barneygale

I also find it crazy that the post that seems to me to spell the end of survival has what, 13 comments? A few more on the subreddit? This server attracted hundreds of people on a good night, and must have gone through a hundred mods/admins through its history. What a pity it ends like this, with a few stragglers wishing it goodbye. In retrospect my suggestion probably wouldn't work unless some PVE players had a good idea for a PVP server.

Rules do matter, but only indirectly. A server with good rules and governance will maintain existing players and keep them happy. If those players stick around they'll recommend players and word will get around. That said, very few people (even when minecraft was dominated by old fucks) choose a server specifically for its ruleset. Most people just go in for a type of server. I haven't been following nerd for a few months now, but when I left the impression everyone had was that survival was in terminal decline. That's been the feeling for many revisions now, and that feeling put people off recommending the server, or really trying anything experimental at all. That's in complete contrast to when I joined, when every revision was bigger and better than the last, and everyone was experimenting and building, trying to make a name for themselves by doing something new. Another thing about this era is that there wasn't so much player/staff divide as there is now, IMO principally because people were promoted through the "ranks" really fast. A very similar thing happened at a bittorrent tracker I worked on, where the core team (that worked well together) dropped off one-by-one, to be replaced at a slower and slower pace with more disconnected people with no passion for the site and community. If times are good at the server then stability of staff and rules are something to aim for (within reason). If survival's future is as gloomy as it appears, then stability is not going to help. IMO the only thing that can raise expectations, bring back some optimism and excitement, is just to start a new PVP server with new people running it. They can be existing moderatorss, existing players, outsiders, whatever. Let people form teams and put forward proposals. Give the community a couple of weeks to discuss them then have a vote. Winning team gets technical assistance and experience from existing admins. Now you have a new server where no one knows where it's going, whether it's going to be crazy successful or a complete failure. That's something I'd contribute and play on, not a server lumbering under essentially the same playstyle and moderation as it had 4-5 years ago. If anyone's reading this and thinking "oh barneygale wants sneak back into mod" I'm not interested. I had that opportunity with Junction and didn't use it, because I lost my passion for the game quite a while ago.

1.) This server would be for people who like to play on multiple servers and don't belong to only one community. Also, hopefully some of the survival community would survive (geddit? ;D). I wouldn't want it to become Junction, where we faffed around forever writing rules and shit. Just hand it over to someone who's done this sort of thing before and don't worry too much about staff structure until it's on its feet 2.) Skills and oversight I think

Sad to see S finally go. Suggestion 1. Put the server on another box (shitty if necessary) and open donations specifically for survival which fund that box. 2. If the donations don't make hosting costs, shut it down 3. Only affiliate yourselves loosely with it 4. Appoint admins based on a vote or a similar kind of process 5. Admins can take the server in whatever PVP-flavoured direction they have a mandate for It seems mad to see the nerd.nu PVP-enabled server closing while PVP in general makes up the vast majority of minecraft servers What have you got to lose if it's shutting down anyway?

Help I'm stuck in a time warp where the admins have spent all year making shitty decisions and acting surprised when people give them shit for it.

I love how my shittery of 2012 has transitioned from a net negative to a net positive for the admins. Need a convenient excuse for never making anyone with a modicum of involvement with the community an admin? Facing a dilemma where you have personal beef with the painfully obvious candidates for admin? Just elect someone you chat with every day in private IRC rooms instead! Why? Because 2 years ago someone we trusted fucked us over, so now we can never trust anyone but our mates again. If MCPublic was a reddit user, they'd be subscribed to r/theredpill. It's ridiculous to read people like totemo once again talk about "naysayers". We had trolls in my day too, you know, but there weren't enough to downvote the announcement of a new admin to 0 points. Are they rabble-rousing, or are you just wrong? Want to get rid of the naysayers in one easy step? Shut down the survival server. Stop playing this fucking game where you perennially give survival players hope, then do nothing for weeks, then do something shitty and unjustifyable. Some of the people in this thread still give a shit about survival, please fucking stop treating them with as much distain as I treated the admins 2 years ago. > You're often asking for a big change, seemingly based entirely on your idea of what you want the S server to be. Someone without any baggage or attachment to the S you call failing would do that job perfectly. How stupid do you have to be to type these words and consider it worthwhile to press the "Post" button? The mind boggles.

Doesn't that rather spoil the fun of exploring the new mechanics?

> And as for staff discretion, we can't claim it doesn't exist just because it doesn't fall our way. Mrloud didn't not make a decision, he just made one you disagree with vociferously. He made a decision that was not explained. All previous appeals that I'm aware of reached a different conclusion. Is it so much to ask for an explanation as to why my appeal is different? I asked in the ban appeal and was told it was not the place; hence these posts. > There is no reason to call out Mrloud in your post or even link to an old appeal where jchance forgave an alt account. Yes it has happened, possibly many times, but there are also many times that it hasn’t happened and we have denied alts being unbanned. I personally don’t want to go dig through appeals to find them. I think you are an intelligent person and can see that there is multiple times where we have denied alt unbans. I'd consider myself intelligent but not all-knowing. If there are occasions where a main account has been unbanned but the alt accounts not unbanned even months later, please show me. > Mrloud clearly explained why your alt account was banned and why it will remained banned He really didn't. He just said "it's banned because that's the rule", but when often that rule is not applied, why is it applied in this case? > This is why Mrloud says that appeals are not the place to discuss policy. We want you to post in a topic where everyone can post in and can contribute to, not a ban appeal that only you and staff can comment on. That's what this topic is and it achieved fuck all in the months it's been around. > coming in here and being upset that your alts were not unbanned is not helping the discussion. Why not? It's a good case study of how tediously stupid this rule is.

