Oblivion out of EQL3

2006-04-18 13:46 by sassa

Oblivion has been kicked out of EQL after getting their second warning.
They have been caught ghosting in their game vs SSC and all of their games will be deleted.
We have been talking about this case for 1 week now to gather all the information and have finally made a decision.

Some info about the ghosting that accured:

Fnosk joined their vent channel not knowing that it was a EQL game and helping his teamm8s during the first map (dm3). I saw/listen to this and took a talk with him in another ventrilo channel to ask him what he was doing and he answered me that it was not EQL, it was pracc.

Directly after he found out that it was a EQL game he told me that he was very sorry about what he did but he didnt knew it was EQL.

Even though he didnt knew, his teammates should have told him to go the fuck out of the vent channel or shut up and not give hints about the enemys.
This is their seccond warning (first warning was given when they played with hagge even though he wasent in their playerlist).

Many teams use mm3 and if you want to be sure that they dont cheat ask an admin to step i,n their vent channel and see how many ppl they got there.

Im very sorry to have lost a team like Obvilion in eql and hope that they will be back for EQL4.

/The EQL-team

Ghosts, like ladies, never speak till spoke to
- Richard Harris Barham

---

Comments

#151 2006-04-18 19:07 by nas (83.226.240.XXX)

actuallt=actually

:)

#152 2006-04-18 19:09 by c (213.65.179.XXX)

When I've read the posts from Oblivion they doesn't seem to deny that they have ghosted so why all this talk about evidence? a confession is evidence enough, it' s obvious that some oblivion member have been on the ventchannel doing some ghosting. In this case sassa have heard this himself andhe must be considered as a judge in this decision.

#153 2006-04-18 19:14 by mipa (80.186.154.XXX)

i wonder who that anonymous person is 15:29:54 <[ServeMe]08> -qw- gawksane - #ibh : OMG OBLIVION CAUGHT ON GHOSTING -> eql.quakeworld.nu..

#154 2006-04-18 19:17 by cpe (158.75.215.XXX)

drama continue
one news = 150+ comms
:|

#155 2006-04-18 19:18 by lib (213.100.62.XXX)

trashie = comedy gold

also, kinda bg o

#156 2006-04-18 19:25 by Diki (85.76.253.XXX)

hahahahah so owned... you noskillzzzzz

#157 2006-04-18 19:26 by menth0l (82.181.141.XXX)

c: actually a number of their members denied it which is why the entire debate started in the first place.

#158 2006-04-18 19:29 by knast (84.147.51.XXX)

oh, i did not know what happens, but i though fnosk's clan was kicked after the 2. warning ?

#159 2006-04-18 19:30 by almeida (213.113.151.XXX)

leave irc !:P

#160 2006-04-18 19:30 by almeida (213.113.151.XXX)

#22 2006-04-18 14:33 by Ari (84.251.171.XXX)

hmm, so it is ok to ghost in practice games?



jeeeeeppp

#161 2006-04-18 19:54 by almeida (213.113.151.XXX)

Oblivion and SD was (is?) big rivals and to annoy them we named up BGSD in a EQL-game. Sassa was furious and forced us to use BGSD as prefix for the rest of the season, otherwise he would kick us out for fakeprefixing. We found it pretty ironic and had quite a few laughs about it. "


errr.. what happens with the clan who plays without prefix?

#162 2006-04-18 19:56 by contender (81.236.21.XXX)

Is it ok for me to join a div5clan for the rest of the season (coming seasons aswell) ?
Havent been playing much the past 3-4months so I guess skill wise div5 would be good.

#163 2006-04-18 20:01 by sassa (213.113.96.XXX)

knast, oblivion was kicked after recieving their second warning.
fnosk might have unintentionally said "enemy at lift....." and it is a minor ghosting and for that they recieved a warning.

Im not saying O always ghosts or what ever, Im just saying that this is what happend. I know O wouldnt do this on porpuse in a off. game or any game at all but this happend one way or the other and we had to do something about it because it was their second warning.

I got no hate against any NQR nor Oblivion, I like them all despite what they have said today. What happend in NQR stayed there. After 2 days of the NQR thingy I wasnt upset anymore. and again, this was not my call, it was EQL-ADMINS call

15:38] @nopee | but i serriously know sassa isnt as involved with the desicion as the other admins

We will all hope that you guys will be back in the next eql with or without me as admin.

nas its not a ban, its just a kick after 2 warnings

#164 2006-04-18 20:04 by almeida (213.113.151.XXX)

rewriting: what willl happend to the clans who plays without prefix?

