Zandronum

Posted: **Tue Aug 16, 2016 8:34 pm**

So I just got back from watching a shitty movie called Suicide Squad and got on teamspeak to see who was on. I was briefly informed by my clan mates were caught up over a callvote kicking frenzy when R was practicing with itself in a server. Now I know this whole Jenova/R vs A3/Mobius thing is getting extremely old, but I feel as though this has not only gotten on far enough but due to recent activities on certain clusters it seems not only is it a problem but apparently when presented with the problem Alexmax doesn't want to do anything about it. The only compromise is that Rosking can be banned for 15 minutes or so for initiating it. Apparently it is ok to votekick ban spectators provided they are not in a game or it doesn't interfere with one.

I don't believe A3 has ever stopped our adversaries (the entire clan scene) from spectating us in practice on a server we don't own since FunCrusher is not privately ours, but having the head administrator of Funcrusher do nothing about it when it happens to us despite Ral being banned for this very same reason issued by Jenova himself is not only hypocritical but also alarmingly in bad taste. So the purpose of this topic is just to simply raise awareness that certain activities from the server host are behaving in one particular way despite bemoaning about the exact same problem elsewhere. I want the community to be well informed about these decisions in the hopes to clarify what certain people want and mean when they want an activity to stop.. especially if it isn't coming from certain people.

Posted: **Tue Aug 16, 2016 8:37 pm**

thank god im not online that often

Posted: **Tue Aug 16, 2016 8:45 pm**

I agree, bad antics going on or AlexMax didn't know of this. I'm hoping it's the latter.

Posted: **Tue Aug 16, 2016 9:50 pm**

If accusations of team/clan bias are to be levied against a server owner, and the objective of the topic is to raise awareness of said bias and/or initiate change of policy, it would be productive to show any proof in the form of untrimmed server/client logs.

To clarify for those unfamiliar with this Funcrusher rule being mentioned, if A3 members were at any point actively joining R's practice against R's wishes and refused to spectate, or were calling votekicks on participating members of R, A3 would actually be in direct violation of Funcrusher rule #6:

Do not maliciously interfere with an in-progress game. This includes (but is not limited to) tomfoolery like kicking people who are trying to play the game, and joining an organized game in the middle of play without permission.

One could draw the line of 'malicious interference' towards indirect actions of A3 while they were spectating, as the rule is not limited to direct obstruction of the game. Unfortunately, in it's current state, this topic is no more than conjecture.

Posted: **Tue Aug 16, 2016 9:59 pm**

Xenaero wrote: it would be productive to show any proof in the form of untrimmed server/client logs.

logs pls

Posted: **Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:43 pm**

Xenaero wrote:Things

http://pastebin.com/M7aZykSf

Lines of interest:

Code: Select all

2016-08-15  22:57:37  <AlexMax> so really, as long as you're not actually playing the game or attempting to, you don't have a leg to stand on

Code: Select all

2016-08-15  22:57:38  <EmZee_>  so basically nothing against kicked spectators you're trying to say
2016-08-15  22:57:42  <AlexMax> basically

Code: Select all

2016-08-15  22:58:13  <AlexMax> i think some a3 member banned cab
2016-08-15  22:58:17  <AlexMax> when he was afk in a server
2016-08-15  22:58:23  <AlexMax> and I personally didn't do anything
2016-08-15  22:58:29  <AlexMax> rust banned him for 15 minutes
2016-08-15  22:58:35  <AlexMax> and then jenova banned him for like a week

As I stated earlier Ral's activity was unacceptable and was punished for it. Jenova even attempted to use this as leverage during the BE incident and I find it completely inappropriate from both sides that votekicking is allowed and even tolerated from "certain" groups. We, and I mean Rust, did not find it acceptable for Ral to votekick Rosking; though, Alexmax did tell Rust he may ban Rosking for a few minutes it is insanely unethical such a proposition had to propose only after people had to actively seek out answers. The real issue is that Alexmax said that as long as A3 wasn't playing then it was absolutely fine for votekick abuse, but has a problem with proxy players using votekick for abuse. Which is it?

Update
There is a demo of the incident. Not exactly everything but..
https://www.sendspace.com/file/oh0sxf

Posted: **Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:55 pm**

From what I've read Rosking (not sure if others were involved?) has kicked various players from NJ's clan scrim server for spectating.

What were his reasons for this?
Were the spectators disrupting the game in any format?

If there was no clear reason for this, to me that is vote abuse, and could be a violation of:

"Do not maliciously interfere with an in-progress game. This includes (but is not limited to) tomfoolery like kicking people who are trying to play the game, and joining an organized game in the middle of play without permission."

Sure the spectators weren't playing, but this doesn't give anyone the right to kick the spectators if they're not doing anything to disrupt the game.

Only heard one side of the story, but if it's anything like the above then Rosking, and anyone else involved in the kicking of spectators (providing they weren't interfering) should be punished imo.

Posted: **Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:15 pm**

My stance on vote kicking is similar to Alex's. In the past I have dealt out punishment more severely for people who directly abuse voting to affect the game. Examples:

1. A player joined in a duel server gets kicked by 2 guys because they wanted the server to themselves.
2. A spectator and a player in-game kick another player in-game because he wanted to fight his friend (spectator)
3. Cooperative abuse: you can use your imaginations for this.

As for the Ral incident, Cab wasn't even in the game and was basically AFK. I banned ral for a short time as a warning. Jenova did ban him for a week from both NJ and BE eventually. I told Alex, Cab should be banned (not long term) as a warning to not be retarded.

Xen wrote:it would be productive to show any proof in the form of untrimmed server/client logs.

The demo above is from the point of view from Dranzer who did nothing. But if you insist, here are the instances where this started straight out of the server logs.

Spoiler: Slyfox (Open)
[16:08:15;23:33:53] Connect (v2.1.2): 127.0.0.1:10667
[16:08:15;23:33:53] [a3]slyfox has connected.
[16:08:15;23:33:53] anim[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:33:53] Stall[R] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:33:55] CHAT cenou[r]: took ye armour m8
[16:08:15;23:33:55] anim[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:33:55] anim[r] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:33:58] Stall[R] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:00] Torvald[r] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:01] cenou[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:01] BEAST3[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:02] BEAST3[R] lost the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:02] BEAST3[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:02] Water[R] returned the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:04] anim[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:07] Water[R] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:10] Stall[R] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:11] cenou[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:12] BEAST3[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:12] cenou[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:12] cenou[r] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:34:14] cenou[r] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:16] cenou[r] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:17] Stall[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:18] Water[R] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:19] Torvald[r] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:21] BEAST3[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:22] Water[R] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:22] Water[R] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:34:22] Stall[R] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:24] Torvald[r] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:24] anim[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:24] list/banlist.txt: 45 entries loaded.
[16:08:15;23:34:24] list/whitelist.txt: 2 entries loaded.
[16:08:15;23:34:25] cenou[r] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:34:26] anim[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:26] anim[r] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:34:27] BEAST3[R] lost the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:27] BEAST3[R] chewed on cenou[r]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:34:28] Stall[R] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:28] anim[r] returned the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:30] Water[R] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:34:32] anim[r] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:34:34] Torvald[r] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:35] Stall[R] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:36] Water[R] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:37] BEAST3[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:38] Water[R] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:40] Five minutes remain!
[16:08:15;23:34:41] BEAST3[R] lost the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:41] BEAST3[R] chewed on Water[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:34:41] Water[R] returned the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:43] anim[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:43] Torvald[r] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:43] anim[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:43] anim[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:46] Water[R] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:46] Stall[R] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:46] cenou[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:47] cenou[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:47] cenou[r] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:34:48] Stall[R] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:34:50] anim[r] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:50] Red flag returned.
[16:08:15;23:34:50] Torvald[r] and Stall[R] scored for the Blue team!
[16:08:15;23:34:53] Water[R] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:55] BEAST3[R] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:55] cenou[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:34:56] anim[r] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:00] anim[r] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:01] Torvald[r] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:02] Water[R] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:05] BEAST3[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:05] Water[R] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:08] cenou[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:11] anim[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:11] BEAST3[R] lost the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:11] BEAST3[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:11] anim[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:11] anim[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:12] Stall[R] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:12] Water[R] returned the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:12] Water[R] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:15] BEAST3[R] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:16] cenou[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:16] Torvald[r] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:22] BEAST3[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:23] list/banlist.txt: 45 entries loaded.
[16:08:15;23:35:23] list/whitelist.txt: 2 entries loaded.
[16:08:15;23:35:25] Torvald[r] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:26] Stall[R] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:26] anim[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:26] Water[R] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:30] anim[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:30] anim[r] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:35:31] Stall[R] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:31] cenou[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:32] BEAST3[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:33] Torvald[r] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:33] cenou[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:33] cenou[r] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:35:34] BEAST3[R] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:35] Stall[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:36] BEAST3[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:39] Water[R] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:39] Torvald[r] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:41] cenou[r] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:41] anim[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:44] BEAST3[R] chewed on cenou[r]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:35:50] Torvald[r] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:50] Torvald[r] lost the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:50] Torvald[r] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:51] Torvald[r] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:52] Stall[R] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:53] anim[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:53] BEAST3[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:53] anim[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:53] anim[r] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:35:55] Stall[R] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:56] cenou[r] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:35:57] BEAST3[R] lost the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:35:57] BEAST3[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:35:58] Water[R] returned the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:36:01] anim[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:02] BEAST3[R] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:05] Torvald[r] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:06] Stall[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:06] cenou[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:36:07] Torvald[r] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:08] cenou[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:36:08] cenou[r] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:08] Water[R] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:36:09] Stall[R] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:36:11] anim[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:36:12] anim[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:36:12] anim[r] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:36:13] BEAST3[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:13] Stall[R] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:36:16] Wolverin3[R] (Caboose:10667) has called a vote ("kick [a3]slyfox", reason: "let me know when u play u").
[16:08:15;23:36:16] cenou[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:16] Wolverin3[R] (ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:36:16] Water[R] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:17] Torvald[r] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:21] anim[r] (ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:36:22] list/banlist.txt: 45 entries loaded.
[16:08:15;23:36:22] list/whitelist.txt: 2 entries loaded.
[16:08:15;23:36:23] anim[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:24] anim[r] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:25] Water[R] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:26] cenou[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:36:26] anim[r] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:28] Water[R] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:28] BEAST3[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:36:28] Stall[R] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:29] [a3]slyfox (ip:10667) votes "no".
[16:08:15;23:36:30] Vote passed!
[16:08:15;23:36:32] Water[R] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:34] anim[r] chewed on Stall[R]'s boomstick.
[16:08:15;23:36:34] BEAST3[R] lost the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:36:34] BEAST3[R] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:36:34] addban: ip added to list. It expires on 08/15/2016 23:46.
[16:08:15;23:36:34] [a3]slyfox was kicked from the server! Reason: IP is now banned - Vote kick, 2 to 1 (let me know when u play u).
[16:08:15;23:36:34] client [a3]slyfox disconnected.

