User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Planetarion Discussions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 2 Sep 2008, 22:57   #1
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Post Jumping through hoops

I get a couple of PMs every now and then from people who work on or want to work on Munin's code or want to use Munin for their alliance. I don't get many, but I do get enough of these that I have to relay information that could be better spread through a channel. That way people who are interested could see discussions I now have to keep in PM.

Thus begins my journey to register #munin. Part 2 is more relevant to Planetarion, since CService are independent and not a part of the Planetarion infrastructure. I've included it because there's obviously a dissonance going on here. I've left IRC quotes inline for context, if mods want I'll cut out pastebin the longer ones.

Part 1: Trying to register a channel
CService limits the number of channels a person can own to 3. I used to own 4 due to being around when an expiring channel needed a new owner and some lazy CService person gave it to me. I thought it was a bit of fun. Some mean CService person hunted me down a year or two later and took the extra channel away. Boohoo.

Fast-forward to today. I knew alliances could get multiple channels registered somehow, because it was getting difficult for alliances to keep all the channels they wanted with just 3 to a head, especially when you count all the stupid anonymizing relay channels they want. I headed off to #cservice to ask.

Since I'd come under the impression that #cservice is a no-idling channel, I figured that the first person to help me was actually CService. He was a twat. Turned out he wasn't CService. So perhaps they should enforce the no-idling policy for 'friends' or whatever status Nightmare has in #cservice.

The question I asked was:

21:44:39 < jesterina> hi, I need to reg a PA related channel, but I'm at the ownership limit, is it possible to get an exception?

When a CService supervisor answered my question, the answer was:

21:48:44 < Speh> jesterina, I'm sorry to say that we can't make exceptions for alliance channels owned by individuals
21:48:51 < Speh> you can register an alliance nick and own them that way

I asked where to get information about registering an alliance nick:

21:51:31 < jesterina> ah, so who should I speak with?
21:51:35 < Speh> if you're a PA rep for an alliance, you should have access to the relevant forum

Unfortunately, I have absolutely no interest in being a "PA rep" for Ascendancy. We generally pass around who gets to be PA rep for rounds arbitrarily. This is because the private forum and channel being a "PA rep" for an alliance give you access to are shitty elitist hellholes filled with cliquey wannabe people who think their opinion is valuable. While I neatly fall into that category, I don't have a planet, haven't had one since round 26 and have little interest in jockeying for position on behalf of my alliance.

So I don't have access to the forum.

21:51:44 < jesterina> we don't take that pa rep stuff seriously
21:51:54 < jesterina> so we just send whatever good feels like dealing with that pack of idiots
21:52:06 < jesterina> I have more important things to do
21:52:09 < jesterina> like register channels
21:53:14 < Speh> then we can't help you

Doh. CService don't care much about service do they?

(For completeness, after this I enquired about getting official status for #pawiki, which wasn't taken very seriously because Speh had "never heard of it". He kept dismissing my line of questioning here despite reassurances that I was not trying to score rhetorical points or game the system.)

Part 2: Getting an alliance nick registered
As CService suggested I headed off to #support to get information about this 'alliance nick' stuff. It really is quite unfortunate that the information about this isn't available somewhere public. If anyone reading this has access, could you mirror the text to the wiki or something? I'd really appreciate it.

In #support, I was immediately told to contact #cservice:

21:52:26 < jesterina> hello planetarion support people!
21:52:39 < jesterina> I have a question about registering channels
21:52:47 < jesterina> I need to register an alliance related channel
21:52:55 < jesterina> CSC tell me you can help
21:55:46 <+Monroe> jesterina #cservices for channel registration questions

Doh!

21:56:34 < jesterina> Monroe: I need to register an alliance related channel
21:56:38 <+Monroe> ok?
21:56:39 < jesterina> but I'm at my limit
21:56:51 <+Cin[Away]> jesterina, for the ally pnick and ally channels you need to have your alliance rep contact ace

Fantastic. I need to have someone else contact a third party who will contact CService. Except it turns out that:

22:04:50 [netgamers] [Ace([email protected])] you reg a nick with the same name as the alliance
22:05:04 [netgamers] [msg(Ace)] you are not serious :|
22:05:09 [netgamers] [msg(Ace)] can't we just use Munin?

Ace was very helpful, he's pretty much excepted from any criticism in this post.

22:07:21 [netgamers] [Ace([email protected])] if you only want 1 or 2 channels its not worth it imo
22:07:31 [netgamers] [Ace([email protected])] as the channels will be #mumin.xxx
22:07:41 [netgamers] [msg(Ace)] well, the channel I'm trying to reg is #munin

At this point I eyed hope. If we could register our alliance nick as Munin, things would work out! To do that, I just need to get PAteam to accept that Ascendancy is actually named Munin. I checked if people in #ascendancy were ok with that:

22:06:37 <@jesterina> does anyone mind if I change the name of the ingame tag to Munin?
22:06:46 < Achi> you can do that?
22:06:48 <@elevator> please do jester
22:06:51 <@Game> jesterina they allow that?
22:06:57 < Achi> if you can do
22:07:01 <@Game> sounds good

Good so far, now to convince PAteam to go along with it:

22:09:29 < jesterina> Cin[Away]: could you change the ingame tag name of Ascendancy to Munin please?
22:11:53 <+Cin[Away]> not really no
22:12:56 < jesterina> why not?
22:13:14 < jesterina> I'll get the ingame HCs to message you ingame asking for it if necessary
22:14:15 <+Cin[Away]> it's not something we should be doing

Not so good. To be fair to Cin (and eventually Appocomaster), I've whined about them doing stuff like that quite often so I'm fine with them not changing the tag name. Would've been cool though

22:34:27 < jesterina> then will you accept that I need an alliance nick registered as Munin?
22:34:54 <+Appocomaster> jesterina: I don't mind what you register the alliance as
22:35:03 < jesterina> oh, Ace told me it had to be the name of the alliance
22:35:18 < jesterina> how do I change what the alliance is 'registered as'?
22:35:19 <+[ND]Spritfire> and Ace is right

And it goes on:

22:36:11 <+[ND]Spritfire> jesterina: register your alliance nick as Ascendancy. Or is there ap roblem with that ?
22:36:12 <+Appocomaster> jesterina: you can probably talk to Ace / [ND]Spritfire :/
22:36:34 < jesterina> [ND]Spritfire: yes
22:36:44 < jesterina> the channel I want to register is not called #ascendancy.something
22:36:56 <+[ND]Spritfire> then we can't help you basically

Terrible words to come from customer support.

I basically can not get the channel #munin registered for the alliance Ascendancy.

PAteam have an agreement with CService to allow exceptions to the 3 channel rule, but only for ingame registered alliances. I went on a rant at this point:

22:37:00 < jesterina> argh
22:37:04 < jesterina> you're all
22:37:04 < jesterina> real
22:37:06 < jesterina> really
22:37:08 < jesterina> really
22:37:09 < jesterina> unhelpful
22:37:13 < jesterina> and it's quite annoying
22:37:22 < jesterina> and frankly, I find it hostile
22:37:24 < jesterina> and offputting
22:37:25 <+Ace> its not our rules m8
22:37:29 < jesterina> yes it is!
22:37:36 < jesterina> you can let me reg Munin as our alliance nick
22:37:38 <+Ace> nope IRC is csc
22:37:44 < jesterina> I already own the ****ing botnick
22:37:46 < jesterina> or heartless does
22:37:49 < jesterina> one of us anyway
22:37:53 < jesterina> ****sake
22:38:01 < jesterina> where's the ****ing problem?
22:39:04 <+[ND]Spritfire> jesterina: rules are rules. This has nothing to do in here. So please leave. If you want a #ascendancy.something regged and have a ascendancy nick regged. please contact Ace or me
22:39:19 < jesterina> you're going to have to ban me to get me to shut up about this
22:39:22 < jesterina> you're being petty
22:39:26 < jesterina> and hostile
22:39:32 < jesterina> and abusing your power
22:39:37 < jesterina> what the **** is the point
22:39:43 < jesterina> this is a game with about 1000 people
22:39:57 < jesterina> it's not like letting us use Munin would change anything
22:40:10 < jesterina> and the stupid score rule limit prevents us from doing this swap ingame ourselves
22:40:19 < jesterina> you guys put us this situation
22:40:38 <+Appocomaster> jesterina: please just wait a minute ok?
22:40:49 < jesterina> sure thing
22:40:53 < jesterina> I can wait

At this point Appocomaster explains that one of the #support helpers is a member of CService and he was willing to try to get them to waive it. Sanity!

