Re: Papyrus, For The Love Of God.. Please Read:

Gunslinger <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about draft crashes or other > understandable ACCIDENTS, what I am referring to is someone waiting > down on the apron for you to come by then slices directly in front of > you.. ON PURPOSE. Then they just laugh about it and say how cool it > is. > This is enough for me to put this game away and never bother with any > future incarnations as well.

Hehe, Two days ago a guy driving the PACE CAR wrecked everyone, but somehow he got engine failure and had to retire. I guess we will have this problem until around september when school starts again, the wreckers will be fed up by then. -- Olav K. Malmin remove .spam when replying

>"Gunslinger" <[email hidden]> wrote >WHat we need is one simple thing.Make it easy for people who PURPOSELY wreck others get banned. It wouldn't be hard to implement. If there incident rate gets to low (in others words, they crash to often) then they are banned for the day. Hey you race *pickup* races. People still do that? Serious pickup racing died the day the NROS closed. Assume the risks that you take, it's free-for-all there. Rankings are just a little blessing for the few of you who still care about such form of stockcar racing. We've all moved onto leagues. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Gun, Two words-- password protect. If you don't do that, you only have yourself to blame. Making any attempt to rid N4 of these wreckers is futile. In the end, everyone will password protect their games and the wreckers will be wrecking each other. Jailers with jailers: wreckers with wreckers: so be it. Alanb

In article <13BQ6.120$[email hidden]>, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> writes: >Hey you race *pickup* races. People still do that? Serious pickup racing >died the day the NROS closed. Assume the risks that you take, it's >free-for-all there. Rankings are just a little blessing for the few of you >who still care about such form of stockcar racing. We've all moved onto >leagues. People have suggested passworded races, or league races(which are also passworded). But, how does an 'outsider' even get INTO these races, when they don't know the password(or the host of the race)? Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +24.63...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Alan [A] you cant password protect unless you host or [B] know of a host that is using a passworded race... Sadly [A] I'm not aloud to host via my server & if I get caught I lose my cable and [B] I haven't found a good passworded server that will just let me in & this is their option! Most of the so called "Good 'Ole Boyz" have their own click' & they are Extremely! 'tight-lipped' about their races! Also the other servers want your first born before you are aloud in & to some degree I can understand cuz I know this shit I go thru now with these open races! "Alan Bernardo"wrote: | Two words-- password protect. If you don't do that, you only haveyourself | to blame. Making any attempt to rid N4 of these wreckers is futile. Inthe | end, everyone will password protect their games and the wreckers will be | wrecking each other. Jailers with jailers: wreckers with wreckers: so be | it. | Alanb

God Bless'Ya & Ah` Amen Child!! Dat' just what I just posted in my other re-post to ya.:o) What does Frankie know anywayz..lol "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message | People have suggested passworded races, or league races(which are also | passworded). But, how does an 'outsider' even get INTO these races, whenthey | don't know the password(or the host of the race)?

On 29 May 2001 02:31:07 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: >People have suggested passworded races, or league races(which are also >passworded). But, how does an 'outsider' even get INTO these races, when they >don't know the password(or the host of the race)? > >Eldred Exactly - what about the people who just don't have the time for a league, or simply aren't that good. Kicking/banning has been a mainstay of FPS server admins, and there's no reason it couldn't be implemented in N4 (you do need a valid, unique key to go online, don't you? - there's how you identify people you want kicked/banned). I want to run a server for us slowpoke racers who may wreck a little more often (sort of an online IRL ;)...), but would like to be able to ban anyone who gets on and tries to deliberately wreck others. Kendt

On Tue, 29 May 2001 03:14:58 GMT, "Thom j." <[email hidden]> wrote: > Sadly [A] I'm not aloud to host >via my server & if I get caught I lose my cable and Yikes! Is this your cable service or something? A server isn't that bandwidth intensive, is it? Stay tuned, when I have ISDN soon there'll be a server. I'm thinking of maybe setting up a mailing list and changing passwords regularly. When a wrecker shows up (or someone not on the mailing list), I'll change the password (and remove the wrecker from the list). Maybe a semi-open server (can you do this like you can in VROC, where admins with password acces can change the race parameters?). Going to read the N4 docs/readme... Kendt

[email hidden] (Kendt Eklund) writes:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> On Tue, 29 May 2001 03:14:58 GMT, "Thom j." <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > > Sadly [A] I'm not aloud to host > >via my server & if I get caught I lose my cable and > > Yikes! Is this your cable service or something? A server isn't that > bandwidth intensive, is it? > Stay tuned, when I have ISDN soon there'll be a server. I'm thinking > of maybe setting up a mailing list and changing passwords regularly. > When a wrecker shows up (or someone not on the mailing list), I'll > change the password (and remove the wrecker from the list). > Maybe a semi-open server (can you do this like you can in VROC, where > admins with password acces can change the race parameters?). > Going to read the N4 docs/readme...

Sounds like a very good idea. Kind of like the VROC F2 club which to my information just race passworded races without all the league hassle. I do want to race pw-races, but I don't have the time and commitment for a championship league. -- Olav K. Malmin remove .spam when replying

"Thom j." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:SuEQ6.12442$[email hidden]... > Alan [A] you cant password protect unless you host or [B] know of a > host that is using a passworded race... Sadly [A] I'm not aloud to host > via my server & if I get caught I lose my cable That's it. You find a group or develop a group of your own to race with and be done with the rest of it. Don't know about that cable stuff, but I'd be changing services (if I could) if my cable company told me something like that. Sounds quite absurd and maybe even against the law. I'd challenge it. Anyhow, hope you find some decent races. Later, Alanb

>>People have suggested passworded races, or league races(which are also >>passworded). But, how does an 'outsider' even get INTO these races, when they >>don't know the password(or the host of the race)? Hang out in chat and on the web. Do some web searches for N4 leagues, looke for email addresses, write to folks and ask to join their leagues, hang out here in r.a.s., post messages in forums. "Knock and it shall be opened." Keep knocking. Don't quit. Chris Noto, see Noto at tee dee ess dot net

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:13BQ6.120$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >"Gunslinger" <[email hidden]> wrote > >WHat we need is one simple thing. > Make it easy for people who PURPOSELY wreck others get banned. > It wouldn't be hard to implement. > If there incident rate gets to low (in others words, they crash to > often) then they are banned for the day. > > > Hey you race *pickup* races. People still do that? Serious pickup racing > died the day the NROS closed. Assume the risks that you take, it's > free-for-all there.