Spoiler: Razgriz (Open)
[16:08:15;23:37:23] Connect (v2.1.2): ip:10667
[16:08:15;23:37:23] [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust has connected.
[16:08:15;23:37:24] BEAST3[R] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:25] cenou[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:37:25] anim[r] was splattered by Torvald[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:27] cenou[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:37:27] cenou[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:27] Torvald[r] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:37:30] Water[R] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:37:30] Torvald[r] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:31] Water[R] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:37:31] Water[R] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:32] Stall[R] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:15;23:37:33] Wolverin3[R] (ip:10667) has called a vote ("kick [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust").
[16:08:15;23:37:33] Torvald[r] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:35] BEAST3[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:37:35] Wolverin3[R] ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:37:36] Torvald[r] was splattered by cenou[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:37] anim[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:38] CHAT [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust: nice
[16:08:15;23:37:38] cenou[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:39] BEAST3[R] lost the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:37:39] BEAST3[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:40] Water[R] returned the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:37:42] CHAT Wolverin3[R]: let me kno when u play us
[16:08:15;23:37:42] [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust (ip:10667) votes "no".
[16:08:15;23:37:43] Torvald[r] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:46] cenou[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:47] JohnCena[R] (ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:37:47] anim[r] was splattered by Stall[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:48] Vote passed!
[16:08:15;23:37:48] BEAST3[R] was splattered by Water[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:37:51] addban: ip added to list. It expires on 08/15/2016 23:47.
[16:08:15;23:37:51] [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust was kicked from the server! Reason: IP is now banned - Vote kick, 2 to 1.
[16:08:15;23:37:51] client [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust disconnected.

Spoiler: Razgriz pt 2 (Open)
[16:08:15;23:47:09] Connect (v2.1.2): ip:10667
[16:08:15;23:47:10] [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust has connected.
[16:08:15;23:47:15] Wolverin3[R] (ip:10667) has called a vote ("kick [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust").
[16:08:15;23:47:16] Wolverin3[R] (ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:47:23] Torvald[R] (ip:2139) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:47:23] Stall[R] ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:47:23] JohnCena[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:47:24] [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust (ip:10667) votes "no".
[16:08:15;23:47:25] anim[r] ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:47:25] CHAT EmZee: what is this shit
[16:08:15;23:47:26] BEAST3[R] (ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:47:26] Vote passed!
[16:08:15;23:47:28] CHAT Wolverin3[R]: whyh not
[16:08:15;23:47:30] CHAT [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust: its a vacation
[16:08:15;23:47:30] addban: ip added to list. It expires on 08/15/2016 23:57.
[16:08:15;23:47:30] [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust was kicked from the server! Reason: IP is now banned - Vote kick, 5 to 1.
[16:08:15;23:47:30] client [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust disconnected.

