Proposed new signup procedure

Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 0

From the front page news - seems to be good points raised in comments there, so let's discuss in here.

Td

Kai Admirer Joined: 08 Jan 2005 Posts: 369

liked the way you wrote that.
just wondering about abuse of the system and the flood of sponsor requests that will hit these forums and the forums of clans etc.

Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 7:45 pm

it does seem a little overboard, but if that is what people have brought this to then so be it.

but i have a few questions;

A) if i want to play a modded game on kai, would it get me in trouble if it was clearly labled or private?

B) if someone higher in the heirarchy gets a banning (lifetime that is,) does everyone that they let in get punished as well?

C) if they don't what happens to the main responsability? i understand if I let someone in and they are assholes, i should get in trouble. and if they let someone in that misbehaves, i still should (but not AS much.)
but if they get banned and their recruites stay i should not be completly responsable for their actions.

in my opinion once someone receives a life ban, anyone under should be dropped as well. just a thought....

Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 0

OK, I'll try to deal with these in order. Just remember though - nothing is concrete yet, so based on what everyone seems to think about it all, we'll probably change things a bit.

OK, the flood of requests here / in clan forums. Well, I'm trying to stay away from getting people to beg for accounts on forums and in IRC - as you rightly say, it would truly suck. So, we have a couple of options I can think of right now - here they are:

a.) A wasteland arena - anyone can go in, and can play. Already authenticated users can recruit people from there. Problem is, why would good registered users want to spend time in there, with all the cheating racists. Still - it would probably do the job, and at least people could play straight away.

b.) A simple cooling off period. So, you sign up - and 48 hours later, you are allowed into the full arena structure. However, *any* proper user can ban you at will - but if you're nice, someone will give you access. Problems: relies on the registered users not being assholes - which we hope would work. Advantage: Let's people get straight in and play everything.

c.) We provide a special forum, which is essentially unmoderated (aside from piracy / racism). Let people shoot it all out in there.

d.) We do nothing - just see how it works with no mechanism for new users who dont know anyone - then sort something out after.

To the next guys questions,

a.) Modded games are not against the rules now, and will not be in future. Simply ensure you do it in the correctly marked arena, and there will not be a problem.

b.) If someone gets a lifetime, it would be nasty to dump all those under him - so we'd either "unattach" the username, so they would need another sponsor to get back in, or we simply reparent them to whoever sponsored their sponsor - if you see what i mean.

Keep the discussion coming here - and dont be afraid to suggest stuff - this is one of the more important things I want dealt with in evo8.

TD

Kai Beginner Joined: 11 Nov 2004 Posts: 47

I think this is a bit overkill if you've ever spent lots of time playing Halo 2 (which is where most of this is directed at I assume, especially the cheating part).

The temporary account in a completely separated unmoderated part of kai won't work... I'll certainly never give an invite to anyone I don't know with the banning system, and I'll always be playing with my friends, and will never show up in the unmoderated part.

I just think that everyone new will automatically go to xbc. The problem isn't nearly as bad as you guys think. I think a better solution would be to give distinguishing abilites to known good players on regularly. It seems the admins and moderators don't spend nearly as much time playing at the root of the problem like I do. They hear feedback but don't see it firsthand.

I'd recommend giving certain regular Halo 2 "hosts" preference -- those that can be relied upon to boot cheaters and laggers, and keep their games civil. I only play in these types of rooms now, but it could be helpful to new players who aren't familiar with them.

Team XLink Administrator Joined: 04 Jun 2004 Posts: 4371

give new un-invited users less access .. an invited user can make a room and only other invited users can join if set that way , or everyone can play together if set that way .. maybe stars , 1 star user is a n00b with no invite, 2, 3, 4 stars are users who signed up and are getting good/bad feedback and 5 is someone who was invited .. that way it would be easy to block out the people you didn't want to play with (no passwords needed see :] ) ..

more ideas people! :]

Kai Regular Joined: 03 Feb 2005 Posts: 81

Alright this system is very good for a few reasons:

1. Everyone will know eachother...therefore be connected and be a true family which is extrememly good.
2. No more cheaters/modders/hackers/racists.
3. No more annoying people who just spam and get banned every day for this reason!

However, a few bad reasons:

1. Wont have as big a community as we have now, from what ive heard we have about 200,000 now and we will be down to 1,000-5,000...
2. If someone you sponsor gets in trouble...you will to but not as badly.
3. 'IF' there will be an invite system...this is good but you will have to earn your invite on kai...so new users will be kinda screwed Sad

I know nothing is set in stone yet but... i hope some stuff does indeed change after reading all of these comments.

-kyle-

Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 0

It's actually not specifically for halo2 - although I don't deny that a lot of assholes do gravitate towards that game.

I note that you say that you only play with your friends. In that case, where would there be a problem? You would get invited by someone who knows you somewhere - or sees you online playing a lot already, and then you would invite all your friends.