I realize that, but for those of us who can't commit to league racing due to scheduling or time constraints, pick-up races are the best we can do. I'd like to see something done to try and ban repeat offenders from the servers. Probably impossible I realize, but there are brighter minds than mine out there who might have a solution.

ymenard wrote: > > Hey you race *pickup* races. People still do that? Serious pickup racing > died the day the NROS closed. Assume the risks that you take, it's > free-for-all there. Rankings are just a little blessing for the few of you > who still care about such form of stockcar racing. We've all moved onto > leagues. Don't tell Nim Cross that serious pick-up racing is dead. I've seen him numerous times at Bristol & the like. Some of the old Legends still participate in pick-up races. -- Fester

>"Uncle Fester" <[email hidden]> wrote > Don't tell Nim Cross that serious pick-up racing is dead. I've seen him > numerous times at Bristol & the like. Some of the old Legends still > participate in pick-up races. Nim races with Speedo, that's different (inside joke LOL) -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

>"Gault" <[email hidden]> wrote > I realize that, but for those of us who can't commit to league racing dueto > scheduling or time constraints, pick-up races are the best we can do. I'd > like to see something done to try and ban repeat offenders from theservers. > Probably impossible I realize, but there are brighter minds than mine out > there who might have a solution. We've all passed by that Gault. After the NROS closed, most of us created our own time and we had the possibility to race in leagues. If you can't have this possibility, I'm sorry because you are trully missing where the real action is :( Serious pickup racing is *dead* since the day the NROS closed. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Yes Kendt I have been **ordered** by my cable company **not** to do any serving! It takes up too much bandwidth.. If I want to serve aka host I must upgrade from my present $40 a month plan to a $250 month plan that would give me a guaranteed 10/100mg-kbs up/down & not my 525kbs-up/10meg+kbs-down as I have now and if I *do* get caught I will lose my cable service & it is the only one in my area! So, Not me! I Cant Afford it! DSL stinks with only 90kbs-up here!! As much as I would love to be a server you can see I can not! Also being on a fixed limited income I can not afford $250 a month.. If I could I still wouldnt waste this kind of money for a internet service! "Kendt Eklund" wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

| On Tue, 29 May 2001 03:14:58 GMT, "Thom j." wrote: | > Sadly [A] I'm not aloud to host | >via my server & if I get caught I lose my cable and | | Yikes! Is this your cable service or something? A server isn't that | bandwidth intensive, is it? | Stay tuned, when I have ISDN soon there'll be a server. I'm thinking | of maybe setting up a mailing list and changing passwords regularly. | When a wrecker shows up (or someone not on the mailing list), I'll | change the password (and remove the wrecker from the list). | Maybe a semi-open server (can you do this like you can in VROC, where | admins with password acces can change the race parameters?). | Going to read the N4 docs/readme... | | Kendt

ymenard wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > >"Gunslinger" <[email hidden]> wrote > >WHat we need is one simple thing. > Make it easy for people who PURPOSELY wreck others get banned. > It wouldn't be hard to implement. > If there incident rate gets to low (in others words, they crash to > often) then they are banned for the day. > > Hey you race *pickup* races. People still do that? Serious pickup racing > died the day the NROS closed. Assume the risks that you take, it's > free-for-all there. Rankings are just a little blessing for the few of you > who still care about such form of stockcar racing. We've all moved onto > leagues. > > --

Nice try. Not all of us have the copious amounts of free time that league racing demands. -- J'm To Reply Direct, Remove Clothes. ...-.-

Gunslinger wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > Ok, I have been a fan of Papyrus sims since the old Indy Car 1 days. > I have bought EVERY IndyCar and NASCAR sim you guys have made since > then. > IndyCar1, IndyCar2, NASCAR, NASCAR 2, NASCAR BGN, NASCAR 99, NASCAR 3 > EXPANSION, GPL, NASCAR 3, and now NASCAR 4 > > WHat we need is one simple thing. > Make it easy for people who PURPOSELY wreck others get banned. > It wouldn't be hard to implement. > If there incident rate gets to low (in others words, they crash to > often) then they are banned for the day.

Well, you just need to race online for a little while and figure out who the guys [and gals] are who run clean. Write their names down. When you see races they are attending, join up. Soon you will be invited to passworded races, etc., when everyone else sees how cleanly *you* race. It takes time. In the mean time, keep track of the morons out there, too, and avoid at all costs. -- J'm To Reply Direct, Remove Clothes. ...-.-

In article <n4FQ6.12459$[email hidden]>, "Thom j." <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>God Bless'Ya & Ah` Amen Child!! Dat' just what I just posted in >my other re-post to ya.:o) What does Frankie know anywayz..lol > >"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message | People have suggested >passworded races, or league races(which are also >| passworded). But, how does an 'outsider' even get INTO these races, when >they >| don't know the password(or the host of the race)? >

Oh, he knows a lot, I think. He's just on the 'inside' with several important groups, so he sometimes forgets about the *rest* of us...<g> Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +24.63...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <LmRQ6.13841$[email hidden]>, "Thom j." <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>Yes Kendt I have been **ordered** by my cable company **not** >to do any serving! It takes up too much bandwidth.. If I want to serve >aka host I must upgrade from my present $40 a month plan to a $250 >month plan that would give me a guaranteed 10/100mg-kbs up/down >& not my 525kbs-up/10meg+kbs-down as I have now and if I *do* >get caught I will lose my cable service & it is the only one in my area! >So, Not me! I Cant Afford it! DSL stinks with only 90kbs-up here!! >As much as I would love to be a server you can see I can not! Also >being on a fixed limited income I can not afford $250 a month.. If I >could I still wouldnt waste this kind of money for a internet service!

