Forest

STEAM_0:1:18394381 probable Steam ID based off of our Player database. That being said, this is just an assumption and should be investigated (I literally just looked up the player list of last week) further for validity. Also assuming the Steam ID isn't present in either of the demos as I did not watch them.

This was/is actually a thing? Cheesus crust. Seriously, @GeneralPopulation gather evidence and report Staff, I implore thee. We need an incentive program up in here that will reward players for reporting rule-breakers or abusive Staff, for real. To those of you already doing so, keep doing what you're doing. You're beautiful, don't ever change.

o shit whaddup

[MEDIA=tumblr]did=da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709;id=48267150139;key=up_cz9_NkC_oFKjlAy1_8w;name=astroknight[/MEDIA]

Mashups far and wide, high and low, post them here. Recently been on a mashup kick; this includes songs that use samples from other songs, or just involves two songs mixed together. Recently discovered these two gems (one is a simple mashup, the other is an album): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD0M7rVDG6g [MEDIA=bandcamp]album_id=1157337962[/MEDIA]

Don't drink too much @Cristo ; we all know what happened last time bby grl ;)

Yep. Standards used to be higher. Vouches that held no weight or didn't offer any sort of insight (IE. The dreaded "+1 cool guy, good warden") weren't counted toward the applicant's overall +1s. Nowadays, it looks like reducing the number of vouches required is either a cause-and-effect introduced by other Divisions lowering their required vouches a while back or just an effort to gain more active Members, but I digress. I don't know, I can understand why it's been reduced, but at this point it's becoming more of a chore than it is an honour to be a full Member of Xeno Gamers. That is to say, 4 vouches (even 5) are so incredibly easy to obtain that it's literally going to be little to no effort to actually get into Xeno Gamers; especially with the kind of vouches that I see on a daily basis (two-word vouches reign). By no means am I questioning the reasoning behind changing the vouching process as I'm sure it isn't purely due to the reasons I mentioned. I'm just worried that becoming an actual Member of Xeno Gamers will [eventually] mean little to nothing aside from gaining access for Staff consideration.

Any potential of referrals carrying over to xG's FaceBook/Twitter/YouTube accounts (think incentives for liking/sharing/etc)? Or, alternatively, raffles that reward multiple vouches once the user has subscribed to our YouTube channel, Liked/Shared on FaceBook, etc. It could be a good way to gain some much needed attention and traction through our social media accounts.

I believe the largest reason is that the majority of our ND player-base are in Europe; so there's a large timezone difference. The London/Redstone Server tends to be borderline filled up during the night, at least from what I've seen (at this moment it's at 27/32). @MineCrack I also neglected to mention that the majority of my earlier post was intended to be directed at our Nuclear Dawn Division, not our Gmod Division. My bad, pretty tired :coffee:

Bring Back Darkrp It's Time For A New Gmod Server... Refer to the threads linked above (would recommend posting here though, no need to Grave Dig) as it is relevant to the current topic at hand. This is unrelated to the current thread, but I've been wondering; why is the entirety of our Gmod Division (Morbus included) incredibly reclusive? That is to say, I rarely/never see any Members/Players/Staff taking an active interest in the forums at all. Not to start an argument or anything of the sort, I'm just genuinely interested.

I believe the general consensus is that unless it is explicitly mentioned in the Hello/Goodbye thread [that the Player/Member is "leaving the clan/community"] they are otherwise just taking a break. Because, let's be honest; 80% of people who say they're leaving end up coming back time and time again to begin with Needless to say, Higher-Ups should consider the fact that a Staff Position isn't a 'welcome back' basket for those who repeatedly leave and come back whenever it benefits them the most (not implying this is the case, but still ought to be considered) :coffee:

If people are actually interested and we don't just get 3 legitimate submissions, then I'm all for it (assuming you're implying that this thread be resurrected in general), otherwise poke @NitNat one more time ;)

^ That being said, check out this thread and equip yourself with knowledge! How-to: Gathering Evidence

Bumping this thread, seeing as how the spookiest day is arriving soon (and I need more spooky movies in my life) :coffee:

