Notpron Forums

You all know the constant mowing about op's what ever they do it isn't right..

I once read about a way to prevent cheating:
http://sauerbraten.org/docs/game.html#m ... yer_online

on short: the first one who uses a certain cmd becomes admin

now, lets translate that idea to db:

the first one who adds becomes op for that pu. not as in +o but simply access to the !red cmd with a limited duration and limited players (the ones who added) and also limited amount (e.g. only 3 times, as it is very unlikly that more then 3 fuck up in ONE game and it also fits well with the veto).
I would also limit the time it can be used to 5mins after the pu start.

another way to determinate the admin could be: make the one admin that has the lowest ban time

the problem starts if the op abuses his power. In the game this is handled by just changing the server, so s.o. else becomes admin.

Here this isn't that easy, as there is only one pu at a time.
and idea would be that a certain number of participants can veto the !red that the abusing op executed.

as in !veto and if 6/4 players do that, all actions by that op are eliminated and applied to him/her self with the ban time added up.
The cmd can also be msged to the bot in case 3/6 ppl got banned (no more possible)

the bot itself could record how often and regulary s.o. gets banned and could increase the time itself by a certain amount everytime, so s.o. who fucks up more often gets longer bans.


so again, the limits for the temporary op would be:

• 5min pause before !red can be used
• !red can be used only 1/2*playernumber times
• max ban time is 1d + the time the bot adds
• 2/3*playernumber players !veto is needed to undo all actions by the op

pro:
always an admin available
less work for 'fixed' ops
neutral:
fairness depends on the players that added
negative:
can be abused if all added don't like a certain player

for the last point, the 'fixed' op's could handle such situations

--Ano


[Edit:] doh. i voted wrong wanted the lowest ban time one

Well, i like the idea, that the hole pu can vote for a ban.
And people, who always find a fault with the bans, can now decide for a ban on their own.
I dont think that there is a need, to give the one with the lowest bantime admin. I think there must be a command, that all players in the pu can send to the bot and vote for a ban with this command. Like that, it would be hard to abuse, excepting all other players dont like someone, as you said. I think 3-4 votes for a ban should be given, to ban someone. And the time should be voted too. Maybe you can log the votes, so the op's can see, if the reason for a ban is right or something.

Anyway, I thought about 'changing' the !rules. Or to rework them. Especially for new players, so that they can see, how to get PW, add in the pu, and what's the regular time to join, the time they will be banned if not, and so on.
I think we should collect some suggestions from all members (even if some think, that this won't work).


Well, time to discuss now


Missie

yes, the !rules cmd says nothing about the bot cmds, no-where in the channel is a link to a bot-tutorial..
we always have to explain everything Oo.
I would just put a fixed link to a bot tutorial in the topic.
e.g. "Read this to play here" or similar.

You adjustment of the idea was also in my head, but hmm no idea why i didn't write it.. i think i was to fixed on doing it the way that guy did

you shouldn't say 4 but instead 4/6 or better 2/3 of the players, so its relative to the max playernumber

--Ano

just rememberd why i didn't choosed the vote only idea:

some ppl get really pissed when others fuck around, others not. If only one decides to ban, it is more likley that he will use it.
If more ppl need to vote, it is likley that some don't care at all.
But it is even more likley that the WILL care if the ban was not justified.
So, others only have to react when something unfair is happening and i think they would react more to undo a unfair ban then to do a fair ban.

maye there should be 2 vetos.. one that reflects(as in, the banner gets banned for abuse) and one that simplies undo's the ban.
could be called:
!abuse // admin abused op power
!veto // admin was to strict


--Ano

we just need some active, available ops. i vote for devilkid

so, missie and me aren't active in your opinion.. right.

most destructive comment .. really nice.

well if no one replies in any way constructive here, it seems that you all just give a FUCK about what happens, and thus you have absolutly no right to cry about anything reagarding ops.

so either constructive or STFU.

--Ano

most of us are just tired of this u know :[

If you browse the forums about that topic you'll know why... that topic has been on for years without any solution that makes everyone happy

anyway, i dont like that idear because

1) its to complex (all commands like red,veto
2) as far as i know - players that open pickups are not always there themself to observe
3) first person to add with the power to remove other ppl that added... (uhm i really dont know if even I can resist removing players there, just because i think they could destroy al lthe fun in game)


ok last thing: Good Idear with alot thinking about all, but for our small community unnessesary imo :[

all commands.. like red, veto.. which are pretty much all..

removing is not part of your power imo.

--Ano

I still think there is no need for such a "bann-system".
The community is to small, and there ain't People who would destroy PU's on purpose. BTW new Players are getting nervous and noobish they just leave the Pickup because they dont care or they dont have the Time, if you would bann them, they won't come back, i guess. Its just rly like Kermet said, tired of this shit.
But isnt a bad idea Marenz/Suprano, would be nice in a bigger community where are more morons around.
so long....