Censorship

[Ethan.]

amen 

[Pingster]

That is something that I unfortunately see many veterans miss, all too often the date of arrival is seen as the first time someone ever opened a game and the newly arrived are treated as such.

Luckily, that's something I didn't get too plagued with, I think I was instructing other newly arrived and even some veterans within 2-3 weeks though, and everyone kept thinking I'm either old player or a banevador, so that probably did it.

But even if you do get treated as a newb on a community right after you join, that's to be expected, and only thing you can do is prove them wrong

[Gandalf]

So you're basically sayin, I can ban evade without revealing my identity. And that's completely allowed now?

Why are many players then banned for "ban evading".

Exceptions included, MOST players never reveal their identity on their ban evading account simply because they don't want to get caught. But still, they get banned sooner or later, regardless of the fact if they revealed their identity or not. Mostly you guys catch him and ban him yourself because their IPs are similar.

So what you're saying is, Ban Evading is now allowed? And Managers are wrong when they ban players, who haven't revealed themselves, for ban evading?

Do not twist my words.
Ban evading is not allowed, and if caught the evading account will be banned. However I do not care to actively hunt after every new registration to see if it might be a ban evader. If they behave and do not attract attention, they might be caught after a long time havig proven them selves and we can let them off knowing they did reform.
If they continue to break rules, soon enough someone will check them and ban, taking stronger measures every time they evade again.

[TheLegitHabibi]

But that means exactly like I said.

You're saying that a guy can ban evade and stay hidden and not rulebreak and after a few months you'll see he's changed and you'll allow him to play.

Which basically means you're allowing people to ban evade.

[Devin]

But that means exactly like I said.

You're saying that a guy can ban evade and stay hidden and not rulebreak and after a few months you'll see he's changed and you'll allow him to play.

Which basically means you're allowing people to ban evade.

Why must you twist every single thing? He clearly stated that we are not going to run around doing a background check on every single player that registers. Do you feel that is not adequate or something?
Why should we waste time looking into every single registered players background in case he may have been banned? If he brings attention to himself and we see they are banevading they will be removed from the server.

And no, if we know a person is banevading we will ban them without question but we will not run around looking for them under every pebble.

[Gandalf]

But that means exactly like I said.

You're saying that a guy can ban evade and stay hidden and not rulebreak and after a few months you'll see he's changed and you'll allow him to play.

Which basically means you're allowing people to ban evade.

There is a difference between allowing and not caring.
Every time a player ban evades he has to start as new player. Because logs are checked and as soon as he tells anyone he had another account the risk is he will be banned and has to start all over once again. So the ban evader is living like a criminal wanted by the police, every time he encounters a police officer he has to fear to be caught.
Some people can live such life, others prefer to stay honest.

[Kirgiz]

Why must you twist every single thing?

Do not twist my words.

If people manage to ban evade and play as a normal member of the community without revealing their original account or returning to bad habits of rule breaking, I do not care.

So you're basically sayin, I can ban evade without revealing my identity. And that's completely allowed now?

I'm sorry, but you're the ones twisting James' words, he obviously meant, in addition, "and behaving like a normal person" alongside with his "without revealing my identity". And that's exactly what you said on the tin. If you sought for something ironic, over the Internet, you failed.

[Cyril]

I'm sorry, but you're the ones twisting James' words, he obviously meant, in addition, "and behaving like a normal person" alongside with his "without revealing my identity". And that's exactly what you said on the tin. If you sought for something ironic, over the Internet, you failed.

You seem to have some comprehension or reading problem. James seemed to think "it was completly allowed now". Gandalf just said as long as they keep a low profile, he doesn't care.
To not care =/= being allowed.

[Leon.]

What is laughable is that you do not know the difference between Waka_Flocka and Woka.

What is even more laughable is that you knew exactly whom I spoke of and yet still felt the need to be impertinent about it.

[SugarD]

What is even more laughable is that you knew exactly whom I spoke of and yet still felt the need to be impertinent about it.

What is incredibly laughable is that you are still trying to pick a fight instead of discussing the original subject of the topic.

[Ragdoll]

This whole topic is laughable... just archive it or something.

[Frank_Hawk]

You are correct, if the administration would for whatever reason wish a discussion of cats to be dropped it would have to be dropped. Once again, you are in a game server and not a chat server. While we do allow off-topic discussion and banter, it is the perogative of the administration to determine when a topic should be dropped.

This is a statement of contradiction which like many of your replies in this topic is a prevailing theme. That aside and given that you have attempted in part to answer the question I had (though it is surprisingly not that one I had hoped to hear) – this topic has now run its course, so feel free to close it at your wish. There will be no further statements from me – thanks for replying in part.

[Gandalf]

This is a statement of contradiction which like many of your replies in this topic is a prevailing theme. That aside and given that you have attempted in part to answer the question I had (though it is surprisingly not that one I had hoped to hear) – this topic has now run its course, so feel free to close it at your wish. There will be no further statements from me – thanks for replying in part.

It is indeed contradictory, as many of our habits are.
That is because we do not strive for a prison-like system where people are bound by a lawbook, but for an open community where almost anything is possible, as long as the few directions given are followed.

The topic you discussed might at another time not have led to any request to drop it, while in some cases it woud have been stopped faster. just like other topics can be allowed to discuss at one time, yet at another time be disallowed.

That is in itself contradictory, but also allows the maximal freedom and gives players their own responsibility as much as we can.
We do not limit what you can discuss, we do not make a list of allowed topics and what would not be allowed. The single thing we ask is that if at any time the administration team gives you an instruction, for whatever reason, you follow it.

[Zentorno]

Please give any proof of them, you are making a blanket statement without content. If you may remember Emre and me had a discussion in a locked topic where he had to admit that not his point but mine were valid. Since then he has taking up trolling and cyberbullying, which is why he is no longer here.

Boy, do you ever learn?

[Devin]

Boy, do you ever learn?

Emre, do you ever learn?