Slicer Posted July 7, 2008 Report Posted July 7, 2008 NEXT WEEK ON SS DRAMA- Priitk returns from his coma!- Desert Storm cheats on Mystic Kingdom- MikeTheNose, has a Nose job!- AND DUN DUN DUN AUDRY IS PREGNANT... but just whos is it?
Aceflyer Posted July 7, 2008 Report Posted July 7, 2008 NEXT WEEK ON SS DRAMA- Priitk returns from his coma!- Desert Storm cheats on Mystic Kingdom- MikeTheNose, has a Nose job!- AND DUN DUN DUN AUDRY IS PREGNANT... but just whos is it?
JDS Posted July 7, 2008 Report Posted July 7, 2008 he's onloy happy cause we forget about him next week
X`terrania Posted July 7, 2008 Report Posted July 7, 2008 Lol, something tells me his idiotic maneuver is going to be remembered for a long time.
Emit Posted July 7, 2008 Report Posted July 7, 2008 this aceflyer character, he spazzes out over a pub game in tw... really someone respectable isn't he?
Cancer+ Posted July 7, 2008 Report Posted July 7, 2008 NEXT WEEK ON SS DRAMA- Priitk returns from his coma!- Desert Storm cheats on Mystic Kingdom- MikeTheNose, has a Nose job!- AND DUN DUN DUN AUDRY IS PREGNANT... but just whos is it? PriitK is in a coma?!
rootbear75 Posted July 7, 2008 Report Posted July 7, 2008 NEXT WEEK ON SS DRAMA- Priitk returns from his coma!- Desert Storm cheats on Mystic Kingdom- MikeTheNose, has a Nose job!- AND DUN DUN DUN AUDRY IS PREGNANT... but just whos is it?- and last but most certainly not least: Rootbear75 drops 150 lbs!
Suicide_Run Posted July 7, 2008 Report Posted July 7, 2008 NEXT WEEK ON SS DRAMA- Priitk returns from his coma!- Desert Storm cheats on Mystic Kingdom- MikeTheNose, has a Nose job!- AND DUN DUN DUN AUDRY IS PREGNANT... but just whos is it?I prefer if Kameloh came back, took control of DS and brought it back to life with magical powers
Audry Posted July 7, 2008 Report Posted July 7, 2008 wtf... im pregnant!!??!??!??!!?!?!? WHO THE !@#$%^&* IS THE DADDY!??!?
»Lynx Posted July 7, 2008 Author Report Posted July 7, 2008 Could be one of MAAAAAAANY possibilities own't
Animate Dreams Posted July 7, 2008 Report Posted July 7, 2008 In the first place this thread shouldn't even be here.R O F Lplease tell me i am not the only one that sees the irony SSC netban disputes are supposed to occur via a netban dispute ticket.No, they should be public knowledge. If you're suggesting that these things should be done in secrecy, then you clearly have no idea how SubSpace works. Anyway, I can't believe how great this topic is. Aceflyer straight up completely !@#$%^&*ing FAILS at ignoring, and throws the biggest !@#$%^&* fit in the history of SubSpace. Nighthawk without asking ANY questions, doing any checking, like, bothering to check with the accused to get HIS side of the story, or... most importantly, seeing the act himself, goes ahead and makes a netban. Don't get me wrong, I think certain chats should be moderated. As a lot of you might remember, we recently went over the fact that it was a shady area in the rules, and it's not very well established. Some people agreed with me(MTN), and others were very against moderating chats(Hoch, Hakaku). But when the netbans were made, it was only after being seen firsthand by a netop. I would've hoped that would have set precedent. Anyway, I'm going to strongly suggest AGAIN that the SSC make some solid rules on moderating chats. Now, remember, there's no great way to do this. But here are a few stipulations I propose:1. Any "infractions" have to be seen by the one who actually puts in the netban. The purpose of this is to enforce a little personal responsibility. There shouldn't ever be any "oh i put in the netban because HE told me to, its his fault".2. WHICH chats are moderated is very simple. If you can convince a netop to join your chat, then you can get it moderated. Netops shouldn't be forced to moderate chats. But if Cre comes up to a netop and asks for help with a spammer in ssdev chat, they'll probably want to help. As for what should be moderated, I guess I'd define that as spam. Anything that disrupts the chat, really, but it needs to be solidly defined. If you notice, these are really more of rules for the admins, not the other way around. As all of you know, abuse is rampant in SubSpace. The people in power need to be bound by rules, even more so than the players, BECAUSE they have power. But rules are supposed to be there to protect the player. In this, and in past situations, I believe rules like these would have protected the players. So hopefully someone will think about this.
