Posts by wild1145

↩  resident_user I guess it's probably a shift in the way the community (and people in general) see in-game staff. Historically staff have played along side players without issue, and other than rare occasions, we've never had issues with players feeling they couldn't play due to the number of staff online.

You make a good point generally though, we do have a lack of engaged players, and the forums now highlight that more than ever. It's certainly not something lost on me, and has become more and more apparent. I suspect some of that is down to the Discord being more active as a platform, and historically our forums being mostly Ex-admins and players rather than just players.

I suspect we need to do a better job at highlighting when we are / are not accepting applications, on previous forums we had the ability to mark applications as "On Hold" and would regularly not be accepting applications, and likewise now a number of our roles don't accept staff roles all of the time, though we probably haven't done a great job of making that clear.

Just to update.

Flarum Upgrades & Re-Platform

This work has now been completed. We were already running the latest version and we've re-platformed on to a new VPS running the latest generation of VPS from Superior Networks, with the software stack overhauled to hopefully provide us with more reliability and better scalability going forward.

↩  resident_user I'm not really seeing your point if I'm honest... The bottom line is the EAO / AEAO can approve / deny apps as they see fit. Steven is responsible for the Freedom game-mode and it's executives, as well as ensuring the game-mode is operating as it should be.

I don't see any point in denying applications for capable individuals just because we want to make some made up numbers all align... It just puts people off in my experience. There's no harm in having more / less admins, it's not a real issue.

↩  resident_user Why does it actually matter...? If someone is doing the role or is 100% capable of doing the role, why should we stop them from being recognised in that role just to make some made-up percentages match up...

I'll also add, this isn't a normal "Executive" role, it like some of the other roles we have are a bit non-standard.

TLDR - It's not a problem as far as I'm concerned.

Quote

↩  resident_user In addition, this server is structured like an inverse pyramid because it never stops accepting admins despite having a dwindling supply of regular players who are uninterested in becoming admin.

In reality this is how TF has operated for nearly it's entire existence... At least for most of the last 8-10 years anyway. Most players want the additional power that comes with admin, and given the nature of our server, it shouldn't be a huge shock to anyone...

The Admin office (And by delegation Assistant admin officer) have ultimate jurisdiction in this matter, there is no requirement for them to have an approval threshold at all, and they can close applications whenever they like. It's 100% a legacy thing that we have a % approval rate and set number of days that they stay open for, but it's not a requirement for one thing, and personally is something I don't fully even agree with myself.

↩  resident_user I'm certainly not overestimating anything... The reality is 99% of permbanned players don't come back after a few weeks... We've purged the ban list countless times before and it's bad no actual positive impact to the overall player base, so why would this time be any different?

I think personally you're over stating the problem... As I said few to no appeals actually get rejected and it's not like we see cases where people that are indef banned try to re join.

I'm personally supportive of the other suggestion linked here which was to re classify all indef bans to be time bound instead. Which would inherently solve this issue.

But why...? If those banned actually wanted to play the server, they could just appeal their ban...

It's rare indef appeals are denied, and when they are it would suggest they are for a very good reason. Every time this has been historically suggested it's done nothing but resulted in spambots returning, we don't get a net gain of players...

Denied as used withdrawn

It's worth nothing that entire guidance for sanctions thread is "legscy" and the community guidelines is what is intended to be being used for actual imposing of moderation / sanctions.

I've had to remove a huge number of posts. Individuals that have nothing to do with the appeal have been deciding to go on a crusade here and are doing more harm for the appealing individual than good.

If it continues when I wake up in the morning, I'll deny it by default. Follow the forum posting rules and community guidelines or expect this not to end well.

↩  Flobbier That's the point of an appeal. Please stop trying to shit stir.

Another user added to the cat 0 forum ban list.

Quote

↩  quack95 I haven’t broken any law

The individual broke the computer misuse act under UK law.

Quote

↩  quack95 and I don’t see how I should’ve been suspended, let alone indef-banned.

The individual broke the law, and is just shitty he got caught.

Quote

↩  quack95 Like, if I decided to go on kaboom and chunkban a TF member that I didn’t even know was a TF member, they can complain about me because they know that I’m a TF staff, and get me in trouble.

Then make sure they don't come and scream at me...? It's really as simple as that.

Quote

↩  quack95 IBRs were literally PUBLICLY LEAKING IPS.

No, ips are public information and as I've said already, we've made this private just to appease you people...

Quote

↩  quack95 I feel like there needs to be a reform on how permissions are handled with TF administrators.

Yes... Attacking the platform to make that suggestions seems a good idea...

Quote

↩  quack95 But they don’t even have OP on the hub anymore

Because we have hub staff. Hub is a different game mode with different rules and different setups...

Quote

↩  quack95 I’m 100% sure if there is some kind of subcommand that could be harmful, it could be removed with NM (NetworkManager).

If you hadn't been dosing the forums you could have seen we already plan to do exactly this...

Quote

↩  quack95 It’s awful how easy it is to get yourself suspended as well. Like - all I did is hide just a bit of information that I had a very minimal amount of. It’s stupid

We asked multiple times and you have useless cryptic information. Was utter nonsense and totally useless.

Quote

↩  quack95 I think suspensions should also have some kind of reform, as I don’t think I should’ve been indef-banned for this.

Of course you do... You got caught out and got indef banned...

