Well did not read all the text until now, because I am a little tired - but it´s an interesting discussion and all in all the concept looks fine to me. Maybe the guideline is a bit to weak.
Just something about the languages: IF we want a comitee with all thas regularies and formalities we also need someone who speaks a language VERY properly for each of the main (and maybe also the other) languages used in the game.
Why? Simple answer: A good and highly evaluated language garants a higher acceptance by all the players in here from a psychological point of view AND it´s important to give comitee a legitimation. How should a group of people judge somebody if they are not able to communicate the result of the discussion and the reasons for fining or not fining somebody without any missunderstoods.
It is also a principle of constitutional legality - Every defendant has the right to defend himself in the language he is used with.
All the other points discussed in here will be mentioned by me in another post when I have more time the next days.
So long
Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
Moderators: systemmods, fairplaymods
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
I am glad that I can little English, otherwise I would apply here 
dazu wenig im Forum aktiv. ich weiß nicht mal wer alles im FC sitzt.
dazu wenig im Forum aktiv. ich weiß nicht mal wer alles im FC sitzt.
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
A comment by Buhmann or lesossies would be great too 
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said.
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
Zum Beispiel ich (um die dunkle Seite der Macht zu vertreten) ausserdem, Widar, Aux, Moto, Adler, Quick und weitereLiberty wrote:I am glad that I can little English, otherwise I would apply here
dazu wenig im Forum aktiv. ich weiß nicht mal wer alles im FC sitzt.
For example me (to help the dark side of power) and Widar, Aux, Moto, Adler, Quick and others.
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
And who are these others?Chense wrote:and others.
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said.
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
I am to lazy to look after it now ... didnt even find the time to answer to the rest of your text (thanks for the effort) ... best ask buhteam fl wrote:And who are these others?Chense wrote:and others.
-
flockmastoR
- Posts: 3121
- Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
Me for exampleteam fl wrote:And who are these others?Chense wrote:and others.
Boaz Trakhtenbrot:
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
- Winner Giro 2022
- 10 GC wins
- 16.609 Eternal Points
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
It just seems that even people from the FC don't know the members exactly? 
and Chense, you don't seem to be the only one, sadly.
and Chense, you don't seem to be the only one, sadly.
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said.
-
flockmastoR
- Posts: 3121
- Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
I just know the ones active, because they set their Fine proposal and talk about the cases, if there are any inactive members, how could i know?team fl wrote:It just seems that even people from the FC don't know the members exactly?
and Chense, you don't seem to be the only one, sadly.
Boaz Trakhtenbrot:
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
- Winner Giro 2022
- 10 GC wins
- 16.609 Eternal Points
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
I thought there would be something like a list. But that's not part of this thread's topic. It would be much nicer to have as many opinions by the current FC as possible about the proposal. And even if it is just that it is not necessary/good/whatever.
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said.
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
No there is no list :/ Sorry Flocke i forgot you ... also just named the active members but there is always one falling through the sieb (what a nice wordgame for RSF hahahateam fl wrote:I thought there would be something like a list. But that's not part of this thread's topic. It would be much nicer to have as many opinions by the current FC as possible about the proposal. And even if it is just that it is not necessary/good/whatever.
)Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
Another thing for this stillborn reform concept:
Give members the power to write ingame messages.
Example see offline specialists with mass tempo like Thorsson. Before taking them out of a race, send them a message. Communication beats punishment in 99% of cases.
Right now the committee actually has the power to kick people like Thorsson out of the race. If enough members vote for it (I think Buh wrote something like that once) But not the power to send an ingame message as a warning? Stupid.
But of course I don't trust the committee right now to be able to write a normal friendly uninsulting message to people like Thorsson. Plus don't trust it to take the right decision when to kick somebody out either, but the number needed to do that seems to be so high that it never happens anyway. Good thing.
