Declined Additions to "Server Rules" thread.

[CallMeBubblesDahling]

The last portion of the server rules thread is a bit vague considering what it actually includes.

"Harming your team for an extended period of time.
ex. blocking sniper views, teleporter traps, refusing to help advance your teams position"

Expanding upon this, specifically "refusing to help advance your team's position" would be helpful for all involved (reporting, investigating/banning and appealing). Friendlies, parties and not capping intel are often reported and with enough evidence, those doing it are banned. If these examples were added to the rules it would make things a lot more cut and dry. If someone did it, the rules would be more specific and it would save admins and others from having to explain why these actions are against the rules. It may also lower the number of reports, bans and appeals because people would see clearly that they can be banned for it. Everything else is specific and clear, but this rule isn't and would benefit from being expanded on.

Also, a lot of players say in their appeals "I wasn't warned, just banned" and other wordage to that effect. If the rules also stated that "you do not have to be warned in order to be gagged or banned, it would save the time in effort of having to explain that admins don't have to warn them. It would also cut down in people complaining that something not stated in the rules isn't fair. If the rules did say "we don't have to warn you beforehand" you would be on more solid ground when people complained that they weren't. A simple "well it's in the rules, you should have known" simplifies the process.

Many admins and other forum members appear to get frustrated when having to expand upon vague concepts in the rules. If the rules were expanded upon, your time would be saved and justifying your actions would be a lot easier. You wouldn't have to constantly explain why parties are part of "refusing to help your team's position", as it would now be explicitly stated as being against the rules. Saying that you don't have to warn players would cut down in the complaints that people weren't warned before hand, for the same reason of it being explicitly listed. Clearly stated rules are a lot easier to enforce, as people trying to sneak around them or try and justify their actions would be quickly and efficiently removed, saving everyone time and efforts.

Thanks for you time.
-Berke.

 

[Cylosis]

http://www.skial.com/threads/clarify-your-server-rules.35644/

 

[Pat]

Lots of suggestions similar to this have been shut down but I'd agree with you I think they need to be clearer as well
+1

 

[CallMeBubblesDahling]

Hopefully this one doesn't. I read the thread Cylosis posted and to be honest, rules shouldn't have to be figured out or inferred upon. Rules should be clear as to avoid any confusion. I'll admit when I joined, I was honestly a bit confused by that last bit of the rules. I read a ton of appeals to see if I could figure out what constituted rule breaking. I learned more from the appeals than the rules themselves, I'm an intelligent person and couldn't really figure it out. You shouldn't just assume that players can figure it out. Make it clear and you're on much more solid footing when you ban someone and lowers the chances of an appeal. I don't play in a manner that risks my getting banned, or even gagged, but I think a small amount of revision and expansion would be a huge benefit. People are paying to play here, myself included, and I don't think it's unreasonable for us to help shape how the system is run.

 

[Rvsz]

tl; -1

 

[mittens]

Even if people don't know the rules or claim they weren't warned before a ban... the first ban is only for 1 day. So if someone is really concerned about breaking the rules there is no reason not to have multiple bans. Whatever you were doing that got you banned you know not to do again.

 

[Bacon Master]

So you're saying that engies building defenses on the attacking team should be banned? Or if someone is standing there, guarding spawn by waiting for people to come around the corner, they should be banned?

 

[Cylosis]

So you're saying that engies building defenses on the attacking team should be banned? Or if someone is standing there, guarding spawn by waiting for people to come around the corner, they should be banned?

This kind of confusion is exactly what we should try and iron out.
The server rules are the last place you want to leave room for interpretation. Enough wiggle room/vagueness to discourage people from trying to slip by on technicalities, but not enough that someone will receive a totally different experience solely because they got the friendly admin or the strict admin.

 

[CallMeBubblesDahling]

No...I'm saying that offenses people are getting banned for and cited as being under the "Harming your team for an extended period of time. ex. blocking sniper views, teleporter traps, refusing to help advance your teams position" rule be expanded on so that it's much clearer and people ask "how are parties/friendly heavies/not capping intel breaking the rules", be asked less. I'm suggesting that things people get banned for be added to the rules. I'm not asking for new rules, just making existing rules clearer and less vague.

 

[mittens]

This needs to be added to "frequently denied suggestions" already.

 

[takethepants]

1.) We have a graduated ban system so even if you didn't understand it the first time, it's not that long of a ban

2.) If we got more specific, people would complain telling us we didn't list one thing in particular and demand to be unbanned because we only listed 30 things and not their thing. The rules are generally made retroactively so we would want to be as broad as possible so we don't have to keep updating the rules every time something comes up and we didn't think someone would grief a certain way, etc. The whole point of the game is advancing your teams position so if you're doing anything that impedes you and your teammates from doing that, you're doing it wrong. There are other modes with different types of gameplay and idle servers for random fun, so if you want to stand around spamming voice commands in spawn while eating Sandvichs do it on a server where people aren't trying to play. I don't think we need a HOW NOT TO BE A FUCKNUT thread emphasizing this.