By the timestamps you can see that it has now taken me an hour to get my channel registered. Yes, CService have helpfully offered to delete one of my existing channels. If push comes to shove, I might. But I like my channels. I don't think I should need to give one of them up just to get an alliance channel registered.

22:44:10 [netgamers] [msg(Appocomaster)] THE BUREAUCRACY HERE IS RETARDED

CService turn out to be convinced I'm doing this to get around the channel limit. I guess I am. I don't even know.

That said, the #support people kept the discussion going, which I really appreciate.

23:15:14 <+[ND]Spritfire> jesterina: We have discussed it over
23:16:12 <+[ND]Spritfire> ah just a last minut thing. so soonish
23:16:36 < jesterina> ok
23:23:28 <+[ND]Spritfire> The rules will stay as they are jesterina. So you can register the p-nick ascendancy.
23:23:34 < jesterina> well, in the mean time
23:23:40 < jesterina> I've signed up to planetarion
23:23:44 < jesterina> and registered an alliance
23:23:46 < jesterina> called Munin
23:23:52 < jesterina> I would like to register the p-nick Munin for my alliance
23:23:56 < jesterina> can you help me with that?
23:24:10 <+[ND]Spritfire> No I can't.
23:24:25 <+[ND]Spritfire> The alliance p-nick needs to get registred with the reps from #alliances.
23:24:26 < jesterina> why not?
23:24:36 < jesterina> I can be a rep for my alliance
23:24:46 <+[ND]Spritfire> And therefor your alliance need to follow the rules for being let into #alliances
23:25:09 < jesterina> what are the rules to be let into #alliances?
23:25:38 < jesterina> where's all this documented?
23:26:40 <+[ND]Spritfire> No place. We are working on getting it documented.
23:26:50 <+[ND]Spritfire> I am finding the rules atm.
23:26:54 < jesterina> sweet

Apparently this isn't public information either. Remember when I told you this whole alliance reps thing was a cliquey elitist shit hole? I wasn't kidding.

In the interest of full disclosure:

23:27:01 < jesterina> this is all going up on PD btw

Then, the bombshell:

23:29:38 <+[ND]Spritfire> Your alliance need to prove itself, ie it can stick around. It needs to be in the top15 and around 20-25ish members
23:30:14 <+[ND]Spritfire> and with stick around we mean above 1 round.

What a ****ing joke. Great way to greet new players. Good job.

In conclusion
It took me almost two hours to find out that I couldn't get #munin registered. I've donated all the code to the Planetarion community. I've helped people set the bot up, but I can't register a channel for the continued development of it because CService and PAteam have a draconian agreement that only lets elitist shit bags register unlimited channels.

a) CService need to be able to drop the 3 channel rule for exceptions. Sure it's liable to stink of nepotism eventually, but can't we all just get along?
b) Access to #alliances is a terrible criteria for support.
c) Access to #alliances is way too limited anyway. I've held before that it should at the very least be a public viewable, but moderated channel where alliance reps were voiced. This should be a minimum.
d) The inane bureaucracy has to go. Having rules is fine, but having rules for the sake of having rules is stupid.

Basically, if you have a new alliance. You can't get access to 'senior alliance' features. You're ****ed. Keep in mind Ascendancy has had representatives in rounds when we've had has few as 5-10 people in the tag, barely inside the top30. And on the flip side, in our first round, when the rules were changed mid-game, we didn't have any.

I understand that it's easier to gauge who has a proven need for the automated assistance mechanisms CService provides through name recognition, but is it really that important to prevent the occasional abuse of this feature? How on earth would it be abused? God forbid someone registers channels! This is a game with barely a thousand players, do we really need to be this asinine?

Edit: I'd mistakenly thought that #cservice was a no idling channel. It's not, it's just got a no idle chat policy, which means that helpful people can hang around and be helpful. The person who was unhelpful to me was asked to leave after being rude to the next person who asked a question.

Last edited by Banned; 2 Sep 2008 at 23:12.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 Sep 2008, 23:04   #2
Snurx
Dirte
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 5,573
Snurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Jumping through hoops

This is awesome. How is it possible to be this stupid?

PA Team, way to go ! Enforcing the rules (that mostly exists in your own heads?)is nr 1 priority.

:highfive:
Snurx is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 Sep 2008, 23:17   #3
Wishmaster
LDK
Chopper Challenge Champion, Rabbit Hunter Champion, Arkanoid Champion
 
Wishmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,220
Wishmaster is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himWishmaster is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himWishmaster is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himWishmaster is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himWishmaster is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himWishmaster is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himWishmaster is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himWishmaster is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himWishmaster is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himWishmaster is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himWishmaster is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Jumping through hoops

hehe, bunch of retards which cant use common sence in a so fking smal game. Not shocked.

I remember we had alliance reps from Hydra the first round we entered PA. Same with excessum a couple of rounds ago. The rules Spitfire gave you are just not correct. Dont give up!!!!
__________________
[Omen]

Quote:
Originally posted by Newt
I would give me right testicle to be in a gal with you wishmaster!!! wonder if thatd be enough to bribe spinner with hmmmm
<JC`> i sent him a msg saying Wishmaster 0wns, so he recalled
Wishmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 Sep 2008, 23:18   #4
booji
a bucket
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chatham, UK
Posts: 1,073
booji is a splendid one to beholdbooji is a splendid one to beholdbooji is a splendid one to beholdbooji is a splendid one to beholdbooji is a splendid one to beholdbooji is a splendid one to beholdbooji is a splendid one to behold
Re: Jumping through hoops

I completely agree with your post, this game seems to create bureaucracy for the fun of it!
I like the idea of having #alliances open to the public to watch (presumably always moderated) would be kind of like the public gallery in parliament, these people are our HCs and are representing us why should there not be some easier way for the members to see the kind of things they get up too, I am sure all the really important stuff is done in pm anyway!

on the general question rather than deleting one of your current channels cant you hand it over to one of the channel supporters instead, anyhow someone you trust to have your channel, or does the bureaucracy not allow this either?
__________________
Proud to have been TGV!
aargh! died in Jenova! | idled in ROCK | disappointed in Audentes | been Roguish | p-p-previously a p-p-p3nguin
Ascendancy

Otterly an Otter.
booji is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 Sep 2008, 23:33   #5
Mzyxptlk
mz.
Space Invaders Champion, Alien Invasion Champion, Mosquito Kill Champion, Squid Hunter Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Barts Watersports Adventure Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,484
Mzyxptlk spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldMzyxptlk spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldMzyxptlk spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldMzyxptlk spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldMzyxptlk spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldMzyxptlk spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldMzyxptlk spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldMzyxptlk spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldMzyxptlk spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldMzyxptlk spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldMzyxptlk spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Jumping through hoops

This is pretty entertaining.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
Mzyxptlk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 00:43   #6
VenoX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 496
VenoX has a brilliant futureVenoX has a brilliant futureVenoX has a brilliant futureVenoX has a brilliant futureVenoX has a brilliant futureVenoX has a brilliant futureVenoX has a brilliant futureVenoX has a brilliant futureVenoX has a brilliant futureVenoX has a brilliant futureVenoX has a brilliant future
Re: Jumping through hoops

I dont mean to ask a probably stupid question since u obviously cut bits of logs etc as not to spam but did u actually explain ur idea for #munin fully to a cservice member and ask politely for an exception? Seems to me the whole alliance nick crap was a complete waste of ur time and everyone else involved since it had nothing to do with what u actually wanted anyway.. and seems like no one actually understood what u infact did want, either that or they are all retarded.
__________________
Founder and HC of [Denial] and [Evolution]
VenoX is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 01:33   #7
GReaper
The BOFH
 
GReaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 463
GReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant future
Re: Jumping through hoops

Perhaps the "partnership" between NetGamers and Planetarion could be evaluated?