#165 2006-04-18 20:05 by ]BGSR[Vladde (85.224.203.XXX)

Dagens drama h?ller verkligen inte samma standard som f?rr.

#166 2006-04-18 20:57 by contender (81.236.21.XXX)

plz...

#167 2006-04-18 21:10 by ]BGSR[Angua (82.182.32.XXX)

Verkligen inte vladde... tacka vet jag v?ra dramer..

#168 2006-04-18 21:21 by djevulsk (213.185.6.XXX)

i would just like to make one single comment in this thread and that is concerning the log pasted by daizuki. it was of course a typo and had the whole conversation been pasted it would have been very obvious that i just simply forgot a "didn't" which would make the sentence: "even if we DIDN'T ghost of course". thx daizuki, youre a great guy.

#169 2006-04-18 21:45 by daiz (82.209.190.XXX)

I'm the greatestest guy, but the most interesting part of the log was not your typo, it was the fact that you said "it's not in the rules, can you find it there somewhere?" as if you were saying that yer youse ghosted, but since its not in the rules it's ok! (please continue drama now everyone)

#170 2006-04-18 21:57 by gaz (84.12.168.XXX)

"After Sassa had consulted the other admins he told me we got an inofficial warning and only the admin crew would know about it. OK, thanks!"

How come the decision was changed?

#171 2006-04-18 21:59 by bvsmissen (81.236.21.XXX)

interesting question u got there gaz

#172 2006-04-18 22:01 by sassa (213.113.96.XXX)

We didnt see that they already had a warning earlier, that changed the whole deal, because in eql, 2 warnings = kick
so we started discussing again...

#173 2006-04-18 22:04 by bvsmissen (81.236.21.XXX)

Help me with the math sasha, how is an unoffical warning plus an offical warning equal to two official warnings and a kick??

I just can't see it :(

#174 2006-04-18 22:12 by fnosk (130.240.202.XXX)

B

#175 2006-04-18 22:12 by fnosk (130.240.202.XXX)

and S

#176 2006-04-18 22:13 by fnosk (130.240.202.XXX)

why can't you just be as honest as me? is that so hard?

#177 2006-04-18 23:48 by gaz (84.12.168.XXX)

Sassa @ #172, but it was an unofficial warning.

1 official + 1 unofficial = kick, seems very harsh indeed :P

#178 2006-04-19 00:30 by Empezar (213.113.96.XXX)

how is 1 unofficial warning less of a warning than 1 official? the eql admins probably didn't want to soil oblivions reputation for 1 mistake, and just decided to warn them and scare them straight. then it turned out they already had a warning, and the rules say 2 warnings = kick, so they had to do something about it. please correct me if i'm wrong.

#179 2006-04-19 00:35 by marklar (81.197.131.XXX)

Even though the rules were broken (unintentionally, I think), it feels like there is just a little too much personal agenda involved (just like in cmf-sr flamewar, it really had very little to do with pings :D).

If a team really wanted to ghost, wouldn't they just have another mm3-channel somewhere else? And to spectate with the same nick he's on the server ?:)

I think it's great that rules are followed as they protect the integrity of the game, but this I feel is uncalled for. Likewise, I also think LA should have reported a WO if another date couldn't have been found against SD in nqr.

As some people said (nakoz, manny etc), qwscene is a relatively small community which shouldn't lose two of it's most active and finest teams just because the rules have to be enforced. I say let the rules be bent when there are no ill intentions.

#180 2006-04-19 00:38 by Empezar (213.113.96.XXX)

i.e. allow cheating as long as the cheaters lose?

#181 2006-04-19 00:40 by sassa (213.113.96.XXX)

marklar this had nothing to do with personal agendas, it was a crew call and as nopee said earlier:
15:38] @nopee | but i serriously know sassa isnt as involved with the desicion as the other admins

#182 2006-04-19 00:55 by :C (85.131.93.XXX)

THEY TOOK OUR JOBS!

#183 2006-04-19 01:18 by contender (81.236.21.XXX)

but wtf cunt-sasha, stop removing my comments, I wasnt even rude this time.

I stand by my statement that I believe that Emp is stupid.

#184 2006-04-19 01:26 by marklar (81.197.131.XXX)

Emp, I think you have a very clear definition of cheating in qw (i.e. what's against the rules). For me it's not so clear-cut. In a way you are right, I think "cheating" is fine when it doesn't affect the outcome or the gaming experience of the other team. I don't feel comfortable calling it cheating because no one was trying to benefit from "cheating".

Sassa, my bad, didn't read every comment as there were over 150 of them and the first 50 corrupted me thinking otherwise. Still, I don't think this is the right way to go.

