MOTD Revamp

Discussion in 'News And Updates' started by SleepySirenMitsu, Jul 10, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. RainbowGauntlet

    RainbowGauntlet Servers Broke Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2016
    Messages:
    339
    Likes Received:
    393
    But the point of someone posting that shit publicly isn't for discourse, it is meant to cause shit or shame an admin who may have made a mistake. I have never in my life seen someone do it respectfully
     
  2. tac45original

    tac45original Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    14
    (I promise from here I will try and limit my replies!)

    I agree with what you are saying. However I think it comes down to things such as public reactions - Admins should not be arguing with players over voice chat. I know that this has happened quite a number of times over the server's history. It makes the admin look bad and makes them seem like they whinge often.

    Rainy, this is true, but admins have shamed players publicly too for rule violations. I think it needs to be more clear on both sides where boundaries need to be set.
     
  3. SleepySirenMitsu

    SleepySirenMitsu MiTaSuNeKoNoNoNo Staff Member Owner

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2016
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    233
    It gets frustrating being called "nazis" or "terrible/shit admins" for doing what we think is best for enforcing the rules and yes there are times when we need to own up to our mistakes. But I can absolutely understand that someone might snap a little with people constantly going at them from every direction when to them, they're just following the rules/doing their jobs.

    That's what this thread is for, to help better staff and community relations but respect is key. I will not tolerate anyone undermining or disrespecting an admin if they cannot discuss things civilly and I won't let anyone talk down to us. If we believe it was a genuine mistake then we will do our best to fix it, if for some reason it was done with malicious intent it is up to us to deal with it, not the community to publicly shame the staff into changing their mind, which is what often happens.

    No one ever said being an admin was easy, an admin has to watch the server, deal with reports, and diffuse/deal with server situations and day after day if you have people tearing into you for every decision you make it can wear you down very quickly and cause mass amounts of stress. Our staff watches the server out of loyalty to the community and a good heart, please cut them some slack every once in a while, we really do try our best.
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2018
    Scorpina, Ailuros and A-J like this.
  4. tac45original

    tac45original Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    14
    Unfortunately I feel like the problem does often rest with enforcing some rules, such as what admins consider mingey. Lovesdads and Bena have been banned permanently and God was banned for 6 months, to the discontent of the community, who had largely disagreed. However, nothing had changed. This is how abuse begins though, when the admins believe that their opinions are by default above those of the community. I don't believe in abusing admins however seeing as common sense DOESN'T always prevail it is bound to happen. It's an ugly and unfortunate cycle.
     
  5. SleepySirenMitsu

    SleepySirenMitsu MiTaSuNeKoNoNoNo Staff Member Owner

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2016
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    233
    We're not above the community, plenty of admins have been punished, demoted, and let go over breaking the rules. Not even Rainy and I are above the rules.
     
  6. tac45original

    tac45original Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    14
    I'm know that this is the case. It's the idea of discarding community opinion in favour of admin opinion only. Tough decisions DO sometimes need to be made, but it's important to consider the rest of the community when it comes to banning some people in certain circumstances.
     
  7. Straight_Bender

    Straight_Bender GLua C0d3r Elite Trusted

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2016
    Messages:
    685
    Likes Received:
    437
    There are cases where this may happen, such as possibly the case of `god`, I normally wouldn't mention names but this is the most forthcoming name that most people have an opinion on either side of the fence, admins and normal players. However, most cases aren't like this, this case is a very plain, obvious what the player did case. Other cases normally have a lot of things happening in the background as mitsu said with reports and the like, sometimes players go deliberately out of their way to target admins.

    I agree and although this
    is true and I will always try and stay the admin side of the fence because I have been there and know what it is like, there are admins who have seemed to have done this without snapping, either that or they snap too easily and shouldn't (have) be(en) an admin.

    As to rules, I know that the motd is fairly long in and of itself currently but there are situations that come up fairly regularly that I think need to be adressed as dealing with 2 different admins ends up with 2 very different results, an example: Hsusing/KOSing off radar in overtime, I don't personally believe you should be able to do this due to disguisers but I was told this by a higher up back then either before I was admin or before I was super that it was classed as T manipulation. Nothing in the rules suggests for or against this, but it is a very common scenario, even if it were to be placed on the forums or somewhere else where people could know the situation. It's not really fair or helpful to players if they get slain for it, but someone else does the same thing to them and doesn't.

    (Don't ask me why I have a long memory for stupid shit like this but I can remember the map, the situation and the person who told me and I have probably a half dozen more for when different situations arise)
     
    Lamb - e and Feldma like this.
  8. SleepySirenMitsu

    SleepySirenMitsu MiTaSuNeKoNoNoNo Staff Member Owner

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2016
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    233
    I will be around as much as I'm able to between work shifts and between myself, Sammi, and Xylo we'll do our best to make sure both the community and the staff treat each other fairly.