Spoiler: Shane (Open)
[16:08:15;23:47:31] Wolverin3[R] was splattered by BEAST3[R]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:15;23:47:35] Red flag returned.
[16:08:15;23:47:35] JohnCena[R] scored for the Blue team!
[16:08:15;23:47:39] Wolverin3[R] (ip:10667) has called a vote ("kick emzee", reason: "traitor").
[16:08:15;23:47:47] JohnCena[R] (ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:47:48] Wolverin3[R] (ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:47:48] One minute remains!
[16:08:15;23:47:49] JohnCena[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:15;23:47:51] anim[r] (ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:47:52] BEAST3[R] (ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:47:52] Stall[R] (ip:10667) votes "no".
[16:08:15;23:47:53] EmZee (ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:15;23:47:53] Vote passed!
[16:08:15;23:47:54] CHAT Wolverin3[R]: bye shane
[16:08:15;23:47:56] CHAT JohnCena[R]: white trash
[16:08:15;23:47:57] addban: ip added to list. It expires on 08/15/2016 23:57.
[16:08:15;23:47:57] EmZee was kicked from the server! Reason: IP is now banned - Vote kick, 5 to 1 (traitor).
[16:08:15;23:47:57] client EmZee disconnected.

Shane was kicked for speaking against the voting or something. Regardless, a few others were caught

Spoiler: Raz pt 3 (Open)
[16:08:16;00:02:59] Connect (v2.1.2): ip:10667
[16:08:16;00:02:59] [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust has connected.
[16:08:16;00:03:07] Starrk[R] killed himself.
[16:08:16;00:03:14] JohnCena[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:19] JohnCena[R] lost the Red flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:19] JohnCena[R] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:16;00:03:20] anim[r] returned the Red flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:21] anim[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:22] BEAST3[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:31] BEAST3[R] lost the Red flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:31] BEAST3[R] killed himself.
[16:08:16;00:03:34] Starrk[R] has taken the Red flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:39] anim[r] lost the Blue flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:39] anim[r] killed himself.
[16:08:16;00:03:47] BEAST3[R] returned the Blue flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:47] list/banlist.txt: 44 entries loaded.
[16:08:16;00:03:47] list/whitelist.txt: 2 entries loaded.
[16:08:16;00:03:51] Starrk[R] lost the Red flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:51] Starrk[R] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:16;00:03:52] anim[r] returned the Red flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:53] anim[r] has taken the Blue flag.
[16:08:16;00:03:54] Wolverin3[R] (ip:10667) has called a vote ("kick [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust", reason: "why do u care").
[16:08:16;00:03:55] Wolverin3[R] (ip:10667) votes "yes".
[16:08:16;00:03:56] BEAST3[R] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:16;00:03:59] JohnCena[R] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:16;00:04:01] Torvald[R] (ip:2139) votes "yes".
[16:08:16;00:04:04] CHAT Wolverin3[R]: a3 noob lmao
[16:08:16;00:04:06] Starrk[R] was splattered by anim[r]'s super shotgun.
[16:08:16;00:04:07] Five minutes remain!
[16:08:16;00:04:09] Ken* (ip:50477) votes "no".
[16:08:16;00:04:09] CHAT [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust: lose to ud more?
[16:08:16;00:04:09] Vote passed!
[16:08:16;00:04:10] CHAT [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust: damn owned
[16:08:16;00:04:12] CHAT [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust: lmao
[16:08:16;00:04:12] CHAT Wolverin3[R]: let me know
[16:08:16;00:04:13] CHAT [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust: nice shot weon
[16:08:16;00:04:13] addban: ip added to list. It expires on 08/16/2016 00:14.
[16:08:16;00:04:13] [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust was kicked from the server! Reason: IP is now banned - Vote kick, 2 to 1 (why do u care).
[16:08:16;00:04:13] client [a3]raz-inswiftwetrust disconnected.

A final instance happened after this last point, but the vote backfired and R left the server. As you can see, no one joined anything or said anything to provoke the voting.

P.S. Hatred would be proud of the topic title.

Posted: **Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:37 pm**

There is no specific rule against troll votekicking on FUNCRUSHER. There is, however, a rule against what's called "malicious interference". Here is what the rule says:

6. Do not maliciously interfere with an in-progress game. This includes (but is not limited to) tomfoolery like kicking people who are trying to play the game, and joining an organized game in the middle of play without permission.

I wrote this rule very purposefully, first because I didn't want to have to itemize out every single way you could ruin the game for another player, but moreover I wanted to put the emphasis on the game being played, not the players themselves.

Second, let's be clear about what this server this incident took place on. This server was not Public CTF. This was not Priv. This was on the Clan Scrimmage server, and R was doing some in-house games against itself. A3 joined to spectate, and R callvote kicked A3 members out of the server.

Even if there was no provocation at all by A3, according to the rules in place R didn't do anything wrong. The A3 members were just spectating the game, and because it was R clan scrim inhouses, I don't think you can even make an argument that anybody who was kicked was trying to play, like you could argue in priv or on a public server - the next opportunity to play on clan scrim is when whoever is using the server is done with it, or if you're the one being scrimmed. Rust banned some R members for 15 minutes.

