Jump to content
Server time: 2018-12-15, 01:19




  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Caesar last won the day on April 20 2017

Caesar had the most liked content!


0 h Beach Bambi

Community Reputation

437 Regular

Account information

  • Whitelisted NEW WHITELIST

About Caesar

  • Birthday 04/24/1992

Personal Information

  • Sex

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Caesar

    December 2017 Staff QnA follow up

    @Jamie, you should check out Para's profile. There was much more scope for agreement than we realised. I agree significantly with your second paragraph. I don't believe you can be 100% consistent. I didn't actually address the creation of the rules directly but more their interpretation. My position can be summed up as follows. Cases with similar facts should be treated the same. If there is divergence that requires a different judgement it should be argued well enough that any reasonable critic can see the reasoning. Be as consistent as possible. But we all understand that over times interpretations can change. As long as they are not changing so frequently or drastically that you unfairly punish those who could not have known. My point was that if you start with the idea that you can do something it unfortunately occurs that people fail to think if they should. I did notice some of that attitude when I rejoined staff briefly. Para's comment seemed to indicate that it had resurfaced. I don't speak about any particular case. I don't intend to reply further as if I haven't made myself clear yet. I probably won't. Oh and you've got that razor sharp edge. o7.
  2. Caesar

    December 2017 Staff QnA follow up

    This answer saddens me greatly. Nothing against Para personally but it is an attitude that needs to be eliminated with extreme prejudice. I understand that you can never be 100% consistent. But you should always strive to that goal. In law they have things called precedents, and while a court can distinguish (basically ignore) a case it is generally only done if a significant legal oversight has been made. There should be a doctrine of equal under the law. If a distinction has to be made it should be explained to a level that would satisfy any reasonable critic. It should be a basic intellectual exercise of the staff to start with the standard and to rigorously challenge the standard with the facts of the case to determine if extenuating circumstances must be taken into account. Only if that can in fact be justified should the punishment or outcome be changed. You should never start from the viewpoint that just because you can, you should. I know much of this comes from Rolle. While he is the "captain" of this boat I would have hoped that the admins would challenge this idea. Rolle has a tendency of making captains calls. While technically his right he does have a tendency to work against his communities best interest in his haste. He will see something he doesn't like and rather than sit back and think it through he will lead from a place of emotion, over logic. Not that I am speaking of any particular case, because honestly I haven't been paying attention. My 2c.
  3. Caesar

    Return of SVR?

    Honestly, the group would need changes. The server was different back then. But I would support it. Although hardly an unbiased observer. It might even make me come back (maybe a 10% chance) if some of our old adversaries came back to make it a challenge in the ever evolving war for dominance.
  4. Caesar

    Anti - telepathic communication rule

    I always said that this was bullshit. If a certain group of people hadn't of changed the definition of surrender and used the plain English definition it would never have been such a big issue (as was originally intended). I distinctly remember when I first saw this in a report I was totally outraged by it, but everyone else saw it as ok. It's a stupid thing to allow. Better late than never I guess. I still maintain that changed for the worse. Sure the original definition may not have been perfect, but in those circumstances it was a significant improvement. As soon as you "surrender", just stop talking. This doesn't mean wait until your radio is taken. There are other good suggestions in this thread, including in all hostile situations forcing a double mic. I am not saying the original intention was the best solution or the only one. More stating that the change in definition was poorly thought out as it went backwards. I get the annoyance here, but I also get the counterpoint. From my experience of group dynamics not everything stated is IC while playing the game. So much of this game can be done on autopilot that you don't even have to talk too much about it apart from some basics or when something interesting actually happens.
  5. Caesar

    TS and Voip - make it more fair?.

    It has the same problem as things like ACRE. It's inherently less fun. Let me explain, people when playing during lulls will not always talk about in game stuff. In my experience there is a great deal of "shit talk" going on with people just having fun. If people had to broadcast this as well they could easily get hit with Bad RP. Is it ideal that people use radio when they can RP in game? No. but it also happens for a reason. This reason is not always malicious or attempting to seek an advantage.
  6. Caesar


    You're right. But the problem in adittion to the actual source is fundamentalism. If you are a fundamentalist christian you are just as able to commit heinous acts. Luckily the western world went through a reformation that the other parts have not. We can only hope other parts of the world follow suit with rapid progress. In my view it's all wrong. But if you believe it without harming anyone. So be it.
  7. Caesar

    New Lore = Re-Whitelist?

