Forbidden Donut

Old rules were too convoluted.

New rules show up when you join the server should be the only ones. If people get that uppity about the CT dish being destroyed they should play a different map.

there is something i am not sure on the old server we're we able to camp in hosties room, if we we're able i don'T think we were allowed to kill the hostages though

Anyone who complains about me camping the drop with a mac is going to get en extra serving of further drop camping, only this time a para will be used and Jason will be doing it with me as well.

I don't think there was ever a rule about camping hosties, as it is the CTs job to get them.

Truly. Camping hosties gave Team Rocket many a chuckle back in the day.

i don't follow rules

so basically its

No hacks
No skywalking
No roofboosting
Do not kill hostages if you are a T unless its in the middle of a fire fight
Do not destroy the CT dish of you are a CT
Do not use an awp or an auto sniper in vent
Have some class (you can add this one if you want)

that all about it i think

http://web.archive.org/web/20071016174155/...mp;showforum=21 closest i could get to the former ones /sad.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad.gif" />

if someone else wants to have a go bruteforce style, a rel="nofollow" href="http://web.archive.org/web/*sr_161nr_10/

that is why i saved the clan members list on my computer so this way if something happen i always have it saved, might be a good idea to the same with rules, admins list, anything which could be important to remember/save

I've eliminated all the rules I'm going to be breaking.

everyone was too sad about fd's demise to think of backups perhaps


but anyway, as only a witness to these threads and not someone who's seen the server in action, here are my thoughts: make the rules few and basic like brian said but allow admins to enforce additional rules as they choose, and then tell admins they can tsay/csay rules like to not blow up the dish, camp hosties, etc., as they will help the server; that is, if people are leaving or are getting disheartened enough they're about to, change it up. if some pub allstar is autosniping every ct each round, an admin might want to restrict it, if only for awhile. that's how i see the server building up a population. once it's built up, consider adding the moral rules (blowing up the dish as a t and/or ct, autosnipe/shield, etc.). the important thing in the prescribed situation is to choose judicious admins, and not ones whose choice of rules and method of upholding them become an additional reason for players to leave. but it's going to be admins, not rules, setting the tone that builds up the server (though in the other direction, both rules and admins could keep it unpopulated), in my estimation&opinion anyway.

I should have a backup of the site files and database.

I used to have backups of pretty much everything FD you could think of, but BOTH drives that I backed it up to have shitted out. They are the only two backup drives I've ever had that got fucked up, so it is especially annoying.

I agree. Well said

Along with the basic rules No racism, No killing of the hoes, and Cts need to atleast try to save the hoes. I don't really care about the dish or camping of hoe room.

You lost me.

It happens

A gentlemen's game perhaps?

I am not saying you have to make a valiant effort everytime. Just saying it gets kinda boring watching a guy run from fd roof to bd roof just waiting for a T to come out.

one quick question did we had a rule against racial slurs on the old server, i am not sure at all about this one but in my opinion i think we should

agreed, that's something that makes people leave (it always made me leave a server or switch to t). the problem is when it's something like 5 t vs. 1 ct. how can you tell the ct to go in? you might as well say to type kill in console. it's very situational. in the other direction in that case, i've never liked the idea of making Ts go outside against there will, even if they should be. it's a hard problem to solve in my mind

No hacks
No skywalking
No roofboosting
Do not kill hostages if you are a T unless its in the middle of a fire fight
Do not destroy the CT dish of you are a CT
Do not use an awp or an auto sniper in vent
Have some class (you can add this one if you want)

Alternatively, no cheating, and don't be a tool.
Additional rules can be enforced as needed to keep people entertained. But that was never really a primary concern before. The philosophy spoke for itself and attracted the players that the community was interested in attracting. And frankly I think we've seen a promising level of traffic so far.

The really intricate part of our previous rules was how to handle ban appeals and ban requests. I recall needing a demo recorded to get a ban before. Or that without a demo the banned person can make a case and since there is no proof of guilt s/he would be unbanned. Two months ago I would have expected that this level of involvment would be impossible, however traffic has really picked up here and we're getting enough new blood in the community that some people might be willing to take up the reigns of Ban Moderator (Z's previous position I think).

/edit: I love watching one lone ct running bd to fd roof confusing the shit out of the 5 T retards who refuse to engage him while they bitch about him not coming in to give them free points. Meanwhile he gets to keep his gun and ammo and suit and save money for a gun that might win. This is part of the game and it is crucial. Most rounds went to within 15 seconds of the time limit anyway.

you're right on about the demo thing i believe.

I suppose whether a ct should go in/t's come out depends on the round length; I hadn't thought of that. Try keeping your sentiments with 5 minute rounds /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" /> (but like you said for fd's shorter rounds, it seems fine)

for someone looking to take up ban mod, here is my description of it: Banmod is about knowing what is beyond the capacity of play as well as beyond the capacity of the game, so it requires both a good understanding of the game, including how it is played, and a confidence in that understanding. It's interesting since it's a puzzle, with some harder than others. It's best to have a strong sense of morality (and a good self conception of it) because there is a lot to decide in the outset of taking the position, such as what level of uncertainty to ban. There are some obvious ones, and there are a lot of trends in the style of play of cheaters, but every so often you get a clever one or one who only uses certain aspects of a hack (it's easier to cover up a wall hack than aimbot, for instance, and the 3rd person hack takes a lot of skill to detect and, still, some luck), and you need to decide how sure need to be. I hear people objecting to this, that one must be 100% sure each time, but there are a lot of cases where actions can be interpreted as both cheating, both when and when not cheating, and as banmod, you'll need to decide how the relationship between those two is factored into your decision. I've seen people get banned for aimbots when they were cleaning their mouse, or because the admin didn't realize with a lower dpi, a mouse can act crazy and shake for a second when moved faster than it can track (this happens often with a low sensitivity and the common 400dpi mouse). You also must decide how much outside influence to take, which might be the hardest problem. You are ban moderator, which means, for instance, either it's your decision, or it's up to you to make the best decision, and those are not the same. And every problem is magnified when it's a clan member, or to a lesser extent a regular, to the point that it really is scary. It's similar to if you and only you decide who should and shouldn't be in donut except worse because s/he's already in donut.

