Forest

lol Don't think you'll be getting an unban any time soon if you were intentionally mass freekilling, though that's up to the discretion of the Higher-Ups. Would suggest the Mona Pizza challenge if you really want it :coffee:

S'uh dude

Welcome to Xeno Gamers' forums, hope you enjoy your stay with our rather colourful community :coffee:

#WBHashTags Will the infamous #Closed make a comeback now?

Promotions: @TurdWig from Twig to Branch @DeathGod from Stoner to Dealer

@Vector the point being made here is that it's bias to determine that only one spray as inappropriate while the other is just as inappropriate, given the fact that the rule explicitly states that sprays must be PG- 13. While Staff may have the final say on the matter, this doesn't/shouldn't entitle Staff to say something is inappropriate just because they personally find it inappropriate. The reason this whole thing is being blown out of proportion is that the rule is coming off in an incredibly subjective matter. Maso has the complete right to protest this as it's apparent that [some] Staff are selectively isolating groups of people by censoring their sprays just because they disagree with it (IE. Furries/Bronies/etc) even though another spray is just as inappropriate as another spray under the "PG- 13" rule. Keep in mind that I'm not saying they're in the same category of "sexualized" content so much as I am saying that they are both against the rule to begin with. That being said, it's all out of order because, technically speaking, it's next to impossible to moderate "PG- 13" content in a game. It's a 'rating' that caters to cinematography, something that gives fair warning to parents/guardians who bring their kids to watch a movie. Obviously, no one here is a legal guardian of one of the [many] players who play on the Servers; and because we have a diverse group of Staff, opinions and values will differ which will result in segregation and isolation of players. I won't repeat what I have already said (found here and here), but this thread is completely justified and I see no issue with this being discussed seeing as both Maso and Vexx have come to a civil understanding.

Any situation that favours one side (T or CT) over the other.

It doesn't matter what the content is; whether it be ponies, furries, anime or whatever. If it's depicting content that shouldn't be seen by kids then that shit shouldn't be allowed on the Servers :Old Man: Anthropomorphic, scantily-clad things with their legs spread apart is just as inappropriate as the depiction of a typical scantily-clad person doing the same damn thing, both are not PG- 13. Look at it this way: you wouldn't have that sort of content made publicly viewable in Grade school (Elementary school), so that very same thing shouldn't be allowed on Servers. To be perfectly honest, I think the rule itself is dumb. I honestly think it should only cover graphic nudity, racist content, and derogatory terms (the ones we typically warn against) among other things.

This is taken straight from our General Server and Community Rules Guide (which can be found here). First and foremost, if Staff are actually enforcing this rule (which I find hard to believe to begin with) then both of those sprays are inappropriate. That being said, if Staff are merely enforcing the latter (in that sprays must not contain any nudity) then both of those sprays are acceptable. Staff should not be demonstrating any sort of bias behaviour toward sprays that they personally think is inappropriate if they are only strictly enforcing one aspect of that particular rule. Either you deal with any/all sprays that fall under the category of being PG- 13 and displaying nudity, or you treat every spray (without nudity) in the same way. To be perfectly honest, if there's a fine line that makes it so difficult for Staff to determine whether a spray is PG- 13 or not (which shouldn't be the case as it should be blatantly obvious) then the rules should be altered along the lines of the following [for example]: "All sprays and avatars must be PG- 13 and cannot have nudity in them. This includes any spray that depicts sexual content, derogatory content, or anything else that may be deemed inappropriate by Staff." With that in mind, I'll re-iterate that Staff must punish any other players with similar sprays if they are punishing players at all under the aforementioned rule.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXXRS3Kghh4 Jumpscare heavy movie (+ Harry Potter!), but still a worthy mention.

Hail, master of TinyChat :hail:

Assuming the last ban was for an intentional mass freekill (hard to tell with Pacific being gone for years, but given the context in that thread it seems to be the case), I'm going to have to -1 as I did in that last Ban Protest. You'll always be in my heart bb, and it kills me now as much as it did then to negatively vouch here, but I have to stand by my convictions, however old they may be.

Yes

"Ech" -Brian (2015)

All I needed to hear. Steam Group has been updated to reflect that and as such is no longer promoting Paid Moderator/Administrator ranks in the description. #RequestClose

Just curious to hear from the Higher-Ups what the situation is on Paid ranks such as Paid Moderator and Paid Administrator. Are these ranks still a thing? If so, what is the one-time fee for each respective rank? @Rhododendron @Nomulous @Scootaloo @kbraszzz @Hidingmaster Reason I ask is out of curiousity and the fact that our Steam Group still highlights it as a feature in our community :coffee:

User was permanently banned for mass freekilling in February. @Chrono for context of the ban, if any

Introducing 11 Eyes And A Dream, /xg/'s Professional Overwatch Team! Other people who may be interested :coffee:

@Owl Requesting that the [irrelevant] posts above (both Charles' and Narwhal's) be removed (with the permission of Narwhal) as they are in no shape or form relevant to the thread and are resulting in some derailing. Would also like to suggest that if you aren't in good standing with someone (pretty obvious that such is the case here) that you don't derail their thread with what may be a touchy subject @Charles :coffee:

Think of it this way; Staff are there to ensure that the Server(s) foster(s) a friendly and fair environment for players, not to specifically weed out the rule breakers. That is to say, they're there to moderate any issues that arise at the time to prevent any other issues from popping up. The tags are more of a deterrent than anything else. Even if people are less inclined to break the rules in the presence of Staff, their (Staff) primary duty is to, like I said, maintain a fun and enjoyable environment, not to specifically target players for the sole purpose of getting them banned. Of course there are exceptions such as a player hacking (required video evidence) or repeat-offenders who [intentionally] only act out when no Staff are present. Their position is more of a passive one, and while an aggressive one can be just as effective, it tends to dampen the mood and results in players who are less likely to try something new out of fear of being banned. That being said, I'm not dismissing the "undercover" status as unnecessary so much as I am saying that it should only be in effect when it needs to be. Mind you, this is all just personal opinion. Whether or not it is to be enforced this way is up to the Higher-Ups :coffee:

Oof. Do you go paint-balling often, or more of just dinging targets? I can't imagine spending that much on a paintball gun (or even airsoft gun) if it in't being used in a recreational way with buds or something :coffee:

How much dosh did you drop on it?

Welcome to the Xeno Gamers' forums m8, hope you enjoy your stay with our rather colourful community :coffee: