DDraceNetwork - general

Yea a birthday is something to be excited about

No

LMFAO

07:11

@ZombieToad I'm laughing as hell danAmazing

07:56

hi guys

hi

#records

hi

hey

hey?

hi

Bye

hi

HEY!

xxxxxxD

my childhood ^^

2

I am a beautiful person.

No

u

you

my childhood too, im even playing lego worlds these days, lego video games always had me aswell as the real life lego!

yeah same. also got the old star wars games on disc

go troll in that discord

17:04

take that

dont advertise these random servers here

@Im 'corneum i got all lego star wars games and indiana jones and football mania and and and

all on disc from many years ago

Get some help

i hate women but i love vagina

fresh avocado

1

Sio Dummy blocker on naufrage

18:11

@Moderator

18:11

so?

18:12

ok

18:12

no one shows up

1

so @Learath2 suggests to soften the rule "no botting" a little, changing it to something like "no cheating"

18:20

I'm kinda against it, thinking that using "no bots" should be doing better to discourage people from "cheating"

2

is cutting a lot of parts considered cheating in this context?

no

18:21

its about bot clients

how else can you cheat except using bot clients? i hope you dont mean the aimbind

I think the only kind of bot client we can identify by eye is fun-bots that gain no advantage to the user, if the rule is to stop people getting unfair advantages it's not doing it's job very well (edited)

"soften the rule"

18:22

@Im 'corneum

18:22

i.e. make it catch less, not more

so for example siO can continue having fun with his client without punishment

I think "fun-bots" are dangerously close to bots that gain competitive advantage

why is him having fun such a horrible concept?

@Learath2 that wasnt meant sarcasticly or something

you can have fun with things that should be disallowed

so you cant enforce the no cheating rule as you dont see when someone is cheating?

that's not a new concept

Think of why you actually hate botting. I feel it's our arbitrary rule that created this hate

no, this is very common in gaming communities

18:24

modifying the client in illegitimate ways

We can't reliably detect anything that matters, we just end up creating unnecessary tension

but if we see people who're using things that can also be used as cheats, I think we should just remove them from the game

18:25

it just gives the idea that this would be OK

We aren't actively using anti-bot measures in the client like other games, if we wanted to do that we'd start with a way to lock down the usage of any other client

teeworlds has a major difference to other gaming communities. other games only care for the best times/world records so onle these matter and have to bechecked and verified. on teeworlds on the other hand points are what matters to most sadly so you would have to check every finish.

english please

@heinrich5991 which part of no cheating is ambiguous enough to allow people to think we are okay with botting that gains them advantages?

what is the command for shooting and doing the emote ghost at the same time?

I think it's more important that people are happy in the community then what makes our life easier as staff

"+shoot;emote <whateverghostwas>"

18:27

it makes it okay to use a cheat client, possibly resulting in other people also wanting to get that client, and resulting in more people actually cheating

18:28

because they're seeing it on the servers

punishing "harmless botters" can turn them to actual botters tho

it's security through obsecurity, make it harder to find bot clients, should we start handing out DMCAs to file-hosts that let people download it?

DMCA is something different

yes, a lot of trolls are doing it because they are disappointed in ddnet.

I don't think we should accomodate for people who want bad things for ddnet

you all know that i did stuff that was meant as a joke and i got hardly punishe dfopr it. kinda ruined the comunity aspect for me

like if I said: keep the "no botting" rule or I'll attack ddnet, then I don't think we should follow it because of that

18:30

hardly = severely you mean?

how does botting in a way that doesn't change anything (that we/the community cares about) accomodate for people who want bad things?

that was @Im 'corneum

18:31

[11:29 AM] Im 'corneum: yes, a lot of trolls are doing it because they are disappointed in ddnet. [11:29 AM] heinrich5991: I don't think we should accomodate for people who want bad things for ddnet

it varied @heinrich5991 some punishments were okay lik ethe first botban. but some i still dont understand until today

I wouldn't go as far to say "botting => wanting bad things for ddnet"

18:32

also how would we know what's bad for ddnet in the long run? We can only know what the majority wants currently, we aren't oracles that can forsee the future, we can only observe the current situation

18:32

and currently I see a lot of unnecessary tension created by the rule

finding the local minimum doesn't sound good

18:33

I think allowing bots to thrive will be bad for ddnet in the long run, if we want to not allow whatever "cheating" is in the future

im probably not the right person to say that because of me being a former botter, but i think the teehistorian thing might not be good in the long run.

why?

teehistorian makes you feel watched all the times. its kind of like all the NSA thing going on. you basicly say "no worries if you have nothing to hide"

it's recording tee movements only, no chat or anything else

18:35

I think it's fairly common for racing games

do u think people will want to cheat when they see someone having a "fun-bot"?

(it doesn't record votes)

but it didnt use to be like this. and if people like N9mkOik find amazing cuts on ageold maps and they get deleted (even tho it wasnt bcs teehistorian) you just dont want to search for cuts anymore.

