Dan_the_Man and Matt007 are banned

sry woka, but, fact is, you're not allowed to take ANY amount of bases at all before a game is called, be it 2 or 15, it doesnt matter. and if dan disrupts (you dont need to take bases to fuck up ppls games) a SECOND game, then fuck, ban him.


i rest my case.

wonka wrote:

Game 2: "he says "Let's play!" and drives around on the map. All quit" The game logs don't show if someone is jaywalking. But even in texas jaywalking doesn't carry the death penalty.

Indeed, we should only enforce the rules that govern the channel in the event that a violation of those rules leads to a player's death. And hey, since Dan's a minor, we can't enforce our rules at all.

wonka wrote:

At the point kas quit, ren was up 3 pills to 2. maybe it was because dan was driving around kas. I don't know since i wasn't there. but no one takes a pill nor a base until both ren and kas leave the game.

to paraphrase something you said to me earlier... Ok bright boy, now what?

[Kax bangs his head on the desk] Indeed, you don't know, so why are you arguing with me about it?

I'm done on this thread. Wonka, if you don't like my decision, that's fine. My position is that if Kas and Ren try twice to have a 1x1, and Dan disrupts their efforts despite warnings, he shouldn't be allowed access to passworded games. He can still play non-pw games to his heart's content. Your position seems to be that if someone refuses to comply with the rules, then (1) nothing should be done about it, or (2) if something is done, you should take it upon yourself to tell him how to get around the sanctions. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if, should Dan be banned from both servers, you take it upon yourself to email him the passwords. But the fact that it wouldn't surprise me should give you some insight into my respect for your views on winbolo ethics.

Kax

Regardless of what happened on .us, I still like Kax.

Those of you that like it under the rock are probably asking yourself (or me if you happen to be one of the rock dwellers that can communicate with 'the outside'), "Why oh why?" For your enjoyment, and my own I might add, I have compiled a very short list of reasons why Kax is a bad 'mutha fucka' (as the kiddies these days say).

1. He is funnier than you are.

2. I think he once said something about getting in a Mormon's pants. That is very commendable and something I have not yet been able to accomplish.

3. Every time I have looked at the picture on fi's site, he is smiling. He must like me too.

4. I can’t think of a fourth reason. I guess I really don't know him too well. So, I'd just like to say that nothing has changed in the time it took you to read reason two and three. He is still funnier than you are.

As for Wonka…

I like you just from reading your posts on the forums. This is quite an accomplishment considering that the large majority of users here push me ever closer to gouging my eyes out with… Well, I better not reveal the method just yet. That sounds like something to save for the second or third date. Anyway, sorry for not rushing to aid you in some of the other threads you've posted in on this forum. It just pains me to think of the obligation I will feel to read replies, which brings me back to what I said about gouging my eyes out.

Kax wrote:

I'm done on this thread. Wonka, if you don't like my decision, that's fine. My position is that if Kas and Ren try twice to have a 1x1, and Dan disrupts their efforts despite warnings, he shouldn't be allowed access to passworded games. He can still play non-pw games to his heart's content. Your position seems to be that if someone refuses to comply with the rules, then (1) nothing should be done about it, or (2) if something is done, you should take it upon yourself to tell him how to get around the sanctions. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if, should Dan be banned from both servers, you take it upon yourself to email him the passwords. But the fact that it wouldn't surprise me should give you some insight into my respect for your views on winbolo ethics.

wow, once again you amaze me with your assumptions.... and the logical conclusion they must indeed lead too. I don't start games early, when i watch games i try to stay out of the action, i've never used a hack in a game, i don't screw allies over. Yet for some ungodly reason you now think that i am hack central. Well, all i got to say to that is go pound sand in your ass.

My whole point in your actions about banning dan or anyone (Wonka thinks that kax now has him in his sights, and that he is tops on the list of the next to be banned) is it's like pissing into the wind. I don't see you out there banning other people for doing the same thing, nor do i see you banning people who play with hacks/cheats or who otherwise violate the code-of-ethic for winbolo.

I think the bottom line was this... a pissy form of retaliation. Your story has changed from what you initially said, and the facts in the game log don't match the story.

wonka wrote:

My whole point in your actions about banning dan or anyone (Wonka thinks that kax now has him in his sights, and that he is tops on the list of the next to be banned) is it's like pissing into the wind. I don't see you out there banning other people for doing the same thing, nor do i see you banning people who play with hacks/cheats or who otherwise violate the code-of-ethic for winbolo.