If you do any serious downloading, would it raise the same red flags(pardon the pun) with your ISP? Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +24.63...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

As I stated before Olav, Many of the "Good 'Ole Boyz" have a tight click in N4 so it is not easy to get into the good server races!! Unlike GPL that has always been race & even newbie friendly N4'ers like their little clicks! If Kendt opens a server for good clean racers I will be the first to apply!! *Hint!* *Hint!* :o)....Cheers Thom_j. "Olav K. Malmin" wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

| > Yikes! Is this your cable service or something? A server isn't that | > bandwidth intensive, is it? | > Stay tuned, when I have ISDN soon there'll be a server. I'm thinking | > of maybe setting up a mailing list and changing passwords regularly. | > When a wrecker shows up (or someone not on the mailing list), I'll | > change the password (and remove the wrecker from the list). | > Maybe a semi-open server (can you do this like you can in VROC, where | > admins with password acces can change the race parameters?). | > Going to read the N4 docs/readme... | | Sounds like a very good idea. Kind of like the VROC F2 club which to | my information just race passworded races without all the league | hassle. I do want to race pw-races, but I don't have the time and | commitment for a championship league. | -- | Olav K. Malmin | remove .spam when replying

Ur right Alan but my cable company has a lock on the entire tri-state area here. Yea like a Monopoly!! So I'm stuck & DSL stinks at $49 a month & ISDN I don't know that much about? So I have cable or Nada, Nunca, Nothing!! phew.. "O" Well Such Is Life..eh? "Alan Bernardo" wrote: | That's it. You find a group or develop a group of your own to race withand | be done with the rest of it. Don't know about that cable stuff, but I'dbe | changing services (if I could) if my cable company told me something like | that. Sounds quite absurd and maybe even against the law. I'd challenge | it. | Anyhow, hope you find some decent races. | Later, | Alanb

It is not the downloading Eldred but the uploading & this is why I am capped at 525kbs/a sec.. At least this is what they told me!! "EldredP" wrote: | If you do any serious downloading, would it raise the same redflags(pardon the | pun) with your ISP? | | Eldred

Too bad the server couldnt capture the MAC address of the clients. The admin could then add known wreckers to a block list & prevent wreckers from entering a server. -- Brian Grrrr baby, very grrr "Gunslinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... Ok, I have been a fan of Papyrus sims since the old Indy Car 1 days. I have bought EVERY IndyCar and NASCAR sim you guys have made since then. IndyCar1, IndyCar2, NASCAR, NASCAR 2, NASCAR BGN, NASCAR 99, NASCAR 3 EXPANSION, GPL, NASCAR 3, and now NASCAR 4 WHat we need is one simple thing. Make it easy for people who PURPOSELY wreck others get banned. It wouldn't be hard to implement. If there incident rate gets to low (in others words, they crash to often) then they are banned for the day. This would stop these idiotic jerks who are ruining this for me and everyone else who comes here to RACE. Did you know there is even a "clan" of wreckers out there? They have there own web site and join games for one purpose, to wreck everyone they can. THe ranking system is not stopping these guys from doing this either, they are somehow pumping up there rankings, then coming into ranking games and ruining the entire race. I have only been racing for a day and a half and I already have a rank of 2 so it isn't hard to get rank. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about draft crashes or other understandable ACCIDENTS, what I am referring to is someone waiting down on the apron for you to come by then slices directly in front of you.. ON PURPOSE. Then they just laugh about it and say how cool it is. This is enough for me to put this game away and never bother with any future incarnations as well. I mean come on, My wife tells me to have faith in the human spirit but when I see idiotic assholes like this I just lose all hope. From, A LOYAL Customer. Gunslinger

On 29 May 2001 09:17:07 +0200, [email hidden] (Olav K. Malmin) wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>[email hidden] (Kendt Eklund) writes: > >Sounds like a very good idea. Kind of like the VROC F2 club which to >my information just race passworded races without all the league >hassle. I do want to race pw-races, but I don't have the time and >commitment for a championship league.

Cool! I'll save your email address, and post when my service is setup and ready to go (maybe up to a month - service takes *forever* out here in the boonies!). I'd like to do GPL and N4 hosting in the club. Everyone like the "AlsoRans" listserv ;)? Kendt

Quoted text (22 lines)

>Subject: Re: Papyrus, For The Love Of God.. Please Read: >From: [email hidden] (Kendt Eklund) >Date: 05/29/2001 10:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time >Message-id: <[email hidden]> > >On 29 May 2001 09:17:07 +0200, [email hidden] (Olav K. >Malmin) wrote: > >>[email hidden] (Kendt Eklund) writes: >> > >>Sounds like a very good idea. Kind of like the VROC F2 club which to >>my information just race passworded races without all the league >>hassle. I do want to race pw-races, but I don't have the time and >>commitment for a championship league. > >Cool! I'll save your email address, and post when my service is setup >and ready to go (maybe up to a month - service takes *forever* out >here in the boonies!). I'd like to do GPL and N4 hosting in the club. >Everyone like the "AlsoRans" listserv ;)? > >Kendt

Hey sounds like what I'm looking for......I hate searching for pickup races. When I find a track I want to run it's either passworded or set to a latency just a smidge too low for my connection or set for a ranking that I haven't acheived as of yet and probably never will at the current pace. Please save my e-mail address in case this dream comes true. Thanks [email hidden] Doug Bishop Jackson MI (Don't gimme NOCRAP in E-mail)

Quoted text (26 lines)

>Subject: Re: Papyrus, For The Love Of God.. Please Read: >From: "Thom j." [email hidden] >Date: 05/29/2001 6:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time >Message-id: <S0VQ6.14094$[email hidden]> > >Ur right Alan but my cable company has a lock on the entire tri-state >area here. Yea like a Monopoly!! So I'm stuck & DSL stinks at $49 >a month & ISDN I don't know that much about? So I have cable or >Nada, Nunca, Nothing!! phew.. "O" Well Such Is Life..eh? > >"Alan Bernardo" wrote: >| That's it. You find a group or develop a group of your own to race with >and >| be done with the rest of it. Don't know about that cable stuff, but I'd >be >| changing services (if I could) if my cable company told me something like >| that. Sounds quite absurd and maybe even against the law. I'd challenge >| it. >| Anyhow, hope you find some decent races. >| Later, >| Alanb > > > > >

so you're saying that you can't even hose a race on sierra.com via pappy? Even with a small field? (Don't gimme NOCRAP in E-mail)

Yup thats right PHYDEAUX99!! U got i!! I can Not host one race and if I get caught I lose my cable server! Btw: Nice racing with you tonite at Dega on the degahead.com server.. I wish we raced closer tho'.. :o) "PHYDEAUX99" <[email hidden]> wrote in message | so you're saying that you can't even hose a race on sierra.com via pappy? | Even with a small field?

Thom j. wrote in message ...

