ZaptOr dont want test to be gay He said I am not ready and I dont know the rules how he now that

Talk about the community, our servers and forums or suggest new ideas to us.
Post Reply
infectedsushi
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 12:31 am
Location: Bulawayo, Matabeleland North, Zimbabwe
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 28 times

ZaptOr dont want test to be gay He said I am not ready and I dont know the rules how he now that

Post by infectedsushi »

I appreciate that rules have to be enforced and procedures have to be followed in case of sanctions. That being said, the number of members has never been as low as it now: if we could just agree on the fact that there’s a problem and that things have to change therefore, it would already be a significant step in the right direction. The idea(s) was already suggested quite a while ago but eventually got left out in the cold.


1. The application process:
It’s only a matter of time before current members followed the trend and left their position as well. The current system can be maintained but is clearly too heavy and fails at providing enough candidates: instead of waiting for people to apply, pay more attention to players who display member traits and ask them to join the team. The idea obviously doesn’t consist in accepting everyone but in taking account of the current situation nD’s now facing and in having more potential members.

2. Setting up a “trusted regulars” group:
Implement a menu in which players can kick and ban (cheaters for instance) for max. 3h. It would also only be accessible when no members are on (similar to the /admin function). If it were to be abused, I’m sure the activity could easily be traced, the privilege withdrawn and a strike given.

3. Allow members to ban cheaters without proof if their “accepted ratio” is fine.

4. ZOMBIE ESCAPE Server:
I find it a questionable choice to have bet the community’s future on a single server. Moreover other (ZE) communities have been active way longer, have more coders, have a wider player base than we do and can manage a 64-people server: we simply can’t compete.


I definitely don’t intend to point fingers at anyone nor have the pretention to tell that things should’ve been done differently or even worse, say that there’s an easy answer which would suddenly “solve” everything, but not voicing my opinion and sharing suggestions wouldn’t be right as well.
Spoiler!
I wait all the time Wath zapper told to wait . Than I ask him to test me if I now the rules he sead in first time yes go to ct application than my mic wasent activited than he told to fix it than I fix it but he sead than you are not ready just like that he dont test me. I now all the rules to be gey and he dont want test me. Why I dont know I want my ct aceses back. I do all Wath he sead so I must be geyy now . I have a mic I now all rules to be ct and I wait the time for testing aging to be ct . But he dont want !
User avatar
zapt0r
neonDragon Admin
Posts: 1516
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 10:06 am
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 125 times

Re: ZaptOr dont want test to be gay He said I am not ready and I dont know the rules how he now that

Post by zapt0r »

Love the title.
1. The application process:
It’s only a matter of time before current members followed the trend and left their position as well. The current system can be maintained but is clearly too heavy and fails at providing enough candidates: instead of waiting for people to apply, pay more attention to players who display member traits and ask them to join the team. The idea obviously doesn’t consist in accepting everyone but in taking account of the current situation nD’s now facing and in having more potential members.
Yes, there are too few members and quality candidates. What you are suggesting is already implemented and has its own section in nd private. The section itself is pretty dead tho, however, good potential member candidates do get asked or urged to apply. The application process itself is fine as it is. Asking someone to be members is kind of pointless if they are not willing in the first place, then they would have applied.
2. Setting up a “trusted regulars” group:
Implement a menu in which players can kick and ban (cheaters for instance) for max. 3h. It would also only be accessible when no members are on (similar to the /admin function). If it were to be abused, I’m sure the activity could easily be traced, the privilege withdrawn and a strike given.
A somewhat similar idea was suggested recently in nd private. It would be a good addition for regulars who don't want the responsibility of a member but still would like to help out on the server. A system would have to be created to manage the process and distinguish between who is eligible or not. It would also encourage regulars to moderate in-game to achieve that "rank".
3. Allow members to ban cheaters without proof if their “accepted ratio” is fine.
This would really make the job as a moderator a lot easier. However, in reality, it won't work. There have been many cases in which people have been banned for various hacks without actually cheating. Without proof, there is no way to justify the ban. All cheater situations are to be reported on the strikelist, with exception of members with permban-tool banning non-steamers. Then a report and proof are only required on request, which is working out pretty good. Exceptions lately have been with Rap-T's frequent ban-evading, insta ban.
I definitely don’t intend to point fingers at anyone nor have the pretention to tell that things should’ve been done differently or even worse, say that there’s an easy answer which would suddenly “solve” everything, but not voicing my opinion and sharing suggestions wouldn’t be right as well.
Spoiler!
I wait all the time Wath zapper told to wait . Than I ask him to test me if I now the rules he sead in first time yes go to ct application than my mic wasent activited than he told to fix it than I fix it but he sead than you are not ready just like that he dont test me. I now all the rules to be gey and he dont want test me. Why I dont know I want my ct aceses back. I do all Wath he sead so I must be geyy now . I have a mic I now all rules to be ct and I wait the time for testing aging to be ct . But he dont want !
I don't get this part?
Last edited by zapt0r on Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Regards,
zapt0r
User avatar
[email protected] *
Posts: 940
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 12:57 pm
Has thanked: 93 times
Been thanked: 52 times

Re: ZaptOr dont want test to be gay He said I am not ready and I dont know the rules how he now that

Post by [email protected] * »

1. The application process:
the current members are leaving but the people who you mentioned will leave too since they don't have motivation to join because they can't make apps, the problem isn't we need more members because our members are leaving, the problem is why they are leaving??

2. Setting up a “trusted regulars” group:
the member shouldn't abuse these powers so if we gave this regular the powers it means he is a good guy won't abuse them, i think there is no need to make a new rank very similar to the member or same, with some guidance this guy will be a member since the main requirements are same.

3. Allow members to ban cheaters without proof if their “accepted ratio” is fine: some of our members have the permban tool i'm pretty sure the admins take care about giving this tool.

Sent from my PGN611 using Tapatalk
Bob Vegana
Posts: 911
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2016 12:28 am
Has thanked: 77 times
Been thanked: 61 times

Re: ZaptOr dont want test to be gay He said I am not ready and I dont know the rules how he now that

Post by Bob Vegana »

2. Setting up a “trusted regulars” group:
Implement a menu in which players can kick and ban (cheaters for instance) for max. 3h. It would also only be accessible when no members are on (similar to the /admin function). If it were to be abused, I’m sure the activity could easily be traced, the privilege withdrawn and a strike given.
I remember suggesting something similar a while ago, got disapproved and left out in the cold. They said there was a risk of "abuse" or something. However now it looks like something we need.
3. Allow members to ban cheaters without proof if their “accepted ratio” is fine.
If you mean "accepted ratio" in strikelist reports, then well...I don't see any issue with this. I mean if you get banned for obvious cheating by a trusted regular, and it says "banned" and the banner turns out to be a trusted regular, the banned one doesn't have an excuse then.

Heck, I might applicate for "trusted regular" immediately. However, would this suggestion allow banning of harassers as well?
Post Reply

Return to “neonDragon Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests