This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - RTC
61
« on: May 10, 2016, 08:10:57 PM »
The folder is Team42, which is Immersion Robotics. You want to replace the Bot2 file in that folder. You may have accidentally modified another robot by mistake.
62
« on: May 10, 2016, 08:05:18 PM »
By not working, does the game crash when you try to use Tanto in an AI battle, or does Tanto still drive backward instead of forward?
63
« on: May 10, 2016, 07:58:29 PM »
No I can use it and I don't need to share because it's not something that needs to be shared until all the mods agree on it.
I'm genuinely trying to make a solution for EVERYONE here and improve future situations that may arise meanwhile you lot are making it absolutely BLOOPing infuriating and I'm sick of trying so I'm done.
OK, so it's not something that needs to be shared until the mods agree on it. That's fine, but it doesn't mean it shouldn't be critiqued in a mature way, which is what we are doing; no-one is saying it's a terrible idea for no reason or attacking you for it, so it's unnecessary to play the victim, especially as you voluntarily let this slip in the first place.
64
« on: May 10, 2016, 07:55:36 PM »
Have you tried modifying the forward heading on Tanto and then exporting it into the AI folder?
65
« on: May 10, 2016, 07:48:27 PM »
Best advice I can offer is to reverse the analog controls on Tanto and export the modified bot into the respective AI folder with its proper name (should be Bot1 or Bot2 in the RWAI pack). With any luck, the game shouldn't crash provided you don't modify anything else concerning the bot.
66
« on: May 10, 2016, 07:40:23 PM »
Also Craaig, he did post from a reasonable and well-meaning perspective based upon what you revealed. No need to insinuate that he's dumb.
What I meant by what I originally said was criticizing what I revealed is an exercise in pointlessness because it's clearly intentionally not the full story. No point asking questions etc when I'm clearly not telling the entire plan anyway because they're all already answered.
You can't use the "You don't know the full story" excuse to deflect criticism if you have the ability to share the full story. I mean, I understand why you don't want to share it immediately since it's a staff matter that needs to be discussed in private, but at the same time, you can't use that as a defence to say it can't be criticized in a logical manner based on what we already know. Bear in mind, I think what you've hinted at in your initial post is a very good idea, I just think there are better ways to respond to critique, especially when it's measured and not inflammatory like Yugi's response.
67
« on: May 10, 2016, 07:15:58 PM »
Earlier on I did propose a system involving appeals after timeframes and stuff that we are talking about, I think it'll work well.
(N.B. don't critique this message as OMG BAD IDEA because you don't know the whole proposal and you'll look dumb)
The only problem I have with this is, it ensures any and all members that, whatever they do, they'll have a chance at an appeal. Surely, that diminishes the point of permanently banning them in the first place, as they are complacent in knowing that they can come back. How would appeals work? Would they be allowed to appeal after making another account? If so, will they be allowed to post in the time period of appeal?
I just think the way we look at perma-banning should change. It shouldn't be something you can recover from. I believe appeals or negotiations would work better if they simply reduced the amount of time they were banned for. For example, you could give someone a year long ban and, given they do not harass anyone outside of the forum or create multi-accounts, they'd be allowed to negotiate a new amount of time they should be banned for, after a while. Appealing a permanent ban seems like a weird concept to me because the appellant hasn't been on the forum for us to witness change, so why would our attitude change towards them other than "everyone deserves a second chance"?
As I said earlier, depending on the severity and the amount of offences, the minimum time would be extended. That way, we can separate the trolls and the people who genuinely want to improve. Also Craaig, he did post from a reasonable and well-meaning perspective based upon what you revealed. No need to insinuate that he's dumb.
68
« on: May 10, 2016, 06:09:34 PM »
To prevent a quote pyramid from spawning:
Yugitom, it's no secret that permanent bans mean nothing here. Of the five prominent users that I know of that got perma-banned, 3 returned and tried to reform, one spammed the forums with alternate accounts and the other attempted to use proxies and got some normal users caught in the collateral range bans. There is nothing permanent about them; and a system that tries to present them as such is flawed. This is why I am trying to propose an undisclosed duration with a minimum time of appeal instead, given the rarity that these bans are handed out to members that aren't spambots.
I'd be pretty sure that the majority of the moderating collective agreed to the initial banning, otherwise it would have likely not have happened. And Craaig and Thyrus did the right thing in informing the moderating collective of HA's return, and allowing a decision to be made on that basis.
69
« on: May 10, 2016, 04:58:15 PM »
@Yugitom: The problem with your proposition is that if Andrew were to return after that temp ban, there would be little guarantee that his behaviour would improve after his sentence, seeing as he has had a history of being muted and warned in the past. With a permanent ban, your message is far likelier to get across as it is the most severe punishment a forum can deliver, whilst still leaving the door open for reformation.
