×
  • Sign In
  • Sign In



    Or sign in with one of these services

  • Sign Up
Jump to content

jaygoki

Members
  • DL
  • D
  • Content Count

    1030
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

Reputation Activity

  1. Agree
    jaygoki reacted to PiNoYPsYcHo in Welp..its Been Two Years Since I Came Here   
    Two years... but you joined January 2015.
     
    ???
  2. Like
    jaygoki reacted to Lithium in Suggestions Thread   
    In regards to long round times, I've thought of a few possibilites that I'd like some input on -

    We simply shorten the round time a minute or two. Shortening too much could make it somewhat unfun when more people are on though, and it feels like rounds are too rushed.
    Scale the round timer based on number of players on the server. This would keep the round time where it is now for when a large amount of people are on (15+?), but shorten it by 1-3 minutes if theres only a few people on.
    Add a !redie plugin. This allows dead players to type !redie and run around and play map games or whatever as a ghost, but not affect the round or people still alive in any way.

    Or, we could do nothing and keep it the same. thoughts?
  3. Agree
    jaygoki reacted to Drendan in Hi Hows It Goin   
    fuck
  4. Like
    jaygoki reacted to xGShadowSpy in Ragingexotics - Counter-strike   
    Oh, the good ol john cena "you cant see me" rulebreaker. -1, undercover staff op
  5. Like
    jaygoki reacted to Chrono in In This Thread Post Your Member Number   
    #3digitsorlessclub
  6. Agree
    jaygoki got a reaction from Charles in In This Thread Post Your Member Number   
    @Chrono 719 :)
    Bonk
    I've been around longer than people think
  7. Like
    jaygoki reacted to LeToucan in In This Thread Post Your Member Number   
    35
  8. Like
    jaygoki reacted to Aegean in In This Thread Post Your Member Number   
    Pinoy is an old f a g with 4 digits lol, im 46. 2 digit master race
  9. Like
    jaygoki reacted to Klure in In This Thread Post Your Member Number   
    532 =D
  10. Agree
    jaygoki reacted to Mogs in Name Contest   
    Lexington Steel
  11. Friendly
    jaygoki got a reaction from Aegean in Just Saying Hi   
    who are you again?
  12. Funny
    jaygoki got a reaction from SniperNoSniping in Hello I'm New To Xg Because I Never Made A Hello Post   
    how many chromosomes do you have
  13. Agree
    jaygoki reacted to xGShadowSpy in Hello I'm New To Xg Because I Never Made A Hello Post   
    Wheres my pizza?
  14. Not Funny
    jaygoki reacted to jubens45 in Hello I'm New To Xg Because I Never Made A Hello Post   
    I just wanted to say hi to everyone because i newbie here and i'd really like to get to know the community better. :))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

  15. Agree
    jaygoki reacted to diabeetus in Hello I'm New To Xg Because I Never Made A Hello Post   
    delete your account
  16. Agree
  17. Like
    jaygoki got a reaction from xGShadowSpy in R.i.pc   
    cya in 4 years
  18. Agree
    jaygoki reacted to Moosty in Changes Are Coming!   
    Bring back the anonymous forum, if at all code-ally possible and we have a deal.
  19. Agree
    jaygoki reacted to Nyuki in Changes Are Coming!   
    Umm, who are you again? Sorry, but no offense, you are kind of a nobody here who is probably trying to trick the admins here for staff ^-^!
     
    Sorry for squashing your attempt, but, this guy is probably scamming.
     
    [attach=full]24363[/attach]
     
    -Nyuki the protector of XenoGamers!
  20. Agree
    jaygoki reacted to Owl in Changes Are Coming!   
    what
  21. Informative
    jaygoki got a reaction from Forest in "accidental" Freekills   
    While I think that there needs to be some sort of reform for this sort of thing, I don't think a test like you were talking about would work because of the blatant cheating issue. Even if they do see the MoTD using a cheat sheet doesn't usually get any knowledge absorbed into the brain of the cheater. Anyone could deem their mfk "accidental" and while the staff would have to prove it I think it would help to be able to deem it accidental only if there was any sort of proof to make it 100% certain that it was accidental because people are never perfect, and it could be seen as an easy way to get out of a permanent ban. Just my $0.02 :coffee:
  22. Agree
    jaygoki reacted to Forest in Jack - Counter-strike   
    Having a history of "berating and insulting members of the server" should not be used as a means of justifying a player's CT ban. This sort of judgement would better suit a Member Protest since it does not really have a direct correlation to being on the CT side.
     
    That being said, intentional or not, OP should take this time to review the MotD rules as there seems to be a lack of judgement on his/her part; especially considering this ban was dealt today and the player has a history of freekilling (found Here). I'd recommend that the offending player remain permanently banned indefinitely until he/she can demonstrate a clear improvement in his/her knowledge of the MotD rules :coffee:
  23. Agree
    jaygoki reacted to Charles in Jack   
    You were banned for massing, and I feel as if it should affect your member app. It doesn't matter if it was on purpose or how many people it was. Massing is massing..................................................................................
  24. Like
    jaygoki reacted to Forest in "accidental" Freekills   
    Hey guys, so this idea just occurred to me and I was wondering what everyone else's thoughts were on the matter. I will warn you now though, this whole thing revolves around the willingness of the Higher-Ups to cooperate and take the time to actually quiz each instance.
     