I think the bottom line was this... a pissy form of retaliation. Your story has changed from what you initially said, and the facts in the game log don't match the story.

Hmm. I wanted to be done, but now I have questions. Specifically:

(1) If banning Dan makes no difference, why do you care whether I do it or not? You just want to let everyone know that I'm a big meanie?

(2) What other people have done what Dan's done, right in front of me, against whom I have taken no action?

(3) What people use cheats/hacks in passworded games I have observed against whom I have taken no action?

(4) In what sense can my action be termed "retaliation"? Dan did nothing to me -- I wasn't playing in either game. Ren asked if he could ban Dan for it, but I did it instead, because I know you guys would have laid into Ren if he did it.

(5) If the facts in the log don't match the story, why is it that none of the other players in the game agree with you? Ren and Saiyan were both there, and both agree with my characterization of the events.

(6) Have I threatened to ban you? The fact that I disagree with you about something I saw and you didn't doesn't mean I think you're a bad guy in general.

Kax

fi wrote:

I feel sorry for you min, want me to send you a virtual hug?

ouch fi, could that be anymore laiden with sarcasm? :( He was just telling the truth after all.

(this in no way is meant to be hostile, so please don't freak out)

-Liz

ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh min is hostile toy i new it i new it ahahaha

Q-mandabomb wrote:

ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh min is hostile toy i new it i new it ahahaha

You’re a moron if you think that. I am Liz, I don't know if you were around when I was actually part of the .com community, either way, Min is Min, and I am Liz, big difference. He's a guy, I'm a girl, there's one huge difference for you. We have very difference personalities, but I do tend to stick up for him, but that does not mean we are one in the same. If there’s one thing I hate, it's being called Min, probably shouldn't bug me, but I hate being referred to as a guy :/

Don't ask me to prove it by putting a pic up on fi's site. I had one there, but it has been removed due to personal differences. I don't want to put another picture up, and I doubt he would even if I wanted to.

whoa sry i didnt know who u were just wondering and im not a sexist and girls can play winboo if they want to no need to freakdh outttt jeashe.



end of story.

so I am banned from the .us server and winbolo severs HOW LONG dan is so sorry he sade if he dos that agen you guys can do anthing can you guys lete me back in PLEASE :D :D

Matt007@007 wrote:

so I am banned from the .us server and winbolo severs HOW LONG dan is so sorry he sade if he dos that agen you guys can do anthing can you guys lete me back in PLEASE :D :D

It's not about apologizing, and if it were, Dan should be the one doing the apologizing, and the apology should be issued to Ren. Tell Dan to come on IRC, explain what he did wrong and why it's a violation of etiquette, and state that he will from this point forward abide by the rules of the game.

And Matt007, we'll know if it's you impersonating Dan, b/c you use a lot more smiley faces.

Kax

Wonka et al.,

Lest you think that the world is a harsh and terrible place populated with people like, well, me, this is a #winbolo Kodak moment (FI's phrase) concluding this whole episode:

* kax sets mode: -b *!*@*.tempe1.az.us.da.qwest.net
* guest has joined #winbolo
* guest is now known as Dan_the_man
<Dan_the_man> sorry for all the s** i did in that game
<kax> there are a few simple rules
<Dan_the_man> ok
<kax> (1) do not start before the go
<Dan_the_man> ok
<Dan_the_man> got it
<kax> (2) do not unlock games that are already locked unless others agree to do it
<Dan_the_man> ok
<kax> (3) do not drive onto a map when you're not playing
<kax> in general, if people ask you to leave, just leave and start a new game
<kax> there are plenty of players
<kax> it's nothing personal
<Dan_the_man> i will prinp this out
<kax> but it's not ok to argue about it
<fi> nice
<kax> I mean, think about it this way
<kax> if you wanted to play a game against bluesnake, and all of us joined and refused to leave, you'd get annoyed
<Dan_the_man> so are you going to permanent band me?????
<kax> then if you started playing and we drove around the map and screwed with stuff during your game, you'd get really pissed
<kax> that's why we don't do it
<Dan_the_man> pok
<Dan_the_man> ok
<kax> so just be a good guy
<Dan_the_man> onlocking
<kax> no, you're not banned anymore
<fi> yeah dan, it's very important to leave a pw game if asked
<Dan_the_man> unlocking the game kax?
<kax> when you join a game, just do what people ask you to do
<kax> yes, in general, don't unlock a game once it's locked
<kax> especially if you're not playing in the game
<Dan_the_man> ok
<kax> thank you
<kax> now go play
<kax> in light traffic
<Dan_the_man> i will abay the rolls
<Dan_the_man> did u un ban me?
<fi> yes you are not banned anymore dan
<kax> if you're here, you're not banned
<Dan_the_man> potd
<sheepbot> The password for sheepbot is carneiros, bluebot is ruronikenshin, narebot is facts, pawnybot is bishop, and renbot is vamos.
<kax> ren might have banned you from his bot though
<kax> I can't help you with that
<Dan_the_man> ill tell matt007@007 thanks rok on
<Dan_the_man> kax
<fi> :)
<fi> this is a kodak moment
<LRL> :>
<Saiyan> :P
<Dan_the_man> no
<Dan_the_man> you guys wore all lissing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
<Dan_the_man> cool:)
<Dan_the_man> well
. . .
<Dan_the_man> thanks so much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<kax> then just behave yourself
<kax> let that be your thanks
<Dan_the_man> ok

