Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett
F1 hcp. +16.36...Monster +366.59...
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
Anyone playing Perry Como CDs should, at the very least, be required to keep
their windows rolled up and their volume down ;)
--
Slot
Tweaks & Reviews
www.slottweak.com
| Anyone playing Perry Como CDs should, at the very least, be required to
keep
| their windows rolled up and their volume down ;)
| --
| Slot
|
| >If I bought a new car, and
| > Chevy removed the radio after three months because in their opinion,
| > they didn't like the fact I played Perry Como CD's, I would be rather
| > upset.
|
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.273 / Virus Database: 143 - Release Date: 8/16/2001
what would you suggest how could the rating system deal with the wrecker
issue?
Obviously, they don't take it away out of sheer spite but because they felt
you used them game in a way unacceptable to all other users, i.e. by
wrecking others on purpose.
If they were wrong, this is certainly a sad situation, but unfortunately,
there is never a perfect indication of intention, other than what the car
does on the track. Therefor, there'll always be a margin of error. But this
is none different from real racing. Most of the time the referee is right,
but sometimes he's wrong.
But let's face it, your move looks like intentional wrecking, especially
since it concerned the leader, the preferred target of wreckers. If that
wasn't intentional, you can't seriously blame Papy for not recognizing this.
I concede, it would probably be better if they talked to you before banning
you. OTOH, you have to see that doing such a job is extremely
time-consuming. I've been the commissioner of online racing leagues for
several years, and know how much time is required to really discuss all
aspects and views with all involved drivers. We'd have to pay someone extra
to do it, really. It's not a job that can be done on the side, not if you're
marshalling something as big as WON.
The fact that you didn't actually hit the car does BTW have nothing to do
with whether the incident was wrecking or not. A failed attempt at wrecking
is just as bad as a successful one.
That's not an argument. Papy's anti-wrecker measures were successfull. The
wrecking has decreased tremendously, and the huge majority of drivers has
greatly profited from this. And I and a lot of others made a couple of
stupid moves on Papy servers as well and we're all still racing.
Achim
I didn't say it was fair, I said that there's a risk of errors in
marshalling sim races just as it exists in marshalling real races. And I
said that this risk needs to be tolerated if we want to do something about
the wrecker issue. There is just no way to get rid of wreckers without
risking a wrong decision from time to time.
I'd like to also repeat that we're making too much of this. This is the
first or second time someone says he was banned unrightfully. The replay
looks a lot like purposeful wrecking, and we know Papy to be dedicated, fair
and sensible towards their customers.
The threads we're seeing here would be justified if half of us would have
gotten banned, but that's not the case. We're talking about one driver vs. a
substantial improvement of the quality of the WON racing.
I haven't even reported guys who I thought tried to wreck me
intentionally conceiling their actions as 'dumb driving'. I'd only report
blatant attempts at wrecking which I've seen so often before Papy
installed their anti-wrecker measures, and which I've never seen again
since Papy installed their anti-wrecker measures.
The current system isn't perfect, but it works. There is no such
thing as a perfect system and I am all for suggesting sensible
improvements, but we should not forget Papy is doing all this in an attempt
to help us - and at our own request!
I'd watch the replay, I'd see if you apologised after the race, and
I'd ask you what happened (and have done so with real wreckers). And then
I'd decide. I'd most likely not report you, simply because I want to
leave the wrecker reporting for really serious cases. But Justin decided to
report, and did so in his full right because he felt that Dodgefan had
wrecked him, so we have to accept this. It's like in real racing. Some teams
will denounce their competitors, others won't. That's life.
The risk has posed a threat upon us which has been most beneficial to the
overall racing discipline on Papy servers. I find the racing on these
servers to be quite good recently. Completely the contrary
of what it was like before. The pressure has been beneficial to the racing
fun.
Achim
Papy's setup is neither fair nor unfair. It's an attempt at helping us enjoy
racing on WON, and it has so far worked very well.
Exactly. Moves that are beyond the tolerable limit have to be punished, and
that's what Papy is trying to do.
Achim
there's always room for improvement, and I'm all for finding better ways as
well.
But, I do appreciate a lot that Papy is doing something at all, and also the
fact that it has had a substantial and positive effect on the quality of
races on WON.
Therefor, IMO we should discuss the issue with a little less high pitched
emotions and not cuss Papy out just because someone we don't know and whose
story has lost some credibility during this discussion says that they were
wrong. Especially since the incident indeed looked like purposeful wrecking.
If we want to discuss and suggest improvements to how Papy is currently
dealing with this, I'm all for it, and I am sure Papy would be glad to hear
sensible suggestions. But we should give Papy support and constructive
criticism, not bash them when all they are trying is to help us.
Achim
> Was this person warned? Do you not think that someone should get a
warning
> or at least have Papy talk to them to find out their side of the story?
> Like I said, I like what Papy is doing, I just think they could do it a
bit
> differently.
> > We shouldn't jump to premature conclusions. Papy wouldn't ban people
> > lightheartedly, and they state this clearly enough in their report
> > guidelines.
> > Nobody knows how many reports Papy has rejected on the premises that the
> > facts aren't hard enough to ban the accused drivers. We've seen one case
> > that might have been debatable, although I personally think it wasn't,
and
> > immediately there's an outcry that Papy bans drivers too lightheartedly.
> We
> > should have a little more confidence towards Papy who have shown time
and
> > time again their determination to help and support their customers.
> > A small error margin remains, and we'll just have to live with that
fact.
> > That's none different in real racing, or all other sports. A referee's
> > decisions aren't _always_ right, just most of the time. But this is how
> > things work.
> > I am apalled at the lack of support among the people whom Papy is trying
> to
> > do a favour by having started the anti-wrecker campaign.