Quoted text (10 lines)

>Yup thats right PHYDEAUX99!! U got i!! I can Not host one race and if I >get caught I lose my cable server! Btw: Nice racing with you tonite at Dega >on the degahead.com server.. I wish we raced closer tho'.. :o) > >"PHYDEAUX99" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >| so you're saying that you can't even hose a race on sierra.com via pappy? >| Even with a small field? > > >

I thought most of those clauses related to hosting web sites rather than races....are you sure you're not being paranoid?! ;o> Ben

I have @home as well and the way I understand the wording is no DEDICATED server. I occaisionally host races...my son sometimes hosts Half Life games. But we don't leave it on for hours unattended. Now this 'may' be wrong in the exact sense of the wording of @home's user agreement...if soo and they complain..there is always dsl... I'm pretty much in the mindset, they want my $30 dollars..soon to $36 more than they want to chase down a server or two on their systems. dave henrie "Ben Coleman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Thom j. wrote in message ... > >Yup thats right PHYDEAUX99!! U got i!! I can Not host one race and if I > >get caught I lose my cable server! > I thought most of those clausesrelated to hosting web sites rather than > races....are you sure you're not being paranoid?! ;o> > > Ben

How bout straight from the cable company's mouth? "You host any races or games you'll take up 'too much bandwidth' with your plan! So if we catch you we will be forced to expire your service with us!" Now does that sound like paranoia to you?? You think I'd just toss a comment as important as this "willy-nilly"? Not this dude!! Phew.. Get with the program will ya?? "Ben Coleman" wrote: | I thought most of those clauses related to hosting web sites rather than | races....are you sure you're not being paranoid?! ;o> | Ben

Ok Dave since you let the cat out of the bag and not me!! ...lol Call your 800# and directly ask them. Then just sit back & see what they tell you!! Remember now I am talking about the $30 or $40 with the modem {if you will}a month plan not the $250 a month plan..ok? Now!! You might not get caught, Yes! But if they do your service *will* be cancalled!! Also I am almost positive this is anywhere with any @home'er.. You may do what you like but I 'checked' when I use to host races for a league on Vroc & I found out quickly that I better stop! They do monitor your activity!! 'i.e. up/dnload time and frequency aka how often you are loading up the bandwidth... Thom_j. P.S. If you do call the 800# tho' Dave they do put you on their hit list after the call....So if you rather not tip them off. Dont call!! "Dave Henrie" wrote: | I have @home as well and the way I understand the wording is noDEDICATED | server. I occaisionally host races...my son sometimes hosts Half Life | games. But we don't leave it on for hours unattended. Now this 'may' be | wrong in the exact sense of the wording of @home's user agreement...if soo | and they complain..there is always dsl... | I'm pretty much in the mindset, they want my $30 dollars..soon to $36more | than they want to chase down a server or two on their systems. | dave henrie

In article <7LVQ6.43671$[email hidden]>, "M5Brian" <[email hidden]> writes: >Too bad the server couldnt capture the MAC address of the clients. The >admin could then add known wreckers to a block list & prevent wreckers from >entering a server. Could this be done with zonealarm, or something like that? Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +24.63...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <8tVQ6.14113$[email hidden]>, "Thom j." <[email hidden]> writes: >It is not the downloading Eldred but the uploading & this is why I >am capped at 525kbs/a sec.. At least this is what they told me!! That's stupid. Wouldn't you be taking the same amount of bandwith either way(up or down)? I admit I don't know as much about ISPs as I should... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +24.63...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

"Thom j." wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > Yes Kendt I have been **ordered** by my cable company **not** > to do any serving! It takes up too much bandwidth.. If I want to serve > aka host I must upgrade from my present $40 a month plan to a $250 > month plan that would give me a guaranteed 10/100mg-kbs up/down > & not my 525kbs-up/10meg+kbs-down as I have now and if I *do* > get caught I will lose my cable service & it is the only one in my area! > So, Not me! I Cant Afford it! DSL stinks with only 90kbs-up here!! > As much as I would love to be a server you can see I can not! Also > being on a fixed limited income I can not afford $250 a month.. If I > could I still wouldnt waste this kind of money for a internet service!

Hmmm... I'm gonna have to browse over my @Home TOS document again. They try cutting me off for something that lame, we'd have to rumble! Not calling you a liar, BTW Thom... -- Fester

Not to say you are wrong about your service but what an employee tells you, what is written, what their lawyers say about it, and..... what they actually do about it are usually never the same. When asked the voice on the other end of the phone will have the most conservative version of the policy. Real life is not black and white. We can all play it safe, make calculated decisions, or just say wtf and go for it. Being a for profit entity, their first priority is to take your money and so have a disincentive to dump you. But if you are not prepared to run that risk then you've made the right decision not to host races. My guess is they won't bother you if you host races as long as you don't have some kind of full time server running. Marty "Thom j." wrote:

Quoted text (27 lines)

> Ok Dave since you let the cat out of the bag and not me!! ...lol > Call your 800# and directly ask them. Then just sit back & see > what they tell you!! Remember now I am talking about the $30 > or $40 with the modem {if you will}a month plan not the $250 > a month plan..ok? Now!! You might not get caught, Yes! But > if they do your service *will* be cancalled!! Also I am almost > positive this is anywhere with any @home'er.. > You may do what you like but I 'checked' when I use to host > races for a league on Vroc & I found out quickly that I better > stop! They do monitor your activity!! 'i.e. up/dnload time and > frequency aka how often you are loading up the bandwidth... > Thom_j. > P.S. If you do call the 800# tho' Dave they do put you on > their hit list after the call....So if you rather not tip them off. > Dont call!! > > "Dave Henrie" wrote: > | I have @home as well and the way I understand the wording is no > DEDICATED > | server. I occaisionally host races...my son sometimes hosts Half Life > | games. But we don't leave it on for hours unattended. Now this 'may' be > | wrong in the exact sense of the wording of @home's user agreement...if soo > | and they complain..there is always dsl... > | I'm pretty much in the mindset, they want my $30 dollars..soon to $36 > more > | than they want to chase down a server or two on their systems. > | dave henrie

Only told you what I was told.. One of the Net Gurus will have to answer this one. Ok guyz wakeup and answer! :o) "Thom j." writes: | >It is not the downloading Eldred but the uploading & this is why I | >am capped at 525kbs/a sec.. At least this is what they told me!! "EldredP" wrote: | That's stupid. Wouldn't you be taking the same amount of bandwith either | way(up or down)? I admit I don't know as much about ISPs as I should... | | Eldred

