Limelight Forums

(Mar 8, 2018, 08:49 PM)Faustin Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 8, 2018, 10:42 AM)Rocket Wrote: [ -> ]There will always be biased yes but that's not something that's acceptable, just because it is a thing that is natural to the humen being doesn't mean it is ok to use that as an accuse and disregard other people because they're not your friends.

Am I biased? to some extent you can probably say so but in when I was an admin, was I biased? I'd personally say No, I play CS:GO with the people who posted abuse threads on me, I disagreed with my best friend admins like and   I play PUBG and role-play and mess around with the people I ban, I don't have a small group of people who kissed ass to me long enough for them to be my "friends" I'm not that kind of person and I think most people know that.

But when there's a clan and they have a majority of the most active player-base and their players asking their admins for rules and permissions then how can it not be biased? If said players asked one of their said admins about a rule that doesn't exsist and the admin allows the rule without talking to the whole team about it nor discussing it with SAs or announcing it to the community, just so his friends can RP out a situation, then yes that is biased.  You'd be too blind if  you can't tell that it is biased, has that happened? yes it has.

So to comeback on "there's always biased" yes there is but it's something I personally view as a weakness, if you're in a position of authority within this community and you favor your friends over the community itself, then it's not just biased behavoir, you're just afraid that you'll lose this group of friends because you said no to them or didn't allow them to do what they wanted. If you can't handle saying no to your friends or not allowing them to do something that isn't in the rules, then you're word as an admin is weak and you yourself are weak as well, so consider leaving the community because you're only causing harm to it.

Which is why you were one of the very few admins truly deserving of that position

 oh you want examples of bending rules for bias look for that AA thread on BlackDog, ignoring rules purely to benefit him and the people he was RPing with

There we go doctor, and even though i mentioned staff there I didn't continue to talk about that.

(Mar 8, 2018, 08:04 PM)Quest Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 8, 2018, 07:53 PM)Gungranny Wrote: [ -> ] 

Can you prove he’s being bias and not subjective to Rocket’s argument? I fail to see how his friends liking his post has anything to do with his argument seeing as he cannot predict that.

For instance, Quest likes your posts. Does that make your opinion bias to favor a party he represents?

I don't like every post :P

Did I say every post :P

(Mar 8, 2018, 09:04 PM)Gungranny Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 8, 2018, 08:04 PM)Quest Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 8, 2018, 07:53 PM)Gungranny Wrote: [ -> ] 

Can you prove he’s being bias and not subjective to Rocket’s argument? I fail to see how his friends liking his post has anything to do with his argument seeing as he cannot predict that.

For instance, Quest likes your posts. Does that make your opinion bias to favor a party he represents?

I don't like every post :P

Did I say every post :P

Yeah, I only like the posts that I agree with, at least IVNT didn't name drop...

(Mar 8, 2018, 08:49 PM)Faustin Wrote: [ -> ]"Doctor Internet" oh you want examples of bending rules for bias look for that AA thread on BlackDog, ignoring rules purely to benefit him and the people he was RPing with

You mean https://limelightgaming.net/forums/thread-18858.html yeah?

Quote:Admin Guidelines will be updated to include that Custom vehicles made with Administrative tools cannot be used in aggressive situations unless the opposing team of the conflict agrees to its use to benefit roleplay, or if the vehicle is approved by HR.

Where the admin guidelines were changed in response, rather than a breach of the rules taking place?

(Mar 8, 2018, 09:14 PM)Doctor Internet Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 8, 2018, 08:49 PM)Faustin Wrote: [ -> ]"Doctor Internet" oh you want examples of bending rules for bias look for that AA thread on BlackDog, ignoring rules purely to benefit him and the people he was RPing with

You mean https://limelightgaming.net/forums/thread-18858.html yeah?

Quote:Admin Guidelines will be updated to include that Custom vehicles made with Administrative tools cannot be used in aggressive situations unless the opposing team of the conflict agrees to its use to benefit roleplay, or if the vehicle is approved by HR.

Where the admin guidelines were changed in response, rather than a breach of the rules taking place?

There was already a rule in place states admin tools cannot be used to gain an advantage in an aggressive situation and this has been this way for years

(Mar 8, 2018, 09:17 PM)Faustin Wrote: [ -> ]There was already a rule in place states admin tools cannot be used to gain an advantage in an aggressive situation and this has been this way for years

That was not a rule while that happened (nor has it been since the rules were re-written I belive), admin guidelines where changed to reflect that internally. How is he being biased? He did not break any rules and they clarified their guidelines to avoid this happening again.

OT: It is getting increasingly tiring seeing people out for drama over the smallest thing. Some are actively witch-hunting staff members or players they do not like in an attempt to push them to edge so they either get tired of limelight and quit or out of anger make the smallest of mistakes and report them for that. It is also extremely annoying having people openly admit they are here to either annoy people or get people banned and nothing is done for that because they tip-toe on the lines of breaking the rules.

People need to calm down, we are here to play a game we all enjoy, it is no fun coming to the forums to find toxic arguments everywhere.

Proving that someone is biased is near to impossible, doesn't make it not true though.

Seeing someone being biased is easy, all you need is a pair of eyes and you can easily tell. 

You can ask for evidence or use your fancy words to avoid what I am saying, but at the end everyone knows that the biased behavior is there and it's something that's killing the community. 

We all decided to leave FL and make our community because we wanted to do our own thing an shape it the way we want it, thus limelight was made, and this is how Fumuku is killing the community, a lot of people left the community because of a "clan" and a lot of people left the community because of some of the admins within the clan, keep this up and you'll eventually just have a server full of fumuku members cause they think that being fumuku is a next step to teacher, then moderator. 

It doesn't matter if you have a circle of friends surrounding everything you say and backing up everything you say and liking your posts, what matters is you're not really being true to the community and just hiding behind lies about how not biased you are when more than enough people can easily see and tell that you are more than just biased, you are just out right weak and that's the reason why people left the community.

(Mar 8, 2018, 10:09 PM)Rocket Wrote: [ -> ]Proving that someone is biased is near to impossible, doesn't make it not true though.

Seeing someone being biased is easy, all you need is a pair of eyes and you can easily tell. 

You can ask for evidence or use your fancy words to avoid what I am saying, but at the end everyone knows that the biased behavior is there and it's something that's killing the community. 

We all decided to leave FL and make our community because we wanted to do our own thing an shape it the way we want it, thus limelight was made, and this is how Fumuku is killing the community, a lot of people left the community because of a "clan" and a lot of people left the community because of some of the admins within the clan, keep this up and you'll eventually just have a server full of fumuku members cause they think that being fumuku is a next step to teacher, then moderator. 

It doesn't matter if you have a circle of friends surrounding everything you say and backing up everything you say and liking your posts, what matters is you're not really being true to the community and just hiding behind lies about how not biased you are when more than enough people can easily see and tell that you are more than just biased, you are just out right weak and that's the reason why people left the community.

Exactly what rocket said, FUMUKU is seen as a way to ranks as a lot of people with ranks are in it.

As he also said, using your fancy language to avoid question doesn't make you look good, just doesn't back anything you say up.

I'm glad everyone is up and willing to throw hands at each other, and reading through the posts I see some very valid points on both sides, though I think the smarter thing to do is to discuss in a more "how can we reduce this problem" to one another instead of trying to prove each other wrong or guilty.

Both parties should be willing to give ground to help reach a reasonable solution for the better of the community instead of going at each other's throats.

(Mar 9, 2018, 12:27 AM)Preditor Wrote: [ -> ]I'm glad everyone is up and willing to throw hands at each other, and reading through the posts I see some very valid points on both sides, though I think the smarter thing to do is to discuss in a more "how can we reduce this problem" to one another instead of trying to prove each other wrong or guilty.

Both parties should be willing to give ground to help reach a reasonable solution for the better of the community instead of going at each other's throats.

A lot of the time, include myself occasionally, certain people lack the ability to accept that they are wrong.

Sadly this is mostly proving Jokkah’s point about player biases.

