=(eG)='s get Tempbans

Status
Not open for further replies.
Matrix

Matrix

Thread Thumper
=(e)=
Joined
May 12, 2018
Messages
1,136
Right now especially after CSGO became free to play and hackers have multiple accounts, they are coming back on and just overall disrupting the server. The worst I've seen is a dude came on saying who wants the server to crash and actually slowed it down to the point where if an eGO wasn't on at that exact time it would've closed. This is why I am saying eG's should be able to get temp-ban permissions at most 15-30 minutes and should be held accountable to ban notes and consequences if they abuse this as well. The two main reasons being

A. Can control the server if no eGO's are on
B. Good practice for if / when they get promoted to eGO
C. Buying 5$ membership unlocks this power, and anyone who plays the server knows the vote is pretty much is gonna be in favor against the perpetrator
 
Upvote 0
eGO is basically eG with ban powers.

While I agree that we should be letting eG have access to banning people, I'd like to suggest an alternative to what you suggested. Because eGs don't/shouldn't have access to ban system, for every ban they make... they need to make a ban request for any player they ban. This will ensure the logging and lets the trial period go by smoothly.

Making a ban request on a banned player sounds redundant for advisor's attention, therefore an AT+ (or even some eGO) can approve/disaprove the ban request from an eG (on players they banned). Disapprove obviously means the person gets unbanned and should resemble the same procedure of eGO's making a false ban (or perhaps stricter since its eG trial period).

Nice idea
 
Another solution would be to switch them to spectator, maybe add a feature that prevents them for choosing a team?Hence not being able to cheat/greif + it takes away their fun.
For example, today Sam was putting this one cheater "selly" in spectator at the start of the round(because if he bans him hell just come back)but I bet it was annoying. The guy was constantly changing names. So I would say add a feautre that gives you power to put somone in spectator team for like 5 rounds, after a few times of trying to join they will get annoyed and leave.
 
Just make a ban request and if they are actively disrupting the server, find an eGO on teamspeak/forums to see if they can do a more immediate temporary ban. eG's are considered admins-in-trial, so giving them the same powers as an eGO would be useless.
 
We should give eG's voteban permissions (30mins - 1hr). eG's won't be able to execute a voteban command if an eGO+ is currently on the server similar to how donators are unable to initiate a voteban/votekick if an admin is on.

eG's should of course continue following the w/kprocedure where applicable before initiating a voteban. They should then post a ban request to up the time if manager+ sees fit.

If we allow donators to have voteban powers I don't see why we don't give these powers to eG's.

We used to have CT bans for CS JB which was great for eG's to practice banning and making ban notes. CT bans also prevented troublesome players from playing CT without completely removing them from our server allowing them to learn from their mistakes.
 
Last edited:
Jacko said:
We should give eG's voteban permissions (30mins - 1hr). eG's won't be able to execute a voteban command if an eGO+ is currently on the server similar to how donators are unable to initiate a voteban/votekick if an admin is on.

eG's should of course continue following the w/k/b procedure where applicable before initiating a voteban. They should then post a ban request to up the time if manager+ sees fit.

If we allow donators to have voteban powers I don't see why we don't give these powers to eG's.

We used to have CT bans for CS JB which was great for eG's to practice banning and making ban notes. CT bans also prevented troublesome players from playing CT without completely removing them from our server allowing them to learn from their mistakes.
Click to expand...

I think Jacko Jacko said it the best but rather than eG(s) accessing ban notes, let them write a ban request on the offender(s) and leadership can handle it. A one hour temp ban is the best thing in my opinion.
 
Meowcenaries said:
Just make a ban request and if they are actively disrupting the server, find an eGO on teamspeak/forums to see if they can do a more immediate temporary ban. eG's are considered admins-in-trial, so giving them the same powers as an eGO would be useless.
Click to expand...

The problem is with premium hacks they can crash servers at will, the last time it happened was 2 weeks ago and if Arbiter wasn't on it would've worked. Me moving him to spectator would've done nothing and kicks are pointless especially if he changed his name and or had non-english characters
 
Jacko said:
We should give eG's voteban permissions (30mins - 1hr). eG's won't be able to execute a voteban command if an eGO+ is currently on the server similar to how donators are unable to initiate a voteban/votekick if an admin is on.

eG's should of course continue following the w/k/b procedure where applicable before initiating a voteban. They should then post a ban request to up the time if manager+ sees fit.

If we allow donators to have voteban powers I don't see why we don't give these powers to eG's.

We used to have CT bans for CS JB which was great for eG's to practice banning and making ban notes. CT bans also prevented troublesome players from playing CT without completely removing them from our server allowing them to learn from their mistakes.
Click to expand...

You have so many hours on pG + eGO servers so you know the chance of a voteban being declined is like 1 every 1000 votes. Also it takes out of account that straight up memers vote No because they think its "funny" or "edgy". Considering admins are trained to know the rules their decisions shouldn't be in the hands of the players
 
Matrix said:
You have so many hours on pG + eGO servers so you know the chance of a voteban being declined is like 1 every 1000 votes. Also it takes out of account that straight up memers vote No because they think its "funny" or "edgy". Considering admins are trained to know the rules their decisions shouldn't be in the hands of the players
Click to expand...