Yes, xG isn't obligated to keep bans permanent, but that isn't why permanent bans should be refuted; it's the principle of the matter. That being said, Member discipline and Staff Member discipline are on two different ends of the spectrum. It is expected that Staff know and understand the circumstances of their actions more-so than a regular Member should. I understand what you're getting at, and literally the age difference is the only thing to consider for this sort of Ban Protest, especially considering we had young Staff at the time (hence the Aged 16+ criteria being added to Staff Submissions). I would otherwise agree with @Warriorsfury in regards to the whole exhausted "I was in a bad place" reason, but the only exception here is if that player happened to be below the suggested age during the time as I have yet to see a 12-13 year old make mature decisions. However, in regards to the 3rd point you brought up; while it's great that a Staff Member has a reputation/status in the community, that does not and should not mean they are entitled to an unban (given the 'abusive leave' context) for whatever reason. They should receive the same judgement as any other Staff Member who abused under the same circumstances, otherwise this inhibits an unfair and biased decision. If anything, a harsher punishment should be enacted as at this point they should be completely aware of the circumstances of their actions. In my opinion, what it all really comes down to is the decision of the Higher-Ups in determining whether: A) an abusive leave should result in a permanent Server Ban with no appeal; B) an abusive leave should result in a permanent Server Ban with an appeal, but no access to Membership (Basic or otherwise); -or- C) an abusive leave should result in a permanent demotion to Non-Member with no access to Membership (Basic or otherwise; dissolution of Permanent Server Ban)

It's to discourage anyone else from doing the same thing as anyone could do it if they don't plan on being a Staff Member again. With this punishment, Staff really have to weigh their options and consider the fact that they will not be able to play on our Servers again should they choose to do something incredibly stupid. Getting a Staff position in xG should mean something and should be something to be proud of; none of that would matter if people think players who abuse their position as Staff get a free pass to play on the Servers. In other words, what's to stop a Staff Member from slaying everyone if they know that the worst that could happen is they will be demoted? They would otherwise still be able to play on Servers, and more often than not, these abusers only consider one thing: to go out with a bang. I say that if that's what they want, then they damn well better accept what's coming. It's one thing for a player/Member to mass free-kill people; but it's a whole other thing entirely to betray the trust of the Higher-Ups who gave you (the abuser) the opportunity to moderate on our Servers by practically spitting on everything and writing it off as nothing more than a joke. That being said, while it's commendable to see someone own up to their mistakes, I personally don't think those who intentionally abuse to get a laugh out of it [because they're pretty well leaving the community] should be unbanned from the Server(s). If this Ban Protest is honestly being considered by the Higher-Ups, the only thing I'd like to point out is that this will open the gates for any other past-abusers to protest their Ban and to receive fair judgement on their part too (assuming this hasn't already occurred).

How? Elaborate

As Mega said, it's a timed event to prevent abuse. Members are unable to edit their posts after a certain period of time, however I don't know how long this is or whether it differs from the OP of a new thread or just a new post in general. Staff already have access to 'histories' of posts/threads as well, we just don't see it because we don't have those permissions :coffee:

Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting that an indepth look into each and every scenario be written out, more-so of the latter of which you proposed. That is, the major offenses that typically occur across all Divisions like Freekilling, Mass Freekilling, Mic Spam, Chat Spam, Hacking, etc; literally just the handful of punishments that are already covered in the Admin Handbook. Either way, it's entirely up to the Staff and Higher-Ups. I just figured that having a basic set of universal rules that carry over across all Divisions would be easier on Staff (IE. revisioned Admin Handbook), especially if someone wanted to transition from a Staff position in say, CS:GO to TF2. Frankly I'm just glad to see that the whole thing is being discussed because I won't lie, seeing outdated Stickied threads really irks me when it comes to rules/guidelines/etc because it certainly doesn't make it easy on new Staff when they're looking for something to refer to. Though, on the topic of Admin-related things, I still think that Staff should specify their reasons when dealing mass freekill bans for clarification. It can really help out down the line if someone is protesting a Ban Protest where instead of the ban saying "mass freekill" it said something like "intentional mass freekill" or "accidental mass freekill" (or alternatively; "int mfk" / "acc mfk"). Again, just a suggestion to make your guys' lives easier when vouching for/against a Ban Protest.