However, he had the comfort of knowing he wasn't IP banned and that he could come back whenever he wanted, once people had calmed down. Something which he did. He didn't wait until he thought he was rehabilitated enough for the forum to handle him, he just came back at his leisure when he thought the reaction to his arrival would be exactly as it's panned out right now, a lot of people defending him asking to give him a second chance.
Also, with the court comparison, I would say it's more to do with being given life and then getting out early on good behaviour. However, the argument of whether life should actually mean life is something different.
I agree that the discretion on the minimum time a user should spend being banned before being allowed into the community should be decided upon by the staff, but the staff did agree to allow Andy to come back onto the website provided he followed their terms and conditions. Parole hearings are still granted whether the prisoner is worthy or not of being released from jail; the only thing that needs to be done is for the prisoner to serve the minimum sentence. It is then the judicial system's decision whether or not the prisoner should be paroled or not.
70
« on: May 10, 2016, 03:37:47 PM »
Honestly, I'd maintain a case-by-case basis with regards to perma-bans, much like most judicial systems have in the form of parole. People who have served indefinite sentences have gone onto to be paroled and contribute to society; and seeing how breaking the rules on a message board is a relatively minor crime compared to what an indefinite sentence can be imposed for, as well as the scarcity of perma-bans on this website, I'd say that a parole-like policy, with a minimum time before parole can be proposed would the best case scenario. Of course, if the user continued to make multiple accounts before the parole, more and more time could be added to it.
Punishment is justice for the victims, and rehabilitation is justice for the perpetrators after all.
@Yugitom: The problem with your proposition is that if Andrew were to return after that temp ban, there would be little guarantee that his behaviour would improve after his sentence, seeing as he has had a history of being muted and warned in the past. With a permanent ban, your message is far likelier to get across as it is the most severe punishment a forum can deliver, whilst still leaving the door open for reformation.
71
« on: May 10, 2016, 03:04:59 PM »
I did some research into the subject, and I'm pretty sure that anyone prominent that has been perma-banned has made some kind of attempt to return to the site, whether it's to change their behaviour so they can be given another chance or to just continue trolling. If we know it's Andy, and he's not actively breaking the rules, and has had an extended hiatus from the website, why should he banned again?
72
« on: April 11, 2016, 05:57:47 PM »
The Foxic robots and Breaker Box AI also seem to have a phobia of using their weaponry.
73
« on: April 07, 2016, 10:56:39 AM »
Kan Opener died for your sins.  (yes, it's a year plus bump, but I didn't want to create a new thread exclusively for this photo).
74
« on: April 05, 2016, 09:19:06 AM »
When I first started playing RA2, I always thought lawnmower blades were one of the best weapons in the game. Goes to show how far I've come.
75
« on: April 03, 2016, 08:51:47 AM »
Yeah, there's definitely a pit; although it's now wider and not as deep as it used to be. There was a photo of the judges in it.
76
« on: April 01, 2016, 07:08:28 AM »
Damn, there's actually robots in that list I don't recognize.
Quite a few have been given name changes. I won't give any examples because I'm unsure about the spoiler policy here, but you could probably look up names online.
77
« on: April 01, 2016, 07:04:22 AM »
If you want a legit suggestion. The one other small forum I frequent has a rep system where you can only give positive rep, and your member ranking, instead of by post count is based on how many rep ups you've gotten. If you want a system that's good at pointing out who's most respected for newbies, that's a pretty good one. And you don't have the drama of "waaah someone repped me down and it's not fair!" (a la GF39, Reier.)
Is that a Xenforo system by any chance? That's one of the few rep systems that can actually work for its intended purpose.
78
« on: March 31, 2016, 10:26:26 AM »
Has there be any mention of the parts being directly imported from RA2 being modified in any kind of way, such as modification of normals, or general buffs/nerfs?
79
« on: March 31, 2016, 08:54:11 AM »
Reputation on a forum really depends on how seriously posters generally take it. Obviously, you'll have dissidents and staunch supporters regardless of the respect the system has in place, but the best indication is not the support of the system, it's the respect.
In my opinion, the rep system here is worthless to the point that I really don't care whether it stays or goes. If you need or are concerned about numerical validation through a forum concerning a relatively obscure 12-year old game, you probably need better activities.
80
« on: March 31, 2016, 07:48:26 AM »
keep it, let everyone past Heavyweight + colored names use it. Done.
If not the above, then remove it.
That, and maybe reset the reputation of certain members if they are not properly represented by it (ACAMS -100? What even?) if we want to make it a more serious affair. That, and remove certain member's priviledges to it. If you wanted a total reform for some reason then you could totally reset rep but that's probably not going to be necessary.
acams's rep is obviously a joke.
Thank you, Captain Obvious.
Which means no-one is actually going to take his rep seriously, except you, who seems to think it's a point worth discussing.
|
Show Posts