(Mar 8, 2018, 09:34 PM)Project Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 8, 2018, 09:17 PM)Faustin Wrote: [ -> ]There was already a rule in place states admin tools cannot be used to gain an advantage in an aggressive situation and this has been this way for years

That was not a rule while that happened (nor has it been since the rules were re-written I belive), admin guidelines where changed to reflect that internally. How is he being biased? He did not break any rules and they clarified their guidelines to avoid this happening again.

OT: It is getting increasingly tiring seeing people out for drama over the smallest thing. Some are actively witch-hunting staff members or players they do not like in an attempt to push them to edge so they either get tired of limelight and quit or out of anger make the smallest of mistakes and report them for that. It is also extremely annoying having people openly admit they are here to either annoy people or get people banned and nothing is done for that because they tip-toe on the lines of breaking the rules.

People need to calm down, we are here to play a game we all enjoy, it is no fun coming to the forums to find toxic arguments everywhere.

Just relating to your first point, there was actually a admin policy in "Examples of abuse" against the VTOL.
"Using admin tools and constructs for an unfair agressive advantage unless previously agreed upon by all parties involved for an RP situation." has been there for quite a while iirc.

(Mar 9, 2018, 05:59 PM)PaulB Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 8, 2018, 09:34 PM)Project Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 8, 2018, 09:17 PM)Faustin Wrote: [ -> ]-snip-

-snip-

Just relating to your first point, there was actually a admin policy in "Examples of abuse" against the VTOL.
"Using admin tools and constructs for an unfair agressive advantage unless previously agreed upon by all parties involved for an RP situation." has been there for quite a while iirc.

Didn't you kill half the crew before it even landed?

(Mar 9, 2018, 06:01 PM)Doctor Internet Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 9, 2018, 05:59 PM)PaulB Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 8, 2018, 09:34 PM)Project Wrote: [ -> ]-snip-

Just relating to your first point, there was actually a admin policy in "Examples of abuse" against the VTOL.
"Using admin tools and constructs for an unfair agressive advantage unless previously agreed upon by all parties involved for an RP situation." has been there for quite a while iirc.

Didn't you kill half the crew before it even landed?

Nope, no one was dead upon landing even though approx 180 rounds just by my self was sprayed around the VTOL + 2 other people shooting only managed to knock one guy down to 50hp, pilot is bulletproof as well as the fact the VTOL was used to transport government members to flank us by flying through the ravine so we couldn't even shoot them if we tried, this was a problem as flanking us normally wasn't a problem as any one who tried to attempt to come down the hill to flank us we simply shot at who forced them to stop to take cover.

Blackdog apparently said in Teamspeak to others that if we shot so many "rounds" to damage the VTOL he would ground the VTOL.
However, from Enzymes words "the VTOL took more than enough damage to severely reduce it's capabilities yet there was no consequence to it taking the amount of fire that it did."

(Mar 9, 2018, 06:07 PM)PaulB Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 9, 2018, 06:01 PM)Doctor Internet Wrote: [ -> ]

(Mar 9, 2018, 05:59 PM)PaulB Wrote: [ -> ]Just relating to your first point, there was actually a admin policy in "Examples of abuse" against the VTOL.
"Using admin tools and constructs for an unfair agressive advantage unless previously agreed upon by all parties involved for an RP situation." has been there for quite a while iirc.

Didn't you kill half the crew before it even landed?

Nope, no one was dead upon landing even though approx 180 rounds just by my self was sprayed around the VTOL + 2 other people shooting only managed to knock one guy down to 50hp, pilot is bulletproof as well as the fact the VTOL was used to transport government members to flank us by flying through the ravine so we couldn't even shoot them if we tried, this was a problem as flanking us normally wasn't a problem as any one who tried to attempt to come down the hill to flank us we simply shot at who forced them to stop to take cover.

Blackdog apparently said in Teamspeak to others that if we shot so many "rounds" to damage the VTOL he would ground the VTOL.
However, from Enzymes words "the VTOL took more than enough damage to severely reduce it's capabilities yet there was no consequence to it taking the amount of fire that it did."

Strange. It didn't seem to be bullet resistant when I checked it last. Looks like something to check when I'm done spamming the change-logs with improvements.