Spam rule re-definition (1 Viewer)

[dayofmone .:[Mad Panda]:.]

So, extremly annoying people shoot arrows out of their spawn and hide instantly=impossible to kill them. Can you change the rule, so that spamming arrows out of the spawn is spam, too, if it's done too often?

Asking because people are really mad atm about a guy doing that since 20 minutes allready...

 

[jasieknms[Happy Panda]]

thats like rocket-spamming and if i know right thats not allowed,

 

[Kevin]

well i am thinking about an plugin wo slays you when you shoot in some secs xx rockets / arrows

 

[dayofmone .:[Mad Panda]:.]

Actual definition of spam is standing at supply locker and shooting withour reloading.

 

[Max .:[Old Panda]:.]

That is bad playing, bad players, annoying players i agree, but is it considered as spamming, that's the problem in defining word "spam". Spam is usually unwanted behaviour, and as that our definition is locker spam, without game intended reload. We can't simply change rules because of 2 maybe 3 bad players. Can we blame it on valve for letting everyone play TF2 for free, which attracted 9 yo kids? No, it's to blame ourselves for not trying to teach those kids how to play. Ofc we could enforce rule to kick bad players, f2p players, non english speakers in mic chat, but where is the line, shall we enforce rule on mini sentry or cuntsman, or beggars bazooka, i hate those weapons, and rarely play with them. But that's not reason to ban those weps. And ofc, there is always plugin to prevent events, but we don't want fully automated system for everything, there must be "human" touch in things like that. Idk, i'm under influence of few beers, so maybe my rationality is out of balance here, but in conclusion, we make rules, we enforce them and we punish those which disobey in following exact rules we enforce. Redefining is matter of opinion, not of actual definition. In this case, if 9 of 10 people are "spamming" arrows, it could be discussed. But 2-3 isolated spammers are not enough to force us to change the rules. In that case they win. So next time i suggest vote, start a vote against "spammer". If majority vote yes, kick. They will either learn to play properly, or rage even more. I'll read everything here when im fully sober and edit irrational things, as i can bet there are few.

 

[Girasim]

How the hell do you type so much words from that?
i would just type 5-10 words :/

 

[Danny]

Max is the wise (and the old) one. allfather alberte

 

[Kevin]

Max is the wise (and the old) one. allfather alberte

and you are a bawnie that i kill nao bananebuddy

 

[dayofmone .:[Mad Panda]:.]

I just meant this case as an example.

You say something about votes but I didn't see a vote option. Is it only aviable via a command?

The surcemods own command list is missing many commands...

 

[Master Keiii]

sm_vote "Kick *playername* because of *whatever*"

this will force 2 answers.. yes and no

optionally you can do:

sm_vote "Kick *playername* because of *whatever*" "Idc" "No" "Yes"


correct me if im wrong