Snackbar 38 Posted October 5, 2011 -1 Honestly I feel like moderators/admins should have the discretion to change their names or omit their moderator/admin tags because its easier to enforce rules when there is a an air of anonymity with regards to the rule-enforcers. For example: if you know that all moderators/admins must keep the :A or :M tag on at all times, and you see none of them in the server, then you know you have greater leeway to rebel. But if it is not readily apparent who is moderating, the fear that the rule-enforcer could be lurking around should prove a greater deterrent for potential rule breakers. Just my 2 cents. Now heres an exception: 1. xG Mods and Admins ARE PERMITTED to join the server under an alias if they are investigating rule infractions, provided they send a message in the xG LEADERSHIP Steam Group, allowing the rest of us to know who/what hes doing. This way, they can monitor and see if someones breaking rules when "No ones watching". ISNT READING MAGICAL???????????? Seriously? Now you just look like a Derp. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JimenyCrickets 0 Posted October 5, 2011 To what purpose does it serve to require something like this to be reportable? SteamID's never change so you don't need to worry about an admin freekilling or abusing. Honestly this is just a more restrictive rule with a very overstated purpose; you claim that it makes it hard for you to differentiate who is in xG and who isn't, and yet the website itself registers an average of 700 xG members in game at any one time. I feel that this is unnecessarily prohibitive and doesn't really help you out in anyway except making it harder for people like me who enjoys smurfing names like "(7)CLASSICS" or "HUDSONS CAT". Plus, don't admins have a /whois function anyways? I'm not trying to call you out or belittle you since you must care about the server enough to want to change it for the better; that's not what is under question here. What I am more concerned about is the needless tacking on of more and more rules and the loss of more and more freedoms. ISNT READING MAGICAL???????????? Seriously? Now you just look like a Derp. And I am not a derp LOL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snackbar 38 Posted October 5, 2011 The /who command is being thrown around like its a comprehensive list of all your past aliases, when it only tells you if said name is an admin or not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAlpha31 0 Posted October 5, 2011 The /who command is being thrown around like its a comprehensive list of all your past aliases, when it only tells you if said name is an admin or not. Oh, I didn't know that. But, seeing as how I am merely a non-member... :P Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snackbar 38 Posted October 5, 2011 No big deal. If i type !Who Alpha31 it will say [sM] "TheAlpha31" is not an admin. Thats all. It wont tell me anything else. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAlpha31 0 Posted October 5, 2011 No big deal. If i type !Who Alpha31 it will say [sM] "TheAlpha31" is not an admin. Thats all. It wont tell me anything else. Oh, so what is happening when admins do "!who (some person with xG in name)" then they say to remove the tag if you are not a member? ---------- Post added at 06:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:15 PM ---------- But in that case, I support a method of keeping track of people's names. +1 ---------- Post added at 06:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:17 PM ---------- If only I could change my vote on the poll. :P Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