Kax wrote:

And Min, sorry you feel that way dude. As far as I know, though, no one ever had a problem with banning people due to messing with passworded games. I know I never did -- banning dZ for his crap was fine with me. The only thing I ever cared about was smackin' people down for acting dumb on wbn or in the channel. Believe me, if that were enough to get people banned on .us, I'd have done this to Dan a long time ago, and to many others besides.

alot of people have problems with banning in general ... they think you should never ever do it .... (Mac for example) .... I never banned nor kicked people for "acting dumb" .... so I hope that doesn't imply that ... on the other hand, alot of people probably think I did ban people for acting dumb becuase I very rarely felt like taking 20 minutes to explain the entire reason for a ban. Major waste of time explaining yourself to people who arn't willing to understand in the first place. Anytime I banned anyone, I had people yelling at me .. one of those people in particular was your buddy fi. makes for a nice and cozy community atmosphere.

Min

Hey here's a thought... couldn't there be an invite-only channel where the bots make games with different passwords or user-defined pwds that everyone in #winbolo couldn't see? Then people could /msg a bot to invite him to a channel and if he's on the bot's buddy list it'll invite him. This would not exclude any players from all that #winbolo has to offer, but merely provide a location that is relatively dildo-free where good folk can go start games without fear of reckless noobs or blithering idiots like Dan. This privilege might also entice said idiots toward better behavior.

Yes, I know this is just clever framing because it's basically promoting the winbolo caste system that .us is meant to defeat, but this would do it in a way that does not penalize someone for being a jackass. They can still babble like a 13 year old on a Mountain Dew bender all they want on #winbolo, but they can't hang with the big boys unless they exhibit a modicum of maturity.

We're going about things wrong... instead of punishing people for acting like idiots, let's reward them for acting like adults. Psych 101, folks...

Fi, I am the savior of the huddled and opressed masses, not Wonka.

Looking at the considerable time invested in straightening out just one 'blithering idiot' and the high turnover of winbolo players, it seems to me that being an op or a mod is a pain in the ass. It's like being a school teacher: lots of responsibility, a job that deserves respect but doesn't get it, and a sense of being a 'complaint sponge' when anything goes wrong. We need people to run the bots and administer bans for the good of Winbolo. But would I ever run for that office?


Nope!!

dude for the NEXT VERSION OF WINBOLO WE FUCKING NEED AN "IGNORE PLAYER TEXT" OPTION. SOME FUCKER NAMED "GREG" KEPT REQUESTING ALLIANCES WHEN I WAS SET TO IGNORE.FUCKING WENT ON UNTIL I LEFT.

I chatted with Kax and LRL. There is a way to keep unwanted people out of a game.

start a pm with sheepbot

sheepbot mappw ringo centeraction.map

sheepbot mappw <pwd> <mapname>

that will start the game with the password of 'ringo' using the map centeraction.

You might have to pm each user, or have another location where ppl can find the password... similar to what the clan uses.

Hope this helps

Yeah Wonka that'd work I guess, but then you'd have to pm it to 10 different people when you're just trying to start up a game for whomever to join (excluding certain folks). That's why I think a separate invite-only channel would be good... that way ppl can launch/join a game at random as they would in #winbolo, only without having to worry about guys like Dan joining and screwing it all up.

