Aceflyer

What Blue said. People were angry before we had a forum, and now they are angry because we have a forum... Also - I edited my original post to avoid appearing elitist (which wasn't my intention).

Then it should be owners or zone ban admins only. Sysops is too broad.

I think that sums everything up pretty well, thanks Blue. I apologize if I was too defensive or if I seemed that I was trying to show off... it wasn't my intention, and I will exercise more caution in my posts in the future.

In hindsight, I agree, and can only say I regret making this topic. My only purpose in making this topic originally was to help spread awareness of the public forum so people could know about it and use it as a resource when necessary.

1) There are certain standards that must be met for someone to set up a SSC zone. 2) We can't prevent that. If it is really abused though (e.g. a SSC zone adding tens of sysops) I imagine we will deal with it if it happens. 3) As people who are !@#$%^&*led as sysop. We are going by !@#$%^&*le and not amount of access. Even in Subgame, there are people who have sysop access but who are not !@#$%^&*led as sysop. 4) The answer has already been given many many times in this thread.

I agree; since you aren't a zone/server admin, the discussions in the private board wouldn't be particularly relevant to you. Currently 10 (out of 19 total) Council members are registered on that forum, and it has been online only 48 hours or so. That seems pretty promising to me.

We do the best we can to be as consistent and fair as possible. I am aware the general guidelines are not loophole-proof, but the guidelines aren't meant to hold up in a real life court of law either; they are just there to serve as general guidelines to help ensure fairness.

D1st0rt is the only official HS sysop, and he definitely qualifies for access. Arnk Dylie is an official HZ sysop and already has access anyway. Cerium has sysop access in HS but is not actually !@#$%^&*led an HS sysop, so he doesn't automatically qualify. People can have sysop access in a zone but not actually be !@#$%^&*led a zone sysop (heck, I've had a Moderator/Developer in SWE in the past who had sysop access in the zone for bot development purposes); these people don't automatically qualify as far as I'm concerned. If you clarify that Cerium is actually !@#$%^&*led an HS sysop, he would then automatically qualify for access.

Explain to us how the above is unreasonable in any way. If we see evidence for how it is unreasonable we are open to amending it.

The private portion of the forum is for SSC members, SSC server admins, SSC zone admins (typically zone sysops/owners), and SSC zone BanG admins to use to discuss various issues. It is meant to help facilitate cross-SSC discussion and collaboration, and it is not just for SSC members. This portion of the forum is irrelevant to most of the community. The portion that is relevant is the public portion of the forum, which is for regular players to ask the SSC members and other SysOps questions and for other general discussion about the SSC. Quite correct.

I do not believe the details are particularly relevant, nor do I believe it would be appropriate to publicly release and/or discuss them. Thanks Lynx.

Indeed, that sums it up quite accurately. Thanks Lynx.

There is nothing wrong with swearing, nor have I ever edited any post for swearing. However, Wiki Moderators' powers in most boards have been revoked. This should end this issue.

Intriguing. This is the same person who told me "I want in" on the SSCouncil.com forum. Probably.

A new forum has been added at SSCouncil.com to address several needs. The purpose of this new forum is to provide an easy, centralized way for regular players to ask the SSC members and other SysOps questions and for other general discussion about the SSC. For all general forum needs, including general ban/netban disputes, SSForum.net is still the place to go. This new forum is not meant to serve as a ban disputes board. This new forum will hopefully help resolve some players' concerns about the SSC by facilitating legitimate player/SSC communications. It will hopefully also help improve Continuum in general.

Understandable, after all you report to him.

Get Continuum-wine site updated with this option as well as another option provided recently by Guest1017.

Backup version of the SSC biller is up thanks to Ghost Ship.

HSCore does seem to be ideal for Digital Core. And it does offer advantages over TWCore in this application. However... The only publicly released version of HSCore is an old/outdated version. Further, it is rather hard for anyone except ace ASSS programmers (such as yourself) to get it to compile and run successfully.

Not surprising.

Topics merged; pointless to have two separate topics in General Board discussing the SSC biller's status.

Weird, HZ was down for me. Agreed, Kilo.

Temporary biller is up. Status of permanent biller yet to be decided, according to GS (see news in Chaos).

Gotcha, thanks for the explanation.