Should I ban Kyle9 for being a little cheater?
 

10 votes and he's out of here....

Based on this thread...
http://www.eqemulator.net/forums/vie...amp;highlight=

nuke his or her ass trump. they could spend their time helping the project and not try and be a pain in everyones ass..

the hemroid needs to go.

I would say drop his @$$... now where did i put that cream?

5 votes yes so far.. not looking good for you little buddy!

Maybe just post his ip and let individual server adms decide for themselves?

I dont feel that conveys a strong enough message. I dont think the eqemu community should tolerate people that are wiling to defraud us.

This is the type of person that gets your credit card # and purchases 5000 dollars worth of everquest equipment on Ebay... Or throws rocks through your window when youre not home.. This is someone who doesnt care how his actions hurt other people... Maybe we'll teach him a little through some 'tough love'...

I don't disagree with your ethics, just your policy. Giving the power to decide who plays and who does not to the hardworking individuals who actually run the servers makes a lot more sense than making administrative decisions based on the input of 10 pointless posters.

I respectively disgree, I feel it is the duty of the admins of the eqemu nexus to protect the community from people like this.. Server owners themselves might not visit the forums for weeks, while nefarious forces are rampaging across their servers... Whose to say they will ever even see the note?

As far as 10 pointless posters, thats like saying its pointless to elect a president on the votes of 100 million worthless rednecks.

I'll up the ante then, say 20 'yeas' . would that encompass enough that some 'worthwhile posters' might be included ?

Who's to say that the admin in question would necessarily have views in line with the "nexus" and not the poster? I have mentioned before that I think that server owners should be given as much power as posible in governing their servers - this case is no exception. Since booting this person probably isn't an effective proactive security measure, I think your motivation in this case is purely punitive. That being the case, the most punsishing action is probably to release as much information about the person as possibile. Server OPs who actually care can ban by ip. Server ops who don't can harass the player. Schoolmates can throw rocks. Whatever.

That would be 100% true if you're not one of the 100 million rednecks. I try to respect everyone's opinion, but that isn't to say that I think everyone deserves equal say in all matters. Quite the contrary - I believe that when it comes to server admin issues the server admin should maintain absolute sovereignty. This would certainly be a much hotter topic if not all of the popular servers belonged to devs.

If I ran a server, I would want to be the only one able to decide whether or not this person could play on my server. To suggest that a vote of twenty nameless others should override my decisions as they relate to my own hardware and bandwidth would be like slapping my face. That isn't to say that I would not appreciate public opinion. However, the buck should ultimately stop with the person running the server. I don't see any way to argue otherwise.

But thats not the way the system here works, regardless of the way you think it should be. The login process is centralized here, and server owners, should they not like that system, are free to develop their own login solutions. There is a centralized administration in place here that overrides those of the server owners. Is this fair? Of course it is, we built the project up from the ground floor along with alot of dedicated community members, and this is the system we decided upon. If a server owner feels like we are robbing him, then please feel free to let me know.
Some people like the centralization ,some dont, but all are free to do what they will with it. Operating a server does not give you complete and total soverignity within EQEmu, server owners can abuse power just like anyone else, it has happened in the past, so I'm not sure what argument is valid that all power should be consolidated at that level.

You'll have to excuse me if I say this, but thats just a blantantly stupid idea, if i am reading your intentions correctly. For me to release private information concerning him to the entire word and open him up to possible attack/reprecussions is civicly irresponsible. I dont want to see him harassed, attacked, humilated, but I am hoping that he can learn a lesson. On what planet is it better to potentially endanger someone by releasing private information concerning them than it is to slap them on the list by ostracizing them from your virtual community. Im not following your reasoning at all, that we should not ban him, but we should publicize his personal credentials.

IPs change, so banning an ip is not a particularlly good solution, you need to plug the leak at the source, not continue to bail water.