So: Give the committee member the power to write ingame warnings. BUT, automatically send a copy to Buhmann, so he can see if the content and the tone are appropriate. (No: You are destroying the race for everybody, stop it or we will kick you out of the game, but: Dear Thorsson. It has come to our attention that you motherfucker often put all the riders in tempo and then are offline. RSF is an online game, try only to inscribe for a race when you can manage to be online at the time of the race. And please read the following pages for a better understanding of the game : www.robyisgreat.com www.ilovefabulous.com etc. By being offline and having all your riders in tempo you're influencing the race in a negative way without any benefit for yourself and taking the fun from a lot the other players that are online. Thank you.) Ok, maybe not perfect either....
The problem of course is once again that Buhmann is to lazy to change anything even if a member would consistently write shit.... so maybe don't send the copy of the ingame messages only to Buhmann but to a third person as well. Not a FC member, sort of a supervisor. His role would only be to check if the tone and content of the ingamemessages are appropriate, and if not to a) tell that to the FC member in question, b) put pressure on Buh to fire that member if his communication skills don't improve.
Anyway, there are many things that could and should be made better with the FC. Give them some powers, organize them better, clarify their role, makes it clearer for them too, but in the end most the most important things are: Communication, transparency and accountability. Teach them to communicate. They are useless at it it seems. A certain degree of transparency. Teach the public what the role of the members actually is. Have them keep the public informed of the progress of different cases. Recommendation sent to Buhmann. Case closed. Bla bla. And transparency for them too, by having Buhmann automatically inform them of the punishment given out, something that isn't happening right now (doesn't mean the public always needs to know the punishment, but the members need to) And accountability, you make shit, you are out. Doesn't mean they have to be perfect and make 0 mistakes. But doesn't have to be like now that once you're in you are in regardless of what you do, regardless of how much shit you do.
But: Power to send supervised ingame messages for the FC.
Have them keep a log in the forum about sent messages. Member a sends a message to user c. Have member a post a note in the forum. Warning message for offline masstempo sent to user c. No need for the text. So the users KNOW as well that somethign is actually happening. And then you might get more feedback from the community if there is a perceived problem with somebody as well, right now there is lots of ingame whining, only a fraction of cases are reported, since the feeling is that nothing is happening. Of course in the end that is, how else could it be, Buhmanns fault. He simply doesn't give a flying fuck about the whole thing, a position I actually fully understand and support. Nothing more boring than the endless whining of the victims that are unable to put a rider in tempo if an offliner attacks with 7 50-60 at km one. Wää wäää wäää, DO SOMETHING, TEAM ATTACK, OFFLINER, DESTROYING THE GAME. Well, just put a 48-80 in tempo red, tell a few others to do the same, you'll have the bad boy in 5 km at the most. But no, rather do nothing and then WHINE. I wouldn't do shit either if I was Buh, grow up and do something little whiny users. Doesn't change the fact that some of the complaints of course are valid, see Thorsson. And often they are not reported, since well, nobody knows if anything will happen. So, keep a log of sent ingame messages on a thread in the forum, more people will report cases that are indeed a nuisance like Thorsson, of course we'll have cases of "he attacked with 7 50-60 and destroyed the race because I was to stupid to think for myself and just catch him"... send those guys a message too.... the ape will comment about the wussiness of the complainer in the thread opened by said user.
Communication, transparency, accountability, it's really basic.
Give members the power to write ingame messages.
Example see offline specialists with mass tempo like Thorsson. Before taking them out of a race, send them a message. Communication beats punishment in 99% of cases.
Right now the committee actually has the power to kick people like Thorsson out of the race. If enough members vote for it (I think Buh wrote something like that once) But not the power to send an ingame message as a warning? Stupid.
But of course I don't trust the committee right now to be able to write a normal friendly uninsulting message to people like Thorsson. Plus don't trust it to take the right decision when to kick somebody out either, but the number needed to do that seems to be so high that it never happens anyway. Good thing.