Given the need for quite a lot of channels per alliance which sometimes need to be changed every round or so, why is this game stuck with an IRC network which is so inflexible? Every channel is a pain to register as it requires 2 supporters which are impossible to remove and someone from CSC to authorise it. Add in the 3 channels maximum restriction and you're screwed.

Evaluate the needs of all Planetarion users and either force NetGamers to offer it or switch to a different network. I seriously doubt this would happen as the people in charge are happy with the status quo - however these aren't the people who suffer from the bureaucratic policies.
GReaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 06:43   #8
Jeekay
Jim Henson
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 23
Jeekay is infamous around these partsJeekay is infamous around these parts
Re: Jumping through hoops

There really aren't that many people in the 'people who make NG decisions' group and I'm pretty sure I'm one of them. Given that, it often surprises me how ready people are to complain on public forums about the incredibly bad treatment bad rules bad this bad that, and yet not a single one of them has ever approached us in a constructive fashion to discuss a way forward.

Rules are made by humans; they are not created by God. If rules aren't working, they can be changed. Complaining about them without even attempting to approach a way forward is not helpful for anyone. This is a good life lesson.

Having said the above, I can understand Jester's frustration. I wish he'd bounced things off me first but hey can't win 'em all.

As regards the channel limits, they like so many things are there for a reason. This does not mean that they can't change or that the resource usage cannot be reevaluated, merely that when those rules were made there were good reasons for them. Whether those reasons are still extant is certainly a discussion that can be started.

In terms of registration limits / supporter requirements, these were essentially introduced to keep P's resource requirements down. The structure behind this could certainly be looked at, as could other possible solutions such as a chanfix-style facility.

All any of this really requires is for people to approach us with an open mind and some constructive criticism.
Jeekay is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 07:02   #9
Jonneh
Netgamers IRC/CSC
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14
Jonneh is a jewel in the roughJonneh is a jewel in the roughJonneh is a jewel in the rough
Post Re: Jumping through hoops

Hi all, and hello Jester.

Having read the above, we appreciate your feedback regarding our channel policy. I'm here to provide support and explain some of background behind our rules and agreements which, hopefully, will lead us towards a better understanding.

Firstly, a minor point, #cservice has never enforced a no-idling policy. I suppose you could say the reason for this is that we often recruit new members from the more helpful #cservice idlers who actually do help people. It does actually state in the #cservice topic that there is a command you can use to recognise staff members. Any Official cservice member/person/admin/helper or alike will have this 'verify' (/msg P verify nick || <P> [email protected] is a CSC Supervisor and an IRC operator and logged in as Jedi).

The channel limit has been in place since way back before netgamers was officially formed. Its enforced for a number of reasons, not least of which that we have to have some kind of limit for 'personal' channels.. simply because it makes it slightly easier from an administrative side of things. Say for example you had 8 channels, and your nick was to go idle.. you quit PA/IRC etc. When your 30 days comes up and we come to delete your nick, we now have 8 channels to lock and flag as idle so that any users still in those channels will have the opportunity to reclaim it and prevent its deletion - as you did before. The administrative overhead for cservice tasks like this is already quite high for an internet/IRC system, so limiting a person to 3 channels makes sense from our point of view.

The more general reason for limiting channels is the fact that it prevents hording. Obviously if someone can only own 3 channels, and they want a 4th.. they either have to have someone else register it for them, or they have to remove an old/inactive channel to clear space to own it themselves. Most people go for these options, which is why you were offered the chance to have a channel deleted. You find that most people on the network own a channel which is inactive, and they are more than happy to part with it in order to secure the new active channel which they wish to run. This places the old channels back into the available pool of names which new users can use, and keeps the cycle going.

Alliance nicks, alliance channels and so forth are a different matter. The system was brought in because we evaluated the needs of PA alliances - specifically the facts that they a) needed to own a lot of channels and b) it would be nice to skip the supporter/application side of registering a channel and just be able to request one directly. It is a good system which has worked well since we brought it in.

The requirements for an alliance nick and channel were defined between us and the PA team. They handle the 'planetarion' side of it, i.e: verifying that you are in fact an in-game alliance, and that you (the person requesting an alliance nick) are listed as a HC inside PA. Cservice have no access to do this, which is why the PAteam get involved at that stage. Once a request is made and sanctioned by them, they simply send us an automated form which requests the channels to be registered/moved to the new alliance nick.

The requirements for channel names are there for simple reasons really. An alliance channel should identify itself in its name. It makes it easier for users, PA reps and cservice because it eliminates any confusion right off the bat. The #alliance.xxx naming convention simplifies the administrative side of things as well, because it protects your alliance standing by preventing others from owning channels which could be used to confuse or trick people into believing they are in an alliance channel, when in fact they are in a channel which has been created as a hoax. It’s neat and tidy, and it allows us to keep track of the channel an alliance owns very simply - which keeps the administrative overhead down when we need to do some work for you.

Official channel status is requested and applied through our Partner system, of which PA is a member. The reason your request was flatly turned down simply stems from the fact that such a request would have to come from the Partner representatives of PA. The reasons for this are obvious - official channels have many benefits which we give to our partner games in order help them maintain their game and its presence on NG. Great care and deliberation is taken before accepting a new game as a Partner, and the benefits that Partner status offers you are not available to anyone else.



As far as the rest of your post goes.. the difficulty you encountered is to be expected when you're trying to bend and manipulate an existing system to fit your needs and purpose. As Jeekay says, perhaps the rules need looking at. Perhaps we can make an exception for just your specific case. Such a discussion would need to come through the right people.

If you'd like to speak to myself (Jedi) and/or Jeekay and make your case, we'd be more than happy to listen to what you have to say and see what can be done to accommodate you.

I hope this has been helpful.

