New Mods

[Gatorade]

Please remember to follow the rules that the admins before you have placed. Dont start making up your own rules and adding your own opinion to them. Its getting kind of old having to go to CM's because of everyones different flavor of a rule now. The admins / CM's before you have set the course , follow it please. No hate, just its kind of silly for everyone to have there own spin on a rule and we all have to go to @bamf to fix non sense.

[SpooderGuy]

+1

[George]

5 minutes ago, SpiderMan said:

+1

 

[Tyrone hugh]

[Seán That Irish Guy]

[Marco]

Edited May 18, 2016 by Marco

[pan fried]

[BaDaBiNg_10-8]

Please elaborate. 

[Sheriff Rick Grimes]

I don't know if this is about something specific.  But it does happen.  So +1

[Boris]

I haven't heard of any drama regarding the new mods, but hey if they make mistakes, they're only human.

[Jaylen Sarrett]

that shit english tho

[Gatorade]

1 minute ago, BaDaBiNg_10-8 said:

Please elaborate. 

i.e lets say for example (I havnt been banned in 6 months but hypothetically) Lets say admin X has openly said killing anyone on arms island isnt RDM , then later today I kill someone and i get banned. Two different flavors of the RDM rule.

Example 2: An admin comments on diseased's montage and says looking through walls isn't exploiting , then another admin says it is.

Example 3: An admin says as long as a player doesn't die from your vehicle it isnt vdm, then another says if you rolling barricade its vdm. 

(Now i havnt reported anyone but another hypothetical thing) I rolling barricade someone , get banned - then i get unbanned after my sentence and someone does it to me - i report it no action taken

 

Everyone has different spin offs / limits on the rules and its very hard for us to follow it when theres so many different flavors and interpretations. The only one who seems to have a simlar set of rules are the older admins / CM's.

[Gatorade]

5 minutes ago, Boris said:

I haven't heard of any drama regarding the new mods, but hey if they make mistakes, they're only human.

They haven't made any crazy mistakes , its just the new admins all have different interpretations on the rules and its very hard for players to follow.

 

I have not been banned for awhile and I wont be, but i feel bad for those who do get banned because its so different from admin to admin nowadays

[Gatorade]

8 minutes ago, Sheriff Rick Grimes said:

I don't know if this is about something specific.  But it does happen.  So +1

nah nothing specific, just a before shit hits the fan thing

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Sugarfoot said:

i.e lets say for example (I havnt been banned in 6 months but hypothetically) Lets say admin X has openly said killing anyone on arms island isnt RDM , then later today I kill someone and i get banned. Two different flavors of the RDM rule.

Example 2: An admin comments on diseased's montage and says looking through walls isn't exploiting , then another admin says it is.

Example 3: An admin says as long as a player doesn't die from your vehicle it isnt vdm, then another says if you rolling barricade its vdm. 

(Now i havnt reported anyone but another hypothetical thing) I rolling barricade someone , get banned - then i get unbanned after my sentence and someone does it to me - i report it no action taken

 

Everyone has different spin offs / limits on the rules and its very hard for us to follow it when theres so many different flavors and interpretations. The only one who seems to have a simlar set of rules are the older admins / CM's.

There is a very fine distinction between what we CAN ban you for, and what we typically WILL ban you for.

The rules state 300M for Cartels; ergo, the entirety of Arms is not a redzone. Will I ever ban for for it? Nah, probably not. Will I ever argue with an Admin that does? Nah, probably not. Rules state 300; it's my choice to be lax on that rule. It's their choice to enforce that rule.

If you rolling barricade someone and they explode; we can ban you (you knew better). Also, players do not have to die for something to be VDM; much in the same way a player doesn't have to die for it to be RDM (see: Downing).

[Gatorade]

1 minute ago, SharingWriter said:

Sugarfoot, 

A very important thing to keep in context is the extent of Administrator decisions. Administrators here make decisions mostly on a case by case basis, while using the official rules as the framework behind that decision. For this reason there will always be interpretation, however new moderators and admins are vetted on all sorts of these hypothetical situations and are only selected if the Administrators and Community Managers feel that they have sufficient knowledge into the issues that affect our members. 

 

Kind Regards, 

SharingWriter

Ive been around for a long time, I know where the rules are and I know what they are. You are reading between the lines and not the whole thing. Admins ban alot off of what they feel is wrong. I.e admins who ban for leaning against walls to see through while others have said it is not against the rules flat out on peoples montages. Which is it? Because it would be nice to know, and again im not banned, nor will I be

Edited May 18, 2016 by Sugarfoot

[Haych]

This is the one and only thing I hate very much about Asylum, and that is Admins having very different view points in what counts as a rule break, and what does not. I've only been here for a short time and I have experienced this so, so many times.