Read my other post Uncle F. to Dave H. It will tell you how I got stuck finding out by calling @home's 800# and then this is where I got the news!! Btw: it wasnt a tier 1 level tech either it was a tier 2 boss!.... | Hmmm... I'm gonna have to browse over my @Home TOS document again. They | try cutting me off for something that lame, we'd have to rumble! Not | calling you a liar, BTW Thom... | -- | Fester

In article <[email hidden]>, "Ben Coleman" <[email hidden]> writes: >I thought most of those clauses related to hosting web sites rather than >races....are you sure you're not being paranoid?! ;o> > That rule sucks, too. If I'm PAYING for an ISP, I should be able to do whatever I want, as long as it's not illegal... :( Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +24.63...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <7LVQ6.43671$[email hidden]>, "M5Brian" <[email hidden]> writes: > Too bad the server couldnt capture the MAC address of the clients. The > admin could then add known wreckers to a block list & prevent wreckers from > entering a server. I'm sure some IP guru will let me have it if I get this wrong, but I believe that the MAC address is a LAN address. Once your packets leave your local LAN and get onto the wider Internet, your original MAC address is lost. When your packet arrives at a server on the other end, the MAC address that the server sees on the packet is that of the last router that handled the packet, and put it onto the server's LAN, not yours. Even if this were not true, there are plenty of network devices (the Linksys Cable/DSL router that I have for instance) that will let you change their MAC addresses anyway. Marc

The problem is in your User Agreement. Most "broadband cable suppliers" do not wish to have end-users run servers. It is very difficult for them to distinguish "which kind of servers" should/shouldn't be used. So... they simply say "no servers". Meaning as an example: Newsgroup Servers. They are standard equipment in most Operating Systems (Windows NT/2K, Linux, BSD, etc.). As such, very easy to setup. The thing is, newsgroup servers (of any popularity) consume HUGE amounts of bandwidth, and can do so 24/7. So... you are paying for an "average end user use fee". When you throw a server on the system, it throws their whole "financial/useage averages" out the window. ALL ISPs base their pricing based on "average use". You can purchase an alternative "business license" which will 'usually' remove such limitations (since youa re now paying more, and the ISP's useage averages are maintained/afforded). They (ISPs) BANK on the fact that you sleep, work, etc. Meaning, in 'most cases' the user is only using teh service say 30% of the time. But... you throw a server on there, and you could be using the bandwidth/services 100% of the time. This throws everything out of whack. As for joining a race (not hosting), on a server/client config, you are the client, and do not break the User License. Even if you host a "Peer-to-Peer" race, you are still 'technically' a "client". You may use just as much bandwidth as if you hosted a server, but the ISP still knows that you will have to sleep/work some of the time, and that it won't be a "sustained high bandwidth useage" scenario. The fact that you use as much (even more in some cases) bandwidth than a server would/does, simply makes you one of those few that they do not make money on. No worries for them, they have 20 people standing beside you who use it maybe 10% of the time. So, when you average out everyone's "useage" amongst those 20 people, it all even out. Servers on the other hand... they don't sleep/work/eat/etc. They are there capable of sucking up the ISP's bandwidth (which the ISPs themselves pay for... in bulk mind you...) 100% of the day. THIS is why they don't like you hosting "servers"... it hurts them financially, unless you purchase a "business license". @Home is a PRIME example of this. They are VERY vigilant in seeking servers (they'll sniff certain ports on random machines, and wait for a response). If they sniff the NNTP (newsgroup server port) and the sniffer gets a response, that means you are running a server (a no-no in teh User Agreement). Same goes for e-mail servers, web-servers, etc. They have to do this, because the @Home folks have NO idea of how much bandwidth you are using (unless you connect through their proxy -- this straight from the mouth of my buddy who works as a tech for them here in Van). The reason: They also offer "@Work" services. Which removes the bandwidth restrictions, but offers the same bandwidth/services. All that it is: Same as @Home, only costs more... because of the potential bandwidth consumption. Anyways... bottom line is that those ISPs also buy the Bandwidth from the Fibre guys. When you start to chew up all their bandwidth, and pay a nickle for it... they lose money... which is not good business. Now to talk about something a bit OT. We know that the User Agreement forbids "Servers". Now we look at the "technical classification of a Server". It is a standalone application that hosts information that "clients" connect to. Meaning... the Server holds/controls the entire transaction. BUT: What if you could host a "Game Server" without it "technically being a 'Server'" in the normal classification. We need look no further than Gnutella, which basically honed in on the Napster crowd after the demise, and were impervious to the same litigation, because it is not a "server based system". Meaning, Gnutella simply created the software, and in turn it creates a giant "sub-network" of "PEERS". Peers are not "servers" technically, so it escapes all the litigation and UA no-nos, but it still serves the same purpose. We are working on (and days away from completion) on a similar system, that should basically leave your ISPs "holding the bag" on those stupid User Agreements. Details will be coming soon, but we have already passed the @Home User Agreement (by studying it, and classifying it... my lawyers did anyways...), and that UA is basically the same as all the rest of them. We are not classifiable as a "server" so, we can maintain all "server-type" advantages, without jumping into the same bag of limitations. Hope it helps in understanding why, and I'll keep ya posted on progress of our project shortly. Cheers, Schumi > "EldredP" wrote: > | That's stupid. Wouldn't you be taking the same amount of bandwitheither > | way(up or down)? I admit I don't know as much about ISPs as I should... > | > | Eldred