Regardless of his faults here, he is , by his own admission, a child, and as such I expect him to do childish things, but that does not mean that I think it is necessary to open him or his family up to public attack by people who feel they are acting as vigiliantes, which is known to happen.. Look at SCO for example...

Honestly, I dont see any way to argue otherwise .

Why did you ask for opinions on whether or not this kid should be banned? The only sensible reason is that you felt that people other than yourself were capable of assessing his behavior and choosing appropriate responses. Why, then, do you think that you are the only one who is mature enough to responsibly handle the burden of knowing this kid's personal details? If your interests are really geared towards protecting the property and privacy of any that this kid may attack, then why would you _not_ release all information that may aid in defending against him? I play diablo, too. What's to say that banning him from eqemu is really going to help me protect myself from him? I certainly don't see why my suggestion is _stupid_. Look at the way the rest of the world handles software security. Vendors do everything in their power to _inform_ their users of security threats. There is just too much to lose by maintaining a snotty and incorrect "I know what's best for my users" attitude.


You say that you are incapable of understanding my reasoning -- that very much definitiely seems to be true.


Some kid says that he wants to exploit gamers. He mentions that he develops software that helps him to do so. If you ban him, I am no better able to protect myself from him than if you don't. Giving out whatever information you may have on him, however, may or may not enable me to better protect myself from him in the future. Isn't that, after all, what your goal is? How on Earth did you contort this into a situation where it is _him_ that you're trying to protect from _me_? That's just downright offensive.

Egin if you dont agree with him and don't feel like he should be banned then vote no its just as simple as that. I though did vote yes, but not just use of his propose to scam the DII community but by the fact that it can work on everything including everquest, I don't know about you but I don't want my users getting tricked ing downloading the program, do you know how i would spend the rest of my day, thats right reimbursing money and items and other things wich is pretty hard to prove unless i see it myself.

okay to put an end to this, i have banned him before ( for reasons i dont owe to you or anyone else outside of the admin team ).

I (YES ME OMG) am banning him reguardless of this thread. dont like it? feel free to contact me in email. Any further talk of this in this thread is pointless.

Eglin, you're arguments are completely contradictory of one another, they make absolutely no sense to me... Thats why I fail to ascertain what youre talking about.

As I stated in my post, your reasoning, as I understood it, was a horrible idea. If I took it the wrong way, then my apologies, but I dont think releasing private information is an acceptable solution.
Yes, my post was very harsh and I realize that, but you cant stand upon a pedastel and claim that you have exercised restraint in some of your almost mocking posts. After reading a few of those this morning, I wondered, why bother with restraint so I said it like I saw it.

As far as who's mature and who's not, when a name/email address/user info is submitted to eqemu for validation purposes, I consider that information to be private, and would only release it if there was some sort of wrongdoing, in this case there is not, only the threat thereof. The difference is that users of EQEMU have entrusted that information with us, not to the world, and unless there is some pressing reason, I would not put that information up for grabs. Be thankful that we dont, valid email lists are very popular trade items amoung spammers. Its for everyones protection.. Be glad that these are our ethics, otherwise if one of the dev's was angry with you, he could release your IP information, email information , etc, out of spite and try to convince others to DOS you, email bomb, send virii , etc.

How did I contort the situation?? YOU'RE THE ONE THAT CONTORTED IT! My god, I just suggested banning him from the community, you're the one that stated 'dont ban him', release his private information. Its not my duty to protect the world from wrongdoers, but I do have a duty to try and protect the users here. If you had stated , 'ban him, then post his info' it might have made some sense! I still would have disagreed , but then your logic would have been sound.

It sounds to me that regardless of the solutions, you are going to argue.

I have absolutely no ill will towards you or anyone else regarding this, this was a debate as far as I am concerned. I still stand by my judgement however, I dont feel that releasing someones information is an option unless said person performs attacks of some kind, which has not happened yet.

I'm actually surprised it took this long to rid these boards of him.