Jump to content

Moose

Joint Chief of Staff
  • Content Count

    7052
  • Donations

    25.00 USD 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

Posts posted by Moose


  1. I kinda figured, but that wasn't really what the thread was addressing... That being said, it would be a good idea to look at them. For example someone with a regular freeday goes and gets the speed bomb, we wouldn't want to take away his speed when taking away his beacon, since that was not apart of his LR. For the time being however, if the command is created, it would just have to be hit or miss whether it takes it away with the rest of whatever his freeday was I suppose.


  2. I'd have to actually start looking but off the top of my head there are papa, Avalanche, blek cocks. I know there's a few more but I don't remember the names off the top of my head.

    Out of the three above, the Avalanche ones are not affected by an commands. The regenerative one on papas is not either. Almost all the other ones on papas and blek cocks are.

    Maybe I can look up the entities later?

    wut?


  3. Since skitt verified it shouldn't be too taxing on the server, the only real complexity should be making sure you're setting all values (so that we hit every possible freeday). The statement posted to chat could be as simple as "All settings are back to normal" or something along those lines. I'd be happy to throw it together, if we're ok with that solution for the command. I'd like to know what Bullets other thoughts are though, as it seems he had another idea for the command.


  4. Bullet, as a quick release of this command (until the work is done to change it) could we not treat it kind of like silence (it just gags and mutes them) and unsilence.. Unless you feel it's too many function calls (I'm not sure on how things affect the server) to just set everything back to default.

     

    For example they have a low grav freeday, but we set speed to default, uncrab, etc. as well as setting gravity to 1.. This way all it would entail is calling the other functions already written to turn things off/set the values back to default on that player. 


  5. Well while we were having our fun before I even did anything he was complaining about admin abuse, so then I burned and slapped him next round. Staff gave him exactly what he wanted, to be made out a victim when nothing was done to even really ruin his round then to have me get "punished". He got exactly what he wanted.

     

    I get you were having "fun" and there weren't many people on. Yes it kills it when one person doesn't want to participate and God forbid that THEY MIGHT ACTUALLY WANT TO PLAY JAILBREAK WHEN THEY JOIN JAILBREAK.

     

    If one person doesn't want it, don't do it. If everyone's ok with it, then whatever. There are no votes for "Admin abuse days", especially on a specific player. It doesn't matter if it gets a 90% vote.. You were in the wrong on this one, even if he can get annoying. The same would stand for any other player. I would say the only time what you were doing would be ok is with a 100% server vote. Even with 5 people, it shouldn't be freedays every round etc.

     

    Matthew shouldn't be playing csgo because its Rated +18 for Mature People, if he decided to play a game rated mature, he should know what type of people he's going to meet there, I feel bad for the parents letting kids to play adult games.

     

    But that's just my opinion.

    Going by that logic, say goodbye to sG. It really is one of the dumber things you could have said. You are saying this because it targets Matthew, not people under 18 in general. We have so many members under the age of 18, or that were at the time of joining (As Banana pointed you, you are included in this). We would lose admins, staff, and our income ( I say this because even though most are over 18 now, they never would have been part of sG, and may have just left rather than sticking around for as long as they have ). 

     

    As I said, this is just another form of targeting Matthew, or other "no-balls" people that the community generally doesn't like. I guarantee there are plenty of people that play on the servers daily that are under 18, and that you enjoy playing on the servers with. 

     

    I think Travesty really said it best, as most people just can't handle/don't know how to handle situations well and in an unbiased manner. 


  6. The biggest issue I see with the CD posting is, is this... 

    or there is something that is IMMEDIATELY relevant to the situation

     

     

    Not to go on a rant about tyranny, but staff decides if something is "immediately relevant" even if the original intent was to help with the resolution (whether it be the punishment stays, gets harsher, or removed) of the complaint. I can think of the one time I really thought my input was valuable as an SO, and having had dealt with the person in the past but never having banned them/reported them (warning, kicking, etc.) for a similar issue, so most likely nobody knew about it but me. My post was removed (luckily I wasn't banned) and the complaint was resolved (I don't remember what the result was). 

     

    Now I know this isn't hard evidence. But my post was unbiased, not trolling, and not harassing anyone. But if as an SO that has had run-ins with the same person for the same issues on the server they're assigned to is not allowed/considered irrelevant to the situation (and really I feel any long time member should be included in this), I really don't understand why that is in there, and it just doesn't say something to the effect of: "If you're not the reporter, reported, or have hard evidence that is not yet posted, don't post."