The problem is in your User Agreement. Most "broadband cable suppliers" do not wish to have end-users run servers. It is very difficult for them to distinguish "which kind of servers" should/shouldn't be used. So... they simply say "no servers". Meaning as an example: Newsgroup Servers. They are standard equipment in most Operating Systems (Windows NT/2K, Linux, BSD, etc.). As such, very easy to setup. The thing is, newsgroup servers (of any popularity) consume HUGE amounts of bandwidth, and can do so 24/7. So... you are paying for an "average end user use fee". When you throw a server on the system, it throws their whole "financial/useage averages" out the window. ALL ISPs base their pricing based on "average use". You can purchase an alternative "business license" which will 'usually' remove such limitations (since youa re now paying more, and the ISP's useage averages are maintained/afforded). They (ISPs) BANK on the fact that you sleep, work, etc. Meaning, in 'most cases' the user is only using teh service say 30% of the time. But... you throw a server on there, and you could be using the bandwidth/services 100% of the time. This throws everything out of whack. As for joining a race (not hosting), on a server/client config, you are the client, and do not break the User License. Even if you host a "Peer-to-Peer" race, you are still 'technically' a "client". You may use just as much bandwidth as if you hosted a server, but the ISP still knows that you will have to sleep/work some of the time, and that it won't be a "sustained high bandwidth useage" scenario. The fact that you use as much (even more in some cases) bandwidth than a server would/does, simply makes you one of those few that they do not make money on. No worries for them, they have 20 people standing beside you who use it maybe 10% of the time. So, when you average out everyone's "useage" amongst those 20 people, it all even out. Servers on the other hand... they don't sleep/work/eat/etc. They are there capable of sucking up the ISP's bandwidth (which the ISPs themselves pay for... in bulk mind you...) 100% of the day. THIS is why they don't like you hosting "servers"... it hurts them financially, unless you purchase a "business license". They are VERY vigilant in seeking servers (they'll sniff certain ports on random machines, and wait for a response). If they sniff the NNTP (newsgroup server port) and the sniffer gets a response, that means you are running a server (a no-no in teh User Agreement). Same goes for e-mail servers, of how much bandwidth you are using (unless you connect through their proxy -- this straight from the mouth of my buddy who works as a tech for them here in Van). The reason: costs more... because of the potential bandwidth consumption. Anyways... bottom line is that those ISPs also buy the Bandwidth from the Fibre guys. When you start to chew up all their bandwidth, and pay a nickle for it... they lose money... which is not good business. Now to talk about something a bit OT. We know that the User Agreement forbids "Servers". Now we look at the "technical classification of a Server". It is a standalone application that hosts information that "clients" connect to. Meaning... the Server holds/controls the entire transaction. BUT: What if you could host a "Game Server" without it "technically being a 'Server'" in the normal classification. We need look no further than Gnutella, which basically honed in on the Napster crowd after the demise, and were impervious to the same litigation, because it is not a "server based system". Meaning, Gnutella simply created the software, and in turn it creates a giant "sub-network" of "PEERS". Peers are not "servers" technically, so it escapes all the litigation and UA no-nos, but it still serves the same purpose. We are working on (and days away from completion) on a similar system, that should basically leave your ISPs "holding the bag" on those stupid User anyways...), and that UA is basically the same as all the rest of them. We are not classifiable as a "server" so, we can maintain all "server-type" advantages, without jumping into the same bag of limitations. Hope it helps in understanding why, and I'll keep ya posted on progress of our project shortly. Cheers, Schumi > | That's stupid. Wouldn't you be taking the same amount of bandwith either > | way(up or down)? I admit I don't know as much about ISPs as I should... > | > | Eldred

Well our whole area is upload capped at 128kbs so I can't really hog the connection and I can't host a very large field...about 10 drivers depending on the sim. That is @home's solution here..punish everyone to stop the few... dave henrie "Thom j." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Uz6R6.15107$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> How bout straight from the cable company's mouth? "You host any > races or games you'll take up 'too much bandwidth' with your plan! > So if we catch you we will be forced to expire your service with us!" > Now does that sound like paranoia to you?? You think I'd just toss > a comment as important as this "willy-nilly"? Not this dude!! > Phew.. Get with the program will ya?? > > "Ben Coleman" wrote: > | I thought most of those clauses related to hosting web sites rather than > | races....are you sure you're not being paranoid?! ;o> > | Ben > > >

EldredP wrote: > That rule sucks, too. If I'm PAYING for an ISP, I should be able to do > whatever I want, as long as it's not illegal... :( Yeah, but that is rarely the case. That's why I left FlashNet last year, because of ISP-imposed limits. They would cap you on downloading files to 100MB a day. Then they wouldn't let me back on for 12 hours afterwards. I ended up using NetZero for most of my 1.3GB Linux iso download. Pretty bad when a free net service gives you more leeway than one you pay $13 a month for. So I went looking elsewhere & found @Home. -- Fester

Jason this was basically what I was told via @home and tried to explain {to the best of my limited abilities} here on r.a.s. but you really 'nailed' it down "spot on!"..:o) When I was approached they threw all the legal eagle mombo'jumbo at me and I cant afford to lose my cable so I just politely said: "thank you & I'll never host a sim race again" & I havent! It wasnt worth the hassle for me!! Phew & Phooie!! Anyway Thank you for the detailed informative post!! Cheers Thom_j. "Jason "Schumi" Murray" wrote: | The problem is in your User Agreement. | | Most "broadband cable suppliers" do not wish to have end-users runservers.

Quoted text (8 lines)

| It is very difficult for them to distinguish "which kind of servers" | should/shouldn't be used. So... they simply say "no servers". | | Meaning as an example: | | Newsgroup Servers. | | They are standard equipment in most Operating Systems (Windows NT/2K,

Linux, | BSD, etc.). As such, very easy to setup. | | The thing is, newsgroup servers (of any popularity) consume HUGE amountsof | bandwidth, and can do so 24/7. | | So... you are paying for an "average end user use fee". When you throw a | server on the system, it throws their whole "financial/useage averages"out | the window. | | ALL ISPs base their pricing based on "average use". You can purchase an | alternative "business license" which will 'usually' remove suchlimitations | (since youa re now paying more, and the ISP's useage averages are | maintained/afforded). | | They (ISPs) BANK on the fact that you sleep, work, etc. Meaning, in 'most | cases' the user is only using teh service say 30% of the time. But... you | throw a server on there, and you could be using the bandwidth/services100% | of the time. This throws everything out of whack. | | As for joining a race (not hosting), on a server/client config, you arethe | client, and do not break the User License. Even if you host a"Peer-to-Peer" | race, you are still 'technically' a "client". You may use just as much | bandwidth as if you hosted a server, but the ISP still knows that you will | have to sleep/work some of the time, and that it won't be a "sustainedhigh | bandwidth useage" scenario. The fact that you use as much (even more insome | cases) bandwidth than a server would/does, simply makes you one of thosefew

