CT bans for CA+ on JB

[All Ts]

This plugin looks good to search into for giving to CA+ to use so that they don't have to resort straight to a server ban and instead can give out a CT ban for X amount of time. These bans would fall right under the protocol of a regular ban, but just give the higher ups an extra tool in their arsenal to take on rulebreakers. We could give this to SA's as well since we already trust our SA's to globally ban people for up to a week, but I don't know if that's something that is necessary as I can see it getting out of hand (due to no limitation on how long you can CT ban). Generally, this would help us retain players who are being dipshits on CT while at the same time making the server less chaotic- which is a big issue currently on PB.

 

I'm not advocating for a warden plugin, or anything of the sort currently but I think we should start being a little more attentive to who's on CT when we have so many players on our server.

[Luke]

I honestly really like the idea of this. I think that certain people (whether it be CA+ or whatever) could use a tool like this.

 

I think that this plugin would help as there are certainly players out there who can be a consistent nuisance but don't necessarily need to be handed out a ban or don't seem to reach that limit, but shouldn't be on CT.

[delirium]

This plugin looks good to search into for giving to CA+ to use so that they don't have to resort straight to a server ban and instead can give out a CT ban for X amount of time. These bans would fall right under the protocol of a regular ban, but just give the higher ups an extra tool in their arsenal to take on rulebreakers. We could give this to SA's as well since we already trust our SA's to globally ban people for up to a week, but I don't know if that's something that is necessary as I can see it getting out of hand (due to no limitation on how long you can CT ban). Generally, this would help us retain players who are being dipshits on CT while at the same time making the server less chaotic- which is a big issue currently on PB.

 

I'm not advocating for a warden plugin, or anything of the sort currently but I think we should start being a little more attentive to who's on CT when we have so many players on our server.

 

do you hear that sound?

 

its the sound of dozens of admin complaints coming in from our squeaky borderline mic spamming ct friends.

[Herpz]

I think that this would be a good plugin for JB. I also like that you can put a time on when they can rejoin CT like a regular ban. This way we can decrease the amount of players that get kicked/banned and switch them to T so they become more experienced with the rules. If this plugin were to be added I also have a feeling that JB's player count will increase and also become less chaotic. I support this

[Suri]

Saw this plugin a while ago and was thinking the same thing BUT looking at it more I can see this being a bad idea. Why would we go for a CT ban. Its the same thing with the e-ban on ZE (SA+ thread btw) we had in the past.

 

I can see it being useful but if we move someone to T side with a reason and they choose not to follow it and go back to CT we can just kick them for ignoring an admin. If they continue it, it results in a ban. Why go with a CT ban only? They are ignoring admins in general so the problem then isn't because they are bad CTs, its more that they don't listen. Or whatever reason that can occur in jb.

 

Point im making here is: we have a protocol already, easy to follow for us admins. Making it more complicated wont benefit us at all. And restricting players on the servers isn't in anyone's best interest either.

[Paralyzed]

Saw this plugin a while ago and was thinking the same thing BUT looking at it more I can see this being a bad idea. Why would we go for a CT ban. Its the same thing with the e-ban on ZE (SA+ thread btw) we had in the past.

 

I can see it being useful but if we move someone to T side with a reason and they choose not to follow it and go back to CT we can just kick them for ignoring an admin. If they continue it, it results in a ban. Why go with a CT ban only? They are ignoring admins in general so the problem then isn't because they are bad CTs, its more that they don't listen. Or whatever reason that can occur in jb.

 

Point im making here is: we have a protocol already, easy to follow for us admins. Making it more complicated wont benefit us at all. And restricting players on the servers isn't in anyone's best interest either.

 

This pretty much. Just read BR's posts in that thread Suri linked and replace 'items' with this topic.

[Zaraki]

The less plugins we add, the less chance we have to fuck up the server

[Bdcoll]

Not even sure PB has plugins other than the ordinary stuff Zaraki.

