Aceflyer

It is not hard to get in contact with zone staff (in most SSC zones). A simple ?help or ?cheater call in game should suffice. It is also possible, in a pinch, to ?message specific zone staff in game or PM specific zone staff at zone boards or forums. As an additional method, some zones offer specific support contact emails (Trench, for example, has a specific email for ban matters). Zone staff are usually pretty friendly and helpful when handling legitimate queries. Players only need to deal with the Council directly if they themselves are netbanned. In that situation, submitting a ticket via the Council's online support system should suffice. In all other situations it is better to contact the local staff in the relevant zone.

Seems that it would be helpful if you (representing 17th Parallel) were willing to "combine your powers" (i.e. the alias data) with some of us as per Rudy's OP in this thread.

All players have the right to directly contact zone staff, or even the Subspace Council, for !@#$%^&*istance. There is no 'need' for advocates.

Indeed. I agree with what ThunderJam said, it seems that SIT is aiming to become a "players advocacy" group of "lawyers".

In most SSC zones he'd only get banned if he violated zone rules. Why would a zone ban him if he merely entered?

True, when put this way it does appear to involve an unacceptable compromise of security. This sounds very promising, thanks Hoch!

Hahaha, agreed.

lol agreed

Agreed; the SSCC bot-run alias database system is terrific.

First off, I realize this is an old thread, but its content is still very much relevant, so I don't feel too bad about 'bumping' it. I agree that being able to cross reference banlists across various SSC zones is a good method of maximizing efficiency in keeping undesirables banned. However, while the current system (designed by Rudy) is great, it does have a major shortcoming - it isn't "real-time". It might be possible to improve on the current system by having a system of "reciprocal BanG access" in participating zones, where the main BanG op (and only the main BanG op) at each zone has L3 access at the other zone for purposes of being able to view bandata in "real-time". (Why L3? L4 can't view IP addresses.) I'm reasonably sure the main BanG ops at most SSC zones can be trusted not to use L3 access at another zone to ban people, or otherwise abuse this access by using it for anything other than the purpose of getting bandata. Besides, the system would only be set up between zones where both zones are willing, so no zone would be 'forced' to grant access to an op they might not trust. Thoughts? Or is this proposal completely ludicrous for some reason I may not have thought of?

Agreed. They do, actually, but so many supposed online girls are really guys, I've started !@#$%^&*uming "male until proven female" with convincing evidence.

I don't see the problem, frankly. That segment X`terrania doesn't seem to show any abuse of powers by Kn|ght. Granted, these two lines: Kn|ght> Well, keep me updated if you release anymoe ^^ but ya... lol Kn|ght> Haha, aww rats, I was hoping for the sequel. But ya, figure'd you would want to know. Might be candidates for borderline sexual har!@#$%^&*ment. But this isn't RL.

Really guys - not that I'm on rootbear's side or that I think rootbear is 'cool' - but there's no reason to pick on rootbear on everything he says.

Indeed.

Glad to hear things are back up and running at 17th. IMHO - Great work and dedication Samapico.

Rofl you're one to talk attraction.

That's why Audry called you re!@#$%^&*ed. God I didn't think there were still guys out there who were re!@#$%^&*ed enough to think that... It makes me ashamed of my gender.

Netbans (or more precisely, BanG) are, and always have been, relatively weak security-wise. The ASSS ?kick is slightly stronger, but only works locally, of course, and is more limited.

Heh, yea, all Resol did was help Rudy to put a stop to Stray's latest attempt at evading his netban.

Stray was the one who brought it up. I agree that it's not relevant.

In reverse chronological order... #2412 access:2 by Rudy 2008-01-20 07:08 days:200 Thre4t another evasion of netban #2384 vs Stray. Completely switched up his details but I got links across the board. Latest netban in this series #2408. #2408 access:4 by Dr Brain 2008-01-12 14:06 days:200 Celeron Stray evading ban #2384 and causing further disruption (cross-zone spamming) #2406 access:4 by Dr Brain 2008-01-12 13:59 days:200 RIOT!! Stray evading ban #2384 and causing further disruption (cross-zone spamming) #2393 access:4 by Dr Brain 2007-12-11 20:26 days:356 Posted Stray evading netban. #2387 access:4 by Dr Brain 2007-12-03 15:10 days:365 StrayisGod Stray trying to byp!@#$%^&* his old ban. #2384 access:4 by Dr Brain 2007-11-17 09:44 days:365 Stray Gained staff access somehow and played havoc with Hyperspace, including granting money and disabling item restrictions. We were forced to roll back the database to our last backup to correct the issue.

Ah, allow me to clarify. I never said Stray's entire post was irrelevant - in fact, as you note, Stray's explanation for why he optimized Legas' base in the first place, is quite relevant to this thread.

There's no 'again' about it, you shouldn't have evaded your netban in the first place. How is this relevant to the issue at hand?

No problem

Yah, I was just wondering. And does anyone know why only Level 1 BanG Ops can copy netbans to local bans? I'm just curious... since lower level BanG Ops can review netbans, and can ban locally, why can't they copy netbans to local bans?