Gray area is not only in whether someone is cheating but whether the rules cover the situation. The first is met with experience, but the second is only met with intelligence in judgement, and there's no saying if you're right or not (unless you decide to greatly consider outside opinion, I suppose). The second keeps one up at night.

You should already know the common elements in a cheater's gameplay going in; it's not something to learn along the way. If you've never tried a hack, you shouldn't be ban moderator. In fact, you're foolish for even considering it if you haven't. Would you trust a fireman who has never worked a firetruck but has been to a fire or two? (That said, I'm not saying you should. In fact, if you haven't, then know that public cheats are often boobytrapped with things like setinfo lines that let people know you've cheated even after uninstalling. You will get caught--or else the position of ban moderator is pointlessly useless anyway). If you see someone going into a corner and not moving for a few seconds, or perhaps it looks like he hit an arrow key once, if either of those things doesn't raise your suspicion, stick with admin and leave ban mod to someone else. Such 'virginity' in regard to the vices of CS is not a bad thing, but it makes you wrong for the job.

In the other direction, it also helps if you know how better CS players play to help frame in your mind what is good versus what is cheating. If you watch professional matches, great. Videos are alright to a lesser extent.

To counter all the bad news and warnings I've managed to give, it really is interesting in a way that's never dull, and it's important to the community. What I mean to say is it's rewarding for all the grief, though the grief matters--at best you do a service for the community at a disservice to others; if you aren't grieving, the job should go to someone else. You are St. Peter, keeping Heaven heavenly for the good by turning some brothers out to Hell, except Peter has God's judgement to lean on.

I'm sure I forgot and have forgotten a ton of things, and I have tried to keep the choices I made in the position out of what I wrote, but I'm happy to go over any concerns a candidate has, so should the reader be a candidate, shoot me a PM if you want.

I think we should add a provision to the ban clause that if there are three or more people from a certain list (up for discussion who to include) saying "This is clearly hacking." I think we can probably circumvent the demo. Last night we had a good group playing, then hackers came, and the server emptied out except for the three or four of us taking the ghandi approach, and stayed that way for over an hour, until we finally got rid of the hackers again, and suddenly we had a spirited 6 v 6.

I'm just saying, given the lack of current infostructure, if me, court, phil, lethal, and richie are all calling hacks, for obvious reasons, I don't really think the demo and full process is entirely necessary. We're not talking about Aussie banning someone for walling the shit out of him in vent, we're talking about four or five reletively well respected players knowing that a group of people are clearly bullshit.

well respected? i'm not so sure given those names... /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />


in terms of the obvious ones, they almost never come to the forums to get unbanned. and if fdassault.com isn't in the motd, i suppose the whole discussion is moot currently

Note my use of the word relatively

I think it's important to have a demo since that gives a server a better class of players. You don't want to be the really good player who people think hacks and will ban him without any proof. I'm banned from too many places based on what people think and not the proof they have. It gets old...Now I also see where you come from saying that there is a long list of trustworthy people saying someone is hacking, and it could be completely obvious but with no proof it's like it never happened and when they say "hey why did you ban me, what did I do wrong?!" we'll have we saw you hacking in our server and we banned you. They'll inevitably ask "do you have a demo? No? I never even did that! You got the wrong guy."

Meh. What about the guys last night though. Know what I'm saying?

Stephen, I don't entirely agree that if you've never hacked you shouldn't be a ban moderator, and I don't think your analogy with the fireman is entirely accurate either. I think what you're saying about hacking is more along the lines of would you trust a fireman who never participated in arson themselves. I think you can definitely have enough understanding of hacks without using them to be put in a position to pass judgment on situations like a ban appeal. That's not say that being a one-time hacker yourself wouldn't help do the job better, but I don't think it is a requirement by any means.

Overall though, I agree with your assessment about rules and ban moderation.

I also think the amount of rules that you must set up and strictly abide by is very dependent on the quality and quantity of the admins on the server. I don't think you need a particular rule about demoing in place to handle a situation like last night. Ultimately I think it was handled the way it should have been (although having more admins than the amount you have now would certainly have helped the situation). That particular case wasn't demo-worthy, and the people that witnessed it and the admin that banned the hackers recognized that.

Too much talk.

Keep it simple, stupids.

What's so hard about recording a demo? I used to do it all the time. So did most of us. Sometimes just for funsies.

It's nice knowing that if you appeal your ban that they will either have evidence to refer to, or you are scott free. As a guy in the category of never-cheated-in-counterstrike I can say that while I'm not and never have been good enough to be accused of hacking on FD, I did get it every now and again on crappier servers. The better you are, the more it happens, of course. And I don't think we want good players to feel threatened by their own goodness when people call them hackers.

It was always really nice to be able to say, "Get a demo and submit the ban. We'll see who's hacking."

It is also really easy to do and frankly in one server I policed for a while, simply seeing me drop out of the round and into spec was occasionally enough to get people to leave.




Were you around for the damn near 2 months of discussion revolving around round/buy times?

These discussions are CRUCIAL damnit!

<3