Quoted text (7 lines)

| that they do not make money on. No worries for them, they have 20 people | standing beside you who use it maybe 10% of the time. So, when you average | out everyone's "useage" amongst those 20 people, it all even out. | | Servers on the other hand... they don't sleep/work/eat/etc. They are there | capable of sucking up the ISP's bandwidth (which the ISPs themselves pay | for... in bulk mind you...) 100% of the day. THIS is why they don't like

you

Quoted text (7 lines)

| hosting "servers"... it hurts them financially, unless you purchase a | "business license". | | @Home is a PRIME example of this. | | They are VERY vigilant in seeking servers (they'll sniff certain ports on | random machines, and wait for a response). If they sniff the NNTP

(newsgroup | server port) and the sniffer gets a response, that means you are running a | server (a no-no in teh User Agreement). Same goes for e-mail servers, | web-servers, etc. They have to do this, because the @Home folks have NOidea

Quoted text (7 lines)

| of how much bandwidth you are using (unless you connect through their | proxy -- this straight from the mouth of my buddy who works as a tech for | them here in Van). | | The reason: | | They also offer "@Work" services. Which removes the bandwidth

restrictions, | but offers the same bandwidth/services. All that it is: Same as @Home,only | costs more... because of the potential bandwidth consumption. | | Anyways... bottom line is that those ISPs also buy the Bandwidth from the | Fibre guys. When you start to chew up all their bandwidth, and pay anickle | for it... they lose money... which is not good business. | | Now to talk about something a bit OT. | | We know that the User Agreement forbids "Servers". Now we look at the | "technical classification of a Server". It is a standalone applicationthat

Quoted text (10 lines)

| hosts information that "clients" connect to. Meaning... the Server | holds/controls the entire transaction. | | BUT: | | What if you could host a "Game Server" without it "technically being a | 'Server'" in the normal classification. We need look no further than | Gnutella, which basically honed in on the Napster crowd after the demise, | and were impervious to the same litigation, because it is not a "server | based system". Meaning, Gnutella simply created the software, and in turn

it | creates a giant "sub-network" of "PEERS". Peers are not "servers" | technically, so it escapes all the litigation and UA no-nos, but it still | serves the same purpose. | | We are working on (and days away from completion) on a similar system,that

Quoted text (13 lines)

| should basically leave your ISPs "holding the bag" on those stupid User | Agreements. Details will be coming soon, but we have already passed the | @Home User Agreement (by studying it, and classifying it... my lawyers did | anyways...), and that UA is basically the same as all the rest of them. We | are not classifiable as a "server" so, we can maintain all "server-type" | advantages, without jumping into the same bag of limitations. | | Hope it helps in understanding why, and I'll keep ya posted on progress of | our project shortly. | | Cheers, | | Schumi

In article <[email hidden]>, "Jason \"Schumi\" Murray" <[email hidden]> writes: >Hope it helps in understanding why, and I'll keep ya posted on progress of >our project shortly. Wow - thanks for all the info. It doesn't help me at the moment(still on a 56k modem, darnit), but it was interesting to read. Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +24.63...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, Uncle Fester <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Yeah, but that is rarely the case. That's why I left FlashNet last >year, because of ISP-imposed limits. They would cap you on downloading >files to 100MB a day. Then they wouldn't let me back on for 12 hours >afterwards. I ended up using NetZero for most of my 1.3GB Linux iso >download. Pretty bad when a free net service gives you more leeway than >one you pay $13 a month for. So I went looking elsewhere & found >@Home.

Last time I even checked various ISPs, I'm not in their 'service' area. But, I'm more than welcome to put my name on their mailing list... :-( Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +24.63...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Sounds like a great idea...count me in! Marc. "Kendt Eklund" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> On Tue, 29 May 2001 03:14:58 GMT, "Thom j." <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > > Sadly [A] I'm not aloud to host > >via my server & if I get caught I lose my cable and > > Yikes! Is this your cable service or something? A server isn't that > bandwidth intensive, is it? > Stay tuned, when I have ISDN soon there'll be a server. I'm thinking > of maybe setting up a mailing list and changing passwords regularly. > When a wrecker shows up (or someone not on the mailing list), I'll > change the password (and remove the wrecker from the list). > Maybe a semi-open server (can you do this like you can in VROC, where > admins with password acces can change the race parameters?). > Going to read the N4 docs/readme... > > Kendt

EldredP wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > In article <[email hidden]>, Uncle Fester <[email hidden]> > writes: > > >Yeah, but that is rarely the case. That's why I left FlashNet last > >year, because of ISP-imposed limits. They would cap you on downloading > >files to 100MB a day. Then they wouldn't let me back on for 12 hours > >afterwards. I ended up using NetZero for most of my 1.3GB Linux iso > >download. Pretty bad when a free net service gives you more leeway than > >one you pay $13 a month for. So I went looking elsewhere & found > >@Home. > > Last time I even checked various ISPs, I'm not in their 'service' area. But, > I'm more than welcome to put my name on their mailing list... :-(

Really! @Home doesn't service your area? I know FlashNet always had a Southfield # plus 2 or 3 Detroit #'s. -- Fester

This occured to me at work today so it MUST be important. You say you have gone over the EULA with lawyers and your solution works. Great. But..... (there's always a but....) What is to stop a local cable provider from mis-interpreting the EULA and shutting off access for whomever is using your program? It may be very all well and good that YOU know the server is defined in such a way as to allow you to host....but if the local provider thinks he knows what a server is, he is going to cut off your access and then worry about the legal definition later. Even if you are right, and have the legal backing to prove it...you are still facing a situation where you will most likely have to continually prove to the locals that what you are doing is proper...and then....knowing corparations like I do...we'll probably get a letter in our next bill with an addendum(notice that word ends in DUM) that covers whatever scheme you have cooked up. I hope for the best but I think you had better be prepared for sticky times ahead. dave henrie "Jason "Schumi" Murray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > The problem is in your User Agreement. >

In article <[email hidden]>, Uncle Fester <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (21 lines)

>EldredP wrote: >> >> In article <[email hidden]>, Uncle Fester <[email hidden]> >> writes: >> >> >Yeah, but that is rarely the case. That's why I left FlashNet last >> >year, because of ISP-imposed limits. They would cap you on downloading >> >files to 100MB a day. Then they wouldn't let me back on for 12 hours >> >afterwards. I ended up using NetZero for most of my 1.3GB Linux iso >> >download. Pretty bad when a free net service gives you more leeway than >> >one you pay $13 a month for. So I went looking elsewhere & found >> >@Home. >> >> Last time I even checked various ISPs, I'm not in their 'service' area. >But, >> I'm more than welcome to put my name on their mailing list... :-( > > >Really! @Home doesn't service your area? I know FlashNet always had a >Southfield # plus 2 or 3 Detroit #'s. >

Sorry - I meant cable modems/dsl connections... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +24.63...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

FWIW yes, I do think you're being paranoid and no, thanks, I won't get with your program. But hey, if you think your service is threatened then don't host...you still get kick-ass client connections to the many hosts out there. I don't think the cable company would discern a 1 hr race from a 1 hr Napster session. Ben Thom j. wrote in message ...