As for what Jenova did, I don't like overruling my administrators decisions unless they are particularly outrageous. I started FUNCRUSHER first because I wanted a home for Duel16, but also because I wanted to provide a great location for people to play competitive Doom on Skulltag - I don't get my rocks off by trying to pick apart ticky tack he said she said bullshit between two clans. Therefore, I give my administrators a wide berth and I'm extremely reluctant to overrule them, and they're even semi-protected by the first rule - you can be banned for any reason or no reason. Jenova is no longer an administrator, and he's even banned for a much more egregious offense, so....he's gone.

For what it's worth, some people also wanted me to take away Rust's admin for showing favoritism to a clan mate by only banning him for 15 minutes, and I told them that I didn't have a leg to stand on due to the fact that the votekick happened with nobody else on the server, thus no game in progress. I think they're still pissed off at me over that. You can't win, really.

That said, you can make a decent argument that the "malicious interference" rule, as it stands, is stupid and incomplete, since it only explicitly covers people who are playing the game. The question is, what do you replace it with? A simple addition would be "no votekicking without a good reason", but then you get into more ticky-tack judgement calls over what a "good reason" is. The last thing I want to do is balloon the rules into something all-encompassing that a sufficiently motivated rules lawyer will just worm their way through anyway.

Posted: **Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:49 pm**

Rust banned some R members for 15 minutes.

Incorrect, I have not handed out any ban(s), yet.

Posted: **Tue Aug 16, 2016 11:52 pm**

Ru5tK1ng wrote:
Rust banned some R members for 15 minutes.
Incorrect, I have not handed out any ban(s), yet.

Ah, gotcha. You told me you were going to, so I thought you had already gone through with it.

Posted: **Wed Aug 17, 2016 12:32 am**

AlexMax wrote: Even if there was no provocation at all by A3, according to the rules in place R didn't do anything wrong. The A3 members were just spectating the game, and because it was R clan scrim inhouses, I don't think you can even make an argument that anybody who was kicked was trying to play, like you could argue in priv or on a public server - the next opportunity to play on clan scrim is when whoever is using the server is done with it, or if you're the one being scrimmed. Rust banned some R members for 15 minutes.

That's not the argument. The argument is that you, specifically, even noticed a raise of proxy votekicking shenanigans and here we are from non-proxy members doing the same even if it isn't in-game related. Reality is that A3 out numbers R with 25 members in total, and out of 25 we have 10+ active members accordingly at any given time. I am pretty confident that you would find it in bad taste if we went around votekicking people all the time and remove them from your servers for so much as being in the spectator box regardless of the reason. This isn't a threat. I don't even want it to get to that point, but the issue is now that you've said it and word has spread can you imagine what floodgate you'd open with the likes of Killstrike or Shadowfox who actively going around already vote abusing. I don't know. I can see it now "well Alex said it isn't against the rules time to kick specators regardless if they may or may not play so long as they aren't playing now rofl."

Alexmax wrote:Stuff about Jenova

I understand but this is more about consistency rather than clan politics.

Alexmax wrote:For what it's worth, some people also wanted me to take away Rust's admin for showing favoritism to a clan mate by only banning him for 15 minutes, and I told them that I didn't have a leg to stand on due to the fact that the votekick happened with nobody else on the server, thus no game in progress. I think they're still pissed off at me over that. You can't win, really.

This isn't some competition you can win, and if you want to win then the only winning move is doing and getting what Alexmax wants. You don't overturn decisions, but then people are getting banned for NOT violating rules (Cab was AFK apparently so Ral did nothing wrong). Which is it? You can't have your cake and eat it too, but if you want to then call it a cake because you're telling us it's bread and you're starving. In short: What is the actual rule for votekicking? Are your administrators going to enforce their own version of their own rules or yours?

AlexMax wrote:That said, you can make a decent argument that the "malicious interference" rule, as it stands, is stupid and incomplete, since it only explicitly covers people who are playing the game. The question is, what do you replace it with? A simple addition would be "no votekicking without a good reason", but then you get into more ticky-tack judgement calls over what a "good reason" is. The last thing I want to do is balloon the rules into something all-encompassing that a sufficiently motivated rules lawyer will just worm their way through anyway.

To answer the first: why would I make an argument about that? The argument is consistency. What is the exact ruling on this situation and what will you do if, say, my clan decided to "do nothing wrong" and use our retarded numbers to overwhelm voting. Will you only make a rule then? If it comes down to that then why have a rule at all. That's my argument, and keep in mind I have been banned from NJ for absolutely no reason (Legion).

To answer the second: how about you make it a case by case investigation instead of a parameter someone is going to obviously find a loophole around. The case right now is that you have votekick problems on NJ from both proxy and non-proxy users. What is the verdict here? Are we allowed to just kick players in spectators with impunity? Has it come down to that?