    The high sus thing has always been iffy yeah.. I personally don't think the Ko S/ Sus off radar during OT should remain a rule so we'll discuss that together.
     
    Feldma and Derp proper like this.
  9. Feldma

    Feldma Professional Zapper Shot Misser Donator Respected

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    179
    Speaking of inconsistencies, perhaps a chart like this (something I was working on) would be useful to properly draft up.

    In overtime, any highly suspicious calls become KOS. Assuming there are only a few players left, and a radar only shows x amount of players, specifically and only one not proven, I think that'd be highly suspicious and therefore maybe worthy of death. Perhaps you have to get the person tested if possible before killing?

    That being said, I feel like this would be such a situational rule that it'd just be easier to say that you can't KOS off radar.
     
  10. Rysta

    Rysta Sore fingers

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2016
    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    107
    Just remember that D vs T 1v1 scenarios are quite common, and nerfing the radar like such puts the detective at a significant disadvantage. Dets were already hit hard by the DG3 nerf.
     
    failtry and lachy101 like this.
  11. SleepySirenMitsu

    SleepySirenMitsu MiTaSuNeKoNoNoNo Staff Member Owner

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2016
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    233
    We'll see what we can do with the radar without screwing the Detectives over.
     
  12. Hoosen

    Hoosen Head Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2016
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    461
    What really matters is how judiciously you interpret and apply the rules, not what the rules are. This is up to the staff to figure out.

    But, we should still focus on simplifying the rules. There are too many, and new players aren't going to read every single thing. Get rid of duplicate rules, such as "crowbarring innos will get you killed", and "any amount of damage towards a player". Also, "allowed acts" and "situational acts" include rules which could be included under just "allowed acts".

    Some rules also seem to be obscure. As a result, some people are slain when they are abiding by the rules. Consider this rule: "Calling a 'Kill On Sight' on an Innocent player. (Does not matter if they hit you, people have no proof.. You just killed an inno)". In the same way, people have no proof that you are proven, even if the detective says so. But people are still slain for killing the "proven" (including myself when I'm detective ending an RDM chain.)
     
  13. Feldma

    Feldma Professional Zapper Shot Misser Donator Respected

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    179
    I have a two hour flight ahead of me, I'm going to try and condense my draft MOTD (posted above) as much as possible.

    It'll give me something to do so...
     
    Hoosen likes this.
  14. tac45original

    tac45original Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    14
    This would be really important for the server to clarify some certain points.
    Something I think would be really important to clarify would be on killing an innocent in the event of RDM or attempted RDM. I've seen a couple of different interpretations of what can happen (killing an RDMing inno can get you killed; killing an RDMing inno is RDM on behalf of the killer and punished with a slay) and it would be nice to see a more concrete idea of what happens in this circumstance.

    Could something relating to barrel warnings perhaps be reformed as well? While it's clear why the rule is in place, most people will blow up barrels without the warning anyway, and is RDM if the explosion kills somebody, and could be dealt with using the RDM rule only. Additionally, if a barrel is in a typically crowded area, most innos will throw the barrel away.
     
  15. Feldma

    Feldma Professional Zapper Shot Misser Donator Respected

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    179
    Barrel warnings as a rule don't exist in the current MOTD as far as I remember.
     
  16. Straight_Bender

    Straight_Bender GLua C0d3r Elite Trusted

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2016
    Messages:
    685
    Likes Received:
    437
    Can we get a concrete number or rule on slay for Ardm, IMO opinion only slaying for over 40 (most not all admins, IIRC) is far too high but I'd rather have a number so I know whether or not to report *people* for Ardm/crowbarring.
     
  17. Rysta

    Rysta Sore fingers

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2016
    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    107
    What about when you get killed by your fellow innocents for retaliating to said ARDM?
     
  18. Rainbow

    Rainbow Baby Admin Staff Member Baby Admin

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2018
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    13
    @Straight_Bender As far as I can tell the rule stands as anything up to 30 is an impair and anything past 30 is a slay, so either way reporting for ardm is probably worth it if they did something to bother you
     
  19. A-J

    A-J Never gonna give a rock Staff Member TTT Admin

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2016
    Messages:
    468
    Likes Received:
    497
    Sorry in advance for the long post but I got a bit carried away. I added colours to make it look a bit nicer on the eyes (but not too much colour *cough*) I will attempt to give my understanding of the rules questioned above and I hope it is correct in the eyes of other staff and clears things up for you guys.