Quoted text (14 lines)

>How bout straight from the cable company's mouth? "You host any >races or games you'll take up 'too much bandwidth' with your plan! >So if we catch you we will be forced to expire your service with us!" >Now does that sound like paranoia to you?? You think I'd just toss >a comment as important as this "willy-nilly"? Not this dude!! >Phew.. Get with the program will ya?? > >"Ben Coleman" wrote: >| I thought most of those clauses related to hosting web sites rather than >| races....are you sure you're not being paranoid?! ;o> >| Ben > > >

Hmmm? My man Mr Dave H has a point here!! "Dave Henrie" wrote: <snip'ed'ed'ed>

Quoted text (7 lines)

| I hope for the best but I think you had better be prepared for sticky | times ahead. | dave henrie | "Jason "Schumi" Murray" wrote: | > The problem is in your User Agreement. | >

Hmmm? My man Mr Dave H has a point here!! <snip'ed'ed'ed>

Quoted text (8 lines)

| I hope for the best but I think you had better be prepared for sticky | times ahead. | dave henrie | > The problem is in your User Agreement. | >

Ben I can see you havent been following all the info about the no hosting via @home.. "O" Well no biggie as who in the "H" cares in Leningrad...lmmfaorofl So thats my 2 more "rubles!!" Back to the USSR Thats where U are Babe! Back Back Back! :o)~ "Ben Coleman" wrote: | FWIW yes, I do think you're being paranoid and no, thanks, I won't getwith | your program. But hey, if you think your service is threatened then don't | host...you still get kick-ass client connections to the many hosts out | there. | I don't think the cable company would discern a 1 hr race from a 1 hr | Napster session. | Ben

He does... to a point. You'll see how we deal with that soon enough ;) (we knew that 2 years ago... and made arrangements accordingly). Cheers, Schumi

He does... to a point. You'll see how we deal with that soon enough ;) (we knew that 2 years ago... and made arrangements accordingly). Cheers, Schumi

>Hey you race *pickup* races. People still do that? Serious pickup racing >died the day the NROS closed. Assume the risks that you take, it's >free-for-all there. Rankings are just a little blessing for the few of you >who still care about such form of stockcar racing. We've all moved onto >leagues. I'm with you FM. It didn't use to be a free-for-all on TEN. Granted, there were a few wreckfests but, it was easy to find a great group of guys to race against, who were there to race and not wreck. Papy and Sierra did more to kill online racing with this version of the software than anyone ever could have. I think I've raced 3 pick up races in the last two or three months. I used to race that many in a night. It just isn't worth my time anymore. There are just too many "kids" out there that think that the object of racing is to take out as many people as possible. I just haven't had any luck in finding a good league to run in Sunday mornings. This is the best time for me to race. The only problem with your idea of moving onto leagues and leaving the pickup races alone is the lack of practice time with live competitors. The AI is pathetic and gives you no real practice that does any good in a live race. That is what was so good about TEN. You could usually find some decent drivers to practice with and know that you could go 100 laps at Dover without some idiot trying to put you into the parking lot. If I or anyone else in my kart club raced the way some of these morons race, we would be banned from the track for the rest of our lives. Dave Casey Casey#9 (NASCAR Racing 4) www.teamcasey.net www.lvkc.com www.buycoolcrap.com

>I realize that, but for those of us who can't commit to league racing due to >scheduling or time constraints, pick-up races are the best we can do. I'd >like to see something done to try and ban repeat offenders from the servers. >Probably impossible I realize, but there are brighter minds than mine out >there who might have a solution. It used to be with TEN you had ranking systems that could be used for this and you could also take a look at the listings and see where a person was on the list. I don't know if there is a place to see listings for N4 but, with Papy's apparent lack of caring for the online racing community, I somehow doubt it. I know there are people out there that will say that rankings and LPI are useless but, they were better than what we have now which is nothing. Dave Casey Casey#9 (NASCAR Racing 4) www.teamcasey.net www.lvkc.com www.buycoolcrap.com

If you can stand using N3 still, and can figure out how to turn right, the TPTCC summer season will run two events a weekend, on Friday nights and VERY early Sunday...TPTCC is an international touring car league and the times are to try and benefit West Coast Yanks as well as Aussies and Euro types. dave henrie "Dave Casey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vp0T6.3243$[email hidden]... > >I realize that, but for those of us who can't commit to league racing dueto > >scheduling or time constraints, pick-up races are the best we can do.I'd > >like to see something done to try and ban repeat offenders from theservers. > >Probably impossible I realize, but there are brighter minds than mine out > >there who might have a solution. > > It used to be with TEN you had ranking systems that could be used for thisand > you could also take a look at the listings and see where a person was onthe

Quoted text (13 lines)

> list. I don't know if there is a place to see listings for N4 but, with > Papy's apparent lack of caring for the online racing community, I somehow > doubt it. > > I know there are people out there that will say that rankings and LPI are > useless but, they were better than what we have now which is nothing. > > > Dave Casey > Casey#9 (NASCAR Racing 4) > www.teamcasey.net > www.lvkc.com > www.buycoolcrap.com

Why??? You already got one of those 56 kB rockets. JensSchumi BTW: Anybody interested in buying my modem? Don't know the brand right now, but it's one of those where you press the telephone receiver in these rubber socket equipped thingies. On 31 May 2001 18:40:53 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: > >Last time I even checked various ISPs, I'm not in their 'service' area. But, >I'm more than welcome to put my name on their mailing list... :-( > >Eldred -- LWFF Ball Bearing conversion at: http://members.nbci.com/JensSchu/ GPLRank: -10.1 Monsters of GPL: sub 200