28/06/20 - Staff Meeting Notes

Messages
1,275
Reaction score
2,750
Points
730
Location
United Kingdom



28/06/2020 - Staff Meeting Notes


Helper/Enforcer Changes
  • Helper requirement for Enforcer removed
  • If an Enforcer candidate has potential but isn't quite ready for the role, they may be given Helper and reviewed for a temporary period.
  • Training for Enforcers will be improved.
  • A section for staff will be added to the help page
Ban Lengths
  • Players will not receive such long bans for minor rule breaks
  • Players who consistently cause problems and do not learn will still receive lengthy bans.
  • Bans for 3.20 will have more consistent lengths.
Bombing in raids
  • The excessive amount of bombs used in raids will have a solution in the coming days/week.
Construction
  • One way defenses, head glitches and pixel peeks will be enforced more strictly.
3.4 Enforcement
  • Clarified that when being gun pointed and told not to move from behind you may not pull your gun even if it is in passive stance.
Withholding evidence
  • Evidence that has been held for a long time period will not be admissible and evidence that is "dug up" or held maliciously can lead to punishment on the reporter.
 
Messages
5,624
Reaction score
15,768
Points
615
Location
North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Bombing in raids
  • The excessive amount of bombs used in raids will have a solution in the coming days/week.
Dom_May I point out this thread that had a discussion about this issue?
 
Messages
687
Reaction score
504
Points
580
Location
Under Lewis088's bed
Bombing in raids
  • The excessive amount of bombs used in raids will have a solution in the coming days/week.
Dom_Lollis are not gonna be happy
 
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2,059
Points
640
Location
Greece
Players will not receive such long bans for minor rule breaks
Dom_I thought people were whining because bans weren't long enough.
 
Messages
687
Reaction score
504
Points
580
Location
Under Lewis088's bed
i believe as in minor they mean running across intersection or prank calling
 
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
2,059
Points
640
Location
Greece
I don't recall seeing any bans for running across the intersection or prank calling.
 
Messages
2,325
Reaction score
6,590
Points
575
Location
Southern Rhodesia
Withholding evidence
  • Evidence that has been held for a long time period will not be admissible and evidence that is "dug up" or held maliciously can lead to punishment on the reporter.
Dom_
How long would be considered a long time?
If you have evidence of someone breaking rules from say 1-2 weeks ago but had a valid reason for not being able to upload it at the time would it still be permissible? Or if you were going through old videos and stumbled across rule breakages?
 
Messages
419
Reaction score
727
Points
605
Location
North Europe, Latvia
I imagine this is more to stop people who have the intent to take revenge on enemy organizations or make revenge AR's, the type of people who have "folders". And if you just stumbled across a rule breakage it probably isn't that serious.
 
Messages
5,256
Reaction score
7,176
Points
580
Location
REHAB
Bombing in raids
  • The excessive amount of bombs used in raids will have a solution in the coming days/week.
Dom_Limit bombs to 2 per person I guess. Simple solution. This could result in "Zerg raids" Ending in overbombing.
 
Messages
303
Reaction score
358
Points
545
Location
Parts Unknown
Bombing in raids
  • The excessive amount of bombs used in raids will have a solution in the coming days/week.
The problem was people bombing below apartments and killing people above them, not giving them a chance to defend. potentially make that a rule? idk.
Dom_
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,288
Reaction score
6,752
Points
665
Location
United Kingdom, Devon
Any updates on the bans that were just issued?
 
Messages
99
Reaction score
176
Points
515
Ban Lengths
  • Players will not receive such long bans for minor rule breaks
  • Players who consistently cause problems and do not learn will still receive lengthy bans.
  • Bans for 3.20 will have more consistent lengths.
Good decision had to be done sometime.
 
Messages
303
Reaction score
358
Points
545
Location
Parts Unknown
3.4 Enforcement
  • Clarified that when being gun pointed and told not to move from behind you may not pull your gun even if it is in passive stance.
Dom_Could you not have your gun in attack stance?
 
Messages
103
Reaction score
130
Points
495
Location
Stockholm , Sweden
Withholding evidence
  • Evidence that has been held for a long time period will not be admissible and evidence that is "dug up" or held maliciously can lead to punishment on the reporter.
Dom_
How long is this long period of time ?
 