My apologies, I forgot to include a key component in my post that many of you are raising; I don't have any grievances with changes being made to reflect a more efficient and trustworthy agenda. The point that I was eluding to in this thread is that we have these rules set in place, staples in how Staff would go about their job; however, these rules and guidelines have been either neglected or ignored for more favourable ones without actually being updated or touched on at any point. Keep in mind that the Admin Handbook was a universal code; applicable to all Divisions. Up until a while ago, Division Leaders started enacting their own versions of rules and such and this resulted in disharmony and branching of xG (IE. CS:GO vs TF2); pretty well adding fuel to the fire of dividing the community. That is to say, that thread was/is supposed to be the [universal] Staff Member's 'creed', so-to-speak and it's a shame to see that it's fallen so far behind. As previously mentioned, the only reason there were static times depending on the ban was to foster an unbiased judgement system where all players would receive equal punishment for any rules they have/had broken. This isn't something I'm bringing up to dismiss Staff as untrustworthy/unreliable in dishing out fair punishment. Mandating a certain set of rules against rule breakers is fair and just (to a certain extent) and presents no bias in any form. The only exceptions (in terms of ban time) that were made back in the day were for repeat offenders, and at that point it would be up to the discretion of the Staff. Either way, these are just the words of a semi-old fag, and as such it should be taken with a grain of salt. I don't have the authority to enforce any of this, nor do I expect anyone else to do so. Just merely reminding people that we used to have global rules in place for a reason until everything started getting segregated.

Admin Handbook Just wanted to shed some light on this lovely Admin Handbook (click on the Header) that seems to be missing some much-needed love. That is to say, I've noticed an increasing number of Staff banning players with varying time lengths as well as dishing out wrongful Permanent bans on players who are supposedly "hacking" without any sort of evidence or proof to back up the claim. Up until when I stepped down, Staff had always upheld this "unless proven otherwise, give the player the benefit of the doubt" mentality, and it's sad to see that in this case it's becoming more and more apparent that Staff automatically deem a player a 'bad apple' as opposed to the former. Now, I don't want to be a shit-disturber as that isn't my intention; but for the duration of time I've spent here at Xeno Gamers as a Staff Member, I've always tried to do my best to uphold our rules and guidelines. You could call me a 'rule-nazi', though I had always taken great pride in enacting fair and just bans; so if that warrants the rule-nazi title, then so be it. I'm not doubting any Staff's integrity or ability to Moderate, that isn't what I'm getting at here. What I'm just pointing out is that there are certain rules and guidelines that were set in place; albeit a long time ago, when it comes to dishing out punishments. It's just sad to see that those particular rules are either being shrugged off or forgotten, though I'm assuming it's the latter. Anyway, I just wanted to bring this to light, because I don't know if/when it will be brought up at any other point by anyone else. Cheers :coffee:

Just throwing this out there since it's becoming increasingly common for Staff to ban players for hacks without any evidence toward it (both in CS:GO and TF2). Not sure if this is due to a lack of knowledge (in regards to the Admin Handbook) or failure to uphold the proper guidelines when dealing with bans of any sort. Not calling the Staff Member in question out or anything so much as I am making it aware that unless there was some change or alteration to how Staff should be carrying out bans, things have been slipping quite a bit. Mind you, this is all from the perspective of a Member, and as such if there were changes then I apologize in advance.

So, thanks to Virr's gif (demo would be sweet too, but this gif is more than enough to justify the ban) it's blatant that you clearly don't understand that you have to give Ts a chance to, you know, do your orders. This is all an assumption, but my guess is that you were ordering Ts to unstack while being fired upon; in which case you gave them like, 3 seconds during the whole commotion before opening fire on the collective bunch of them. I won't throw a vouch in here, though I will say that I'm leaning toward a negative one given the context here. While we don't exactly have a time set in stone as to how long a T has until they are considered a rebel via not following orders, 3 seconds (assumption) really isn't enough time, especially provided the whole commotion going on. There are a bunch of variables that will influence this, but being shot at and panicking when giving orders shouldn't enable you to kill a whole bunch of them within such a short time frame. Just to clarify, the majority of this post involves assumptions, hence the lack of a vouch.