I've even been clarified on the Grey Area thread, yet seen people get banned for something a Admin said is not bannable. C'mon gents, get on the same page as each other.

Here is notable examples of such things - Some Admins have said its not bannable, however people have been banned in the past.

3rd person to look through walls

Rolling Barricades/ Break checking

Using the water in combat

Suicide without initiation. I've been banned for this in the past. I remember when I first joined, I asked on the old forums if I can suicide if a cop is approaching me, a Admin responded, "You can suicide as long as RP hasn't started, for example sirens"

Arms Island KOS - Another thing I've been banned for, sniping someone sitting 1km out from Arms.

Spawning into Rebel. Yes, I've heard a Admin once say spawning into rebel, with or without combat is considered ghosting, just like spawning into Cartels. Like what the fuck is this shit?

There is so much more notable examples, but these are just the common ones.

Edited May 18, 2016 by Haych

[Guest]

Just now, Sugarfoot said:

Ive been around for a long time, I know where the rules are and I know what they are. You are reading between the lines and not the whole thing. Admins ban alot off of what they feel is wrong. I.e admins who ban for leaning against walls to see through while others have said it is not against the rules flat out on peoples montages. Which is it? Because it would be nice to know, and again im not banned, nor will I be

In that specific instance:

It is an exploit. It is also like trying to piss on the World Trade Center to keep it from falling; ergo most of us don't care.

[Agent X]

1 minute ago, SharingWriter said:

Sugarfoot, 

A very important thing to keep in context is the extent of Administrator decisions. Administrators here make decisions mostly on a case by case basis, while using the official rules as the framework behind that decision. For this reason there will always be interpretation, however new moderators and admins are vetted on all sorts of these hypothetical situations and are only selected if the Administrators and Community Managers feel that they have sufficient knowledge into the issues that affect our members. 

 

Kind Regards, 

SharingWriter

Rules are black and white. If you do this then you get banned. It should not be up to the individual to make up his own definition of what he thinks is a rule and go by personal opinion. There is a official guideline that admins have come up with that is black and white which should be followed to the last letter. Doesn't make any sense to ban one person for one thing and not ban another for the same thing. 

[HotWings]

6 minutes ago, Gnashes said:

The rules state 300M for Cartels; ergo, the entirety of Arms is not a redzone. Will I ever ban for for it? Nah, probably not. Will I ever argue with an Admin that does? Nah, probably not. Rules state 300; it's my choice to be lax on that rule. It's their choice to enforce that rule.I

Bamf said all of Arms island is an RDM zone tho...

[Agent X]

Just now, HotWings said:

Bamf said all of Arms island is an RDM zone tho...

This is exactly the problem. One guy says one thing the other guy says another. 

 

2 minutes ago, Gnashes said:

It is also like trying to piss on the World Trade Center to keep it from falling; ergo most of us don't care.

WTF is this shit?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, HotWings said:

Bamf said all of Arms island is an RDM zone tho...

Not seeing that reflected on the rules page anywhere.

Not that it particularly matter in my case.

[Midamaru]

Looking through walls by leaning is an exploit, exploit is against the rules.

The majority of the admins here don't seem to mind it and are quite lax about it but just like the arms dealer thing you CAN get banned for it.

It being fair or not is an opinion which is personal however the admin or CM's have the last say in it.

(Also the staff can ban you for whatever reason they like, they literally have the right to.. so if they think it's unfair or should be bannable they can ban outside of the "punishable rules").

Things do get messy and cause drama if put in perspective like player X not being banned for something while player Y gets banned for doing the same thing.

I think in the end the system as of now is just fine, if something specifically screwed up happens just take it up to the CM's.

[Gatorade]

2 minutes ago, Gnashes said:

In that specific instance:

It is an exploit. It is also like trying to piss on the World Trade Center to keep it from falling; ergo most of us don't care.

We both know Player X and Player Y post montages with it every month and forum person Z and G post that hes an exploiter! Following that statement an admin always comments thats not exploiting. Its confusing 

[Gatorade]

Just now, Gnashes said:

Not seeing that reflected on the rules page anywhere.

Not that it particularly matter in my case.

Was on patch notes for a change 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Agent X said:

WTF is this shit?