> > We asked them to do it for us, they complied in a very careful and
> > resnsible way, and the first time someone who got banned accuses them
of
> > having made a mistake we all start an uproar against the anti-wrecker
> > campaign we asked Papy to start for us instead of supporting them?
> > Especially since the guy in question seems to have lost a lot of his
> > credibility throughout the thread!?
> > Achim
--
Kevin Anderson
> --
> Kevin Anderson
> > I am starting this thread because I would like to talk about this from a
> > General point of view. Not based on the incident in the thread before
> > this.
> > Personally, I like what Papy is trying to do, but I really do not like
the
> > way they are executing it.
> > We have all had bad days while racing. We have all made mistakes that
if
> > someone of a neutral party looked at the replays, they may take it as
> > intentional wrecking.
> > I personally do not want to race under the "threat" of being banned for
a
> > mistake.
> > The way they are approaching the matter right now is pure black and
white.
> > The problem is, most incidents are not just black and white. In most
> cases
> > it is someone trying to do one thing, the other trying to do something
> else
> > and unfortunately they clash. The problem is, neither was trying to
wreck
> > the other but I bet if you look at the replay it will definately look
like
> > one persons fault.
> > Heck, just look at a real WC race.. last nights race for example. There
> > were a whole bunch of accidents. I forget who it was, but there was one
> > last night where they came out of turn 4 and one of the cars just
drifted
> up
> > and punted the other in the back left of the car. Do you think it was
> > intentional? Heck no, but it would sure look that way.
> > Now, as I said.. everyone makes mistakes. However the constant
execution
> of
> > those horrible mistakes is the problem. That is why I truely believe
> there
> > should be some sort of warning system involved.
> > Maybe set it up so you get a warning the first time something like this
> > happens. They can just put your CD-Key in a list and when you log on it
> > tells you that you have a warning. If you go 30 days without any other
> > problem, it automatically removes you from that list.
> > If you have another problem within the 30 days "probation period" then
you
> > are banned. Maybe have it ban you for 30 days. If after your CD-Key
is
> > re-instated, if you are banned again, it is permanent
> > I know that some of you say "go buy another game". Give me a break.
> Sure,
> > I could afford to go out and buy another one, but not everyone can. Try
> > looking at it from others view. I have been poor enough in my life
where
> I
> > could not even afford a color tv and where I had to s***together money
> to
> > go buy a loaf of bread. Some people are not as well off as you are.
Do
> > not use the argument about "how did they get the computer" Who knows,
> there
> > are a million ways. Do not persume to know everyone elses situation.
Don Burnette
> they prob. get and email and just ban away...thinking "he'll go buy
> our game again woo hoo!"
> BH
> > Yes
> > >Or does the person making the report send the replay
> > >in question to an e-mail address for review?
> > No, Papy uses server replays.
> > > Does the person accused get to
> > >find out who reported them?
> > Not by the sounds of it.
> > >If you just send a replay, I see a BIG problem. I'm sure most of us
have
> > >replays saved of various online races. Here's a hypothetical
situation. I'm
> > >in a league, 2nd in the standings. I want to use every possible option
to win.
> > > I know of a fun race where we were screwing around, testing the crash
> > >dynamics, playing demo derby, or whatever. That replay shows the
points leader
> > >deliberately wrecking someone. I send that replay to Papy saying,
"This guy is
> > >a menace! Take a look at this!" The driver gets banned(because Papy
has no
> > >way of knowing these wrecks were all in fun), I win the championship
because he
> > >can no longer compete on WON(where the races are held), and he never
knows who
> > >reported him. Since there isn't an 'appeal' process, and the banning
currently
> > >seems to be permanent, he now has a game that is useless for
multiplayer.
> > >Given my 'assumptions', does anyone else think this scenario could
happen?
> > It could. :)
> > ----------------
> > Skotty Flynn
> > http://www.nascar-racing-sims.com
| Thought you were switching to Heat??
|
| Don Burnette
|
| > I would LOVE to know if there has been anyone reported that papy HAS
| > NOT ruled intentional and not banned them.
| >
| > they prob. get and email and just ban away...thinking "he'll go buy
| > our game again woo hoo!"
| >
| > BH
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.273 / Virus Database: 143 - Release Date: 8/16/2001
>| Anyone playing Perry Como CDs should, at the very least, be required to
>keep
>| their windows rolled up and their volume down ;)
>| --
Eldred
--
Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001
Homepage - http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett
F1 hcp. +16.36...Monster +366.59...
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
| I heard of a punishment like that. A guy(late ***s/early 20's) got a
ticket
| for blasting rap music from his car while driving. The judge sentenced
him to
| 2 hours of listening to Perry Como...or someone else just as bad...<g>
|
| Eldred
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.racesimcentral.net/).
Version: 6.0.273 / Virus Database: 143 - Release Date: 8/16/2001
> | I heard of a punishment like that. A guy(late ***s/early 20's) got a
> ticket
> | for blasting rap music from his car while driving. The judge sentenced
> him to
> | 2 hours of listening to Perry Como...or someone else just as bad...<g>
> |
> | Eldred
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.racesimcentral.net/).
> Version: 6.0.273 / Virus Database: 143 - Release Date: 8/16/2001
| you never saw a youngster listen to Perry have you?
| :)
| dave henrie
| > "O" Hells Bells Eldred that judge had to be a whimp :)
| >
| > | I heard of a punishment like that. A guy(late ***s/early 20's) got a
| > ticket
| > | for blasting rap music from his car while driving. The judge
sentenced
| > him to
| > | 2 hours of listening to Perry Como...or someone else just as bad...<g>
| > |
| > | Eldred
|
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.racesimcentral.net/).
Version: 6.0.273 / Virus Database: 143 - Release Date: 8/16/2001