So: Give the committee member the power to write ingame warnings. BUT, automatically send a copy to Buhmann, so he can see if the content and the tone are appropriate. (No: You are destroying the race for everybody, stop it or we will kick you out of the game, but: Dear Thorsson. It has come to our attention that you motherfucker often put all the riders in tempo and then are offline. RSF is an online game, try only to inscribe for a race when you can manage to be online at the time of the race. And please read the following pages for a better understanding of the game : www.robyisgreat.com www.ilovefabulous.com etc. By being offline and having all your riders in tempo you're influencing the race in a negative way without any benefit for yourself and taking the fun from a lot the other players that are online. Thank you.) Ok, maybe not perfect either....
The problem of course is once again that Buhmann is to lazy to change anything even if a member would consistently write shit.... so maybe don't send the copy of the ingame messages only to Buhmann but to a third person as well. Not a FC member, sort of a supervisor. His role would only be to check if the tone and content of the ingamemessages are appropriate, and if not to a) tell that to the FC member in question, b) put pressure on Buh to fire that member if his communication skills don't improve.
Anyway, there are many things that could and should be made better with the FC. Give them some powers, organize them better, clarify their role, makes it clearer for them too, but in the end most the most important things are: Communication, transparency and accountability. Teach them to communicate. They are useless at it it seems. A certain degree of transparency. Teach the public what the role of the members actually is. Have them keep the public informed of the progress of different cases. Recommendation sent to Buhmann. Case closed. Bla bla. And transparency for them too, by having Buhmann automatically inform them of the punishment given out, something that isn't happening right now (doesn't mean the public always needs to know the punishment, but the members need to) And accountability, you make shit, you are out. Doesn't mean they have to be perfect and make 0 mistakes. But doesn't have to be like now that once you're in you are in regardless of what you do, regardless of how much shit you do.
But: Power to send supervised ingame messages for the FC.
Have them keep a log in the forum about sent messages. Member a sends a message to user c. Have member a post a note in the forum. Warning message for offline masstempo sent to user c. No need for the text. So the users KNOW as well that somethign is actually happening. And then you might get more feedback from the community if there is a perceived problem with somebody as well, right now there is lots of ingame whining, only a fraction of cases are reported, since the feeling is that nothing is happening. Of course in the end that is, how else could it be, Buhmanns fault. He simply doesn't give a flying fuck about the whole thing, a position I actually fully understand and support. Nothing more boring than the endless whining of the victims that are unable to put a rider in tempo if an offliner attacks with 7 50-60 at km one. Wää wäää wäää, DO SOMETHING, TEAM ATTACK, OFFLINER, DESTROYING THE GAME. Well, just put a 48-80 in tempo red, tell a few others to do the same, you'll have the bad boy in 5 km at the most. But no, rather do nothing and then WHINE. I wouldn't do shit either if I was Buh, grow up and do something little whiny users. Doesn't change the fact that some of the complaints of course are valid, see Thorsson. And often they are not reported, since well, nobody knows if anything will happen. So, keep a log of sent ingame messages on a thread in the forum, more people will report cases that are indeed a nuisance like Thorsson, of course we'll have cases of "he attacked with 7 50-60 and destroyed the race because I was to stupid to think for myself and just catch him"... send those guys a message too.... the ape will comment about the wussiness of the complainer in the thread opened by said user.
Communication, transparency, accountability, it's really basic.
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!
-
flockmastoR
- Posts: 3121
- Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
Hm maybe some "voreingestellte" (leo it yourself) massages for: team attack, tempo with all riders,... in all languages so nobody has to read all this stupid massages a second time.
Boaz Trakhtenbrot:
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
- Winner Giro 2022
- 10 GC wins
- 16.609 Eternal Points
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
I like that.Communication, transparency, accountability
Sounds nice to me too. But a Supervisor will be hard to fint. And I don't think Buhmann will have time to read all the messages.Give the committee member the power to write ingame warnings.
Good start. BUT: make a log for every account, where you keep track of: such ingame messages, warnings, punishments (for what).Have them keep a log in the forum about sent messages.