-Jedi
CSC Supervisor
Jonneh is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 07:23   #10
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,007
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Jumping through hoops

Wow, you guys are really helpful. I don't have to read books!
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 09:45   #11
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: Jumping through hoops

Thanks to everyone for their replies

Quote:
Originally Posted by VenoX View Post
I dont mean to ask a probably stupid question since u obviously cut bits of logs etc as not to spam but did u actually explain ur idea for #munin fully to a cservice member and ask politely for an exception? Seems to me the whole alliance nick crap was a complete waste of ur time and everyone else involved since it had nothing to do with what u actually wanted anyway.. and seems like no one actually understood what u infact did want, either that or they are all retarded.
I'm afraid I didn't make it entirely explicit to CService myself. I stated that I needed an alliance related channel. I did explain the situation to the #support staffers and presumably they comminucated this to CService when they were discussing this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GReaper View Post
Given the need for quite a lot of channels per alliance which sometimes need to be changed every round or so, why is this game stuck with an IRC network which is so inflexible? Every channel is a pain to register as it requires 2 supporters which are impossible to remove and someone from CSC to authorise it. Add in the 3 channels maximum restriction and you're screwed.
There are plenty of ways to get this done. The alliance nick thing will let you register as many per-round channels as you want, with the owner nick hidden. Similarly, every alliance can create as many #alliancename.whatever channels as they need. My problem was that I needed #munin and not #ascendancy.munin.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeekay View Post
There really aren't that many people in the 'people who make NG decisions' group and I'm pretty sure I'm one of them. Given that, it often surprises me how ready people are to complain on public forums about the incredibly bad treatment bad rules bad this bad that, and yet not a single one of them has ever approached us in a constructive fashion to discuss a way forward.

Rules are made by humans; they are not created by God. If rules aren't working, they can be changed. Complaining about them without even attempting to approach a way forward is not helpful for anyone. This is a good life lesson.

Having said the above, I can understand Jester's frustration. I wish he'd bounced things off me first but hey can't win 'em all.

As regards the channel limits, they like so many things are there for a reason. This does not mean that they can't change or that the resource usage cannot be reevaluated, merely that when those rules were made there were good reasons for them. Whether those reasons are still extant is certainly a discussion that can be started.

In terms of registration limits / supporter requirements, these were essentially introduced to keep P's resource requirements down. The structure behind this could certainly be looked at, as could other possible solutions such as a chanfix-style facility.
I complained publicly because I believe in transparency. Almost all the people I spoke to yesterday were very reasonable and understanding. Getting people understand my plight wasn't the problem. There are two reasons I didn't contact you or any CService authority. One was that I really have no idea what the structure of 'people make NG decisions' is. I just know that any CService person I talk to talks like they're the dog's bullocks (understandable, really). The other reason is that I don't really believe that this is a CService problem.

I certainly understand the need to keep P's resource requirements down. What I don't understand is that alliances have a framework within which they can register dozens of pointless channels for a round at a time, or enforce their own draconian channel hierarchies, but for an alliance that uses 2 channels, it's impossible to get a third because the relevant party has it the limit.

Quote:
All any of this really requires is for people to approach us with an open mind and some constructive criticism.
If you don't mind, we can continue this discussion here. Like I said, I'm a fan of transparency.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonneh View Post
Hi all, and hello Jester.

Having read the above, we appreciate your feedback regarding our channel policy. I'm here to provide support and explain some of background behind our rules and agreements which, hopefully, will lead us towards a better understanding.
Fantastic, I like understanding things

Quote:
Firstly, a minor point, #cservice has never enforced a no-idling policy. I suppose you could say the reason for this is that we often recruit new members from the more helpful #cservice idlers who actually do help people. It does actually state in the #cservice topic that there is a command you can use to recognise staff members. Any Official cservice member/person/admin/helper or alike will have this 'verify' (/msg P verify nick || <P> [email protected] is a CSC Supervisor and an IRC operator and logged in as Jedi).
Yeah. Webvictim pointed this out to me last night and I've amended the post above to reflect this. If you think I should clarify it further I can. I just misunderstood 'no idle chat' in the topic to mean 'no idling'.

Quote:
The channel limit has been in place since way back before netgamers was officially formed. Its enforced for a number of reasons, not least of which that we have to have some kind of limit for 'personal' channels.. simply because it makes it slightly easier from an administrative side of things. Say for example you had 8 channels, and your nick was to go idle.. you quit PA/IRC etc. When your 30 days comes up and we come to delete your nick, we now have 8 channels to lock and flag as idle so that any users still in those channels will have the opportunity to reclaim it and prevent its deletion - as you did before. The administrative overhead for cservice tasks like this is already quite high for an internet/IRC system, so limiting a person to 3 channels makes sense from our point of view.

The more general reason for limiting channels is the fact that it prevents hording. Obviously if someone can only own 3 channels, and they want a 4th.. they either have to have someone else register it for them, or they have to remove an old/inactive channel to clear space to own it themselves. Most people go for these options, which is why you were offered the chance to have a channel deleted. You find that most people on the network own a channel which is inactive, and they are more than happy to part with it in order to secure the new active channel which they wish to run. This places the old channels back into the available pool of names which new users can use, and keeps the cycle going.
It makes a lot more sense when you put it that way. Perhaps you should write this down somewhere people in #cservice can copy/paste it to people like me.

Quote:
Alliance nicks, alliance channels and so forth are a different matter. The system was brought in because we evaluated the needs of PA alliances - specifically the facts that they a) needed to own a lot of channels and b) it would be nice to skip the supporter/application side of registering a channel and just be able to request one directly. It is a good system which has worked well since we brought it in.

The requirements for an alliance nick and channel were defined between us and the PA team. They handle the 'planetarion' side of it, i.e: verifying that you are in fact an in-game alliance, and that you (the person requesting an alliance nick) are listed as a HC inside PA. Cservice have no access to do this, which is why the PAteam get involved at that stage. Once a request is made and sanctioned by them, they simply send us an automated form which requests the channels to be registered/moved to the new alliance nick.

The requirements for channel names are there for simple reasons really. An alliance channel should identify itself in its name. It makes it easier for users, PA reps and cservice because it eliminates any confusion right off the bat. The #alliance.xxx naming convention simplifies the administrative side of things as well, because it protects your alliance standing by preventing others from owning channels which could be used to confuse or trick people into believing they are in an alliance channel, when in fact they are in a channel which has been created as a hoax. It’s neat and tidy, and it allows us to keep track of the channel an alliance owns very simply - which keeps the administrative overhead down when we need to do some work for you.
I agree it's neat and tidy. The problem I have isn't really with CService. I think you guys held up your side of everything pretty ok. However, I'm put at a disadvantage when the PA reps tell me that I can't even rename my alliance for the benefit of registering this channel (yes, we offered to do that). Apparently they have some magic crystal ball which tells them whether or not a rename is real or not. Likewise I couldn't start a new alliance and expect to get treated like an alliance either.

Quote:
Official channel status is requested and applied through our Partner system, of which PA is a member. The reason your request was flatly turned down simply stems from the fact that such a request would have to come from the Partner representatives of PA. The reasons for this are obvious - official channels have many benefits which we give to our partner games in order help them maintain their game and its presence on NG. Great care and deliberation is taken before accepting a new game as a Partner, and the benefits that Partner status offers you are not available to anyone else.
Oh yeah, I totally got that. Like I explained to Speh, I was just asking hypothetically, not to weasel a way to get an extra channel. I was actually interested in knowing what it entailed and stuff. He answered my questions adequately once he got over telling me that I shouldn't be doing it to get around the limit

Incidentally, PAteam offered to vet the channel for official status donkey's years ago. I turned them down.

Quote:
If you'd like to speak to myself (Jedi) and/or Jeekay and make your case, we'd be more than happy to listen to what you have to say and see what can be done to accommodate you.

I hope this has been helpful.
Very much so, thank you for your time.

I feel I need to restate this: my problem is not how CService treated me or how you maintain your policies. I find them reasonable and understand why they are in place. My problem is how the PA representatives conduct themselves with respect to the system and what their criteria for acceptance are. The only thing I think CService need to be able to do is be able to make exceptions for the 3 channel limit. I know it's possible (if not desirable!), because I used to have 4 channels. Oh, and perhaps your people could be taught to explain the resource limitations line instead of just saying 'the line has to be drawn somewhere'.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 10:16   #12
GReaper
The BOFH
 
GReaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 463
GReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant future
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeekay View Post
There really aren't that many people in the 'people who make NG decisions' group and I'm pretty sure I'm one of them. Given that, it often surprises me how ready people are to complain on public forums about the incredibly bad treatment bad rules bad this bad that, and yet not a single one of them has ever approached us in a constructive fashion to discuss a way forward.