Posted: **Wed Aug 17, 2016 9:14 am**

Some points here. Disclaimer: that's just an opinion, don't overreact please.

The fact that there's no separate rule for votekicking is very bad, since troll votekicking from one server automatically grants you troll 10 minute ban from the entire cluster.
You are not zandronum.exe and not Sean to think that spectators aren't players. It's the community that is important, not the random 6 people that happened to be playing at the moment.
What would happen if it was an R vs A3 scrim and R kicked benching A3 member from spectators? Would the game interference rule apply here? BUT HE DIDN'T PLAY!
Besides, if R chose to practice on a public server, it's their own problem.
Pretty sure there are people in R who are able to host a separate passworded server for clan practice in NY or NJ, which is what every other clan does if they don't want others to spy on their tactics.
Since they didn't do this, it's safe to suggest that Rosking's only motivation was simply offending A3 and that's disruptive behavior which should be punished.
There are multiple ways to be unbiased. You can do that by punishing everyone equally based on the situation and not strict rules, but instead you choose to not do anything at all.
The long ban for votekicking is correct since people who do troll votekicking are usually ready to get the punishment and 15 minutes (and even few hours) don't really matter here. Getting banned for a week could make them think a bit more next time though.

Anyway, my main point is that you should think how would you feel if you knew that anyone who dislikes you and has a decent team to back it up can remove you from the cluster provided you are spectating and not playing.
This is one of the community-supporting rules similar to the no impersonation rule that prevent it from becoming a shitstorm IMO.

...come to think of it, impersonation and clan impersonation is not punished if you follow the rules strictly.

Instead of discussing this based on precedents and "hey you are biased, you banned our clan member but don't ban their clan members!" it'd be useful to take this out of context and also add some basic rules that most people follow anyway.

Posted: **Wed Aug 17, 2016 11:35 pm**

Mobius wrote:Stuff

The problem is that you're looking for consistency in a ruleset that was fundamentally mercurial by design. Years ago I saw people getting banned from other servers over ticky tack shit, and I also had memories of equally petty shit going down in ZDaemon. I never really wanted FUNCRUSHER to follow in their footsteps, where people come crying to the admins over every inconsequential slight. So my rules were pretty lax on purpose, aside from the first one:

Playing on this server is a privilege, not a right. The administrators of this server can ban you for any reason or no reason at all.

This in essence gives individual administrators their own discretion so that they could feel empowered to nip actual problems in the bud that don't explicitly fall within the rules using their own judgement.

I never really expected such a system to be fair. I knew that those individual administrators have their own biases. But I figured that if I gave people from opposite sides of the community stake in the server that things would shake out in the long run. Keep in mind that ever since Jenova resigned, R has no major competitive stakeholders in the administration of the server, so if anything the deck is stacked against them right now.

As for this specific scenario, Rustking weighed in and said that given the circumstances he wanted to give a light punishment for the people responsible, and I don't see a problem with that. So there you go.

However, there's something wrong here. Giving so much power to administrators was supposed to let me do what I'm actually good at and enjoy doing, making sure the servers are up and running and correctly configured, along with occasionally making content to put on said servers. I like hosting for you guys. I like making stuff for you guys. I don't like being the middle of shit like this. Yet somehow it keeps happening, with increasing regularity. Something is clearly wrong with the status quo.

Posted: **Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:27 am**

AlexMax wrote:
Playing on this server is a privilege, not a right. The administrators of this server can ban you for any reason or no reason at all.

This rule alone, from the get-go, is a mistake. Sure, it might be controllable, but sometimes the damage cannot be undone. Some people -- myself included -- have gotten banned from various servers for petty reasons, and with a rule like the one you quoted you completely contradict the following statement you made yourself:

The problem is that you're looking for consistency in a ruleset that was fundamentally mercurial by design. Years ago I saw people getting banned from other servers over ticky tack shit, and I also had memories of equally petty shit going down in ZDaemon. I never really wanted FUNCRUSHER to follow in their footsteps, where people come crying to the admins over every inconsequential slight.

As I said before, this is still controllable to some extent, but once the damage is done, the damage is done. Reason being is that if you allow an administrator to ban people for anything at all, even if it means simply being in the server, the user will have absolutely no right to complain simply because of the fact that this rule is in place. This rule alone almost voids the purpose of the other rules set in place for the end user. Should those rules be followed? Absolutely, but when you have a rule that gives the admins free reign to do whatever they so please it completely screws with everyone because there are suddenly an infinite number of hidden and unwritten rules that could be put in place by the admin(s) currently in the server. Yes, I understand that this is extremely unlikely to happen, but you cannot rule out the possibility of this, especially since a large number of people have gotten banned for absolutely no good reason in various other places.