Like M Meowcenaries mentioned eG's are 'admin-in-trial'. We don't give Juniors server bans to prevent abuse of power. eG's are promoted because we THINK they have the potential to be successful admins.

We need to first see how they handle simple powers like muting and kicking because we won't truly know if someone is power abusive until they are given certain admin privileges.

However there are cases where an extremely abusive player needs to be taken off the server immediately and there isn't always an eGO at hand. A compromise is to allow the eG to at the very least have voteban so if the majority of players deem someone unfit for the server they will vote him off the island.
 
eG's are probationary admins. They are in trial periods.

No one wants to hear they are just in trial, but they are. It's similar to being in probation at a job. It comes with restrictions.

Giving eG's the ability to ban would take merit away from being an eGO, even if it's temporary.

Of course, I am not in this community, so my words fall on deaf ears.

Good luck.
 
I agree with what Jacko Jacko said most people are kind of overlooking the obvious here there are times when no EGO's are on the server and only EG's are on and times like this is when players are able to disrupt the server the most. Being able to kick is great and all but its not going to stop someone from simply reconnecting to the server with intentions to disrupt it. Even a short temporary ban is enough to stop a troublesome player until either an EGO can get on or a report can be made on the player and Manager+ can handle it.

I would say the rank eGO is something more than just the power to ban and shows a standing in the community. but hey what do I know
 
Let's bring this back from the dead.

I've read all the posts here and for what it's worth, it's a good discussion to have. I do find it weird that DS (keep in mind everyone can get DS for $5/month) get the opportunity to have a voteban (which, as its been said multiple times, is always an immediate yes) and eG's (who are "admins in training") don't get the right to at least a 30 minute ban.

It's not as if the eG's who got promoted were bad characters in the community, there's a good reason they got promoted. Now, I'm not saying that they should get access to full bans. What would the point of being eGO be?

There's also a good argument to be made here about ban req's. No shade to the managers who run it, but it isn't optimized for quick-style bans. It's also tough as an eG to get someone on sometimes in the wee hours of the night to get a quick ban on someone. So here's what I propose.

eG's get access to small 30 minute bans only. This way, the concern of abuse can be simply "yeah but why tho" instead of full time bans like O's can do. If eG needs to adjust the ban for more time, the eG should make a ban request on the person. You can't logically justify votebans for DS and not at least have a 30 minute ban for eG's.
 
I think this is a great idea and complete my agree with what Larry_Da_Lobster Larry_Da_Lobster said. There is always a time where no O?s are on and they can?t do anything. I myself remember freaking out a lot whenever I couldn?t handle a problem appropriately.

This is also a fantastic learning experience for the interns, I mean eGs. We could incorporate notes into it and they can practice getting ready for the real thing. Even if it isn?t through MAUL we can have them make notes in some sort of other form and have a manager or other O look over those.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, eG’s should get a half hour ban. I might be a little biased but it’s pretty infuriating when there’s no O’s on.
 
There is also an accountability to be held to us Os. We need to pay attention to MAUL chat when requested by the eGs. It is our jobs and we can’t just assume someone else is going to go
 
Makes sense, just last night I hopped on the TTT server and had to remove some unsavory people. Sadly there were only eG’s on and had to wait for me. I would just like to say if this ability is given to the interns, it should be clear that it should only be exercised if an O isn’t on.
 
There's been a plethora of threads suggesting this very thing within the past year and the verdict has always been the same, that being something along the lines of, "This is a plausible suggestion and it will be discussed at the Community Management level".

I'm not sure what efforts have been made since then, but I know this was brought up before. It will of course have to be thoroughly discussed by all figure heads in each game and may end up taking some time.
 
CtrlAltDelicious said:
There's been a plethora of threads suggesting this very thing within the past year and the verdict has always been the same, that being something along the lines of, "This is a plausible suggestion and it will be discussed at the Community Management level".

I'm not sure what efforts have been made since then, but I know this was brought up before. It will of course have to be thoroughly discussed by all figure heads in each game and may end up taking some time.
Click to expand...

If it hasn't been brought up in a year (I know there were threads made soon after the merge) then it probably isn't being talked about anymore, if it was at all.
 
i agree with Jacko Jacko For let's be honest here yeah people hack and all that shit, and we hate it so what its not hard to get a 2 min proof of a video then make a ban request if you have vote ban as a vip use it, for being a eG is an admin in trial to see if he or she deserved to get that promotion yeah i know it sucks to make 5-15 ban request a day but look from the positive side they will get banned and they wont be on the server anymore, you are only doing the server and yourself a good thing to come, if you want to have those powers to ban prove yourself to it prove that you are worthy to get a bigger responsibillite (got no clue if that is wrote right) yeah we had alot of threads about this its being going back and forth but, if i have to say its not worth to give eG ban power for why do we call eG for admin in training then it could just be a full admin then, its the same. and its the same as a manager for i believe manager have less power than a senior and then forth. The only thing you should be focused on is to make the server clean and make a better reputation for yourself and you will most likely get promoted again, and the other thing just keep up your hard work, it sucks though but who tf cares right, as long as people are happy that you are doing something to make something different to the servers or just 1 specific server then they will be glad and happy for you. There is a secret too those that aren't admin they dont know the hard work we actually do until they get those powers too feel it.

I hope i inspired some people by this for i really suck at writing in English when it comes to this so i also hope it made kinda some sense

~BeastTheNinja
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top