»Lynx Posted July 7, 2008 Author Report Posted July 7, 2008 Meh, I've got nothing better to do... than to bump another post showing how re!@#$%^&*ed Aceflyer is.. Wheee I can't believe this nonsense. In the first place this thread shouldn't even be here. SSC netban disputes are supposed to occur via a netban dispute ticket. Right, so then I can be unbanned, and you can carry on with life as usual, without serving any kind of punishment (Albeit not an "official" punishment, but I think the fact that you're now a complete laughing stock, is more than good enough in my books) If you are ignored, I'm not supposed to be able to see messages from your alias. If you're facing any kind of technical difficulties with the ignore function, then you should talk to somebody who knows about how that function works (And, yes - there are plenty of people within your bubble of "friends" who do know how it works) - and if you can't overcome them technical difficulties, then you should simply avoid that player. I was in a chat - which I might add had NetOps inside it, and if I were actually breaking any kind of rules in that chat, I would have been banned anyway. The very fact that the chat had the more knowledgeable members within it while this whole thing happened, just makes the whole story even more laughable. The fact that you were on my ignore.txt, that you knew you were on my ignore.txt, and yet were able to force me to see your messages - against my will - indicates a willful attempt at evading my ignore. The only thing, if anything at all that statement indicates is that either you are: i) a spineless lying !@#$%^&*, or;ii) a freaking moron, who can't even use one of the simplest tools that Continuum has to offer. Take your pick. So yeah, anybody with even a basic understanding of how the chat client works, will understand that the ignore is enforced by the client (continuum) on the users (Aceflyers, in this case) computer. Anyway, so there's the first accusation of a netban. So, as usual, I just think it's a newb being a newb, and it's not the first time a power-mongering transparent fool has threatened to netban me, so I laugh it off, in-fact, pretty much the whole chat laughs it off, and we resume in our general conversation...How am I being a newb exactly? Bwahahaa When players put someone on ignore.txt they expect that they will not have to see any further messages on Continuum from said ignored person. This is of course, on the pretence that that player isn't such a newb that they know how to use the freaking ignore function in the first place. Cross-zone evasion of a zone sysop's ignore... Nowhere in the rules does it say that SysOps have more rights to players. That rule would be completely illogical, and completely un-ethical. However, it would of course, make it a lot easier for abusive ASSS such as yourself to get more le-weigh and e-penis on this game, so feel free to keep muttering that kind of bull!@#$%^&*. I'll just sit here smiling at how re!@#$%^&*ed you look. ...with accompanied 'wisecracking' (which I deem har!@#$%^&*ment, due to the evasion of ignore), which continues after a clear warning to stop, is a netbannable offense. Again, this is a complete figment of the basic and failed imagination from the clouded pathetic excuse for an organic life form we know as Aceflyer. Firstly, the "wisecracking" was there for good reason, and I believe you already muttered that you understood that it was a joke.. Remember... 4:CRe>> he has lynx on ignore4:CRe>> the ignore isnt working4:Cerium> clearly lynx is hacking4:CRe>> ace thinks lynx is evading the ignore.4:L Y N X> pwnace.exe4:L Y N X> I c0d3d 1t in VB++4:L Y N X> IR1337 now?4:Cerium> no4:Cerium> but you'd be 1337 if it was lolcode4:L Y N X> I knew the above 'hacking comments' were jokes. Did I ever indicate that I believed that bull? ... and secondly, you can't get a NetOp to make a netban, because "You deem har!@#$%^&*ment" - we've all seen how you choose appropriate penalties for rule breakers. (Recalls the 61 day ban for quickwinning) - so please, do yourself a favour, and never make judgement on anything, ever again... Ever. The relevant excerpts from logs: P :Nighthawk:Hi?C 4:Nighthawk> ?C 4:Aceflyer> Can someone be netbanned if they use % etc. to repeatedly evade ignores?C 4:Aceflyer> and har!@#$%^&* me while doing that?C 4:Chambahs> yesC 4:Aceflyer> Really?C 4:Aceflyer> In that case - could you netban L Y N X? He won't quit doing it. I can't ?ignore or ignore.txt him succesfully because of his % tactics.C 4:Nighthawk> why is he doing it? i bet if you just ignore him he would stopC 4:Aceflyer> He's trying to tick me off by cir!@#$%^&*venting my ignore.txt.C 4:Aceflyer> It's just highly annoying. I'm not really responding to him but I don't want to leave 2 chats because of his behavior.C 4:Nighthawk> warn him that he could get netbanned if he still does it, and if he continues ill add a banC 4:Aceflyer> I already did. He hasn't stopped.C 4:Nighthawk> fine whats his ip/mid, i only have an old copyC 4:Aceflyer> secP :Nighthawk:[ip snipped] ip, [mid snipped] midP :Nighthawk:Many thanks, I appreciate it. "The relevant excerpts from logs" - I love how you said that. I that's another way of saying "This is my attempt and putting the blame on Nighthawk - even though it shows I just epicly fail more at trying to do the 'right thing'" Generally netbans are made without first checking with a biller op. Or do you seriously believe BlueGoku/Mackieman get bothered every single time a netban is being made? Generally eh? Another extremely loose word to use. OKay, generally netbans are made by netops who have actually seen the offending player do something "in person" - or have a significant amount of proof. They would also generally ask various questions, not just 'walk-in-the-park' questions. And didn't you just admit to evading my ignore? You asked me if you were still on my ignore. You should not have been able to ask me that, since you were, in fact, still on my ignore. Again, you fail, re!@#$%^&*. Furthermore you weren't 'informed' of anything. You said (in a post you made on the SSC Forum) that that was how you were doing it. Actually, on the SSC Forum, I was trying to help you to catch people who might have been doing it. But I guess selective reading is good in these kind of things, but at the end of the day - just shows that you are again, an idiot. Flaming isn't the issue. Cross-zone evasion of ignore is the issue. And the reason you ignored me? Stop looking at symptoms, and look at causes. -Lynx
Ghetto D Posted July 7, 2008 Report Posted July 7, 2008 http://starwars.sshq.net/ghettod/DeadHorse.jpglol
AstroProdigy Posted July 8, 2008 Report Posted July 8, 2008 (edited) The edrama in this thread just made my boring internship interesting. Anyway, all this explains why I was forced to school Aceflyer in the world discussion board for his complete ignorance and willingness to take a strong stand on issues that he has no idea what he's talking about. He seems like the type who !@#$%^&*umes he must always be right. What zone is he sysop? Edited July 8, 2008 by AstroProdigy
Recommended Posts