I think people will want to get the bot, and realize that they can cheat with it, as well

at which point the rule "no cheating" comes into effect and they get banned for it

yes, but that already created an annoying effect

18:37

I'd rather have less people banned

18:37

by simply disallowing cheat clients, less spread, less bans

with banning fun-botters you will end up with more bans

less spread is only because they get less visibility, not because they are available less

yes

speaking of it. the first month of my ban is almost over @heinrich5991 . are there any chances for be getting unbanned soon?

No

@Im 'corneum this is basically a "permanent" ban

@Im 'corneum when we fix the maps, we have to delete the now impossible to reach ranks

unless something changes, but I don't know now and I didn't know when the ban was enacted what that would be

so the ban is lifelong...

you just dont want to search for cuts anymore.

Not really a real shame that you are not the intended recipient, you can also be used to be a good idea to advertise the best way to get the best way to get the most important thing is that the information contained in this email.

thats nice for us xd

see? now i am disappointed again in ddnet for creating hope and then destroying it

where did we create hope?

snail said the ban is 2 months. you said i can ask in one month

18:40

now its forever

you were banned. you asked for an unban. I said: "what? we can start talking in a month, you were banned for cheating twice in a row, right after telling you not to"

18:42

this was to make it crystal-clear that I definitely won't consider an unban right after you were banned?!

so you see me as a hopeless case?

what would you say to someone who was caught botting right after they were told not to?

18:42

right after the ban for the first time ended?

i stopped botting for 30 days because its ramadan

@Deleted User mind your words

what

18:43

do you want from me

(just a general warning, you tend to escalate things ^^)

1

ok don't tag me just a general warning

lol

moin

@snail can i get unbannsd

@heinrich5991 i can only say that the first ban was to harmless. i thought i can risk it again fully knowing that i might be banned for even longer. but if i knew that its forever i wouldnt have done it. its just not worth it. how can i possebily prrove my remorse to you?

I don't know why you consider cheating to be OK if you know that the ban is short (edited)

sounds stupid but maybe even 2 chances arent enough

what if i bot with your name heinrich what r u gonna do

delete the ranks, probably?

ban heinrich banhammer

(edited)

syltox

18:46

dont be like konsti

18:46

reacting to his own messages

18:46

Good

18:46

ay

Anyways, I still dont feel no bots is a good way to put it bur if all of you feel its better not much I can say

why not just make a server for botters

lets make a poll

polls are troll magnets

reword rule or not

@Deleted User like a prison?

yes

send trolls blockers and botters to that server

thats what i exactly meant

not me cuh

I agree with @Im 'corneum, polls are hard

unless

18:48

im admin on that server

ud be the warden

you can try to make a fake option that trolls will feel funny for voting for. like i did

then make a poll where only the staff can vote?

Redirect name banned people to that server

but make the results public tho

18:49

@snail true

ok take the discussion back to intern channels

no, @Ryozuki will lynch us

not that intern channel

how do i get access for the secret nsfw channel

type bbhelp

be staff

bbhelp

18:51

?xd

18:51

why u bait

bbhelp?

dont ask

DDHelp

Bb=boobbot?

how come

19:08

jao is the only one that joined

19:09

i thought u guys r trolls

19:09

:/

can u not spam that here

@ezy dude that was just a troll

xD

@Moonlight h-hello, you're c-cute

2

add /botters to see who ever botted on the map that is online at the moment

19:34

and unban me for this nice idea

ban botters always

19:49

like every single other gaming community

everyone does it so it's right?

Is cheating by modificate client also to allow zooz on other gamemodes? monkaS

You can use dummy spectator + dummy copy to zooz with ddnet client anyway feelsgoodman

@Ryozuki Every single other gaming community isn't based around an OS game that's designed to be modified by the end-user

20:11

A blanket statement like "ban bots" should also apply to ddnets own dummy which has a built in aimbot and perfect hammerfly, but that's rather silly now isn't it?

20:11

Ban people that actively use bots to cheat? yes. Ban people using bots to mess around? why?

@Ravie 1player per ip at noby fng feelsbadman

@heinrich5991 ^^

@Deleted User where it is designed to be modified by the end user? code-wise?

Open source, moddable, no anticheat?

that doesn't mean its designed to be modified by the end user

20:30

most end-users wont even know how to modify it

server up for you guys?`

"Ban people using bots to mess around?" heinrich explained this several times, there is fine line that when u have fun with a bot you can start cheating with it

20:31

also all botters say its for fun

20:31

its the poorest excuse

20:31

have fun with another thing

I can't vote, why?

or host ur localserver with ur own rules

ddnet ger is down

20:31

?

DNSBL

lexin are u using a proxy?

20:31

or a vpn

20:32

@Lexin

no, it worked now

20:32

i restarted the client

weird

@Gwendal yes but smh not for everybody

I'm saying we can't even detect the bots we don't want, why punish the ones that are no harm

well, I'm arguing that they do indirectly harm

How Is an chatranking a cheat ? -.-