What I'm saying is, you can't exactly expect anyone to play fairly when you have a rule that essentially gives them a blank check to do whatever they want.

Posted: **Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:34 am**

One other thing that occurred to me that I don' t think I've made entirely clear.

If administrators are supposed to use their own discretion, why did I even bother with added rules about proxying in the first place? Don't I trust the judgement of my own administrators to handle abuse that isn't explicitly covered by a rule?

The simple answer is - and I suppose this is pretty much an open secret at this point if you've been playing on my servers recently - that I now have a script that automatically detects proxies upon connecting to a server and bans them.

Scripts aren't people. Scripts don't have discretion. They can't tell if somebody is proxying to the server for benign or nefarious reasons. Thus, I felt like an explicit rule that banned even non-nefarious proxy usage was necessary.

EDIT: I'm not ignoring your post, yellowtail, I was merely just so happened to finish an unrelated post after yours. I' wanna let this thread sit for a while before I respond again.

Posted: **Thu Aug 18, 2016 1:16 am**

your server, your rules, your admins, their discretion. its not like zandronum has some kind of server limit in which funcrusher is taking up internet real estate that prevents people from hosting new clusters or utilizing the ones that already exist. or even hosting a few on a local PC / laptop that can be run 24/7. the only criticism i have is that if the votekick thing actually does ban from the entire cluster then that might be a valid issue to attempt to find a solution for.

that said this post is grandstanding and should probably be tacked onto the original funcrusher thread and discussed directly with funcrusher staff on irc.

Posted: **Thu Aug 18, 2016 1:46 am**

(Yeah, I know I said I'd let the thread sit, but this is something that I feel is pretty easy to address).

nax wrote:your server, your rules, your admins, their discretion. its not like zandronum has some kind of server limit in which funcrusher is taking up internet real estate that prevents people from hosting new clusters or utilizing the ones that already exist. or even hosting a few on a local PC / laptop that can be run 24/7. the only criticism i have is that if the votekick thing actually does ban from the entire cluster then that might be a valid issue to attempt to find a solution for.

that said this post is grandstanding and should probably be tacked onto the original funcrusher thread and discussed directly with funcrusher staff on irc.

Just because it's my server, doesn't necessarily mean that I'm not open to discussion and criticism. It doesn't necessarily give me an obligation to find a consensus with every single issue that people bring up, sometimes we just have to agree to disagree, but ideally I'd like to find common ground with my players, and I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with hashing it out in a public forum as long as everybody keeps a cool head and it doesn't descend into drama 2.0: electric boogaloo. In fact, I actually prefer forums to IRC because it's not in real time and I have some time to think about things. I already said that I'm not exactly happy with the status quo, anyway.

And actually you do bring up a valid point - I think it would be useful to have a delineation between bans that write to the ban-list and bans that don't. I agree that the 10 minute votekicks that ordinary server denizens have access to shouldn't ban across the entire cluster, but unfortunately all bans on a server are written into a single banfile.

Posted: **Thu Aug 18, 2016 2:10 am**

AlexMax wrote:
The problem is that you're looking for consistency in a ruleset that was fundamentally mercurial by design. Years ago I saw people getting banned from other servers over ticky tack shit, and I also had memories of equally petty shit going down in ZDaemon. I never really wanted FUNCRUSHER to follow in their footsteps, where people come crying to the admins over every inconsequential slight. So my rules were pretty lax on purpose, aside from the first one:

That's understandable for the time that it is happening, but this situation is more clear-cut than just any inconsequential shit considering it doesn't happen very often among known players (how often does R and A3 take out their grudges over your server using votekicking? Like almost never I think). The only reason I am bringing it up is because of your latest issue with proxies doing just that and I have a case of non-proxying players participating in said activity.

Playing on this server is a privilege, not a right. The administrators of this server can ban you for any reason or no reason at all.

This is true. It is also a privilage to have a user base continuously using your service. It swings both ways.

Alexmax wrote:This in essence gives individual administrators their own discretion so that they could feel empowered to nip actual problems in the bud that don't explicitly fall within the rules using their own judgement.

I got banned from NJ for 2 weeks because I insulted Legion. He would have banned me for a year had I not took the issue to you.. you opted just to let it be two weeks. I wouldn't say empowering moreso as being complicity corrupt as he is. You have a tendency of "doing nothing" to empower people and the last time a public figure from your server was brought up on certain things you ended up banning that person. Sometimes.. you have to actually be an admin. I know you don't wanna deal with shit and I know for a fact you enjoy some of the shit shows that happen in Doom (altdeath) but I'm curious to know a definitive position from you:

Which is it?

Alexmax wrote:I never really expected such a system to be fair. I knew that those individual administrators have their own biases. But I figured that if I gave people from opposite sides of the community stake in the server that things would shake out in the long run. Keep in mind that ever since Jenova resigned, R has no major competitive stakeholders in the administration of the server, so if anything the deck is stacked against them right now.

