Jump to content
News Ticker
  • Developer applications are still open
  • Helper applications are still open
  • ba-rp.net:7777
Sign in to follow this  
BYLUG

Unofficial Rules Being Enforced

Recommended Posts

BYLUG
Posted (edited)

I will mainly address the issue of the unofficial rule "idling" being enforced. 

 

I find the threat of permanently banning users for idling absolutely absurd. No where in the rules does it state AFK/Idle is not allowed, therefore, no consequences should be associated with idling. If this seems like a substantial problem which needs to be avoided, please do so by incorporating a rule which prohibits idling. Additionally, an AFK system can be implemented to alleviate the "issue" (as recognized by some administrators).

 

To affiliate idling/AFKing with bug abusing is inaccurate. As seen below, bug abusing is referred to as abusing any SA-MP and/or gamemode bugs. Idle/AFK does not conflict with this rule, as it is not an abuse of SA-MP physics or a gamemode bug and can easily be countered with an AFK script/system or an unambiguous rule (as mentioned previously). If the staff team is concerned about the community players leeching paychecks, then this is something that needs to be combated against in the rules section and not enforced without any appropriate notification to the players.

 

6. Bug Abusing

Abusing any SA-MP and/or gamemode bugs is not tolerated whatsoever. If you find a gamemode bug, report it correctly on the forums.


 Repeatedly jumping to travel around faster.
 Using animations to avoid damage, no-clipping inside walls or gaining infinite oxygen.
 Crouching to cancel default animations during a shootout is also considered bug abuse.
 Quick-scrolling to avoid reloading.

Punishments: Admin Jail or warning. Varied on situation, offense may be bannable.

 

To all staff, please re-evaluate your stringent actions being taken against "idling" and act in accordance with community rules. Avoid originating self-made rules and invoking consequences correlated with these unexpressed rules.  

 

Please bear in mind that I am not promoting idling/AFKing, I do believe a system should be put in place to kick those who are AFK/idle without any serious punishment.

 

@Rehasher @DamianC @Giga

Edited by BYLUG
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lockhart

If you use animations to bypass idle timers I would class that as bug abusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Krayzie
1 minute ago, Lockhart said:

If you use animations to bypass idle timers I would class that as bug abusing.

But really is it THAT big of a deal to perm ban someone over?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lockhart
1 minute ago, Krayzie said:

But really is it THAT big of a deal to perm ban someone over?

 

I was just addressing the point of it not being in the rules, because it does fall under bug abuse.

 

In relation to punishments associated with this, I would consider a ban depending on the severity. A "perm" ban I wouldn't be too sure on though.

 

Has this happened to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Krayzie
Just now, Lockhart said:

 

I was just addressing the point of it not being in the rules, because it does fall under bug abuse.

 

In relation to punishments associated with this, I would consider a ban depending on the severity. A "perm" ban I wouldn't be too sure on though.

 

Has this happened to you?

of course not. I'm not dumb enough to idle long enough to get kicked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BYLUG
2 minutes ago, Lockhart said:

If you use animations to bypass idle timers I would class that as bug abusing.

 

I definitely agree. If there are players who are bypassing a system (which currently does not exist) with animations or other techniques, then yes, it would fall under bug abuse. However, players who are not using any methods to bypass any system are being threatened to be permanently banned, whereas there should be no punishments at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Highwire
Posted (edited)

I think someone using anims to avoid the AFK script should be bannable, it's common knowledge that you shouldn't do it. But you're right, it should be in the rules. Everything that the admins are to enforce should be on the rules for reference or clarification. If someone hops on the forums to check if something is allowed or not, and they don't see a rule against it, it really isn't their fault for assuming it's okay. For example, someone asked me on discord a week ago if it was okay to make a new UCP account since they couldn't namechange or delete characters. I assumed it was fine due to not being in the rules. I apparently was wrong and could have gotten that person into trouble.

Edited by Highwire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BYLUG
1 minute ago, Highwire said:

I think banning someone for using anims to avoid the AFK script should be bannable, it's common knowledge that you shouldn't do it. But you're right, it should be in the rules. Everything that the admins are to enforce should be on the rules for reference or clarification. If someone hops on the forums to check if something is allowed or not, and they don't see a rule against it, it really isn't their fault for assuming it's okay. For example, someone asked me on discord a week ago if it was okay to make a new UCP account since they couldn't namechange or delete characters. I assumed it was fine due to not being in the rules. I apparently was wrong and could have gotten that person into trouble.

 

The issue I'm addressing in my topic is "idling" not bug abusing. Administrators are intimidating players with a ban for excessive idling without any sort of bug abuse. However, I agree with the fact that any administrative actions should be justified and backed up with established rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lockhart

In relation to excessive idling, and not bug abusing,  I think whilst there isn't a rule written in stone, it does fall under common courtesy. If an admin has kicked you twice for being idle in your house and even after that you continue to log in primarily to idle around, you are doing something which you have been told not to do. You are OK to idle but if you keep logging in directly after being kicked just to do it again I can see the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BYLUG
6 minutes ago, Lockhart said:

In relation to excessive idling, and not bug abusing,  I think whilst there isn't a rule written in stone, it does fall under common courtesy. If an admin has kicked you twice for being idle in your house and even after that you continue to log in primarily to idle around, you are doing something which you have been told not to do. You are OK to idle but if you keep logging in directly after being kicked just to do it again I can see the problem.

 

Not sure if you've read the rules or not, but there is no such rule or subtopic as "common courtesy". Even then it does not justify an administrator to ban a player for breaking a nonexistent rule. These threats are also being expressed to players who do not log in immediately after being kicked (I have proof).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lockhart
Just now, BYLUG said:

 

Not sure if you've read the rules or not, but there is no such rule or subtopic as "common courtesy". Even then it does not justify an administrator to ban a player for breaking a nonexistent rule. These threats are also being expressed to players who do not log in immediately after being kicked (I have proof).

 

I wasn't stating that it was a rule; it's like saying please, thank you, or holding a door for somebody.

 

Learner's definition of COURTESY
 
[noncount] : polite behavior that shows respect for other people
  • They treated us with courtesy and kindness.
  • He didn't even have the common courtesy [=he was not even as polite as people can usually be expected to be] to say goodbye when he left.
 
We could possibly look at making additions to the rules to clarify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boss
Posted (edited)

BYLUG has a very strong argument and using common courtesy to defend the recent administration actions sounds a little irrational to me. Especially considering that idling does not seem to violate common courtesy at all.

Edited by Boss
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lockhart
21 minutes ago, Boss said:

BYLUG has a very strong argument and using common courtesy to defend the recent administration actions sounds a little irrational to me. Especially considering that idling does not seem to violate common courtesy at all.

 

If you've been kicked for something but continue to do it is not showing courtesy, so I still believe what I said is rational. At face value idling isn't exactly "not showing courtesy" but ignoring admin instruction is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Terry

if the rules told you absolutely everything you can and can’t do, then it would be comparable to a jk rowling novel. use your common sense and read between the lines, it’s fairly obvious idling for long periods of times is abusing, because ultimately you’re granting yourself an advantage over players who actually play the game... not log in, only to run off and finish their house chores. if idling was allowed, you would soon have an army of high level players without experience of the actual game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bash_Barti

Too many people are AFK'ing though. It's becoming like PR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×