Rules are made by humans; they are not created by God. If rules aren't working, they can be changed. Complaining about them without even attempting to approach a way forward is not helpful for anyone. This is a good life lesson.

..

As regards the channel limits, they like so many things are there for a reason. This does not mean that they can't change or that the resource usage cannot be reevaluated, merely that when those rules were made there were good reasons for them. Whether those reasons are still extant is certainly a discussion that can be started.

In terms of registration limits / supporter requirements, these were essentially introduced to keep P's resource requirements down. The structure behind this could certainly be looked at, as could other possible solutions such as a chanfix-style facility.
Okay then, I'll propose the following:

- 10 channel limit per person
- No need for any supporters
- Instant registration

Why? Make it simple and easy so people can get the channels they want. I'm certainly fedup of having to jump through hoops just to register a new channel. Alliances shouldn't get special treatment, give the same options to all players.

It's also what other IRC networks offer. Not every network, but I'd guess that the backwards policies of this network are in the minority.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonneh View Post
The channel limit has been in place since way back before netgamers was officially formed. Its enforced for a number of reasons, not least of which that we have to have some kind of limit for 'personal' channels.. simply because it makes it slightly easier from an administrative side of things. Say for example you had 8 channels, and your nick was to go idle.. you quit PA/IRC etc. When your 30 days comes up and we come to delete your nick, we now have 8 channels to lock and flag as idle so that any users still in those channels will have the opportunity to reclaim it and prevent its deletion - as you did before. The administrative overhead for cservice tasks like this is already quite high for an internet/IRC system, so limiting a person to 3 channels makes sense from our point of view.

The more general reason for limiting channels is the fact that it prevents hording. Obviously if someone can only own 3 channels, and they want a 4th.. they either have to have someone else register it for them, or they have to remove an old/inactive channel to clear space to own it themselves. Most people go for these options, which is why you were offered the chance to have a channel deleted. You find that most people on the network own a channel which is inactive, and they are more than happy to part with it in order to secure the new active channel which they wish to run. This places the old channels back into the available pool of names which new users can use, and keeps the cycle going.
So what if people have a few extra channels? Is there some sort of crisis where channels are like the supply of oil and have to be rationed to people? If I want to register a channel and someone else has taken it then I'll simply get a different channel name.

The administrative overhead is only there because of your policies. Registering a channel requires authorisation, changing a channel owner requires authorisation. Most other IRC services allow you to register a channel without requiring someone to authorise it, most other IRC services allow you either set multiple owners incase you do disappear - or a replacement founder which takes over automatically - instead of having to rush to #cservice every time your channel owner decides to quit Planetarion for a round.


I'm interested to see if you're actually willing to listen to this post, particularly Jeekay. Are you really bothered about what users think? Or are you more interested in enforcing rules just for the sake of being a bunch of jobsworths?
GReaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 11:44   #13
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: Jumping through hoops

Again, I really don't think CService are the problem here. Just look at how willing they are to start a dialogue. There's no point in accusing them of being unreasonable here.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 16:17   #14
Appocomaster
PA Team
 
Appocomaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,416
Appocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned View Post
b) Access to #alliances is a terrible criteria for support.
Whilst I hate systems myself, you were very much trying to 'adapt' the system purely to get a channel for your alliance bot, which is certainly not what it's setup for, without being an alliance rep, which is what it's setup for.
I don't think that a 'bad' standard of support (i.e. not getting what you want) when asking for support for to mis-use the alliance channel system whilst not actually playing in an alliance (let alone being an alliance rep) in what's generally discussed in alliance rep channels is a terrible failing, to be honest! Ace did talk to CService, who were not willing to waive the agreement that alliances have to have the same name as their alliance nickname (which you already have registered to yourself), and we weren't willing to rename your alliance this round, which you admitted you were generally against.

Quote:
c) Access to #alliances is way too limited anyway. I've held before that it should at the very least be a public viewable, but moderated channel where alliance reps were voiced. This should be a minimum.
The alliance channel isn't always that active. You make it sound like some sort of constant forum of discussion and activity! Do you not trust alliance representatives to represent their alliances?

Quote:
d) The inane bureaucracy has to go. Having rules is fine, but having rules for the sake of having rules is stupid.
I know this is a general point. When we don't stick to the rules we create though, several people (including yourself!) complain that our rules are inconsistently applied and that we need to not make exceptions to them. I'm sure you'd be willing to name these rules we have for the sake of having them

In this instance there were several parties involved (alliances, via their reps, Planetarion representatives, and CService) with there being pre-agreed rules in place. The only rule I can see you having an objection to is 'Alliances must have the same name as the channel they register', which CService require us to have and refused to waive.

As has been mentioned earlier, explaining to members of CService the requirements and reasons behind registering another channel may have been more productive and potentially more suitable.
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
Appocomaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 16:28   #15
Phil^
Insomniac
 
Phil^'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,584
Phil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Jumping through hoops

aaah. bureaucracy. How useful.

Is Heartless at his channel registration limit? Might be an idea for him ( or JBG perhaps ) to get the channel registered?
__________________
Phil^
Phil^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 16:57   #16
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: Jumping through hoops

Appocomaster: Since you complained about the length of the original post, here's the condensed version:

me: hm. I need an alliance related channel. I'll go to #cservice
#cservice: you need to go to #support.
#support: you can't have one, it needs to be named after your alliance
me: ok, I'll rename my alliance
#support: lol, no
me: ok, I'll start a new alliance
#support: no, this is only meant for people who don't do those things
me: that's not terribly useful then, is it?
#support: rules are rules!
me: that's not very helpful

Quote:
Originally Posted by Appocomaster View Post
Whilst I hate systems myself, you were very much trying to 'adapt' the system purely to get a channel for your alliance bot, which is certainly not what it's setup for, without being an alliance rep, which is what it's setup for.
My entire involvement with Planetarion and my alliance currently revolvess around this alliance bot. Either my involvement with Planetarion is wrong or the system is wrong. And while the former is very much possible, I don't see why you should be of that opinion.

Quote:
I don't think that a 'bad' standard of support (i.e. not getting what you want) when asking for support for to mis-use the alliance channel system whilst not actually playing in an alliance (let alone being an alliance rep) in what's generally discussed in alliance rep channels is a terrible failing, to be honest! Ace did talk to CService, who were not willing to waive the agreement that alliances have to have the same name as their alliance nickname (which you already have registered to yourself), and we weren't willing to rename your alliance this round, which you admitted you were generally against.
The standard of support was good. A lot of people were very reasonable, helpful and understanding. Not everyone was, but enough people that this wasn't my complaint. The problem is that you were basically fighting rules you yourself have put into place.

It's like scene out of Brazil. You didn't think of this contingency, so it can't exist. Reread Jeekay and Jedi's posts if you want to see how to correctly deal with this sort of thing.

Quote:
The alliance channel isn't always that active. You make it sound like some sort of constant forum of discussion and activity! Do you not trust alliance representatives to represent their alliances?
I think you misunderstood. #ascendancy is too active for me to realistically discuss Munin technology with the 2 other people currently interested. #ascendancy generates about 7-8k lines of logs per day. It's simply not reasonable to expect people to skim through all of that to catch a few lines about refactoring a parser. In addition, I would like the channel to be open to the public so that other contributors that aren't members can stop by.