That is their problem. We can maul over that outside the forums though.

Alexmax wrote:As for this specific scenario, Rustking weighed in and said that given the circumstances he wanted to give a light punishment for the people responsible, and I don't see a problem with that. So there you go.

No I am fine with that. We can move pass that point and onto how votekicking nonsense should be handled in general for the future. I am more perturbed by your reaction to it for being a stickler for the rules while simultaneously allowing your administrators to bypass those rules on a whim so it kind of contradicts itself. The rule itself is pretty funny compared to your latest conundrum over proxies abusing votekick which led me to build a case. I know right now this paragraph reads like your right and left index fingers pointing but imagine how I interpret the situation from its overview.

Alexmax wrote:However, there's something wrong here. Giving so much power to administrators was supposed to let me do what I'm actually good at and enjoy doing, making sure the servers are up and running and correctly configured, along with occasionally making content to put on said servers. I like hosting for you guys. I like making stuff for you guys. I don't like being the middle of shit like this. Yet somehow it keeps happening, with increasing regularity. Something is clearly wrong with the status quo.

No it's just you trying to placate everyone. This always happens when someone tries to placate both sides.
A3 on top though

Posted: **Fri Aug 19, 2016 12:04 am**

Mobius wrote:I got banned from NJ for 2 weeks because I insulted Legion. He would have banned me for a year had I not took the issue to you.. you opted just to let it be two weeks. I wouldn't say empowering moreso as being complicity corrupt as he is. You have a tendency of "doing nothing" to empower people and the last time a public figure from your server was brought up on certain things you ended up banning that person. Sometimes.. you have to actually be an admin. I know you don't wanna deal with shit and I know for a fact you enjoy some of the shit shows that happen in Doom (altdeath) but I'm curious to know a definitive position from you:

Which is it?

Most of the time, I don't want to be involved, and I personally would rather err on the side of not punishing than punishing.

However, there are some things that I consider third rails. DDoSing and Cheating. I feel like those gnaw fundamentally at the integrity of not only individual games, but of the server cluster and even the entire port as well. Of course, there end up being grey areas here too, and we can go into my decision making on past events if you really want, but that's the ideal at least.

I am more perturbed by your reaction to it for being a stickler for the rules while simultaneously allowing your administrators to bypass those rules on a whim so it kind of contradicts itself.

It's pretty simple. I don't actually play doom a whole lot and I'm garbage at actual competitive doom. Therefore, give the administrators, who are presumably more active than I am, the ability to do judgement calls. If I was actually playing doom a lot, I'd trust my judgement calls too, but when I just pop into a server once every two weeks for fifteen minutes, I don't trust myself to make informed decisions.

The rule itself is pretty funny compared to your latest conundrum over proxies abusing votekick which led me to build a case.

Proxy votekicking had an easy solution that required no judgement call on my part and even had a fun programming challenge to go along with it.

No it's just you trying to placate everyone. This always happens when someone tries to placate both sides.

Pretty much. I don't want FUNCRUSHER to be known as the R hangout, or the A3 hangout or the anything hangout. I want anybody who wants to play classic or competitive doom to feel comfortable on the server. And sometimes, trying to make everybody happy ends up being...difficult.

Anyway,...let's hash this kickvote thing out:

The reason why I never really had a specific rule against kickvoting was pretty simple. There are people in the doom community that who are pests, and I didn't really want to give said people blanket immunity from being kicked not for any "real" reason, but just for being an annoying idiot and the bugging people in the server. I figured that if you got kicked out of a server, that was because most of the people in the server thought you were worth kicking out. Simple as that, go elsewhere or come back later.

Incidentally, that's also another reason why I thought that proxy votekicking was so offensive, as well as why I am fan of a feature preventing people from voting unless they've been in the server long enough - it's like vote manipulation. This is also why I'm a fan of preventing votekicks from being written to the banfile, since I also don't think it's fair that people get banned from the ENTIRE cluster just for being an idiot in one server, even if it's only for 10 minutes.

But even barring these exploits, my thinking on the subject is pretty old, from when I first started the server. Let's be real, you can still be an asshole with kickvote without resorting to exploits, and sometimes people don't pay attention enough to make an informed decision on if somebody is worth banning. And there are distinctions between "Go away, you're annoying" and something malicious like "I'm going to troll by going onto random servers and kicking people randomly for no reason" that can be difficult to codify into a terse rule. This is an area where I hoped that my administrators would be able to use their judgement.

So let's say we have a rule - no kicking without a good reason. What's a good reason? What's covered? What's not?

Zandronum

Yo yo - FunCrusher

Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher

Re: Yo yo - FunCrusher