Reviving this thread to once again point out how silly and poorly-applied this rule is. We have staffers like jchance who are can forgive a 1 year old permaban for alt evasion, saying "I'm willing to let it go". This player was appealing their alt ban alongside their main and hence had not been involved with nerd for some time. And we have staffers like Mrloud15 who can't forgive a 2 year old permaban for alt evasion, fails to explain why, and posts in a way that implies staff discretion doesn't even exist. It does exist! It existed in the the ban appeal jchance handled, and it existed in the appeals of edmundishere, Toncom and probably others too. Another factor is that my main account was unbanned months ago, and the admins have had plenty of time to determine whether I'd do anything malicious with those alts. I'm not massively pleased that I have to post in the "general discussion" forum on an issue that's tightly aligned with my (now closed) ban appeal, but apparently my ban appeal isn't the right place to talk about it :/ I would like to hear someone explain how the current formula is better than Dumbo's suggestion. Mrloud15, would you like to take it away?

Feel free to respond to the points I've been repeatedly making: the rule is known to be defective, it never made sense, previous head admins KNEW it didn't make sense and decided not to enforce it, I'm not aware of it EVER being enforced in a ban appeal until now.

> I was not trying to patronize you at all, and I'm sorry if it came across that way. Given the words you were using and the multiple appeals, it seemed like you were unsure about what the policy says, that it was written down, and how it applied to your accounts, so I attempted to clear those things up for you. Mrloud15, did you seriously think that I was not aware of the rule or how it applied to my account? You had forgotten that I'd posted a thread about this exact issue only a couple of months ago? You had forgotten that I'd posted a few times in your thread, specifically mentioning my accounts and my situation? You thought that I too had forgotten the alt evasion rule, despite my many thousands of bans on mcbouncer for precisely that infraction? You thought I'd forgotten this rule despite months of trawling the internet for compromised accounts and banning them? You thought I'd forgotten but didn't see fit to ask what rule I'd broken in the original post? ... This is what you genuinely, honest-to-god believe? I'm not sure which explanation for your attitude is more terrifying: malice or astounding ignorance > Once again, ban appeals are not the place to discuss policies and there are far easier ways to ask about them. This is exactly the place to talk about this rule. It doesn't make sense, it didn't make *grammatical* sense until very recently, it's rarely appealed, when it *is* appealed I know of ZERO instances of the appeal being denied. If you can't explain why the rule is a good rule, why the fuck are you enforcing it?

Another thing worth mentioning: historically the head admins have opted not to use this rule on a number of occasions (I know of three, there may be more). The reasons are usually obvious and similar to mine, i.e. I had a *permaban* lifted. IIRC, Dumbo52 also mentioned to me in-game that he knew of exceptions.

I wonder what you sound like when you're not being patronising, Mrloud15. Yes, I am aware of the rule, as you well know given I've posted a thread about it and posted multiple times in the duplicate thread you needlessly made. You'd do well to remember that *you* are the head admin and *you* make the rules. Replying to a query about why I was banned by saying "you were banned because you broke a rule" is as good as saying "you were banned because you were banned". If you think your continued talking down to players is winning you any admirers, think again. The defects in this rule are known, and have been well discussed in two forum threads in which you participated. The facts are all before you; they have been since august. If you have found time to discuss my appeal, you must surely have found time to discuss a well-understood problem with a rule. Rules against griefing and hate speech are obvious. A rule that punishes some accounts but not others (as opposed to some people but not others) is a head-scratcher. Where's the benefit to the community? Why not extend the original ban and unban all the accounts at the same time?

Hi, This is a continuation of my appeal from here: https://nerd.nu/forums/index.php?/topic/2654-barneybot-vivalahelvig-head-admin/ The admin who dealt with my request made the following mistakes in a short space: 1. Giving no justification whatsoever for the continued ban on two of my alt accounts. 2. Claiming that the policy is to never unban alt accounts, something that is patently false (both currently AND historically). 3. Closing the appeal before it was complete and both parties were agreed on the course of action, something which has been written about multiple times before by various admins. I would like an explanation of exactly what benefits keeping some (but not all!) of my alt accounts banned brings to nerd. I think this is a perfectly reasonable request, as bans are *supposed* to benefit the community. I will continue to press for an answer on this, unless I am threatened for doing so. For all the (deserved) shit I gave JohnAdams, she at least tried to rationalise her policies and not hide entirely behind ideas of half-remembered precedent and tradition.

Bump.

Could you please unban my alts? Thanks.

In

I've been busy with other stuff. Should have some some time in a week or two; if someone wants to take over feel free.

This is exactly the server we were going to implement on Junction.at, which is shutting down, and we're making all our plugins public. It wouldn't be too hard to use the plugins I think?

pay-to-win is pretty different from cosmetic perks. I'd suggest donating once gives you a permanent badge, and further donations don't give you anything. It works well on waffles.fm.

lol wtf josh

Here's what nat gave us in 2012: http://www.reddit.com/r/mcpublic/comments/ohfnk/at_long_last_mcpublic_hardware_drive_full/

Seems like a weird feature, that's all. When I send a letter or an email I can't then delete it. If you don't want to send a message, don't press the "send" button! What's the legitimate use-case of this?

Ya it totally defeats the point of the feature... The one place I've seen the "silent edit" feature used was when Mrloud asked roast in the donation thread why he's asking questions about donations. Now obviously this is a silly question and I can forgive Mrloud for not thinking it through. I make silly posts with some regularity, too! But then to use an admin-only feature to remove the "edited by..." line on the post? How does attempting to maintain an illusion that you're never wrong qualify as official staff work?

Monthly costs and current funds remaining would be ideal. That's a reasonable request for a non-profit organisation founded on ideals of community and transparency.