Jump to content
Server time: 2017-10-18, 05:45
Safe Zone: CLOSED

Sign in to follow this  
Mapesy

My Meta Mission

Recommended Posts

Mapesy    3

After my discussion of ingame coms fizzeling out and coming to nothing with no answers from mods only  avoidance of questions or reluctance to give a strait answer i have decided to take on metagaming and other rule breaks in video evidence!

its fair to say the vast majority play by the rules and the new hostage rules are long overdue. However there are still some that negate to apply them in-game and get away with it !

this was submitted as some ones defence and as evidence against them for KOS, tricky situation you might think!

error.png this is what i originally picked out with the video!

1. the guy running for 2 minutes 30 seconds is clearly outside of the 500 meter KOS rights radius and clearly has only travelled to that point to back up his buddy because some one is trying to steal his truck, *wags finger* stealing trucks is bad!Also to point out with that point the person who's truck it is   clearly heard stating that "i told him if he trys to take it i will kill him" that is a initiation in itself happening well before the 500 meters!

2.when he is taken into custody/hostage/detained he is still communicating to his friend on the hill, part two of the hostage rule clearly states "

  • Use this as an opportunity to metagame while a hostage."!

Now i have to explain that i am in NO way a community helper or anything like that, and that these are solely my own judgements based on the rules laid down by the DayZRP team. i would like to state  that i will not undisclose names in any of these reports !

thank you for reading my report and i hope to add more too it, please comment if you agree or disagree!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TEazy97    8

So you are basically making a report section in the general discussion sub-forum for meta gaming? People can just file a report... This makes 0 sense imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bruce    0

Have to say, don't really see the point of this thread other than you trying to get someone banned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whip    0

I am Quite confused with this thread so i will ask some questions

What are you trying to accomplish here? A discussion?

Or

is this a report your trying to file? as it should then be made in the reports section!

as for posting videos from other peoples reports here to discuss can be a little Flamy and lead to arguments and problems, even if you dont say who it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Doug Quade   
Guest Doug Quade

I understand and appreciate your intentions, but I would advise against this.  Let us Staff do our jobs :) The decisions being made are to be made only by the staff team, and potential opinions, could misinform the community. We have no issues with a discussion regarding a verdict of a particular report, but please refrain from passing your own judgement as it could be misinterpreted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mapesy    3

it is simple really i am trying to gauge peoples response to metagaming in reports, clearly i am NOT trying to get any one banned as i am not mentioning any names in these reports! the end result is i want people to be judged and people reviewing the videos to apply the rules to every one when it comes to reports!

i think that the point i am making is simple and clear in that respect!

IE people posting the evidence are displaying/ carrying out metagaming and are not getting picked up on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bruce    0

it is simple really i am trying to gauge peoples response to metagaming in reports, clearly i am NOT trying to get any one banned as i am not mentioning any names in these reports! the end result is i want people to be judged and people reviewing the videos to apply the rules to every one when it comes to reports!

i think that the point i am making is simple and clear in that respect!

IE people posting the evidence are displaying/ carrying out metagaming and are not getting picked up on!

I understand you must feel cheated or wronged in some sort of way, but staff do their jobs well. If they didn't see a problem maybe you should let it go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mapesy    3

"I understand you must feel cheated or wronged in some sort of way, but staff do their jobs well. If they didn't see a problem maybe you should let it go."

hey, i haven't had anything happen to me or had a report filed against me in a very long time. Staff do do there job extremely well and i applaud there efforts!

theses examples i give are few and far between but if the reviewer of this didnt stop to think " jesus i need to have a word" then its pretty lax reviewing is all im saying!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shikaka    25

2.when he is taken into custody/hostage/detained he is still communicating to his friend on the hill, part two of the hostage rule clearly states "

  • Use this as an opportunity to metagame while a hostage."!

Well if you read the rules properly then you'll see that my friend is allowed to communicate with me. As his hostage takers never took his radio from him.

And I was within 100 meters when the guy shot my friends truck.

I strongly recommend that you get your facts straight and make sure you have a solid case before doing anything like this again.


If you would like to speak to me so you can ask me questions about the event then PM or find me on TS. I'll explain to you how we weren't breaking any rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mapesy    3

this isnt a comment on your report but a general issue popping up within reports, that is why a link was not posted on your report and only the video as a example, also why no names werent mentioned!

i have read the rules and have them saved for reference purposes, i would be more than willing to post the link to them if you so require !?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shikaka    25

Even though you didn't mention any names or reports, picking out a specific video from a specific report will still lead people to my name.

I've read the rules and I understand them. And we did not break any rules whatsoever. You say you don't want to make this into a report but trying to point out rule breaks is exactly what a report is for. What you're doing here is nothing more than a report that is open for all to post their opinion about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mapesy    3

Look guys you dont seem to be getting what this posting is about!

its not about anybody individual report, its not about verdicts of reports by the moderators, sure as hell not trying to get people band!

what it is simply, is that video evidence clearly shows metagaming and rule breaks (by people posting the reports) which is never mentioned!

if its the case that this sort of evidence takes less presidence then the reported action then so be it, surely rules should apply in all situations even if it only results in a comment!

there are other backdated examples then just this, this is just the 1st one i came accross today, sorry you feal agreeved!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Doug Quade   
Guest Doug Quade

I really appreciate your enthusiasm but as this direction could potentially lead to flaming, and OOC hate I do not see this as a viable, or recommend undertaking.  Staff is well equipped to handle the reporting and we can increase our attention to details , outside of the primary rule break reported, and if additional rule breaks are discovered, they will be addressed.  As Shikaka mentioned, regardless of the verdict of stated report, you are dragging him through a whole secondary (unnecessary) judgement process. This can be construed as shaming/OOC hate.  Whether you say it is or not, it could be taken that way. You are also mentioning that you are not trying to get anyone banned, but there is additional punishment for metagaming if found guilty. 

So with that, I am going to step forward and close this , as I feel that it will cause too much drama and issues within the community.  Trust the Staff team that handles these reports to put forth due process (per our rules and guidelines) and render proper verdicts. If you want to discuss this more, I will be more than happy to speak with you in Teamspeak or via PM.

ANother reason for closing is this discussion is already happening in your other thread

http://www.dayzrp.com/t-In-Game-Comms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rick    19

Well, seeing as a signed the verdict based on the report you linked, let me explain:

While an original initiation may have occurred when the sniper was outside 500 meters, further hostilities occurred while he was in the zone, allowing him KOS rights.

As far as metagaming is concerned, there were two different people down there. While there was communication, the video blocks him, so we could not see if his hands were up or not. The main time he comes into view is when he is prone in front of the truck. Simply being prone still allows you to communicate over radio.

When banning people, we have to be almost 100% sure that they committed the crime. If we do not have very solid evidence, we will not ban them. In this case, we could not be 100% sure of the metagaming, so we did not punish for it. I will say however, it was discussed, and it is not as if we simply ignored it. If we see rule breaks in video evidence, we punish for them, regardless which side of the report they are on.

If you disagree with a verdict, or feel we missed something (which happens, we're not perfect), feel free to PM the GM who posted the verdict. Making threads about general topics is perfectly ok, however giving a specific example leads to further unnecessary back and forth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×