I'm sorry but you all remind me of feces.

stimpy wrote:

Yeah Wonka that'd work I guess, but then you'd have to pm it to 10 different people when you're just trying to start up a game for whomever to join (excluding certain folks). That's why I think a separate invite-only channel would be good... that way ppl can launch/join a game at random as they would in #winbolo, only without having to worry about guys like Dan joining and screwing it all up.

A separate invite-only channel is a option, but like all other options it could and would get abused, certain ppl would never be invited, we would need to have a policy for such a channel.

Stimpy, we sort of have a channel for that, yet the bots forget to come back on a server ping out. Btw, it's called #wbb, i'm trying to grab all the bots in. It sounds like a good idea too.

Q-mandabomb wrote:

dude for the NEXT VERSION OF WINBOLO WE FUCKING NEED AN "IGNORE PLAYER TEXT" OPTION. SOME FUCKER NAMED "GREG" KEPT REQUESTING ALLIANCES WHEN I WAS SET TO IGNORE.FUCKING WENT ON UNTIL I LEFT.

Or you could use the existing functionality and turn off network status messages in the WinBolo menu.

Madd Maxx wrote:

stimpy wrote:

Yeah Wonka that'd work I guess, but then you'd have to pm it to 10 different people when you're just trying to start up a game for whomever to join (excluding certain folks). That's why I think a separate invite-only channel would be good... that way ppl can launch/join a game at random as they would in #winbolo, only without having to worry about guys like Dan joining and screwing it all up.

A separate invite-only channel is a option, but like all other options it could and would get abused, certain ppl would never be invited, we would need to have a policy for such a channel.

I've thought about this a little bit, and I think there's an easy way to combine the Stimpy and Wonka solutions. Creating another channel is kind of a pain in the a** and it would ultimately be pretty useless, b/c the 95% of players who behave would all be on the "cool guy" channel, and the 5% who are peons would be in their little rubber room. It would basically amount to the same ban system we have at the moment, just one level higher, in a sense.

On the other hand, Wonka's private message system, while clever and nice to the little ijits, does have the problem of having to PM a pwd to all the good-behaving folks in the channel who might want to play. I doubt many people would do this, although some probably will.

Given these problems, the best way to proceed is through a "modified Wonka" or "Monka" proposal. Someone just creates a list of 100 easy passwords (I could even do this), and I'd email it to everyone who's not a peon. Then, start games using the Wonka method (PM'ing sheepbot), and just write in the channel "Chew Toy 3 is using Password 24" or something like that. The miscreant population wouldn't have the list, but they'd still be able to be in the channel with everyone else. It's easy to change the list from time to time as need be.

Thoughts? I don't see many drawbacks to the idea, but then again, people on rare occasion do disagree with me...

Kax

Kax wrote:

Madd Maxx wrote:

stimpy wrote:

Yeah Wonka that'd work I guess, but then you'd have to pm it to 10 different people when you're just trying to start up a game for whomever to join (excluding certain folks). That's why I think a separate invite-only channel would be good... that way ppl can launch/join a game at random as they would in #winbolo, only without having to worry about guys like Dan joining and screwing it all up.

A separate invite-only channel is a option, but like all other options it could and would get abused, certain ppl would never be invited, we would need to have a policy for such a channel.

I've thought about this a little bit, and I think there's an easy way to combine the Stimpy and Wonka solutions. Creating another channel is kind of a pain in the a** and it would ultimately be pretty useless, b/c the 95% of players who behave would all be on the "cool guy" channel, and the 5% who are peons would be in their little rubber room. It would basically amount to the same ban system we have at the moment, just one level higher, in a sense.

On the other hand, Wonka's private message system, while clever and nice to the little ijits, does have the problem of having to PM a pwd to all the good-behaving folks in the channel who might want to play. I doubt many people would do this, although some probably will.

Given these problems, the best way to proceed is through a "modified Wonka" or "Monka" proposal. Someone just creates a list of 100 easy passwords (I could even do this), and I'd email it to everyone who's not a peon. Then, start games using the Wonka method (PM'ing sheepbot), and just write in the channel "Chew Toy 3 is using Password 24" or something like that. The miscreant population wouldn't have the list, but they'd still be able to be in the channel with everyone else. It's easy to change the list from time to time as need be.

Thoughts? I don't see many drawbacks to the idea, but then again, people on rare occasion do disagree with me...

Kax

I think 100 pws is not enought. Let's make this 10,000 pws, that way it'll be even more spool proof. While we're at it, we should require p[pl to have a pw to view which pw we're using, because who knows, someone could have distributed that pw page.