Two things have been suggested in one of the other topics, I wish to give them some extra attention so they do get added.
There's always players requesting a ban for themselves after they get pissed off for some reason. I wish to have a rule for it so that it will always allow me to accept their request. I won't have to make up my own opinion anymore then, just ban the player.
"If you request to get kicked or banned, the admin shall grant your wish however don't expect to get unbanned until after a server restart."
I guess the result is them being way more careful for requesting a ban for themselves. It is annoying enough how I once got called "biased" for banning someone once before, then later when that player requested a ban again, I wouldn't ban . With that rule I wish to get over that bs.
I also wish to point out the case of "fun kicks" or bans.
If an admin wishes to risk giving out a fun kick still (high chance it ends up being used against you at some point ), there should be a rule for it too.
Quote:
Well, we can make III illegal - but if no one reports you, because they liked it so much: GG.
III being the case of fun kicks shown here: http://jazzjackrabbit.net/index.php?op=forumz&watte=viewpost&postid=4280 and further.
Simply if a fun kick is handed out, and the player doesn't lets say report it within 24h anymore, it was a valid kick and can no longer be used against the admin.
That way, you will not have backstabbing anymore months after something happened, and which was supposed to be fun . Hope I explained things well.
Two things have been suggested in one of the other topics, I wish to give them some extra attention so they do get added.
There's always players requesting a ban for themselves after they get pissed off for some reason. I wish to have a rule for it so that it will always allow me to accept their request. I won't have to make up my own opinion anymore then, just ban the player.
"If you request to get kicked or banned, the admin shall grant your wish however don't expect to get unbanned until after a server restart."
I guess the result is them being way more careful for requesting a ban for themselves. It is annoying enough how I once got called "biased" for banning someone once before, then later when that player requested a ban again, I wouldn't ban :). With that rule I wish to get over that bs.
I also wish to point out the case of "fun kicks" or bans.
If an admin wishes to risk giving out a fun kick still (high chance it ends up being used against you at some point :) ), there should be a rule for it too.
[quote]Well, we can make III illegal - but if no one reports you, because they liked it so much: GG. [/quote]
[size=5]III being the case of fun kicks shown here: http://jazzjackrabbit.net/index.php?op=forumz&watte=viewpost&postid=4280 and further.[/size]
Simply if a fun kick is handed out, and the player doesn't lets say report it within 24h anymore, it was a valid kick and can no longer be used against the admin.
That way, you will not have backstabbing anymore months after something happened, and which was supposed to be fun :). Hope I explained things well.
I'm not sure about the current rules on spamming, but a kick when things get out of hand (10 lines of spam, 5 lines of spam, a couple of times with 2-4 lines of spam?), and a bann for 15-30 min if that doesn't work?
How specific do the suggestions need to be?
And sorry if the current rules are already completely clear about spamming.
I'm not sure about the current rules on spamming, but a kick when things get out of hand (10 lines of spam, 5 lines of spam, a couple of times with 2-4 lines of spam?), and a bann for 15-30 min if that doesn't work?
How specific do the suggestions need to be?
And sorry if the current rules are already completely clear about spamming.
I dont think they are. Spamming needs some sort of guideline too.
So many lines within so many seconds for example... Lol. I guess we might as well make an autokick of it if possible :/. But that could be annoying too. We shouldn't set the kicker too strict then.. If the spam only consists of the same shit its definitely annoying, like laughing and such.
I dont think they are. Spamming needs some sort of guideline too.
So many lines within so many seconds for example... Lol. I guess we might as well make an autokick of it if possible :/. But that could be annoying too. We shouldn't set the kicker too strict then.. If the spam only consists of the same shit its definitely annoying, like laughing and such.
I don't think that JJ2 can see who is idle and who is not. What if you're spectating someone and someone is dueling/2v2ing/3v3ing and you don't chat (it's impossible for you, but some players never chats during the game).
I don't think that JJ2 can see who is idle and who is not. What if you're spectating someone and someone is dueling/2v2ing/3v3ing and you don't chat (it's impossible for you, but some players never chats during the game).
So, unless someone changed JJ+' code, kickidlers for spectators wont work, just has to be done by hand as moti said.
Either way, and the other of my suggestions? I'd like some kind of answer >[
So, unless someone changed JJ+' code, kickidlers for spectators wont work, just has to be done by hand as moti said.
Either way, and the other of my suggestions? I'd like some kind of answer >[
JJnet user
. With that rule I wish to get over that bs.
JJnet user
JJnet user
JJnet user
JJnet user
JJnet user