#185 2006-04-19 01:44 by Empezar (213.113.96.XXX)

no, there's breaking the rules, and there's cheating. two different things imo. and if this was just a mild breaking of the rules, i would probably agree with you that they should not be kicked out.

#186 2006-04-19 07:54 by menth0l (82.181.141.XXX)

Fifi makes good points as always :I

#187 2006-04-19 08:20 by daan (81.235.161.XXX)

"how is 1 unofficial warning less of a warning than 1 official? the eql admins probably didn't want to soil oblivions reputation for 1 mistake, and just decided to warn them and scare them straight. then it turned out they already had a warning, and the rules say 2 warnings = kick, so they had to do something about it. please correct me if i'm wrong."



Not the topic at hand, but this thread seems to be a lush ground to sow some overall rule improvement ideas, so I'll grab onto this one.

If warnings should even be a means for admins to make a clan follow the rules, shouldn't this always be for the public to see?

When do you suggest, Empezar, that an official warning is valid, and when will you keep them unofficial not to soil a clan's reputation?

Is this way of thinking reasonable for you, seeing that even unofficial warnings would count?

#188 2006-04-19 08:59 by Haggis (62.101.203.XXX)

Angua/Vladde: Even flamewars can be divided into divisons, BGSR flamewars is obviously div0, and this one is div2 flamewar. I miss that final little spark that make people go off :)

Simple Minds - Ghostdancing!

#189 2006-04-19 09:00 by gaz (84.12.168.XXX)

Hagge I guess it needs Paradoks to ban Mrlame for it to become div0 :|

#190 2006-04-19 09:41 by nas (83.226.240.XXX)

haha :D

#191 2006-04-19 09:43 by dramah lover (81.231.247.XXX)

More dramah plz!

#192 2006-04-19 10:54 by Hagge (83.233.145.XXX)

can people stop confusing me with Haggis xD he's a norweigan god damn it! Be sniff, guess my comeback to qw was just all in vain :/

#193 2006-04-19 11:32 by Eta-bETa (81.229.245.XXX)

Suger du hagge?

#194 2006-04-19 11:49 by nakoz (80.217.82.XXX)

we're not bad guys trying to ruin a scene, most people should know that (after 8 active years of fraggin').
I totally agree with markler who made some great statements last night.
we earlier used our own ventrilo-server, and if we had bad intentions with it we would never have left it.

feels like most people of the scene have read the newspost and judged us after that. last night we even had an eql-admin confessing that this wasn't the right way to do it. and he apologised.
way2go, but 2late.

think before you talk.

#195 2006-04-19 12:26 by Empezar (213.113.96.XXX)

@ #187 to me, an unofficial warning is an official warning for the clan that gets the warning, no less of a warning than an official one.

i'm sure oblivion got this inofficial warning out of respect for their "8 years of fraggin'" and gave them a second chance without ruining their reputation. then it appeared they already had a second chance, and that inofficial warning had to be made official.

i don't believe labeling a clan as cheaters is the best way of making them follow the rules. but this time, it apparently couldn't be avoided - seeing as they already had a warning.

note: i am NOT an eql admin, as you make it sound.

#196 2006-04-19 12:45 by HighlandeR (150.254.194.XXX)

~200 posts is too much to read, so i skip it.
i might say what have been said here already thou.

isnt the rule to drastic to kick a clan after 2 warnings?
i mean, even in profesional sports like football or so, teams dont get kicked out of the league whan they're cought cheating, especially for such trivial reason like using not yet registered player (1st warning for oblivion).

isnt WO after the game where cheat was proven enough?

#197 2006-04-19 13:12 by daan (81.235.161.XXX)

Okay, so one warning is equivalent to "labeling a clan as cheaters", which isn't "the best way of making them follow the rules", but if you "out of respect" unofficially call a clan cheaters first and then - if they screw up again - make 2 warnings public at the same time... is that what you're saying?
That's the way it comes off.

I personally think warnings aren't that harsh that they ruin a clan's rep, but a good way for admins and clans to shape up and keep some control. Unofficial such though feels like they could be misunderstood and perhaps played like an ace up some admins sleeve all of a sudden.

Things should be kept official or there's room for mishaps and arguments.

#198 2006-04-19 13:29 by gaz (195.72.182.XXX)

FREE THE LULEA ONE!

#199 2006-04-19 13:39 by pepin (81.236.21.XXX)

sooooo close to 200 now!!!

#200 2006-04-19 13:41 by manny (86.132.79.XXX)

:cry:

---

Showing Page 4 of 7
A total of 333 comments
Previous Next
Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Note
On this site we log the IP of all users who post comments on matches/articles.

Code from image aboveNameComment