Also, ya know, "everyone going to XBC" is pretty much fine really. We don't have a problem with a significantly smaller userbase - as long as people can still get games when they want, and can trust the system to be honest.

I hear you about the idea for halo2 hosts - it's not a bad idea at all, but I don't feel it would give the overall level of confidence the hierarchy system would give, nor would it give "the people" sufficient power to express their choices regarding new players.

TD

Team XLink Moderator Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 1536

TheDaddy @ Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:15 pm wrote:

Also, ya know, "everyone going to XBC" is pretty much fine really. We don't have a problem with a significantly smaller userbase - as long as people can still get games when they want, and can trust the system to be honest.

yeah when i started to use XLink Omega, i loved it cos only because of the community. then after a while XLink Kai came out and all, then we got them punk a$$ XBC members coming to ruin our experience. So hell yeah TD, good job.

Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:23 pm

maybe a dumb thing to say but;

Users can send invites to people who also can give invites and so on, so the community will get as big as now, or am i wrong ??

Team XLink Moderator Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 1536

R4z0r-W1ND[NL]* @ Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:23 pm wrote:

maybe a dumb thing to say but;

Users can send invites to people who also can give invites and so on, so the community will get as big as now, or am i wrong ??

yeap, but we all need to be carefull who we give the invite too, as it will affect you if they do bad.

Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 0

Thats exactly the idea - the community will probably get big pretty quick, but hopefully will include a completely automatic self-control mechanism. Hopefully Smile

TD

Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:30 pm

Oke got that Very Happy

...

second thing...

is it possible to withdraw your sended invites ??

Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:32 pm

Although I do think there needs to be something done to limit/stop cheaters and racists from messing with our fun while playing, and I don't have the answer to this problem, I think this is going a little too far. I do think there would be less racists and cheaters, but a whole different group of problems seem to be likely.

Lets say you sponsor someone you've played with or know. You and this person get in an argument, he wants you to pay, he gets a lifetime ban, this makes you look bad and you may get a) your username banned, b)banned from Kai for a short time, and/or c) etc.

Since I don't play Halo2, from what I hear, ppl host in the main lobby, (not sure why they don't just setup a room, that's a different discussion). I would like to see certain members, who have shown their dedication to keeping the gaming to just gaming, other than admins and mods, to have special powers like being able to kick people in someone elses room if they have it set to dedicated, or if they are away from their computer. These special users would then go to a special forum on Kai when they ban /kick someone and have to justify their reasons to stop people from abusing their powers.

Those are just some of my beliefs on this subject.

Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 0

It is - remember that you can ban someone (only temp ban, of course) who is a.) below you vertically and b.) registered after you.

Given this, you can always revoke invites by banning people you added. Perhaps we also need a mechanism whereby any users *actual sponsor* has the power to completely ban one of his charges, in case he turns out to be an ass - that could well be a very good idea.

TD

Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:35 pm

i prefer the idea of returning to un-nominated if a lower heirarchy then me gets banned.

not that i have that many friends that play these games, but i wouldn't want to be any more responsible for the people someone i knew let in, especially if they get life-banned.

just a thought, but if this is going into effect, it should be done right.
if a higher ranked player gets caught for cheating, whose to say his judgement in allowing players to join is reliable, therefore they shouldn't get banned but just Dropped and notified. by that point they should have been able to meet someone to let them in.

Team XLink Administrator Joined: 27 Aug 2004 Posts: 1826

TheDaddy @ Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:02 pm wrote:

b.) If someone gets a lifetime, it would be nasty to dump all those under him - so we'd either "unattach" the username, so they would need another sponsor to get back in, or we simply reparent them to whoever sponsored their sponsor - if you see what i mean.

The whole idea sounds oke to me, but this hierarchy part might turn out to be a problem. Say someone high up in the hierarchy (mind you: i hate that word) would get a perm ban. That would mean chances are that 100s of players would need to find another sponsor and could lose their place in the hierarchy.

Would this potentially create more work for admins and mods? The fixing of broken up piramides?

Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 0

I would agree - but that approach presents us with the problem of "where do orphans go?" .. Say your sponsor, or a sponsor above him is life-banned - then either a.) you just get reparented to his parent, or b.) you go into some reduced-privelege group - who must get a new sponsor. I personally dont want unattached people floating round - coz that lets the jackasses in - i would rather someone was always answerable to someone above.

TD

Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:46 pm

i think that is part of the responsibility of being in the heirachy all together.

Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 0

(last reply ws for guy above)

OK TwoCents,

Well I hope not - see, the pyrmaid will fix *itself* - all done on the server. The mods life should get a lot easier - and hopefully involve more playing of games.

I wonder, as a mod, how would you react to this new scheme? Would you rather be weeding out assholes to ban, or would the mods prefer to be selecting *good* people from a pool of unattached users who have lost their sponsor / dont have one?

TD