My short and sweet way of saying that I refuse to attempt to enforce any rule that would be an exercise in futility.

[Gatorade]

Just now, Midamaru said:

Looking through walls by leaning is an exploit, exploit is against the rules.

The majority of the admins here don't seem to mind it and are quite lax about it but just like the arms dealer thing you CAN get banned for it.

It being fair or not is an opinion which is personal however the admin or CM's have the last say in it.

(Also the staff can ban you for whatever reason they like, they literally have the right to.. so if they think it's unfair or should be bannable they can ban outside of the "punishable rules").

Things do get messy and cause drama if put in perspective like player X not being banned for something while player Y gets banned for doing the same thing.

I think in the end the system as of now is just fine, if something specifically screwed up happens just take it up to the CM's.

While it should be an exploit, its widely considered not to be and posted in several video's

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Sugarfoot said:

We both know Player X and Player Y post montages with it every month and forum person Z and G post that hes an exploiter! Following that statement an admin always comments thats not exploiting. Its confusing 

Because if we actually say it's an exploit and allude to our taking action on it; all of you lot start reporting everyone you think is doing it, and we don't feel like wasting our time to police it.

 

Again, exercise in futility.

 

Is it an exploit? Absolutely. Would I ban for it? Absolutely. Do I refuse to ban for it because it's more trouble than it's worth? Absolutely.

[HotWings]

1 minute ago, Gnashes said:

Not seeing that reflected on the rules page anywhere.

Not that it particularly matter in my case.

Just pointing out how such confusions happen.  Not implying anyone is in the wrong.  

[Midamaru]

2 minutes ago, Sugarfoot said:

While it should be an exploit, its widely considered not to be and posted in several video's

Quite true, i wonder what the CM's have to say about this. ^^ 

[Gatorade]

Just now, SharingWriter said:

Your missing the point. Almost every report that I have reviewed is different. It involves different people, different evidence, different context, a different environment, and different role play. Yes the rules are straightforward but everything else behind these reports are unique. 

What do different players / places / role play have to do with an RDM or a VDM or an exploit? YOu eithor didnt engage, hit a mother fucker with some vehicle, or cheated. It shouldnt differ on a player , place , or how well you told a story

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Sugarfoot said:

What do different players / places / role play have to do with an RDM or a VDM or an exploit? YOu eithor didnt engage, hit a mother fucker with some vehicle, or cheated. It shouldnt differ on a player , place , or how well you told a story

People can miss someone giving them an order due to music or other comms

People can try every way in the world to NOT hit you, and still accidentally hit you.

[HotWings]

1 minute ago, Sugarfoot said:

What do different players / places / role play have to do with an RDM or a VDM or an exploit? YOu eithor didnt engage, hit a mother fucker with some vehicle, or cheated. It shouldnt differ on a player , place , or how well you told a story

It makes a huge difference actually.  Initiation can be a very fine line, running someone over (report) can easy be a 2 second clip, but the counter evidence could show the full story making hitting the person within the rules.  The rules are most def black and white, but the situations that lead up to those rules being broken or not are not always so straight forward.

[Midamaru]

3 minutes ago, Gnashes said:

Is it an exploit? Absolutely. Would I ban for it? Absolutely. Do I refuse to ban for it because it's more trouble than it's worth? Absolutely.

Does that mean you don't handle the report and let another admin deal with it, or you simply take no action and close the report?

[Gatorade]

1 minute ago, Gnashes said:

People can miss someone giving them an order due to music or other comms

People can try every way in the world to NOT hit you, and still accidentally hit you.

You eithor hit an orca with your car or you dont. Accidents happen but you comp. Doesn;t matter if your bikstok or Sam monk you comp or get banned

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Midamaru said:

Does that mean you don't handle the report and let another admin deal with it, or you simply take no action and close the report?

Nobody reports it; because they know we don't ban for it.

[Midamaru]

Just now, Gnashes said:

Nobody reports it; because they know we don't ban for it.

Hmm if you say it like that i would just be using it all the time, but once i get banned for it i'd lose my shit because you said the staff doesn't ban for it

[Guest]

Just now, Midamaru said:

Hmm if you say it like that i would just be using it all the time, but once i get banned for it i'd lose my shit because you said the staff doesn't ban for it

The key point being that we can ban for it. We simply elect not to.

 

Imagine it as the US voting system. You can vote, and just choose to never do so. Nobody can get mad at you for voting if you take the notion to do so.

[Gatorade]

Ill be back after class with my torch

[Haych]

I swear Gnashes and hes retarded analogies