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said.
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
Massages? Full body massage? Coooooooooool. I start team attacks today!
Prewritten ones ok. But what needs to be clear to all the members is WHEN to write/send such messages. IMO it should be restricted (at first and with this group as members indefinetly) to clearly defined cases. SEe Thorson. See CC Quintanensesensesomething. Mostly newcomers that don't know something. Maybe add a nice one for suspected multiaccounts. Dear user, some other users suspect that you are using more than one account. If their suspicions are true, all your accounts except one will be deleted. Please register at the forum and give an explanation in this and this thread. Ok...Define WHEN those ingame messages should be written. then write them. BUT, give the members the option not to use a pre written phrase, to personalize it. And while I don't really trust all members to be actually able (Viva Star trek) to write sensible messages, they really should be able to do that. If not, kick them. And no sending of ingame messages for other reasons. Ok, Mathe writes to CC whatever former step: We discovered you have a multi account plus you are austrian and like to drink water with lemon in it, grrrr... ok ok, some jokes sometimes to friends, who cares. But don't send other stuff to friends, warnings to ennemies etc. No abuse.
Supervisor, I want one .Don't trust youuuuuu guys. Ok, might not trust the supervisor either.
But all sent ingame messages by FC committee members should be reviewed.
FL, logs in the forum. Mmhh, for those simple ingame messages and massages, yes, one thread, nobody writes anything except the FC members. Message sent to a for "offline tempo", repeated team attacks etc. Warning sent. Transparency, basic information for other users, you see something is being done. For warnings, punishments... not sure. see an earlier post, IMO it's not 100% necessary to publicize all fines, punishments. In some cases it should be, multis, in others, I really don't care. It really doesn't have much interest for anybody. Every case is different, posting all the fines punishment could just lead to endless protests because user a got this, while user b got this. Even though it's very similar things, but still not the same.
INGAME, yes, there should be an automized log that the FC members see each time Buh gives out his devilish punishment. Right now as far as I know the FC members have no clue. They should really form a labour union to improve their working conditions. Forum, public, no. But the FC members should keep the popcorn eating public informed, wrote that already... mmh, could it be that I sometimes repeat myself? Don't think so. Mmh, maybe I sometimes repeat myself? No, wouldn't happen. So recommandation sent, post it in the case thread. Informed by the new clever automatism that x has received a fine, punishment, nothing. Post: Case closed. Finished, expect no further problem from this case. Done. Post the punishment or not depending on the guidelines for publicizing it or not. Right now no guidelines, but Buh has handled it as "don't post" publicly. IMO should be depending on the offence, but has to be discussed. mmh, somehow think I already wrote that all before.. but don't think I ever repeat myself.
Prewritten ones ok. But what needs to be clear to all the members is WHEN to write/send such messages. IMO it should be restricted (at first and with this group as members indefinetly) to clearly defined cases. SEe Thorson. See CC Quintanensesensesomething. Mostly newcomers that don't know something. Maybe add a nice one for suspected multiaccounts. Dear user, some other users suspect that you are using more than one account. If their suspicions are true, all your accounts except one will be deleted. Please register at the forum and give an explanation in this and this thread. Ok...Define WHEN those ingame messages should be written. then write them. BUT, give the members the option not to use a pre written phrase, to personalize it. And while I don't really trust all members to be actually able (Viva Star trek) to write sensible messages, they really should be able to do that. If not, kick them. And no sending of ingame messages for other reasons. Ok, Mathe writes to CC whatever former step: We discovered you have a multi account plus you are austrian and like to drink water with lemon in it, grrrr... ok ok, some jokes sometimes to friends, who cares. But don't send other stuff to friends, warnings to ennemies etc. No abuse.
Supervisor, I want one .Don't trust youuuuuu guys. Ok, might not trust the supervisor either.
