherwise notified) we have no cause to think it's for any other reason than to avoid the slay. 

 

And as I've stated before, I don't know why you care. They took the slay, they're already going to miss the round. Whether they leave the server is only relevant to the punishment because our administration has this notion that they should wait to leave. In my opinion, like the many other opinions that I have against this, it shouldn't matter because the slay was already given and that was their punishment. Whether they re-enter the server afterwards doesn't matter because they have already missed the round. I understand your feelings in the matter, I've read your feelings in the matter; unfortunately, as I've said before it is only an opinion in the matter based on the punishment. It could easily be changed and the outcome would still be the same. Thus why it is an opinion, and why my opinion won't be changed.

Edited January 7, 2017 by Rune

[Darren 272]

27 minutes ago, Rune said:

 and why my opinion won't be changed.

 

Ah, should have realized I was wasting time.

[Avenger 1048]

To clear things up, banning people for not staying the entire round they're slain has always been optional  (according to zach).  Personally, I don't think its something we should be doing.

[spiderpigrider 312]

Fucken John being a troll... I was on my phone and couldn't read it, unless its me being the dumbass.

[dash 292]

1 hour ago, spiderpigrider said:

Fucken John being a troll... I was on my phone and couldn't read it, unless its me being the dumbass.

? ? ?

do you mean the perma being a troll? 

wat

[Poseidon 269]

6 minutes ago, Dash♥ said:

? ? ?

do you mean the perma being a troll? 

wat

Where if your background is white (for me atleast) couldnt see what he typed unless I highlighted it

[Imperium 295]

33 minutes ago, Poseidon said:

Where if your background is white (for me atleast) couldnt see what he typed unless I highlighted it

This was his message @spiderpigrider@Poseidon, not sure why you cant see it :

On Saturday, at 9:15 PM EST, I received a permanent ban from iafunky for having 4 bans in the same category (racism). I received these 4 bans for racism for playing certain songs that contained a racial slur. One of these bans I received without a kick, mute or a warning, which I feel is unfair and pretty sure is against the rules. I fully accept my consequences for this and I promise that it will never happen again. I promise to uninstall Slam, never micspam, and never say ANY racial slur on any sG servers anymore or you can feel free to give me another permanent ban. I have made so many great memories playing on sG servers and would hate to not be able to play on them.

[Don Juan 679]

Avenger fucking cleaning the TTT community, can we have an advisor that clean the JB server?

[Dr. NarwhalsNumbNuts IV 2291]

4 hours ago, Don Juan said:

Avenger fucking cleaning the TTT community, can we have an advisor that clean the JB server?

@PeeWee @Chowder @Leeroy 

[Chowder 793]

3 minutes ago, Dr. NarwhalsNumbNuts IV said:

@PeeWee @Chowder @Leeroy 

 

i dont play jb wtf

[Don Juan 679]

26 minutes ago, Dr. NarwhalsNumbNuts IV said:

@PeeWee @Chowder @Leeroy 

Why are you tagging cancer?

[Leeroy 735]

1 hour ago, Dr. NarwhalsNumbNuts IV said:

@PeeWee @Chowder @Leeroy 

 

neither do i, but u do

[Dakota 4722]

This was his message @spiderpigrider@Poseidon, not sure why you cant see it :
On Saturday, at 9:15 PM EST, I received a permanent ban from iafunky for having 4 bans in the same category (racism). I received these 4 bans for racism for playing certain songs that contained a racial slur. One of these bans I received without a kick, mute or a warning, which I feel is unfair and pretty sure is against the rules. I fully accept my consequences for this and I promise that it will never happen again. I promise to uninstall Slam, never micspam, and never say ANY racial slur on any sG servers anymore or you can feel free to give me another permanent ban. I have made so many great memories playing on sG servers and would hate to not be able to play on them.

Spider knows better than to do that if you're not staff.

[Joscal 339]

13 hours ago, Hawk said:

Eh, he did not try to mfk, I think he just tried to killwhore. What he said is to get attention probably. I did not know what to do about this one so I felt like 40 rounds was good enough because he was kinda right. He said all ts from the top row of cells run and freeze to the cellbutton. But on dojo its only one level of cells, even though it still got a top row since you can stand on the cells kinda. Either way he forgot to say no detours or delays. It wouldnt matter though since there were no ts on the top row. I honestly dont know about this one. I feel like he should be cted either way for that order, wasnt quite sure for how much though.

 

He is kinda right, even though I dont think it was his intention. Will have to ask @Iherdcows and @Pike about this one. What I considered as top row of cells on dojo?

The comparison here, is the warden is arguing that there are a set of cells that are on a different level (elevation) than the other cells. This simply isn't true.