Quote:
I know this is a general point. When we don't stick to the rules we create though, several people (including yourself!) complain that our rules are inconsistently applied and that we need to not make exceptions to them. I'm sure you'd be willing to name these rules we have for the sake of having them

In this instance there were several parties involved (alliances, via their reps, Planetarion representatives, and CService) with there being pre-agreed rules in place. The only rule I can see you having an objection to is 'Alliances must have the same name as the channel they register', which CService require us to have and refused to waive.
I repeat:

me: ok, I'll rename my alliance
#support: lol, no
me: ok, I'll start a new alliance
#support: no, this is only meant for people who don't do those things

What form do I need to fill out to change the name of Ascendancy to Munin? Does it need to be delivered in triplicate? Who do I need to sign the forms? Are there any officials that need to be bribed?

I'm not even saying that you should change the rules just for us. I'm just asking how to comply with them given our alliance's requirements. Help me out here.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 18:31   #17
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Jumping through hoops

I cant help but feel many parts of your complaint are just there for the sake of complaining. Especially the #alliances and its reps issue.

I mean are you serious in thinking that you think anyone should be able to create an alliance and then be able to get as many channels as they want. If that was allowed it would be a complete mockery and ultimately the selfish desires of you and anyone else who abused it would see us All lose something which is helpful to alliances in general.

Now I do agree that at times the access to #alliances is a little strict (Top 15, 25 members and either a round of play or a provable pedigree) and could do with being more fluid so that its not so much about an alliances rank, members or pedigree but on the viability and stability of an alliance. But either way your new 1 man alliance created on a new free account without any intention of playing wouldn't and shouldn't qualify as stable and viable and suitable for #alliance membership.

The simple fact is you wanted to do something you aren't allowed to do by CService rules and then went about trying to basically abuse other systems to get around these rules and then complaining here when your told you cant as the other systems aren't there for what you want to do. PAteam and Support did nothing wrong by not allowing you to abuse the system.
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 18:35   #18
Jeekay
Jim Henson
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 23
Jeekay is infamous around these partsJeekay is infamous around these parts
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by GReaper View Post
StUff
I think perhaps you misunderstand the meaning of the phrase 'constructive criticism'. Last I knew, it wasn't 'rampant excuse to throw insults at people whilst pretending to propose alternatives'. When you're done being bitter, please let me know and we can probably have a good conversation about how to move forward.
__________________
Forever shall the wolf in me desire the sheep in you

[13:04:52] <MT> morning god
[13:05:01] <queball> morning antichrist
[13:05:30] <MT> you arent god!
[13:05:35] <MT> jeekay is god
Jeekay is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 18:43   #19
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey View Post
I cant help but feel many parts of your complaint are just there for the sake of complaining.
Oh but I do love to complain.

Quote:
Especially the #alliances and its reps issue.
Yup.

Quote:
I mean are you serious in thinking that you think anyone should be able to create an alliance and then be able to get as many channels as they want. If that was allowed it would be a complete mockery and ultimately the selfish desires of you and anyone else who abused it would see us All lose something which is helpful to alliances in general.

Now I do agree that at times the access to #alliances is a little strict (Top 15, 25 members and either a round of play or a provable pedigree) and could do with being more fluid so that its not so much about an alliances rank, members or pedigree but on the viability and stability of an alliance. But either way your new 1 man alliance created on a new free account without any intention of playing wouldn't and shouldn't qualify as stable and viable and suitable for #alliance membership.

The simple fact is you wanted to do something you aren't allowed to do by CService rules and then went about trying to basically abuse other systems to get around these rules and then complaining here when your told you cant as the other systems aren't there for what you want to do. PAteam and Support did nothing wrong by not allowing you to abuse the system.
This one's for you.

I'd try replying to your actual points but you're just going to assault me with another wall of text so what's the point.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 20:05   #20
Machado
Seraphim
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 196
Machado is a jewel in the roughMachado is a jewel in the roughMachado is a jewel in the roughMachado is a jewel in the rough
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeekay View Post
Complaining about them without even attempting to approach a way forward is not helpful for anyone. This is a good life lesson.
I actually have a note to make on this topic. Just wondering, when did ringing the bell (as the Dutch expression goes) become a bad thing? Can somebody not simply say something is going bad or isn't very useful, so that other people who might know more about the subject can find a way to fix it?

"We only look to improve/fix something if a clear solution is presented to us (or attempted by the person in question). If it is not offered, we shall pretend there were no complaints," is a very bureaucratic view, one that is unfortunately far too common.

Anyway, is there not a way to limit channel registration to the amount of time one has been registered? Say, a new person gets 2 or 3, like now, whilst people who have been around for 4+ months get 5 or so, which should be enough to suit anybody's needs. (Not talking about alliance reps here)

It doesn't seem like a horribly large extra demand, although I'm not sure how many people are actually on this server on a daily basis, naturally.
__________________
Seraphim
Machado is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 21:19   #21
Jonneh
Netgamers IRC/CSC
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14
Jonneh is a jewel in the roughJonneh is a jewel in the roughJonneh is a jewel in the rough
Post Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by GReaper View Post
Okay then, I'll propose the following:

- 10 channel limit per person
- No need for any supporters
- Instant registration

Why? Make it simple and easy so people can get the channels they want. I'm certainly fedup of having to jump through hoops just to register a new channel. Alliances shouldn't get special treatment, give the same options to all players.

It's also what other IRC networks offer. Not every network, but I'd guess that the backwards policies of this network are in the minority.
I think to better understand your request we need to first explain the reasons behind having supporters for channels.

Incidently, if you're refering to Qnet.. while you dont 'technically' need "named" supporters - you do need 5(?) people to idle your channel during the registration process. Most prespective owners who have less than 5 people available to them will simple /amsg "COME TO #CHANNEL AND HELP TO GET L PLZ" - Which is entirely something we want to avoid.

Named supporters are part of the requirements for a channel so that one man alone cannot simply register pointless and worthless channels. For this we mean idle channels with no use, other than to add load to our services, size to our database and all those other bad things which need to be considered when resourcing an IRC network. Supporters cannot be removed to prevent the above; "please support my channel, and I'll just remove you when its done". This used to happen alot under the old system, before we made supporters 'permanent'. It ensures that a channel has to have a purpose, which 3 people agree on and think is worth the time and effort. Jumping through our hoops, as you say.

Manual channel acceptance has always been a process of NG, even before it was NG and it was PA-IRC. We filter channels for content, by which it allows us to review each registration and ensure that nothing obviously against network policy would go on in there. We ask each owner to tell us, briefly, what the purpose of their channel is.. again just simply so we can get some idea as to what will go on in there (i.e: nothing bad.).

We keep the process because it allows us control of what we do and don't resource by way of services on the network. As explained above, the whole channel supporter system is there for good and valid reasons from our perspective. If we didn't have a manual acceptance procedure though, someone could simply register 3 nicks and get himself 9 channels by cross supporting them all. As it stands at the moment, that violates our policy and would be caught by our registration system.

The two systems really go hand-in-hand as you can see.

I'm also quite concious that you/I/we may be hijacking Jester's thread for discussions perhaps not particularly on-topic to the main issue. I will respond to your points directed at my reply, but then ask you to move this discussion to the netgamers suggestion forum should you wish to continue and formalise your requests.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GReaper View Post
So what if people have a few extra channels? Is there some sort of crisis where channels are like the supply of oil and have to be rationed to people? If I want to register a channel and someone else has taken it then I'll simply get a different channel name.

The administrative overhead is only there because of your policies. Registering a channel requires authorisation, changing a channel owner requires authorisation. Most other IRC services allow you to register a channel without requiring someone to authorise it, most other IRC services allow you either set multiple owners incase you do disappear - or a replacement founder which takes over automatically - instead of having to rush to #cservice every time your channel owner decides to quit Planetarion for a round.