3.) I don't think many of the rules can be broken accidentally besides maybe some of the words people say, but again it's context dependent. If someone is jumping in front of their team's sniper blocking his view or trapping people in teleporters I don't think they need to be warned that they did something wrong, that should be pretty obvious. People that appeal them are just trying to get off like nothing happened, I think they're aware they did something obviously wrong.

 

[Bacon Master]

No...I'm saying that offenses people are getting banned for and cited as being under the "Harming your team for an extended period of time. ex. blocking sniper views, teleporter traps, refusing to help advance your teams position" rule be expanded on so that it's much clearer and people ask "how are parties/friendly heavies/not capping intel breaking the rules", be asked less. I'm suggesting that things people get banned for be added to the rules. I'm not asking for new rules, just making existing rules clearer and less vague.

Wouldn't my list be put under "Not helping team advance?"

 

[CallMeBubblesDahling]

Well considering how specific you are on things like homophobic slurs (even though enforcement is inconsistent compared to how concrete the rule is), racism, admin impersonation, scamming, dodging and hacking, asking for you to be specific elsewhere doesn't seem like asking that much. You even list a couple of examples under "harming your team", asking you to take what would amount to minutes to add a couple more, isn't asking much. Considering it would save you time in explaining why they were banned in the future with just "it's in the rules" as opposed to "doing this makes you useless blah blah", I'd think you'd open to ways of saving time. It's interesting how people continue to ask for this, looking at the number of threads on it.

I'm asking an honest question, how long would it take to update the rules in this manner? Then compare that to how much time you spend having to explain to people how what they're doing fits under this category of rule breaking. Also compare how long updating the rules would take compared to how time you spend telling people you don't think you should and don't want to. Takethepants response right there probably took longer to type than what many people have been asking to have done with the rules. It's a time thing, I'm suggesting legitimate ways to save EVERYONE time in many ways.

Either you will, or you won't. It looks like you won't, but the reasoning being "because we don't think we should have to" seems kind of strange when you compare it to the benefits of actually doing it. I'm asking for these changes because they'll directly benefit play on your servers and save time on the forums.

Lastly, this suggestion isn't coming from a player with a bad rep and many bans. I'm an honest player who has never done anything to even consider a ban or gag. I'm not suggesting this to save my ass in the future, I'm suggesting this to make it easier for rule enforcement, which benefits everyone who isn't breaking rules and trying to enjoy themselves. Just think about that for a second.

 

[Bacon Master]

Well considering how specific you are on things like homophobic slurs (even though enforcement is inconsistent compared to how concrete the rule is), racism, admin impersonation, scamming, dodging and hacking, asking for you to be specific elsewhere doesn't seem like asking that much. You even list a couple of examples under "harming your team", asking you to take what would amount to minutes to add a couple more, isn't asking much. Considering it would save you time in explaining why they were banned in the future with just "it's in the rules" as opposed to "doing this makes you useless blah blah", I'd think you'd open to ways of saving time. It's interesting how people continue to ask for this, looking at the number of threads on it.

I'm asking an honest question, how long would it take to update the rules in this manner? Then compare that to how much time you spend having to explain to people how what they're doing fits under this category of rule breaking. Also compare how long updating the rules would take compared to how time you spend telling people you don't think you should and don't want to. Takethepants response right there probably took longer to type than what many people have been asking to have done with the rules. It's a time thing, I'm suggesting legitimate ways to save EVERYONE time in many ways.

Either you will, or you won't. It looks like you won't, but the reasoning being "because we don't think we should have to" seems kind of strange when you compare it to the benefits of actually doing it. I'm asking for these changes because they'll directly benefit play on your servers and save time on the forums.

Lastly, this suggestion isn't coming from a player with a bad rep and many bans. I'm an honest player who has never done anything to even consider a ban or gag. I'm not suggesting this to save my ass in the future, I'm suggesting this to make it easier for rule enforcement, which benefits everyone who isn't breaking rules and trying to enjoy themselves. Just think about that for a second.

Thread moved to declined. May I request an Admin/Mod to close this thread please?

 

[CallMeBubblesDahling]

I love that Bacon Master, an honest player tries to save admins/moderators time, and you completely dismiss it. It doesn't actually apply to you, so you look like a kiss ass requesting that. If the admins/moderators want to continue having large amounts of their time wasted, that's really up to them. I was simply attempting to enhance users' experiences, nothing more. I tried, by actually explaining the how and why, and failed. Quickly and without any real consideration, which is disrespectful. Your loss. I'm going to go do something else. Have a good one.