But all sent ingame messages by FC committee members should be reviewed. FL, logs in the forum. Mmhh, for those simple ingame messages and massages, yes, one thread, nobody writes anything except the FC members. Message sent to a for "offline tempo", repeated team attacks etc. Warning sent. Transparency, basic information for other users, you see something is being done. For warnings, punishments... not sure. see an earlier post, IMO it's not 100% necessary to publicize all fines, punishments. In some cases it should be, multis, in others, I really don't care. It really doesn't have much interest for anybody. Every case is different, posting all the fines punishment could just lead to endless protests because user a got this, while user b got this. Even though it's very similar things, but still not the same.
INGAME, yes, there should be an automized log that the FC members see each time Buh gives out his devilish punishment. Right now as far as I know the FC members have no clue. They should really form a labour union to improve their working conditions. Forum, public, no. But the FC members should keep the popcorn eating public informed, wrote that already... mmh, could it be that I sometimes repeat myself? Don't think so. Mmh, maybe I sometimes repeat myself? No, wouldn't happen. So recommandation sent, post it in the case thread. Informed by the new clever automatism that x has received a fine, punishment, nothing. Post: Case closed. Finished, expect no further problem from this case. Done. Post the punishment or not depending on the guidelines for publicizing it or not. Right now no guidelines, but Buh has handled it as "don't post" publicly. IMO should be depending on the offence, but has to be discussed. mmh, somehow think I already wrote that all before.. but don't think I ever repeat myself.
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!
-
deuseburger
- Posts: 187
- Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 1:50 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
just a friendly reminder...
especialy fl´s opening post is just to good to be forgotten (ie, to loaf around on page 2) and the theme imho is way to important to be ignored...
cheers deuse...
especialy fl´s opening post is just to good to be forgotten (ie, to loaf around on page 2) and the theme imho is way to important to be ignored...
cheers deuse...
"Listen to everyone, read everything, believe nothing unless you can prove it in your own research."
Milton William Cooper
Milton William Cooper
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
Any reform has to start with new members... still don't know exactly who is in the committee, but without thinking about it too long there are at least 4 members that shouldn't be in.
Alphabetically:
Adler: Now he has a forum account. Good. But, he isn't riding anymore.... Doubt he's active there, I mean, why would you be active in the fairness committee and not ride? Why have dead weight, non active people in the committee? Does he plan a restart? Second point IMO is still that a guy with his fairness understanding shouldn't be there... TdF 09? 10? don't remember, but he sits a team in the evening, big chaos, with a team attack (by the awesome weedn?) that at first nobody sees, than near the end all hell breaks lose in that group, teamattack is seen xx km after it happened, insults, endless complaints in the forum, lots of work for Buh. Adlers comment later in the spec chat: "I had seen the team attack, but didn't mention it because it helped the team I was sitting". Sorry, that is the wrong attitude, out. Even if he was still riding.
Amor Lux: (His signature at least says he's in) He seems to have done nothing since he's in. Doesn't understand the system was his public complaint. Hasn't been active for a long time, just came back to the game now. Not sure how long, how much time he has now, but why keep dead weight in the committee(s) ?
Auxilium Torino: For the Italia Cycling case. viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2180 Prosecutor, judge, jury, all in one. Ban for a guy that had insulted him and others. First documented offence. Very bad insults, like coglione. The same insult Aux btw uses in the Italian part of the forum when talking about others.... With that first insult-ban policy Petit Singe should be banned, Auxilium Torino should be banned, almost everybody should be banned. When questioned, both before and after the verdict, refusal to communicate with others. His usual boring whining victim routine. And the usual racism accusations for people who disagree with him.
Motorizzati: For the Pirati-Equipe-(Aux) case: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2466 He has to be out of the committee anyway. If his accusation is correct, then as he says himself for covering equipe/pirati for a long time .If he's accusation is wrong, then of course he's unacceptable too in his position.