  7. Out of curiosity, where in the Complaint Department does it say you can't post in there unless you have evidence?

     

    Maybe they could make it a sticky so people like Aimbot don't come in wicked late and post in there haha

    The best part is that Matthew had already posted in the thread multiple times, and one of his two posts (he even double posted in the CD....) was replying to Eddy asking someone to let Matthew know about the thread haha. I mean I get he was trying to help - but again, the rules of the CD are kind of stupid (IMO).

     

    The complaints are not private/locked to people outside of the complaint... Honestly, I think anyone (Especially Veteran level clan members or SOs) that has stuff to contribute should be allowed to post as the current system stands. For example, I have had similar run-ins with Matthew, and as an SO should be able to bring this up in the CD so that they know that it is not just a one time thing. I don't have evidence, but as "a form of staff" as they say we are, I don't see why we can't add in our two cents when it involves the serve we help manage.

     

    IMO Matthew shouldn't have his admin removed, he's typically an alright kid. People egg him on, which we do need to help stop, but he also has to grow a pair and realize even though he has admin, this is still the internet, and he's a little kid and will occasionally be the target of people. As Mark said, he needs to not take what one SO told him for one circumstance as a "rule above all others" if you will. Where he doesn't even try to use common sense, or listen to other admins (Whether they be SO's or not, other admins should be able to help calm a situation).


  8. I would say that when there's a higher admin on the server (and responsive) punishment should be left to them. I had to basically tell Matthew that last week as he had a similar issue where anyone that he even thought was talking to him he would instantly gag. Even after I told him I would handle anymore abuse, he continued to pull the trigger on unnecessary gags. I get some people really do egg him and other paid admins on. Making fun of them for being young especially. But he can definitely be over sensitive and get to a point where his emotions are just controlling him.


  9. I can attest to k1p doing to this me as well. Instant slayed even though he didn't know the reason why I wasn't with team (as I was running back to them). Frustrating as hell.

    Trav why you not messaging me when this happens? I'll come in and ban him no questions asked and leave :B): .

     

    You don't even need me to be on steam to message me.... 


  10. Mark, the reason why I piped in was because as a JB SO, I've played with both of them, and I know they both have patterns of causing problems (even minor such as mic spam). My post was removed, but my point stands that this is not a single occurrence.

     

    As far as handling it, I'm not sure why Kim/Piero hadn't done anything. But if it seems like nothing is being resolved don't be afraid to flex the power... Just kidding, kind of. In my opinion, in the end it'd be better for them to have a complaint against you rather than putting the server through that stuff for as long as it went on. I'm sure that it interfered with things like orders being given throughout that time, as fuzzy tends to be very vocal on his mic....If they still have a problem with each other though, you can tell them to shut up or they'll be banned (since gagging doesn't work in admin chat and some people insist on spamming it even when you gag them) and they can take it to the forums to be resolved...


  11. xmen, lately when the server is decently populated (25+ish) there has been a lot of spamming for warden, to the extent of cells being opened without clear orders. A few times I've just started asking CTs if they want to be warden or not, and going down the list so that it does rotate warden and rounds can actually happen. That or I mute all the CTs except the one that I know will be a good warden.

     

    I do like the idea of restricting warden within x amount of time, however, it would be very hard to automate this process. Considering as xmen pointed out, there are still more times than not, a very few number of CTs wiliing/wanting to be warden. How would we manage these times with this process? For example, we set it so that you can only be warden once every 4 rounds when there are 30+ people on. Well what if there are only two people that want to be warden, and there are no admins on? Does that mean after two rounds of having a warden, they would be stuck with two rounds without one until one of them can be warden again?

     

    I do think a good idea, would be that whoever is set as warden could be the priority speaker, where if they are speaking no other CTs can talk (admins exempt). This would prevent the pretty common complaints of "CAN YOU REPEAT I COULDN'T HEAR OVER ALL THE IDIOTS" complaints. 


  12. Put me in coach.

     

    old one

    and

    if you want the one that I'll be on for the tourney.

    No captain.

    Also we should stop setting these up for a single weekend... I'd rather see a throughout the week with finals on the weekend, or multiple weekend tourney so more people can make games without dedicating an entire weekend. People having to do things like ask off work is stupid (and in my opinion nobody should do for a gaming community tourney, but hey that's your choice)...


  13. lol

     

     

    let's hope not 

     

    jebus 

     .

     

    Also knox, it wasn't Tristan.. it was waffle wasn't it? And then we had to do everything on splewis' server. 

     

    Anyways... unless you guys are actually going to have someone run it that knows anything about comp & comes up with a better alternative to back to back to games all weekend it'll fail again.


  14. I don't get it.... You don't have to play it, I guess some people like to max every race.

     

    But like x-men said, the point is more for having a race that doesn't really give you any extra abilities and not whore something op. So what would it matter if the max level is 1000+ at that point...? 

     

    Skitt, increase the max level!

×
×
  • Create New...