    Proven wise you should have some sort of verifiable source such as but not limited to:
    • The word of another proven (detective)
    • A test result preferably claimed by the detective or another proven.
    • Having performed an innocent action such as KOSing a traitor (not relaying), calling a detective to get credits from a body etc.
    • Otherwise if the general living base believe that you are proven then that is sufficient. An example of this is when asking "Is X proven?" a significant amount of responders say "Yes X is proven".
    Significant amount is a little vague but consider it enough to be unlikely to be traitor support. It is POSSIBLE for a traitor to attain a proven status from the above but highly unlikely. Even if a deemed proven attacks you, you may still return fire anyway. This is my opinion on proven and may vary. You DO NOT have to believe someone when they claim proven when identifying a traitors body if you have reason to suspect they are lying.

    As for the "Calling a KOS on an Innocent player" you must consider the circumstances. You need a verifiable source of the Innocent performing a traitorous act to not then be shot for killing the innocent yourself. This may include but is not limited to:

    • The innocent having a confirmed kill of another innocent on their corpse (proof of RDM).
    • The general living player base observing the innocent traitor baiting or damaging others.
    • Fake tester call that was not widely accepted as a fake tester.
    • A legitimate KOS call made by someone else, or a false KOS made by the innocent.
    You get the idea anyway. What is NOT NECESSARILY verifiable is when you get shot first by the innocent but kill them first. If this was not witnessed then it is not verifiable and COULD be a traitor covering their tracks. This is unfortunate but you SHOULD be shot for this and that is where the RDM chain should end. No chain should exceed 2 innocent kills (assuming there is only 1 RDMer). I hope this clarifys a few things but let me know if it doesn't or alternatively if I have missed something other staff.

    IMO you should NEVER be slain for killing an RDMing innocent whether they are killing you or another player without reason. The only person who will be slain in that situation is the original RDMer who SHOULD be reported by the killer. This is especially important if the killer then gets executed for killing an innocent anyway within reason. Here is the real scenario.

    "So during the round, Xylo begins to RDM and AJ kills them for it. Ailuros has no evidence that Xylo was RDMing (even though he was) and kills AJ. The only person who can be slain is Xylo if they are reported by AJ. AIluros has no reason to be shot in this case." - Just think of it as a rule of 2 at most in any RDM chain. If you are killing the 3rd person, you are probably RDMing.


    Personally I employ the idea that damage amount does not matter but what does matter is how significantly did the ARDM affect the victims round. The best way I can describe this is some scenarios. (The names are only used to make it easier to distinguish players instead of saying Player X, Y, Z.)

    "At the start of the round, Hoosen crowbars tac45 for 20hp. Tac45 then executes Hoosen and identifys the body. Nobody witnessed the crowbar from Hoosen, therefore the detective Rysta executes Tac45." - In this scenario Hoosen did 20hp damage yet ultimately caused Tac45 to die. This would be slayable ARDM if Tac45 reported Hoosen.

    "At the start of the round, Hoosen crowbars tac45 for 40hp. Tac45 eventually kills Hoosen and identifys the body. Most people saw the fight be started by Hoosen, therefore the detective Rysta buys a medkit and heals Tac45. Tac45 later dies to an AWP by a traitor unrelated to the Hoosen incident." - In this scenario Hoosen did 40hp damage yet ultimately Tac45 died to something unrelated (a weapon that 1 shots regardless of hp) and was healed to full hp. Despite being a significant amount of damage I would likely only impair Hoosen as the round was not affected significantly. This would be harder to justify at more hp loss.

    "At the start of the round, Hoosen crowbars tac45 for 80hp. Tac45 eventually kills Hoosen and identifys the body. Most people saw the fight be started by Hoosen, therefore the detective Rysta does not kill Tac45. Tac45 shortly dies to an AWP by a traitor unrelated to the Hoosen incident." - In this scenario Hoosen did 80hp damage yet ultimately Tac45 died to something unrelated and a weapon that 1 shots regardless of hp. Despite Tac45 dying to an AWP anyway (meaning the 80 damage was meaningless) it is too much to simply impair and could affect Tac45's round in other ways (change of playstyle to avoid damage etc.) therefore I would slay in this case for ARDM.


    As you can see it is more complicated than simply hp loss but it is very difficult to describe that precisely and concisely in a !motd. As a general rule 40hp loss is significant enough that anything above is definitely slayable and I believe thats how it should be interpreted, not that anything less than 40hp is only ever an impair. I hope this clears things up. Either way report for ARDM anyway to get an impair. If the person is targeting you then include that and with multiple reports we can be harsher for repeat offenders or targeting.

    Answered above but basically unless it is verifiable that you were not RDMing, then your fellow innocents should kill you in that situation without punishment. It sucks but in this case you must report the person who was ARDMing to get them slain.
     
    tac45original likes this.
  20. SleepySirenMitsu

    SleepySirenMitsu MiTaSuNeKoNoNoNo Staff Member Owner

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2016
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    233
    The number I remember Rainy giving was either 20 or 25 I believe..but 30 might be a good middle ground.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page