Alphabetically:
Adler: Now he has a forum account. Good. But, he isn't riding anymore.... Doubt he's active there, I mean, why would you be active in the fairness committee and not ride? Why have dead weight, non active people in the committee? Does he plan a restart? Second point IMO is still that a guy with his fairness understanding shouldn't be there... TdF 09? 10? don't remember, but he sits a team in the evening, big chaos, with a team attack (by the awesome weedn?) that at first nobody sees, than near the end all hell breaks lose in that group, teamattack is seen xx km after it happened, insults, endless complaints in the forum, lots of work for Buh. Adlers comment later in the spec chat: "I had seen the team attack, but didn't mention it because it helped the team I was sitting". Sorry, that is the wrong attitude, out. Even if he was still riding.
Amor Lux: (His signature at least says he's in) He seems to have done nothing since he's in. Doesn't understand the system was his public complaint. Hasn't been active for a long time, just came back to the game now. Not sure how long, how much time he has now, but why keep dead weight in the committee(s) ?
Auxilium Torino: For the Italia Cycling case. viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2180 Prosecutor, judge, jury, all in one. Ban for a guy that had insulted him and others. First documented offence. Very bad insults, like coglione. The same insult Aux btw uses in the Italian part of the forum when talking about others.... With that first insult-ban policy Petit Singe should be banned, Auxilium Torino should be banned, almost everybody should be banned. When questioned, both before and after the verdict, refusal to communicate with others. His usual boring whining victim routine. And the usual racism accusations for people who disagree with him.
Motorizzati: For the Pirati-Equipe-(Aux) case: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2466 He has to be out of the committee anyway. If his accusation is correct, then as he says himself for covering equipe/pirati for a long time .If he's accusation is wrong, then of course he's unacceptable too in his position.
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!
-
el Galactico
- Posts: 908
- Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 5:12 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
Add Gala please.
Reason: Mobbing by Buhmann. Said it like 3 times that i want to be taken out of the FC, but nothing done until now
Reason: Mobbing by Buhmann. Said it like 3 times that i want to be taken out of the FC, but nothing done until now
Rodrigo Tellez - Winner of Tour Down Under 2023!!!
Siempre Campeones! Hala Galacticos!!
Statistics
Hall of Fame
Cyclist of the Month
Siempre Campeones! Hala Galacticos!!
Statistics
Hall of Fame
Cyclist of the Month
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
The whoel fairplay thing does not work at the moment...
We have 2 big problems:
1. The automatically ban of teams does not work because of any bug. I must fix this.
2. The members are not voting anymore.
I think we have to do the folllowing: Fix the bug. cancel all running fairplay proposals. And hope the the members vote again or find new members.
We have 2 big problems:
1. The automatically ban of teams does not work because of any bug. I must fix this.
2. The members are not voting anymore.
I think we have to do the folllowing: Fix the bug. cancel all running fairplay proposals. And hope the the members vote again or find new members.
-
flockmastoR
- Posts: 3121
- Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
The members are maybe tired of waiting months for a decising by you and so they may think "why should i vote now and nothing happens"
okay its me who thinks so, kick me please for that
okay its me who thinks so, kick me please for that
Boaz Trakhtenbrot:
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
- Winner Giro 2022
- 10 GC wins
- 16.609 Eternal Points
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
I confessed that is my fault, too. But it is fact, that nobody is voting. I have no open fairplay entries where more than 1 members has voted.
-
flockmastoR
- Posts: 3121
- Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
1) Equipe - Aux - Pirati
Still no clue what happened there, Equipe doesnt say anything to that but he is active in forum and in races, if he doesnt say anything about it, kick him, if Aux doesnt say anything about the remaining questions, kick him (at least out of the FPK, he is there much to long now). Okay auf Deutsch weil mir danach ist. Was sollen wir auch abstimmen wenns keine informationen gibt. Gibts diesen equipe manager überhaupt oder ist es ein pirati multi, wusste aux davon, hat er die ganze Rundfahrt mit Equipe bestritten?
