Do you feel that the SA-Sub and CA-Sub ranks should be done with? 18 members have voted

[eXtr3m3]

I have always been against the idea of granting those staff members (excluding AO+) extra immunity and commands because of their ability to subscribe. Not everyone can afford the $5 a month, and we have to respect that. I understand that we cannot thrive on funds provided by the higher up staff, nor will we survive on those few individuals who donate large sums of money at once to help complete the monthly goal (@Gunner412 @imbalanced @WickedZealot). I understand that we are also looking for ways to provide Subscribers more for their money, but extra immunity and command access (aside from !colorsmenu and such) is not the way to go.

 

Everyone who has been promoted to SA or CA has been trusted to handle the responsibilities and tasks of their rank, and with that they are also awarded with their extra powers and immunity rightfully so.. If they deem fit for a promotion, then that occurs too. Just because someone has the means to scrape up $5 a month does not make them a better staff member or community member than those within their same rank. Granted, some people are cheap with their money or see the idea of donating to an online community as idiotic, but in a lot of cases (especially with the younger members), they are not able to afford $5 or do not have access to a PayPal account, credit card, or a debit card. I do agree that it would be alright if they were to not have access to chat tags, chat colors, special player models, and colored names, seeing as these do not give them any special privileges.

 

This does not only grant those who subscribe permissions that outweigh those of their own rank, but it has also been a hassle to set up permissions-wise (particularly on the Garry's Mod servers). To my knowledge though, @Dirk managed to fix these issues.

 

I will put a poll up and I encourage all to leave your input and vote on the poll if possible. Thanks for reading!

[Goku]

Tbh I didn't even realize we had SA sub ranks till someone mentioned it few weeks ago. I don't even know what exactly that grants in regards to permissions and immunity.

 

If someone could better explain it to me, I'd be able to give a more educated answer but until then here's my general thoughts:

 

Some people become sub for the slot res and access to a different skin than the default. If they get admin, they could drop sub since they now have slot res and admin skins. I think having a few extra perks as SA-sub is something to motivate admins to become and stay sub.

 

I also think that all admins should have access to the basic, necessary commands to properly do their job. Depending on what exactly SA-subs get, I see no harm in giving those members that have earned admin, and can afford to donate, some extra perks.

 

I completely understand your point of people not being able to afford to sub, I even made a big thread about it close to this time last year. And I do think people should donate because they want to, and because they want to contribute to the community, but sadly people will always be looking for perks when they donate. So again, depending on what exactly these perks are, I see no harm in having SA and CA sub.

[eXtr3m3]

Tbh I didn't even realize we had SA sub ranks till someone mentioned it few weeks ago. I don't even know what exactly that grants in regards to permissions and immunity.

 

If someone could better explain it to me, I'd be able to give a more educated answer but until then here's my general thoughts:

 

Some people become sub for the slot res and access to a different skin than the default. If they get admin, they could drop sub since they now have slot res and admin skins. I think having a few extra perks as SA-sub is something to motivate admins to become and stay sub.

 

I also think that all admins should have access to the basic, necessary commands to properly do their job. Depending on what exactly SA-subs get, I see no harm in giving those members that have earned admin, and can afford to donate, some extra perks.

 

I completely understand your point of people not being able to afford to sub, I even made a big thread about it close to this time last year. And I do think people should donate because they want to, and because they want to contribute to the community, but sadly people will always be looking for perks when they donate. So again, depending on what exactly these perks are, I see no harm in having SA and CA sub.

 

SA-Subs are immune to SA's and CA-Subs are immune to CA's. For the longest time, SA-Subs were able to target CA's.

 

SA -> SA-Sub -> CA -> CA-Sub

 

On TTT, the SA and CA subscribers have access to commands such as !maul, !explode, and !gimp unlike normal SA's and CA's. A few issues with this are that if a CA is targeted by a CA-sub with gimp, they are not able to ungimp themself.

 

Also, I do agree that SA's and CA's who subscribe should receive more perks, but not if it going to grant them more power within the servers.

[Dirk]

Tbh I didn't even realize we had SA sub ranks till someone mentioned it few weeks ago. I don't even know what exactly that grants in regards to permissions and immunity.

 

If someone could better explain it to me, I'd be able to give a more educated answer but until then here's my general thoughts:

 

Some people become sub for the slot res and access to a different skin than the default. If they get admin, they could drop sub since they now have slot res and admin skins. I think having a few extra perks as SA-sub is something to motivate admins to become and stay sub.

 

I also think that all admins should have access to the basic, necessary commands to properly do their job. Depending on what exactly SA-subs get, I see no harm in giving those members that have earned admin, and can afford to donate, some extra perks.

 

I completely understand your point of people not being able to afford to sub, I even made a big thread about it close to this time last year. And I do think people should donate because they want to, and because they want to contribute to the community, but sadly people will always be looking for perks when they donate. So again, depending on what exactly these perks are, I see no harm in having SA and CA sub.

 

The problem potatoes has with it is that a SA can pay, get SA-sub and be immune to CAs and target CAs. The side to that is that neither CAs or SAs sub or otherwise are allowed to use admin powers on each other without permission so any use of SA sub to harass a CA would be grounds for an admin strike anyway.

[Goku]

The problem potatoes has with it is that a SA can pay, get SA-sub and be immune to CAs and target CAs. The side to that is that neither CAs or SAs sub or otherwise are allowed to use admin powers on each other without permission so any use of SA sub to harass a CA would be grounds for an admin strike anyway.

 

SA sub being immune to CA just seems like a flaw in design or something. Is there not a way to set CAs on a higher permissions than SA sub so targeting won't be a problem?