I'm interested to see if you're actually willing to listen to this post, particularly Jeekay. Are you really bothered about what users think? Or are you more interested in enforcing rules just for the sake of being a bunch of jobsworths?
Our policies are in place to make NG a better place to be, not worse. Why else would we put these rules in place unless we actually believe they add value to the network? I mean, I cant seriously believe that you think we would put these rules in place to amuse ourselves. Far from it. Our volenteer staff put work into making the network run this way because we believe our policies prevent the network from falling into unstructured disarray.

You guys may have a different opionion or perspective, but I'll bet there are alot of people who idle Qnet etc who can agree that other networks lack something compared to NG. Its hard to describe and put your finger on, but its something we're proud of.

Primarily though, I'm concerned by the aggressive tone of your post. I dont really see how you can be so angered at this point. I cant speak for all the other NG staff, but I've always listened to the suggestions of users. Indeed; we have a suggestions forum which our staff ("Particularly Jeekay") respond to regularly. Several changes, once justified by the requestee, have been implemented because of user feedback.

If anyone would like to contribute to NG policy, suggest changes we might make or anything which might make NG a more pleasent environment to support PA and other games - Please feel free to tell us. Our forums can be found on the main NG site!


Apologies for hijacking your thread to respond to this Jester, I'll stop sidetracking your discussion now.

-Jedi
Jonneh is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 22:18   #22
Nadar
I see you!
 
Nadar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In any girl
Posts: 2,825
Nadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Jumping through hoops

ha ha ha

Thanks for sharing, jesterina. I almost crapped my couch and roof when I read Spitfire's "Rules are rules".

Yeah, as if those rules really matters about such a minor thing. Keep going on about the (very pointless) rules forever and soon there will not be anyone to enforce the rules on

Edit: I feel a little pity for Spitfire. He did not make the rules and were probably just told to enforce them as they were (and thus ending up being the one who is laughed of (by me))
__________________
www.foxystoat.com
Nadar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 3 Sep 2008, 23:55   #23
GReaper
The BOFH
 
GReaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 463
GReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant futureGReaper has a brilliant future
Re: Jumping through hoops

Sorry for the hostile attitude, but surely this is all relevant to the original post? jesterina can't register a channel due to the restrictions placed by NetGamers and all the rules/systems in place. So far most of the replies are along the lines of: yes, we know there are rules and restrictions in place and we kind of like them, but you can always talk to us about it.

I'd like to see a solution which is fair to all users instead of being an absolute inconvenience. If you want my opinions or suggestions feel free to contact me on IRC.
GReaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Sep 2008, 07:35   #24
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by GReaper View Post
Sorry for the hostile attitude, but surely this is all relevant to the original post? jesterina can't register a channel due to the restrictions placed by NetGamers and all the rules/systems in place. So far most of the replies are along the lines of: yes, we know there are rules and restrictions in place and we kind of like them, but you can always talk to us about it.

I'd like to see a solution which is fair to all users instead of being an absolute inconvenience. If you want my opinions or suggestions feel free to contact me on IRC.
Please take this somewhere else if you wish to continue this line of discussion.

I have no problem with the 3 channels limit. I have a problem with the stupid rules surrounding PAteam's agreement with CService for the mechanism that allows an alliance to register more than 3 channels.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Sep 2008, 12:07   #25
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned View Post
Oh but I do love to complain.

Yup.


This one's for you.

I'd try replying to your actual points but you're just going to assault me with another wall of text so what's the point.
What you really mean is you don't have a leg to stand on with your views, you know you are trying to abuse a system that isn't designed for what you want and rather than take it up with the correct people you would rather act like a spoilt little bitch and complain because about support rather than actually use your energy to discuss it constructively with netgamers who are the ones who could potentially help you. By ignoring anyone who tells you your complaints at support and pateam aren't valid you can continue to act like your right
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Sep 2008, 12:24   #26
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned View Post
Please take this somewhere else if you wish to continue this line of discussion.

I have no problem with the 3 channels limit. I have a problem with the stupid rules surrounding PAteam's agreement with CService for the mechanism that allows an alliance to register more than 3 channels.
So what you would prefer that we are only allowed 3 channels each meaning to get enough channels for an alliance you either a) have to be able to afford your own server or b) you have to have your channels register amongst multiple people and when that person leaves the game or alliance then have to juggle ownership around.

If not then how else do you think it can be done. You cant let anyone create an alliance with just them and then get extra channels otherwise we will have people like you creating fake alliances just to abuse the system. That totally defeats the object of the 3 channel limit in the first place and NG are just then going to remove every alliances ability to get extra channels which helps no-one

And you have to have some kind of naming convention in place as well to cut down on potential abuse and to aid the admin on both the PA and NG's side and for completely sensible reasons this naming convention has been decided on using alliance name. As I have said you are bitching about not being able to use a system for creation of alliance channels when you are trying to create not an alliance channel but a channel for your OWN personal use. If I was to write a some open source pa tools and wanted a channel for them then then I would have to register the channel on my personal account, if joe bloggs created some open source tools and wanted a channel they would have to register them personally too so why do you think you have a sense of entitlement that you should be treated special?
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Sep 2008, 12:38   #27
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey View Post
What you really mean is you don't have a leg to stand on with your views, you know you are trying to abuse a system that isn't designed for what you want and rather than take it up with the correct people you would rather act like a spoilt little bitch and complain because about support rather than actually use your energy to discuss it constructively with netgamers who are the ones who could potentially help you. By ignoring anyone who tells you your complaints at support and pateam aren't valid you can continue to act like your right
Actually no.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey View Post
I mean are you serious in thinking that you think anyone should be able to create an alliance and then be able to get as many channels as they want. If that was allowed it would be a complete mockery and ultimately the selfish desires of you and anyone else who abused it would see us All lose something which is helpful to alliances in general.
a) These are scare tactics. We have no way of knowing whether it would be abused or not. And if it were, as Jonneh has stated, all channel registration is still handled manually on CService's side (I dunno if this is true for alliance/relay channels, but here's me assuming). This means that any attempts at outright abuse would be visible to CService.

b) Of course my desires are selfish. It's not like I give out the Munin code to the public or anything.

c) You're not an authority on either CService or PAteam, so who the hell are you to say that we're going to be losing all this? I've seen no objection from CService or PAteam to the principle of my request, simply that the wording of their agreement stands in the way of it.

Quote:
Now I do agree that at times the access to #alliances is a little strict (Top 15, 25 members and either a round of play or a provable pedigree) and could do with being more fluid so that its not so much about an alliances rank, members or pedigree but on the viability and stability of an alliance. But either way your new 1 man alliance created on a new free account without any intention of playing wouldn't and shouldn't qualify as stable and viable and suitable for #alliance membership.
#alliances is a (bad) joke and the fact that you take it so seriously that you care about what the criteria for entry are just shows how wildly off course you are. Requiring people to take part in that farce to get CService alliance treatment is insulting.

Quote:
The simple fact is you wanted to do something you aren't allowed to do by CService rules and then went about trying to basically abuse other systems to get around these rules and then complaining here when your told you cant as the other systems aren't there for what you want to do. PAteam and Support did nothing wrong by not allowing you to abuse the system.
Like I've stated a bajillion times. I'm fine with CService's limits and criteria. By the time I'd posted this thread I'd resigned myself to losing one of my channels to get #munin.

My gripe is that when #support/PAteam were confronted by something they hadn't anticipated, and instead of going 'we hadn't thought of that' they became defensive and pointed at the rules going 'look, you can't have it'. These are rules they put in place. This is circular logic.

