New TWD rule shortly

[Reaver]

If it's still unclear-- If a person is TWD banned, and they evade the TWD ban and register under a different name, and a squad recruits that evading player, that's who this rule applies. That includes people that are permanently TWD banned, and that includes TW bans. As I said before it's unlikely that any caps would be punished after the first incident, but be safe anyways and request a TWD op if you've got a suspicious player.


Kthx, as head TWD op and as an assistant of the squad that beat the squad that went undefeated in TWLD whilst only playing 4v5, moderator's aren't closemouthed about running alias checks, unless you're referring to keeping peoples privacy. There's a good reason alias' are and will continue to stay private. If a player told a TWD op about a suspicious player before and now, it would be handled the same way. The TWD op would look into it and ban the player if need be, if there's no need to TWD ban the player there's no need to tell the captain any additional information.

[Darkmoor]

So, you are handing the responsibility of this over to the captains who have no resources in their use to check the players (except for asking for help from a TWD Op with every single recruit) and are punishing them and their squads, great...

[Reaver]

So, you are handing the responsibility of this over to the captains who have no resources in their use to check the players (except for asking for help from a TWD Op with every single recruit) and are punishing them and their squads, great...

If a squad recruits a player and they're TWD banned and that squad recruits the same player again the next day under another alias, and that player vanishes off the roster again, and the squad recruits him again under a new alias, what are we supposed to think? This rule is completely acceptable and entirely needed, the option is there for a captain to contact a TWD op, and even if the captain can't or doesn't wish to contact a TWD op it should be common sense that you don't just recruit someone that you don't know who they are or keep recruiting them because they're changing their alias. Hell, even if the captain can't recognize as obvious signs that they are evading TWD bans from that, at the very least he or she should know that they're violating the waiting policy around name changes/squad changes. If this kind of thing isn't common sense to the captain then I'm sorry to say that they would have made other poor decisions down the road as well.

I foresee very few if any at all squad's being punished as a whole, mostly just captains. But then again, when you join a squad you're putting your trust in the captain to do what's right regarding the squad. Though people do have the right to run their own squad if they dislike how it's being run.

Edit: Oh and there's no need to check every single recruit, there's maybe 3 people right now that keep evading their ban under different names. If you recruit someone to your squad that nobody has ever heard of, and you've never seen before other than that day, and you neglected to ask a TWD op to check them out, then yes you're taking a risk.

[Foreign]

I'll echo dm on this one, it just looks like you in staff would rather twd captains do your job for you. I can understand knowingly recruiting a player who was evading a ban being punishable, but let's be honest about some points here:

a. Proving beyond a reasonable amount of doubt that anyone knew anything at a certain point in time is incredibly difficult (as you can see from the Eelam incident, logs don't matter nor do witnesses).

b. For captains, knowing when they are being duped and when they are recruiting a legitimate player is impossible. If I were still a captain of a TWD squad, I'd have ops check every last one of the players on my roster to avoid having my squad dissolved for shit beyond my control.

c. Don't you think it is better to have something in place that automatically does these checks for captains without them having to ask, and wouldn't it be possible to implement a notification module in the TWD site that would flag suspicious players and notify a captain when a player has been kicked and why?

What you are requiring of captains is only creating more work for yourself.

[Reaver]

I'll echo dm on this one, it just looks like you in staff would rather twd captains do your job for you. I can understand knowingly recruiting a player who was evading a ban being punishable, but let's be honest about some points here:

a. Proving beyond a reasonable amount of doubt that anyone knew anything at a certain point in time is incredibly difficult (as you can see from the Eelam incident, logs don't matter nor do witnesses).

b. For captains, knowing when they are being duped and when they are recruiting a legitimate player is impossible. If I were still a captain of a TWD squad, I'd have ops check every last one of the players on my roster to avoid having my squad dissolved for shit beyond my control.

c. Don't you think it is better to have something in place that automatically does these checks for captains without them having to ask, and wouldn't it be possible to implement a notification module in the TWD site that would flag suspicious players and notify a captain when a player has been kicked and why?

What you are requiring of captains is only creating more work for yourself.

Despite what you think, we have caught, and will continue to catch these 2-3 players within 1-3 days every time until they give up. Unfortunately that's not enough, certain squads are continually recruiting the same evading players over and over. Just like in Eelam's case, the burden of proof isn't upon us. If you recruit the same evading player over and over, it's your responsibility to prove it's just a coincidence. Your point B is an exaggeration, I've already pointed out that the likelihood of any squad being dissolved over this is extremely low. Even so, a captain would be warned once and punished once before this would even be considered, so it's not like your squad would be dissolved and you'd be left wondering what happened. Point C is ridiculous to be quite honest. The methods we have now for checking players isn't clear cut. You actually have to think about it and then proceed by different check's, we have multiple ways of checking a player. Even then it can sometimes not be 100% accurate, so to set up some script to check players is out of the question.

Yes this puts more responsibility on captains, but in the end I think it will be great for two reasons. First and foremost to put an even greater burden on these evaders. And additionally it will weed out captains that were already poor captains to begin with.

[Darkmoor]

Oops, somehow I missed the keyword 'continually' in the first post. Which means that this is much less of a problem for captains than I first thought. It could still potentially cause problems, but probably only in some rare cases. It would be good to have 'continually' replaced with something else though, as it is not exact enough.

[Foreign]

Despite what you think, we have caught, and will continue to catch these 2-3 players within 1-3 days every time until they give up. Unfortunately that's not enough, certain squads are continually recruiting the same evading players over and over. Just like in Eelam's case, the burden of proof isn't upon us. If you recruit the same evading player over and over, it's your responsibility to prove it's just a coincidence. Your point B is an exaggeration, I've already pointed out that the likelihood of any squad being dissolved over this is extremely low. Even so, a captain would be warned once and punished once before this would even be considered, so it's not like your squad would be dissolved and you'd be left wondering what happened. Point C is ridiculous to be quite honest. The methods we have now for checking players isn't clear cut. You actually have to think about it and then proceed by different check's, we have multiple ways of checking a player. Even then it can sometimes not be 100% accurate, so to set up some script to check players is out of the question.

Yes this puts more responsibility on captains, but in the end I think it will be great for two reasons. First and foremost to put an even greater burden on these evaders. And additionally it will weed out captains that were already poor captains to begin with.

As much as I have seen staff interpreting rules in the most convenient way to them, I really don't think the actual implementation of this new rule is always going to look the way you are implying. I'd make sure to word this rule in the most restrictive way possible, leaving little to the interpretation of 1 person.

Other than that I must not have read your first post as closely as I thought, because you are right about my previous post.

[killah]

BANN them ALL!!

[HateTheFake]

now called "the delectable rule"

[H.M.S. Stargazer]

New rule NEEDED: No obvious feeding.

Eh, dice and Heavy?

[veetee]

What about non-obvious feeding.