 

If you have a set containing one number (like the set of [1]), the only number that's going to returned if he says give me the highest number is 1, same as if he were to ask for the lowest (bottom) number.

 

You really shouldn't say top row of cells is the ledge above cells because that is literally the ledge above cells. Not a set of cells that can be considered top relative to another set of cells.

 

Chances are if only a group of Ts had moved he would have "interpreted" it differently so as to allow him to kill more Ts. Pure killwhore. I'd consider it on par with mfk, but there's the small chance he just thought he was being clever.

[Hawk 1124]

7 minutes ago, Joscal said:

 

 

The comparison here, is the warden is arguing that there are a set of cells that are on a different level (elevation) than the other cells. This simply isn't true.

 

If you have a set containing one number (like the set of [1]), the only number that's going to returned if he says give me the highest number is 1, same as if he were to ask for the lowest (bottom) number.

 

You really shouldn't say top row of cells is the ledge above cells because that is literally the ledge above cells. Not a set of cells that can be considered top relative to another set of cells.

 

Chances are if only a group of Ts had moved he would have "interpreted" it differently so as to allow him to kill more Ts. Pure killwhore. I'd consider it on par with mfk, but there's the small chance he just thought he was being clever.

 

Thanks a lot. Thats what I thought but did not wanna take the risk since I was unsure.

[Velo 2077]

4 hours ago, Joscal said:

 

 

The comparison here, is the warden is arguing that there are a set of cells that are on a different level (elevation) than the other cells. This simply isn't true.

 

If you have a set containing one number (like the set of [1]), the only number that's going to returned if he says give me the highest number is 1, same as if he were to ask for the lowest (bottom) number.

 

You really shouldn't say top row of cells is the ledge above cells because that is literally the ledge above cells. Not a set of cells that can be considered top relative to another set of cells.

 

Chances are if only a group of Ts had moved he would have "interpreted" it differently so as to allow him to kill more Ts. Pure killwhore. I'd consider it on par with mfk, but there's the small chance he just thought he was being clever.

Does the set of all sets contain itself?

[MistaChang 2023]

Lol good job @Karma

[cookie eater 965]

14 minutes ago, MistaChang said:

Lol good job @Karma

 

 

Kids being stupid, get punished, complain of abuse.

Edited January 10, 2017 by cookie eater

[Smash 188]

Before I get started, sorry I'm late. Hadn't been on the forums as much recently, so doing some catching up and just couldn't pass by the chance to give some personal input on this conversation.

 

On 1/6/2017 at 8:11 PM, Rune said:

Stuff stuff and more stuff

 

 

On 1/6/2017 at 9:39 PM, Darren said:

 

I assume you think it's warranted because the person is obviously avoiding the consequences of breaking a rule?

 

Unless you can devise a way to tell whether a person who left during their slay round (without notifying the admins) did so to avoid punishment or simply because they needed/wanted to leave, then I don't really see how you can think it's a dumb rule. Because it's as impossible to make that differentiation in this scenario as it is in the seemingly clear-cut case where someone leaves immediately. I mean hey, that guy who left a millisecond after RDMing might've just needed to go, too.

 

The bottom line is this; if you break a rule and decide to leave before completion of a slay, then (unless otherwise notified) we have no cause to think it's for any other reason than to avoid the slay. 

 

Edit: We almost never pay attention if someone leaves well into their slay-round anyways. Pretty much all the bans are people who either leave before their slay, or immediately after it takes effect. It's usually a case of "What!? I was slain!? Screw this server!!! <Disconnected by user>". If there's a small minority of people who just happen to need to leave right after breaking a rule, and don't have time to tell an admin, all I can say is: tough for them. 

 

The slay being given is punishment for breaking a rule, after they receive that punishment there shouldn't be anymore. They lose the time for that round whether they are in the server, leave or are slain. Keeping them there or otherwise banning them, is as Rune said, a power trip really. It's to show them that there are consequences, however as was already stated, the server isn't all children. Regardless, I get the fact that there are times when the ban is warranted to it's fullest extent, no matter when the player leaves. However it should be your job as an SO to decide whether they were leaving due to malicious intent or simply had something come up. "tough for them" is a horrible way for an admin to think, indiscriminately handing out bans because of a rule that as Avenger stated isn't even set in stone. 

 

 

On 1/7/2017 at 0:17 AM, Darren said:

 

Ah, should have realized I was wasting time.

 

If you are going into a discussion with someone with the intent of simply changing their mind, and not even considering their side of the argument then you were indeed wasting your time. As you are the fool, not them. Don't always assume you and your way of thinking is right, especially in a position of power.