 

In regards to "Just ban them if they ignore you". Surely thats counter intuitive. By banning them from CT you force them to T. They either leave (No real loss as they would have been banned), stay around for a little while (Boosting the server population, meaning more people join), or if they stay for long enough, they actually learn the CT rules and can become a good CT, something that is lacking on PB.

 

Seems to be win-win to me.

[All Ts]

Saw this plugin a while ago and was thinking the same thing BUT looking at it more I can see this being a bad idea. Why would we go for a CT ban. Its the same thing with the e-ban on ZE (SA+ thread btw) we had in the past.

 

I can see it being useful but if we move someone to T side with a reason and they choose not to follow it and go back to CT we can just kick them for ignoring an admin. If they continue it, it results in a ban. Why go with a CT ban only? They are ignoring admins in general so the problem then isn't because they are bad CTs, its more that they don't listen. Or whatever reason that can occur in jb.

 

Point im making here is: we have a protocol already, easy to follow for us admins. Making it more complicated wont benefit us at all. And restricting players on the servers isn't in anyone's best interest either.

 

The reasoning within that thread by itself is narrow-minded to that if we already have an admin protocol we should just stick to banning people globally when we have other suitable options that don't harm our servers by unnecessarily banning players from all of them.

 

Sure we have an admin protocol, but aren't we supposed to resort to banning people when we feel we've done all we can?

 

1. Having to ban someone removes them from all our servers, and it hurts population. If we can stop people from breaking the rules without actually globally banning them we should.

 

2. Admins are not constantly on the server, these bans could serve to keep shit intact when admins aren't online and hence make our regulars lives A LOT easier.

 

3. This would be not different from protocol whatsoever. If someone isn't following the rules get rid of them for X amount of time.

 

4. As stated on that thread ZE SA's were using the command incorrectly by removing the ability to use items from players due to them using them the wrong way, not due to actually breaking the rules. This doesn't speak for all our admins- but just a few fuckups. Even if you believe it's a trend we could still give this to just CA+.

 

5. Restricting a player for breaking rules is fine, that's basically what you do when you ban them flat-out and I see no reason why for someone making small offenses on PB such as conflicting orders, forcing deathgames, freekilling, screaming on mic, etc.. why we shouldn't have ANOTHER option to deal with them while admins aren't online.

 

If you think this isn't needed I encourage you to go undercover at peak server time with NO admins online so you can understand how our regulars feel.

 

Not even sure PB has plugins other than the ordinary stuff Zaraki.

 

In regards to "Just ban them if they ignore you". Surely thats counter intuitive. By banning them from CT you force them to T. They either leave (No real loss as they would have been banned), stay around for a little while (Boosting the server population, meaning more people join), or if they stay for long enough, they actually learn the CT rules and can become a good CT, something that is lacking on PB.

 

Seems to be win-win to me.

 

I know you already know this, but to add to the point you made/not ignore the possible cons and be completely objective I'd like to say this.

 

A CT sided ban is really just an extra tool to stop people from breaking the rules without getting rid of them completely. If anything if you ban them from CT and they continue being a shit for brains on T side at least by that point they would probably be showing a lot of intent in the case they appeal or complain like children.

 

Basically what I'm saying is that it's not necessary to make any special protocol as admins can simply go about their business and use this punishment as they would use a ban normally except for the cases where someone is being a clear minge you can just issue them a normal ban.

[Jake]

After spending the better part of this afternoon trying to keep ratio's balanced and new players off the CT side I'm going to support adding this plugin.

 

Yes, there are players who freekill on CT because they are new and aren't fully aware of the rules. Most of the time they don't have malicious intentions when frees killing they just are not aware of the situations in which they can shoot/kill a T. A lot of these guys are also stubborn and only want to play CT even though they don't know the rules of our server. So instead of having to ban them and losing a potential regular player on the serevr why not just restrict someone to T side for a certain period of time. Now I'm not saying every single new player is going to be CT banned, just players who have issues/are difficult. It is really annoying sometimes to keep switching people back to T side and having to check every 5 minutes to make sure they don't switch back.

 

Worse case we test the plugin and it doesn't work for our server, cool. Then we remove it and move on