2) Pavler/Sporties/ProTourTeam und "noch viele mehr"
Sind das Multis? Vorher sollen wir das wissen, bugatti sagt ja, sagt gäbe noch mehr teams, sagt habe überall das selbe pw, kann man das nachvollziehen und alle mit dem PW rausfinden, kicken?
3) Bugatti hacking the teams above and sprinting
sollte wenn das stimmt (und angeblich hätte er es schonmal wo gesagt) schon eine Strafe geben
2+3 habe ich gerade erst eröffnet, wollte warten ob Pavler-Sproties zum hacking etwas sagen, nichts aber das unterstützt wohl nohc mehr die multi-option
4) Whatever + KKB multi?
Was sollen wir hier ohne Wissen abstimmen?
5) calzaturieri - rapagnanese
Wieder Multi, nichts zu machen für uns
6) San Francisco Classic - 9h - RMC Cyclisme**
wieder Multi
7) clodo team/cleps team
Oha wieder multi
Sonst sehe ich nichts offen allso sag mir wo ich abstimmen soll
Still no clue what happened there, Equipe doesnt say anything to that but he is active in forum and in races, if he doesnt say anything about it, kick him, if Aux doesnt say anything about the remaining questions, kick him (at least out of the FPK, he is there much to long now). Okay auf Deutsch weil mir danach ist. Was sollen wir auch abstimmen wenns keine informationen gibt. Gibts diesen equipe manager überhaupt oder ist es ein pirati multi, wusste aux davon, hat er die ganze Rundfahrt mit Equipe bestritten?
2) Pavler/Sporties/ProTourTeam und "noch viele mehr"
Sind das Multis? Vorher sollen wir das wissen, bugatti sagt ja, sagt gäbe noch mehr teams, sagt habe überall das selbe pw, kann man das nachvollziehen und alle mit dem PW rausfinden, kicken?
3) Bugatti hacking the teams above and sprinting
sollte wenn das stimmt (und angeblich hätte er es schonmal wo gesagt) schon eine Strafe geben
2+3 habe ich gerade erst eröffnet, wollte warten ob Pavler-Sproties zum hacking etwas sagen, nichts aber das unterstützt wohl nohc mehr die multi-option
4) Whatever + KKB multi?
Was sollen wir hier ohne Wissen abstimmen?
5) calzaturieri - rapagnanese
Wieder Multi, nichts zu machen für uns
6) San Francisco Classic - 9h - RMC Cyclisme**
wieder Multi
7) clodo team/cleps team
Oha wieder multi
Sonst sehe ich nichts offen allso sag mir wo ich abstimmen soll
Boaz Trakhtenbrot:
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
- Winner Giro 2022
- 10 GC wins
- 16.609 Eternal Points
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
Da Typen, wie Aux, noch immer im FC sind, hat das ganze an Sinnhaftigkeit für mich verloren und ich bin froh, dass die Jury in jetziger Zusammensetzung nirgends votet!
J-Czucz hype train
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
As i said: The automatic ban is broken. It does not work. And that is the problem.Still no clue what happened there, Equipe doesnt say anything to that but he is active in forum and in races, if he doesnt say anything about it, kick him, if Aux doesnt say anything about the remaining questions, kick him (at least out of the FPK, he is there much to long now).
Because of that we have some very old open fairplay proposals. If i ban now all which should be banned for soome weeks, it would not be very good. So i would prefer close all fairplay proporsals and restart working in the comitte without bugs and with votings.
-
flockmastoR
- Posts: 3121
- Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fairplay Committee Reform Concept (FCRC)
aber schieb "uns" nicht den Miesepeter zu den es nicht gibt, das Ban zeug ist kaputt ok, aber sonst ist zur Zeit wirklich auch nichts zu tun für uns, ok FL jetzt ja mit nem neuen Fall da
Boaz Trakhtenbrot:
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
- Winner Giro 2022
- 10 GC wins
- 16.609 Eternal Points
Schrödinger's Dogs: Alive & Dead
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests