Maybe someone has seen this ban list [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1483607[/url]
And almost everyone agreed that this were a bad idea, but should i ask...This was a bad idea at all?
In my opinion, it wasn't, the implementation indeed was a bad
I want to share an idea that i can build by myself, but i would preffer to hear everyone opinions about what do you think about this...
Basically, i like the idea about don't letting bad seeds to play on servers, but banning them in the way that hex did it, was pretty bad, so:
[b]Let's clean the ban list:[/b]
Everyone it's free to play without any limitation, doesn't matter if you hacked on a server and now you want to play again
[b]Report them:[/b]
If i build this addon, i would preffer 2 kinds of people, clients and overwatchers, people can use this addon, but they can't report until they register in x webpage with your server info
Once you do this, you can report players by using an id in your server convars
[b]Mark players as problematic players:[/b]
Imagine, that players have a global score, every time you get reported, you earn a point (Just in perma ban case) if your score it's greater than x (Configurable by server), then server won't let you to connect, either way, this just will mark you as problematic player, this will help moderators to perfom tasks
[b]Everyone can check their historial:[/b]
By using x webpage, you can query info about your history and reasons about why you have been banned, if do you think that your ban it's unfair, talk with one of our moderators (This is not a just one man job)
[b]This is too much power:[/b]
Indeed, [B]i don't even think that i'm someone who could control this[/B], that's the idea about colaborators, but you can find some good peps on fp
As I said, this is just a concept, there's nothing built yet, i would like to ear your opinion and suggestions (If there are some suggestions) about how could we improve the community without applying a wall to players like HeX did
Maybe a global ban could be more of a serious issue.
You could have an online voting system where players vote whether the person should be global banned or not with sufficient evidence etc before they actually get global banned.
A normal ban would occur but an admin would have a choice to create a global ban vote with the evidence.
This looks way better idea than that idiot ban list.
This would just be as a CS:GO overwatch, so that admins or owner can give a "small reputation" to players that seem bad.
Also some ideas:
- Configurable option to set how many points does a player gotta have to be blocked on join
- Only one account per community
- Account can be either managed by anyone thats admin on the server (reputation can be set by any admin)
- Configurable account permissions (who can set reputation)
[editline]3rd September 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=YaYaBinks3;48608783]Maybe a global ban could be more of a serious issue.
[B]You could have an online voting system where players vote whether the person should be global banned or not with sufficient evidence etc before they actually get global banned.[/B]
A normal ban would occur but an admin would have a choice to create a global ban vote with the evidence.[/QUOTE]
That is the idea...
Yeah, CS:GO way seems like something to explore.
I am thinking maybe server owners can import bans into local database from the global one manually, or like see what's was imported and what they are importing, this way they can see if any fishy/random massbans are present in the list and choose not to import that. Maybe per-day categorization or something.
Of course the problem with this is that is most will just import without checking the list out, but this would still add some sort of anti-"rogue admin going nuts" protection.
Maybe an option to decide how sensible would be the database imported, like "Players with score above 5"
Maybe make it so that the banlist can be voted and deliberated on but only by us Big Server Men
[QUOTE=BFG9000;48608946]Maybe make it so that the banlist can be voted and deliberated on but only by us Big Server Men[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=geferon;48608811]
[QUOTE=YaYaBinks3;48608783]Maybe a global ban could be more of a serious issue.
[B]You could have an online voting system where players vote whether the person should be global banned or not with sufficient evidence etc before they actually get global banned.[/B]
A normal ban would occur but an admin would have a choice to create a global ban vote with the evidence.[/QUOTE]
That is the idea...
[/QUOTE]
Any community based control of bans not within that community is a bad idea, period.
An Owner can report a player who was hacking with evidence and that report is brought through many people and they check to see if this report is legit or not and if it was legit put it in the system if it was not then remove the report.
[QUOTE=BigBadWilly;48609453]An Owner can report a player who was hacking with evidence and that report is brought through many people and they check to see if this report is legit or not and if it was legit put it in the system if it was not then remove the report.[/QUOTE]
Overwatch in GMod confirmed
Please I BEG OF YOU do not add this, one ban or mistakes in one server does not constitute being banned from a huge list of servers or made you to seem like a big villian on a webpage/list.
Let's take this scenario, you are banned in one random DarkRP server for mass RDM for two weeks, you were mad and you admit you made some mistake, This servers part of the "global ban list".
Then you try to join a TTT server and find you are banned for two weeks, try to join some sandbox servers also find you are banned for 2 weeks. You basically can't play gmod multipalyer on most servers if they implement this for two whole weeks.
Please do not support this in any way, punishments should stick to their OWN servers only.
[editline]4th September 2015[/editline]
Please really do not make this I do not support this at all I don't think this is right. Even if it is fair or whatever it shouldn't be added as there are many ways this can be abused.
[editline]4th September 2015[/editline]
You would have to allow yourself to be dis-added from the global ban list to protect your data rights.
[editline]4th September 2015[/editline]
Really do not go ahead with this it will end up in shambles there will be so much abuse and wrongdoing this will ruin gmod forever.