 

And an SA sub doing something like gimp to a CA is admin abuse and a direct rule violation of admins not using powers on other admins. So I don't think removing the rank completely is necessary. If possible, just rework it where the permissions thing will cause as little of problem as possible.

 

Plus I think having some fun in game commands for Sub level admins is fine. Things like maul are just another way to slay a player. As I said as long as the fundamental powers are there to do an admins job, I see no problem. If there is a problem with targeting, then an admin complaint should be made and a strike given. I first hand haven't witnessed too many problems with this, and as I showcased, I don't think SA sub is very common knowledge which also means I don't think this is a really big problem.

[Caution]

SA sub being immune to CA just seems like a flaw in design or something.

 

 

Just responding to this portion right now since I'm on my phone...but CA's are not allowed to punish SA's in the server.

[BlackWhite]

After reading long discussion from everyone, I personally thinks that it is unfair for sub have higher permission than normal admin, but i dont see why we should remove it. Sub immune to normal admin is just a perk. After the issue with SA.sub able to target CA is solved, i dont see a problem if we syay at it is.

 

Unless it is to prevent SA.sub able to abuse normal sa

[Leon Mordecai]

I didn't even realize we had SA-Subs and CA-Subs, but I don't think that people with subs should have more power than non-subs. It just feels unbalanced in some way.

[Caution]

We have to create SA-sub and CA-sub for people to gain the perks of being a subscriber. Regardless of whatever extra perks they may get, ie colored text, banning, making a map change, kicking, making votes, WHATEVER the extra command is (just using the previous ones as examples), there HAS to be a separate group for them on the servers for them to be placed into a group that allows the extra perks, whatever they may be. Otherwise, we'd have to manually add each ID back and forth, which is something we aren't going to do when it can just easily be pulled from sourcebans. So as far as actually taking the physical grouping away from them (ie removing the adminsub and casub groups), I am 100% saying no to removing it. That part isn't up for debate. We have to have these groups so they can award people the perks of being sub.

 

As far as immunity goes, unless you are an AO, there is no admin vs. admin commands allowed. Fun aside (IN MODERATION), CA's can't punish SA's, SAsub can't punish CA's, CAsub can't punish SA's, etc. The point I'm getting at, if it isn't clear already, is that admins are not allowed to punish other admins unless you hold the rank of AO, TA (majority of these guys were ex-BD's anyways, so I trust their judgment with this), BD, or PO. Period. The ONLY stipulation I would say is fine is if you, as an SA, catch another SA trying to mass ban servers, blatant hacking, or something crazy along those lines. For ANYTHING else, you need to go through an AO+. This also is not something up for debate.

 

Continuing with immunity levels, I looked into it and you guys are correct; SAsubs have higher immunity than CA's. This is something I was not aware of, and will get to fixing. Give me a few days to get this into play (probably sometime this weekend). I'm really busy the rest of this week until then. If one of you can remember, tag me in this thread on Friday to remind me, cause I will forget shit pretty easy if you guys don't remind me about it. It sucks, but I work full-time, go to school, and then spend the rest of my time that I'm not out with friends either fixing things around here or talking to BD's / AO's about changes, drama we have to handle, promotions, demotions, etc. Seriously...being a PO can suck at times if you invest a lot of time trying to better this place. Not saying AO's or BD's don't do a lot of work, cause they do...but I digress.

 

Still talking about immunity here...I just didn't want one wall of text lol. Anyways, my opinion on it is that SA's and CA's should have the same immunity levels. None of you guys should have higher immunity because you shouldn't be punishing each other regardless. Don't get immunity confused with perks, because those aren't the same thing. I don't have all of the commands of sourcemod in my head, so I would have to take time to review them. I also don't think that any special powers pertaining to admin should be given to admins that are subs. If they have the admin powers, so should all of the other admins. I'll have to talk to the other BD's about this and get their thoughts. I don't want to say this as an absolute, because there may be some power out there that I would say 'Yeah, that's cool that only sub admins have,' but I certainly can't think of any off the top of my head.

 

Last bit (yup...still talking about immunity). I am also going to be bringing up possibly removing SA's and CA's from performing any admin commands on each other. So same immunity levels for SA's, CA's, SAsubs, and CAsubs, and not allowing you guys to utilize admin commands on anybody who is an admin. I know this might suck for some of you wanting to do 'fun' commands like slap or whatever, but I'm pretty sure it's possible to bypass certain commands, so we could allow you guys to slap each other, just not kick or ban. I could be wrong on that part, so don't quote me. I just got off work and don't feel like going back into the server files to review this right now, so this is also something I would have to look at again.

 

Okay, this is really the last bit. I am absolutely not saying that we are for sure going to remove you guys from being able to use admin commands on each other. I know that may seem as a punishment, so I know a lot of you guys may quote me and say it's a bad idea lol. It is 100% not a punishment, and I don't want you guys to think it is. I'm not really for it or against it at this point, but I see both sides of the fence. You guys shouldn't be using admin commands on each other, but there is a portion of it that can definitely increase the amount of fun in the server if done correctly. Even though the last part of that sentence is true, there isn't really an absolute need for you guys to be able to do that. It doesn't prevent you from doing your part administrating the servers in any way, shape, or form. If we do end up changing this, you will know, but it's something that might not even happen, so don't get caught up with it yet.

 

 

I'll get with the BD's this weekend and we'll discuss the issues mentioned. If I didn't answer something here, let me know.

[ExRev]

I'm not sure what the hell suddenly has happened in our servers, but I believe Potato's original post had nothing to do with admins punishing other admins, and was entirely around the idea that while yes Subs do deserve perks, being allowed to slap a fellow SA while they can't slap you back or do anything about it simply because you're able to donate and they aren't is kinda bullshit.