Quote

↩  quack95 The fix is so stupidly basic that I just don’t see the Atlas Management Team as capable of actually taking care of the server properly, I don’t even think that they know what they’re doing. If a fix as basic as ONE LINE OF CODE can actually be that hard to do, then I’m sorry. I don’t see how you’re capable of doing your job.

The fix wasn't one line of code, it never was. You were simply lied to. The change was substantislly more complex to deploy. And the fix we've deployed tonight causes us quite a few issues longer term... If you'd bothered to share the info on how you thought it was a one line fix that'd have been great, but given the levels I've had to go to in order to try and get the attack mitigated I'd be disappointed if there was a simpler fix we could have rolled out given you were crippling the Web servers themselves...

Quote

↩  quack95 And Ryan is just plain irresponsible - yes, he does have a job

I work full time... And frankly tf is a hobby. If you decided to attack it fixing it isn't a priority...

Quote

↩  quack95 If you own a server, you better take care of it properly.

Ahh yes. Because spending hours after hours trying to figure out how to block denial of service attacks isn't taking care of the server. Glad it was appreciated.

Quote

↩  quack95 This problem should’ve never happened at all - in fact, if people actually knew what they were doing, I think there wouldn’t have been exploits like what happened with NM and the forums attack.

If you believe that then you're frankly foolish... Attacks and exploits are inevitable. This is the first time we've had any major issues with the forums due to attacks. The bottom line is attacks are inevitable.

Can I remind the applicant especially, but generally everyone of the rules around replies.

Quote

↩  elmon Note 1: If an admin asks you a direct question, you should reply. If an admin objects and give reasons that you believe are incorrect, you may reply to state why you believe the reasons are incorrect; do not rage or get dramatic - just state facts and do not reply more than once; no debates.

Quote

↩  Flobbier Did the logs show Riawo as executing this exploit?
Does KMPK99 fall into this? Or what about Fabrigonation? Are you sure it’s safe to generalize all of the banned players here under one banner?

You may have misunderstood. The exploit most recently that enabled the framing (where we beehive Ria was framed) is very different to the original one or at least the original one we were aware of.

I can't remember who exactly we had logs for and who we didn't, I'd have to go deep diving through archives and old chats to see and honestly given this thread it isn't worth it because the bans have been lifted.

My point was that these players have been un banned because we are aware of an exploit that now exists which could have been used to frame them, though we also know some genuinely did exploit. So this isn't a thread proclaiming innocence, but more the lack of certain guilt.

Quote

↩  Flobbier How so? I’m not trying to start a flame war but I just want to know the facts.

The details are currently still confidential, what has been released is linked off the original post here. The current difference is one issue was a permissions issue that let people use some nm commands they shouldn't have which included changes to their own perms and bans. The other allowed people to create false punishments as any player / staff member. Very different issues and one only being able to be done by self, the other being able to frame some one

↩  Flobbier We know that's not entirely true. We did have logs of some of these individuals being the ones to execute and discuss the specific exploit previously.

As I said, this is "not enough to confirm guilt" rather than "innocence".

My personal belief having investigated this at the time, is those originally banned for the original exploit weren't framed because the method of framing was a very different issue.

↩  Noah Teleportation was one example, it's more general than that. Things like someone flying to another persons base to work out how to attack them that sort of stuff.

I wanted the first version of this to give everyone a somewhat level playing field, if we want to make it more cruel later we can and we can do things like multiple lives etc etc.

Quote

↩  Deauthorized If I had a suggestion for it, I think it should force you into spectator mode rather than outright banning you from the event, unless there’s a pretty good reason why that wouldn’t be possible

There were a few issues with it which is why I didn't.

One being it screws around with some of the spawn protection region stuff, and I'd have to customise worldguard to get around that. The other is I didn't want to make it easy for someone to "Cheat" and TP to other people on a dead account to get one up on their primary.

If this event is successful (Subject to it going ahead) we can look at options to do that going forward, I just wanted to get "Something" out there as a minimal viable experience that people could play with and feed back on.

↩  resident_user My reply was intended to cover other general comments I was expecting off the back of this conversation, apologies if it had sounded like it was purely targeting your response.

I do genuinely believe that when individuals make racist remarks it's inappropriate, there is no need for it and given the age ranges the server attracts, I don't think it's really something I'd want younger people hearing, or frankly anyone being subject to. That's ignoring the fact I've had a lot of complaints when I first took over running the server that people were allowed to be racist towards other individuals and get away with it. The community has up to now been pretty clear it as a whole doesn't want racist / similar (Ie Sexist / Homophobic etc) behaviour because people want to come on and have a chilled out environment, not somewhere they feel personally attacked or have to witness others being attacked.

I've already said, Anarchy may not be the best description for this game-mode, it's certainly inspired by anarchy, but I couldn't think of a better and accurate name for it, I'm happy for suggestions to be made to change it on this thread, but I was hoping people would be more interested in the content of the event, not the name on the door.

If people want an environment to target / attack other players, using racist, sexist or other similar language, then I'll quite happily cut my losses and those players with it. I don't want or plan to host an environment for those types of individuals, if that ends up killing TF in the longer term, I'll have killed it content that I didn't open the door to that group(s) of people.

Again, if you don't like the game-mode, please don't play it. You don't have to and I wouldn't want you to play something you don't agree with. Likewise, if there is a general consensus (As I said, and this is open to everyone) that this Anarchy event isn't what they want, you and others are encouraged to vote here: https://forum.totalfreedom.me/…ation-confirmation-thread