I would like to do N.
You can't do N.
Why not?
Because of the rules.
Why is it in the rules?
Because of the rules.
How do I go about getting the rules changed?
You can't, those are the rules.

You'll notice that CService's representatives (Jeekay and Jonneh) took a completely different beat on this thread. They did not arbitrarily claim that nothing can ever be changed and I should just learn to live with whatever arbitrary rules have been put in place.

PAteam/#support, while being very helpful and reasonable, did nothing of the sort.

Incidentally, people have come to me suggesting many ways to get around the channel limit. Here are some of them and the reasons I haven't taken them:

a) Get another nick and register it under that
-> Against CService rules, plus I'd need to login to that nick every 30 days.
b) Use the alliance nick for Ascendancy to reg it as a relay channel.
-> Abuse of the feature, plus sucks because it expires every round.
c) Get someone else to reg it.
-> I don't see why I should. More in a previous reply.
d) Get official channel status for #pawiki.
-> Despite Speh never having heard of the channel, I've been offered help by PAteam to get #pawiki made an official channel before. Given my dislike for PAteam's practices, it'd be fairly hypocritical of me to accept.

I'm not interested in jumping through hoops or (and this might surprise some people) arguing my way to another channel. Like I said, I've resigned myself to the fact that I'm going to have to ditch a chanel to get #munin.

My complaint is merely that I tried to use a system put in place to do exactly what I desired, and was stymied not because I wanted to do something outrageous, but because I wanted to do something completely normal in a way PAteam and CService had not foreseen.

When confronted with this, PAteam tried to help me within the confines of this agreement, without realizing that the agreement exists to serve exactly the kind of person they were trying to help. On top of that all these rules are undocumented, so I can't just go read them and say 'oh, I guess not'.

I have one unanswered question that I'd like to get an answer to: How do I change the name of Ascendancy to Munin?

I guess there's a (less important) followup to that question:
What happens to an alliance's nick if they sign up as a different tag during a later round?
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Sep 2008, 12:39   #28
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey View Post
So what you would prefer that we are only allowed 3 channels each meaning to get enough channels for an alliance you either a) have to be able to afford your own server or b) you have to have your channels register amongst multiple people and when that person leaves the game or alliance then have to juggle ownership around.
What. I never said that.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Sep 2008, 16:06   #29
Phil M
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 47
Phil M is a jewel in the roughPhil M is a jewel in the roughPhil M is a jewel in the roughPhil M is a jewel in the rough
Re: Jumping through hoops

So you're trying to abuse the alliance system to register a non-alliance channel?

If you want your channel to be associated with your alliance go and register #ascendancy.munin, just because it has your alliance name doesn't mean other people can't use it. If you want #munin then drop one of your other channels, or transfer ownership of one of your other channels so you can register it. I've had to do this before, and the 3 channel limit is there for a reason. If you're going to be awkward and insist on renaming your alliance to Munin then register a new alliance ingame and get all your members to join it.

Is this about the channel limit, which is there to prevent people registering pointless channels? Or is it about the alliance system which is designed to provide a service to genuine alliances which need alliance channels? It's clear that this isn't an alliance channel, it's a personal channel.

I'm with wakey on this one...
Phil M is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Sep 2008, 16:56   #30
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil M View Post
So you're trying to abuse the alliance system to register a non-alliance channel?

If you want your channel to be associated with your alliance go and register #ascendancy.munin, just because it has your alliance name doesn't mean other people can't use it. If you want #munin then drop one of your other channels, or transfer ownership of one of your other channels so you can register it. I've had to do this before, and the 3 channel limit is there for a reason. If you're going to be awkward and insist on renaming your alliance to Munin then register a new alliance ingame and get all your members to join it.

Is this about the channel limit, which is there to prevent people registering pointless channels? Or is it about the alliance system which is designed to provide a service to genuine alliances which need alliance channels? It's clear that this isn't an alliance channel, it's a personal channel.

I'm with wakey on this one...
Way to read the thread before posting asshole.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Sep 2008, 19:01   #31
qebab
The Original Carebear
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 1,048
qebab is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himqebab is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himqebab is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himqebab is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himqebab is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himqebab is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himqebab is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himqebab is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himqebab is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himqebab is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himqebab is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Jumping through hoops

I'm going to take this opportunity to say a few things about Munin, since some people seem to think that Munin is inherently something very tightly bound to (and only interesting for) Ascendancy.

I first saw Munin in round 19 or something like that, at which point I had never programmed before and this whole superduperadvanced IRC bot that made my calculations for me instantaneously was fantastic. It really made the game easier for me. Munin is probably pretty tightly bound to Ascendancy, mostly because it's such an integral part of the community there (And as jester mentioned, that's what has him sticking about in the community). At this point I actually got quite interested in programming, and I asked jester how I could go about writing an IRC bot, and he actually linked me to the code, which was out in public on this very forum.

I mean, what happened? Not many alliances that put their high tech secrets out for everyone to have. But jester did. It wasn't trivial to set up, and I didn't have linux at the time, so I couldn't really make it run, but I looked at some of the code, and I was able to program a bot of my own (That was actually in use a couple of rounds in that other game). Obviously, Munin was more than just the hugely useful IRC bot to me. It actually helped me get starting with something that has later turned out to be 'the right career' path for me.

It's also running in a whole bunch of galaxy channels, not to speak of the public #transcendancy channel, where everyone can use it. I'd hazard that most people who have been around for a while have now used, or seen Munin used at some point.

The problem is though, that development has been pretty much closed to everyone but those in the Ascendancy community, which is really not what it should be like. It's open source after all, getting more people to help out is a good thing. It makes sense for such a project to have an official channel where people can come with suggestions, questions, or just to help out. In my opinion, this project is so useful that it deserves that.

You guys need to understand that even if what jester wanted, or asked for, seems selfish and shit, he's using his spare time to develop this fantastic tool that he actually gives away for free, and now he wants a place where everyone, instead of only the people in #ascendancy can come with feedback, suggestions, questions and discussions. That's not selfish. If anything, it's the opposite.

Thanks for Munin, jester!
__________________
If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then quit. No use being a damn fool about it.

Oh crap, I might be back. I should take my own advice.
qebab is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Sep 2008, 19:40   #32
Nadar
I see you!
 
Nadar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In any girl
Posts: 2,825
Nadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Jumping through hoops

What would be the problem with registering more than 3 channels per user anyway? It's not like Netgamers is flooded with active people anymore.
__________________
www.foxystoat.com
Nadar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Sep 2008, 20:25   #33
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadar View Post
What would be the problem with registering more than 3 channels per user anyway? It's not like Netgamers is flooded with active people anymore.
Please read Jeekay and Jonneh's posts.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2008, 08:25   #34
Cooling
Tilting at windmills
 
Cooling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 578
Cooling is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himCooling is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himCooling is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himCooling is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himCooling is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himCooling is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himCooling is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himCooling is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himCooling is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himCooling is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himCooling is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Jumping through hoops

This thread is worse than a Kafka novel.
__________________
[Fury] [1up] [Ascendancy]
Cooling is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2008, 11:53   #35
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,990
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Jumping through hoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishmaster View Post
I remember we had alliance reps from Hydra the first round we entered PA. Same with excessum a couple of rounds ago. The rules Spitfire gave you are just not correct. Dont give up!!!!
What makes this amusing, is, that Omen didn't have access to the representatives channel until round 19. Round 17, Insomnia representatives in the alliance representatives channel had argued that Omen is an unproven alliance that will not be sticking around.

Funny coming from Insomnia.


It's all a load of shit no matter what you try make of it.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 18:27.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018