New server mods! yay!

[Necrosis]

Easier to spot vote troublemakers now, and if it scares people then good, all the better, they'll be less quick to hit Vote just because the comm didnt drop them a shotty.

[Vinegar Ninja]

and believe me, when crap like that happens, I WILL KICK YOU! I dont take joke ejects lightly. Had a guy on the server once try to eject the com, under the reason "WHY NOT".  needless to say, this dosnt make me happy.

[Guspaz]

Who cares if people start joke ejects? Ignore them, if it's a joke eject nobody will vote for it and it will fail.

Perhaps we should also make public who voted for who in elections. Because then people would vote less for the stupid candidates.

Yeah, that makes great sense.

[Wolfwood]

There's always the mob mentality scenario, where an idiot starts an ejection, and some rather new players (lets say a "newb", even though i never use the term) think "Hey, there's an eject vote going. Lets vote!". And then your comm is gone and the already screwed marine team is 100% screwed.

[TheAdj]

I like the new mod, for the most part. One thing, however strikes me as EXTREMELY bad:

- Notification of who's starting the eject vote

That is NOT a good change. There are reasons why voting is anonymous. It is meant so that people are not too scared about reprisals to vote for a comm eject.

If a comm eject succeeds, good, it doesn't matter who started it. It doesn't matter because for the eject to succeed most of the marine team obviously wants a new comm,  so who voted is irrelevant.

If a comm eject fails, it STILL doesn't matter who started it, because it had no effect; nothing happened.

The reason we NEED comm votes to stay anonmyous is primarily in case the vote DOES fail. Imagine this scenario:

Player A is not pleased with the commander, who is generally wasting lots of res on useless things and ignoring the requests of his team. He starts a comm eject vote. Unfortunately, only 4 of 8 players vote to eject, failing to meet the "50% plus one" criteria. But the commander now knows that Player A tried to get him ejected. The commander now decides to try to be mean to Player A, denying him of all weapons, medpacks, items, etc. He also tries to undermine him by giving him useless orders.

This is the situation we want to avoid. People should not be afraid to start a comm eject vote!!

[snapback]51816[/snapback]

I'd be inclined to agree, except I've been booted by some random idiot starting a vote and others following someone's lead one too many times.  If this happens, that's what an admin presence is for.  I think that would fall under llama behaviour, since that seems to catch nearly everything possible that isn't already listed in the rules.

[Guspaz]

The admins better make it clear then that a commander is not permitted to "punish" a player for starting a vote. It goes both ways.

In addition, the definition of a "llama" eject should not be if the admin thinks it is deserved, but if the player can explain. If the player says "I feel that the commander was wasting resources on such and such", even if the admin does not agree no action should be taken against the player. On the other hand if the player says "He was a ****tard" or "He's a noob" or some such thing, by all means.

Does this mean that players can make llama bans and then try to justify them with intelligent reasons? Yes. However we don't need players getting kicked/banned for starting an eject they really do think is needed.

[Malevolent]

In addition, the definition of a "llama" eject should not be if the admin thinks it is deserved, but if the player can explain. If the player says "I feel that the commander was wasting resources on such and such", even if the admin does not agree no action should be taken against the player.

[snapback]51867[/snapback]

While that may seem fine and dandy, any person that has something that resembles a brain would say that so they don't get in trouble.

[Guspaz]

Unfortunately it's the only way to do it. The moment you start relying on admins to decide if a eject vote was warranted you're going to get a slew of UNwarranted kicks and bans.

[2_of_8]

It really isn't hard to decide whether a vote is warranted or not. There's no fine line - there are comms that waste res on CCs everywhere, recycle base, spam welders and such - and comms who try to win, maybe not in the right way, but to the best of their ability. There is a very easily detectable difference, whether the comm is abusive or just not very good.

[Goldy]

Guspaz have you had some sort of traumatic experience involving a comm punishing you for trying to vote him out? I've never seen a decent to good comm do that. If they did, then they deserved the eject vote.

[Niteowl]

This plugin has been requested numerous times for those instances when a number of ppl keep 'joke' ejecting every comm who steps in the chair. That's llama ejecting.