[QUOTE=serverwatch;48609640]Please I BEG OF YOU do not add this, one ban or mistakes in one server does not constitute being banned from a huge list of servers or made you to seem like a big villian on a webpage/list.
Let's take this scenario, you are banned in one random DarkRP server for mass RDM for two weeks, you were mad and you admit you made some mistake, This servers part of the "global ban list".
Then you try to join a TTT server and find you are banned for two weeks, try to join some sandbox servers also find you are banned for 2 weeks. You basically can't play gmod multipalyer on most servers if they implement this for two whole weeks.
Please do not support this in any way, punishments should stick to their OWN servers only.
[editline]4th September 2015[/editline]
Please really do not make this I do not support this at all I don't think this is right. Even if it is fair or whatever it shouldn't be added as there are many ways this can be abused.
[editline]4th September 2015[/editline]
You would have to allow yourself to be dis-added from the global ban list to protect your data rights.
[editline]4th September 2015[/editline]
Really do not go ahead with this it will end up in shambles there will be so much abuse and wrongdoing this will ruin gmod forever.[/QUOTE]
You mass rdm -> you are banned -> you want more -> go to another server -> fuck it up -> be banned again -> key to mass rdm
Ideally, server operators should be intelligent enough to decide whether they really want to use something as nasty as this on their server, and decide not to.
Realistically, someone from facepunch studios should probably intervene...
I don't believe Falco should intervene because this isn't [b]only[/b] about DarkRP.
Basically, I don't agree with you for some reasons, but I do for others, as for example not being banned on 50 servers just by micspamming in one
[editline]3rd September 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=ph:lxyz;48609805]Ideally, server operators should be intelligent enough to decide whether they really want to use something as nasty as this on their server, and decide not to.
Realistically, someone from facepunch studios should probably intervene...
I don't believe Falco should intervene because this isn't [b]only[/b] about DarkRP.[/QUOTE]
Fuck D:
My automerge!
[QUOTE=ph:lxyz;48609805]
I don't believe Falco should intervene because this isn't [b]only[/b] about DarkRP.[/QUOTE]
Falco intervening only concerns DarkRP
[QUOTE=Exho;48610022]Falco intervening only concerns DarkRP[/QUOTE]
I know. What I mean is, a global banlist is not gamemode-specific. Ideally, if having a global banlist controlled by the whims of a single user is a bad idea (which I agree that it is), then it's not just a problem for DarkRP users, right?
Global banlist are both good and bad, to try to paint it as one would be covering up part of the truth
The good:
-Stops continual minges from wreaking havoc on a server with the banlist. This gives the admins less to deal with since it's a 'solved problem'. This is a very obvious major plus.
-Reported hackers would also be banned as well.
The bad:
-Players might join a server with the intention of playing normally, but by having a history of griefing, they are immediately banned. Given the age of many garrysmod players, its not an unlikely assumption to assume that many minges, despite their past actions, can mature to the point where they're not a minge and become a normal player.
-A lone player might be targetted by a group of individuals with the intent of banning him/her from as many servers as possible by getting them added to the global banlist.
-It's not foolproof. A minge could get on an alt account to completely evade the banlist.
I've been thinking it over, and I thought it would be a good idea to have tiers of offenses.
Level 1: Hacking/Exploiting
Level 2: Killing players out of context of the game (Like RDM in DarkRP for example)
Level 3: Actively harming/annoying players, ruining other people's fun. Like minging.
Level 4: Breaking rules (Things that don't actively harm players, but still ruin gameplay. Prop surfing, or some other type of passive rudeness)
Level 5: Being an asshole, mic spamming, stuff like that.
Then, we could allow server owners to choose how much tolerance they could have for each category of bad behavior. Dethmatch servers can be more tolerant to #2 than #3, or really complex games can be less tolerant to #4.
[editline]3rd September 2015[/editline]
These are just examples, open to suggestions.
Why the disagrees? What's wrong with having ban categories? Wouldn't it be better for others to have a general view about how bad that person is? Not every bad person is bad the same way.
Don't get bothered by ratings, in fact, I find it better to just outright ignore that they exist.
I'm personally not too fond of the whole global banlist idea (for minges) since I have had my fair share of well earned permabans from many servers.
On the other hand, hackers, with irrefutable proof (Videos or screenshots; chatlogs mean nothing), I am perfectly fine with having banned.
Can't you just warn players on the server, that this player has done this and this? Notify to him the same, if he keeps breaking rules, he will get on the banlist?
No matter what you do or how you implement it, there is always someone with the ability to add someone they hate. In your idea, gonzalog, you put mechanisms in place to prevent server owners from abusing it, but there are no mechanisms that prevent YOU from adding people manually in the database.
You would have access to the database, so you have a final say in who is on it and who isn't. You can remove a friend from a couple of servers' lists if you think it was unfair. You can also add someone you hate the same way, faking evidence.
It's down to your promise not to abuse your power as the developer as the addon. That's the core problem with every ban list addon I've seen so far. Your idea is really good in looking like it's well managed, but the power you would have yourself makes it not.