    As other's have said. A notice would suffice. Also as suggested change the PW to force people to check the PW and hopefully lore. Seems reasonable. Easily possible. Trust me on that one. You could easily do it.
  8. Caesar

    Text RP Breakers

    I personally believe that if you as a text RPer find it difficult to keep up with a reasonable speed of conversation that is a problem that should have been considered before you decided down on this path. That is a very good reason why I never became a text RPer. I understand that text RPing has benefits. But adding more allowances for text RPers when it come down to their choice annoys me. I fully support your ability to text RP. But I suggest that in order to do it, you should be able to continue the flow of conversation without requiring special allowances.
  9. Caesar


    It sounds good, until you realize that is what got us here in the first place. Time for the west to focus on the west. Get our forces and military equipment out of these areas, hopefully the people in these countries can eventually stabilise them on their own. We are simply not helping. All we are doing is creating further instability and putting a target on our backs. Let the middle east fight their own wars. EDIT: In case it isn't obvious, these attacks are pure barbarism and I hope everyone involved in such brutal acts the most painful deaths possible. My condolences go out to all those affected.
  10. Caesar

    Rule changes to reduce subjectivity

    This wont happen....... The system is ambigious by design. Rolle is entirely happy with that fact and he passionately hates any form of consistency. As it stands I do not think Rolle can be convinced against this. I know I and others have made made plenty of arguments to this effect to no avail. I could be wrong but I do believe a a majority of admins are also ok with this barring a few examples, like adding distances. Don't quote on that last bit. I am not 100% sure. Removing subjectivity when the owner will fight against any form of consistency is an exercise in futility unless he excuses himself from the rule changes entirely. I don't see it happening. Examples of ambiguity I can think of. NLR and ghosting distances. Why metagaming is ok if you fuck it up. Why the person that baits gets 3 days while his hapless friends can get 7. Hell if you want to talk consistency which is related the staff cannot even present a unified look when presenting verdicts. You have admins and GM's free forming or using their own touch of flair. I've always believed consistency in both presentation and effect is a cornerstone of instilling faith in a system and it's outcomes. "It's not a defect, it's a feature."
  11. Caesar

    NLR Clarification needed

    That's a little inconsistent with how we treat other matters such as combat log. I was surprised when I reentered staff that even 30 second or perhaps smaller was enough to punish someone. The problem with going for the subjective call of how bad something is where does it stop? Is 980m ok? 970m? 950m? 900m? If these distances are ok. Shouldn't they be the minimum? No, staff should pick a minimum and rule based off it. Anything less will lead to claims of bias and inconsistency. If you want to do something like this. Make a standard of x% under will be unpunished. But once again. If you do this than you may as well reduce ghe distance. The standard should be 1500m's. It's a good number that ensures no shenanigans are had. For people that respawn in the area they must leave through the most direct route out of the zone only.
  12. Caesar

    [GAME] What would you use to kill the person above you?

    Irony. Just irony.
  13. Caesar

    Ads on mobile

    I have. Will SS next time.
  14. Caesar

    NLR Clarification needed

    I would prefer 1500m's. That way even 1m over shouldn't cause any issues, it was the amount we had for ages and it worked very well indeed. While you're at it please change ghosting to the same area again. I suspect I know why this was changed in the first place. IIRC one of the admins added both and then Rolle saw a rule change he didn't like and reverted all the rules to their stock implementation. Wiping out the good with the "bad".
  15. Caesar

    Points vs Warnings

    @King, In reality I only find minor points of disagreement with you. Firstly I must still state that regardless of whether it is a conservative of progressive revolution my suggestion is neither. It is a relatively minor change of making a standard of where before such things were left up to subjectivity. As for your point about the UK economy, I accept that I have no power to really intervene in the Australian economy and as such don't really do much on that front myself. As for our shared interest in DayZRP, I am beginning to accept the fact that the powers that be do not like changing the system. It is what they are comfortable with and they believe that it is "working as intended". I suppose one of my points can be considered to be revolutionary, in that I believe the entire system needs a reworked from the ground up. But the actual specific proposals I have come up with have been more incremental. The only reason I believe the entire system needs to be reworked is because you can now find a report that supports any interpretation of the rules and the idea of consistency is very difficult to achieve with such moving goal posts. As for your suggestion, I am happy to say I have already done something similar. A week after leaving staff I sent a letter to the admins that outlined 6 areas where I felt that the staff team was faltering. I will not post these publicly as some of these contained very strong criticisms of current staff and would only served to drum up drama. @Kat, patronizing and condescending, ouch. This will be my last post as we are starting to go a little off topic. In regards to the OP's point. I state categorically that the OP's wishes about the situation should have no impact on the decision. Something is either a rule break, or it is not. The current lenience system strikes a good balance. It gives the person a chance to learn without points points but further rule breaks are punished. It's a much less subjective system that what the OP suggests.