    ... The post is also really long, so there's that too.
     
    :coffee: Alright, let's get started.
     
    So, say we have someone who mass free-kills. Now let's say that this particular individual, whom I will now call Joe for the duration of this post, has just posted a Ban Protest stating that it was accidental. Now, all that Staff have to go on is the instance in which Joe mass free-killed in determining whether it was accidental or not. Aside from that, Staff can also do a background check on Joe to determine if he has a past history of free-killing. For the sake of this example, let's just assume that Joe has a clean record; no free-kills or bans dealt otherwise. That leaves Staff with an idea of whether it was accidental or intentional (which I still think should be labelled as such when banning: IE. acc mfk, int mfk), not including situations where it's blatantly intentional. Anyway, let's say that the Staff are unclear and that it appeared to be an accidental slip-up on Joe's part. Should Joe be unbanned on the spot? Should he receive a shorter ban time? It's quite the dilemma as "permanent" bans are becoming notoriously easy to get out of (not including that damn Mona Pizza challenge b/s)
     
    Staff will typically butt heads on this matter, and it isn't hard to see why. It's difficult to determine whether a mass free-kill was done with a malicious intent or if it was accidental, and herein lies the problem. So, my suggestion (or theory, whichever floats your boat) is that any player who pleas "accidental" (provided that Staff are unsure) can be given a [minimum(?)] week (or less) to brush up on the MotD rules. Once the week(?) has come to an end, the player will then be tested by the Division Manager/Leader(s) (the Ban Protest will remain open) with a pre-determined amount of questions that will [more or less] cover each and every section of the MotD rules. This set of questions will obviously vary for each Division, and should differ from test to test to prevent any "cheat sheets" from being made. After being tested, the DM/DLs will compile the player's percentage of answers correct and will then determine how long the player should be banned for based on their percentage (IE. 0-40% is a permanent ban, 40-50% is a month ban, 50-60% is a two week ban, 70-80%+ is a week ban [% to time is subject to change, discretion of Higher-Ups]).
     
    Now, this does seem like a lot of work, but do keep in mind that this sort of testing will only go into effect if an offender pleads "accidental" mass free-kill that is otherwise not 100% clear on the Staff's part, which is already somewhat rare to begin with. Moreover, this "defense" can only ever be used once at any given time by each offender.
     
    The implementation of such a task introduces a few pros that I believe are pretty beneficial:
     
    First and foremost, it gives the whole "permanent" ban for "accidental" free-kills a lot more validity (Think "he should be unbanned because this guy was" argument). It's entirely up to the offender to take matters into their own hands by brushing up on the MotD rules, or risk being permanently banned unless he/she chooses to undergo the 'challenges'. That is to say, instead of taking up the Staff's time, it'll take up the offender's time. If they aren't willing to put the time in, then they obviously aren't interested enough in playing on the Servers.
     
    Secondly, it allows DM/DLs to more accurately determine a proper punishment befitting of each particular individual; that is to say, there won't be this "bias" air floating around Ban Protests (not implying there is, but better safe than sorry) against supposed accidental free-kills. Again, the ban time will solely depend on the offender's diligence in brushing up on MotD rules.
     
    Third, it can increase efficiency and reduce any wasted-time of our Staff. It can potentially save Staff time from having to actively monitor a particular individual to determine whether or not improvements have been made in the long run and frees up their time on the Servers to do what they do best: moderating.
     
    Alright, so before you start saying "but Forest, these offenders could just as easily take a gander at the MotD rules during the time of testing and bull sh*t their way through it!", just hear me out. Even if this is the case, the offender will inadvertently retain some of the information they are reading up on in the MotD whether they like it or not, even if it is their intention to cheat. Besides, even provided that they bull sh*t their way through the test, what is there really to lose? If Joe happens to mass-freekill again and comes back here to bitch and moan "but it was accidental, I swear!" Staff can wash their hands of it since he was already given the opportunity to better himself, right? At this point, Joe has dug his own grave with a shovel of ignorance/arrogance and is now sitting up sh*t creek without a paddle.
     
    Obviously this whole thing is far from full-proof, but that is exactly why I've brought it up here. Think of it as a proof of concept more than anything. I'd honestly like to hear what others have to say, whether you agree or disagree, or whether you think it's just stupid as hell and that Staff have enough on their plate as it is.
     
    As always, comment, berate, give your opinion, or what-have-you down below. I'm not sorry for this long-ass post.
     
    - Dat guy, Forest
  25. Agree
    jaygoki reacted to Charles in Jack - Counter-strike   
    Yo if I massed with like five friends on. What would stop me from telling them to say that I did it on accident?