Customizability is key. Allowing a server owner to determine what level of shitbrid a person is or how many servers have banned him for being a shitbird before allowing said shitbird to be autobanned from their own server will determine the success of this addon, at least in my opinion.
For example, I run a server with fairly lassez-faire administration, but I want this addon to keep the obvious griefers out, so I configure a threshhold that at least 10 servers on the system must have banned this person before it autobans them from my server.
Or perhaps I'm running a super serious and strict server and only want the people with no ban records on my server - so I set a threshold that anyone with a permanent ban in the system on any registered server gets autobanned from mine.
There's also something to be said about autobans not triggering the threshold - only bans added by a user while the player in question is actually on the server.
Also, anyone coming in here and decrying Gonzalo or Falco for making this addon is an idiot - he can make an addon that plays farts sounds constantly to any server subscribed for all anyone should care so long as it's elective for server owners to install it and not forcibly bundled with the gamemode (or bundled but disabled by default until it's configured by the SO.)
[editline]4th September 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=FPtje;48611778]No matter what you do or how you implement it, there is always someone with the ability to add someone they hate. In your idea, gonzalog, you put mechanisms in place to prevent server owners from abusing it, but there are no mechanisms that prevent YOU from adding people manually in the database.
You would have access to the database, so you have a final say in who is on it and who isn't. You can remove a friend from a couple of servers' lists if you think it was unfair. You can also add someone you hate the same way, faking evidence.
It's down to your promise not to abuse your power as the developer as the addon. That's the core problem with every ban list addon I've seen so far. Your idea is really good in looking like it's well managed, but the power you would have yourself makes it not.[/QUOTE]
This [I]is[/I] a point of concern, though, I hadn't thought about that. Hm.
Perhaps using a public web gateway somewhere to show the access logs at any time?
[QUOTE=Sonador;48612570]
This [I]is[/I] a point of concern, though, I hadn't thought about that. Hm.
Perhaps using a public web gateway somewhere to show the access logs at any time?[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure what you mean, but are you talking about an access log which Gonzalog could edit?
[QUOTE=FPtje;48612688]I'm not sure what you mean, but are you talking about an access log which Gonzalog could edit?[/QUOTE]
No, I'm more talking about hosting the database on a third party service which logs all of the accesses and lists them publicly. Sort of like a workspace on google docs, where it logs all of the changes and anyone can see the edits and who made them. I'm not sure if such a thing exists.
I once had an idea for a ban system called 'garrysrep', a variation of the steamrep system. Basically this system works based off of your 'reputation' which essentially allows the user to be banned off various levels. The lowest being Micspam (Only affecting local server) and the highest being DDoS threats (Banned from multiple servers). This would all affect your reputation as a lower offense would affect perhaps 5-15% of your reputation and a higher offense would affect perhaps 16-75% of your reputation. Joining the community would be simple however, actually contributing through bans would first require a strong bond with the staff and the community. This entire system was inspired by SteamRep.
Although I disagree with Falco on some issues, I [i]do[/i] strongly agree with his point that any ban list must not be centralized.
If we must have a global list of troublemakers, the best I can think of is this:
- Records of any kicks or bans that occur, along with their reasons must be immutable.
- Nobody outside of Valve (who already can) should be able to switch off the users' access across multiple gmod servers.
Now for the crazy:
A blockchain could exist, whose purpose is to keep a record of kicks, bans and reasons, which are then signed using the certificate of the domain on which the server is hosted.
The information about the ban / kick and its reason is then "spent" into the blockchain as a transaction.
Server owners, when deciding whether to kick or ban a player, may then look at that players' history of kicks / bans on other servers and which servers kicked / banned them and why.
Then they are freer to make a good decision as to what to do with this individual.
This removes control from the central authority and allows the server operator to remain in control. People wouldn't be auto-banned but the server ops would be free to see if people appear to be a trouble maker when deciding whether to permanently ban them.
"The Banchain".
Have I missed anything?
I never even thought of just a centralized history system. Being able to 'run out' a player and return with their entire disciplinary history and simply notifying server staff if they have a history of kicks/warns/bans over a specifiable amount on join might be a sweet spot - you don't directly control their access on other servers, but everyone anywhere's gonna know your history.
[QUOTE=Sonador;48612975]I never even thought of just a centralized history system.[/QUOTE]
Well - I mean it would be "decentralized" - same way bitcoin works. The server would digitally sign the kick/ban/warn with their domain certificate and the date of the infraction and place it on a decentralized block chain for all server admins to see. People that don't cause so much trouble over a period of time would be less obvious candidates for a complete server ban on the server viewing the list. You could even have it so that when a player joins, the blockchain is searched for the SteamID and admins are notified of the players' record, which they can then view - or consider when administering justice.
[QUOTE=ph:lxyz;48612996]Well - I mean it would be "decentralized" - same way bitcoin works. The server would digitally sign the kick/ban/warn with their domain certificate and the date of the infraction and place it on a decentralized block chain.[/QUOTE]
I don't quite understand what that means. Isn't there a central point where you're pulling the history from? If not, what's the point?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