Messages
832
Reaction score
839
Points
545
Location
Birmingham, United Kingdom
Messages
1,275
Reaction score
2,750
Points
730
Location
United Kingdom
Evidence that deals with more severe issues will be made an exception, however obviously a relevant time limit would still need to be met. We wouldn't go banning people who cheated 3 years ago or something stupid like that, same with metagame.
 
View previous replies…
Messages
1,082
Reaction score
2,706
Points
545
Location
Under a Rock, North Wales, United Kingdom
  • Evidence that has been held for a long time period will not be admissible and evidence that is "dug up" or held maliciously can lead to punishment on the reporter.
Dom_
You looking to get someone banned? You're gonna need this, sucker!
 
Messages
2,288
Reaction score
6,752
Points
665
Location
United Kingdom, Devon
Did not mean to bump this thread however something needs clarifying, specifically regarding the clarification to 3.4. in this post:

3.4 Enforcement
  • Clarified that when being gun pointed and told not to move from behind you may not pull your gun even if it is in passive stance.

Why is it now even if your gun is in attack stance that this is now being enforced as a violation of 3.4.? If that change was made why wasn't this actually communicated to the community properly, @Tetra (I believe) was the one who lost 70k to this bizarre ruling and without any prior notice.

How do sweaters now safely sell drugs? before you could throw them a PPK they could keep it in passive and they would be on their way, was this considered before making the change?

Was this change even communicated to you as Community Manager or discussed within this exact meeting? @Dom_
 
Messages
928
Reaction score
1,755
Points
610
Location
Norway
As far as I know we have never discussed holding it in actual attack stance, and if this is against 3.4 or not. So if it is being enforced like this there is probably some different views going around. Will clear up.
 
Messages
928
Reaction score
1,755
Points
610
Location
Norway
@Husky I'll just leave what I put in slack here.

Regarding the gun pointing at drug dealer thing: During the full staff meeting we had, and the admin meeting that followed we decided if you were gun pointed from behind at the drug dealer, even with a gun in passive you should follow the muggers orders. The exception here is if there are multiple people at the DD with firearms in passive. For now we will allow people to turn around and fire if their gun is in attack stance while selling drugs. This will be discussed in the next admin meeting, and we'll update you as soon as something has been decided.
 
View previous replies…
Messages
5,256
Reaction score
7,176
Points
580
Location
REHAB
If you have a gun in passive stance there’s nothing unrealistic about being able to raise it and shoot the mugger though, that’s what I’ve always believed? Why change it now?
 
View previous replies…
Messages
323
Reaction score
451
Points
525
@A1L
I can provide a demo if a staff member requests it. I am currently in the process of clipping the entire situtation to make it easier
 
Messages
2,288
Reaction score
6,752
Points
665
Location
United Kingdom, Devon
@Madda appreciate the response, the ruling has become blurred due to the specific mentioning of "passive stance", I think it's incredibly unhealthy and unfair to players for rules like this to change at the discretion of a staff member. This in my opinion probably should have already been discussed, the wording suggests it was. If the ruling changed it should read:

3.4 Enforcement
  • Clarified that when being gun pointed and told not to move from behind you must listen to orders regardless of your weapons stance (passive/attack).

As a player I do not demand a say in each rule, I simply ask to be informed and updated to the actual rules that we have to abide by. The passive aggressive comments by other staff on this thread are a big yikes, the whole "just dispute it and stop whining" is a horrific take in such a circumstance.

Regardless, I thank you for the quick response @Madda - It's truly appreciated.
 
Messages
323
Reaction score
451
Points
525
Just to say the entire thing about having your gun in active stance was apartently overruled when it was brought to his attention by a “certain” staff member.
This staff member who isn’t being named due to the fact it could be slanderous went over 2 senior administratiors heads and went straight to boli
 
Messages
258
Reaction score
323
Points
545
Location
Massachusetts, United States of America
Any information about your activity recently? And what to expect in the future?

personally haven’t seen an event hosted since you’ve went inactive. This was also a huge topic talked about in the community meeting
 
Top