I didn't know exactly what subject catagory to post this in, but I am deciding this is the best place to post this at. I am from USWest, and have come to USEast, because USWest now bores me, and USEast has many more people. At any rate, I am looking for a well known clan, that has been around for awhile, and that has exceptional members. Valhala Legends seems to have those qualities, and seems to be mainly a programming clan, which is very cool. I am a programming in C/C++ myself, and can use my skills in whatever the aims are for [vL], and put my programming skills to my own purposes. I am currently working on Devastation Bot. At any rate, I am looking at [vL] as a clan to join, aswell as some others. Please reply to this message thread if you are willing to provide me with some info, as to if I can join or not, and what I must do before joining. Thanks!
First, you must read the site(not the forums).
All the information you seek is found on this website.
I have read through the website, etc. I know I need to be approved by 2 out of 3 leaders. But I could not find anywhere as to wha to do, to get them to approve me. The only thing I can come up with is talking to them when I get unbanned from the channel [IdleBan]. Can anyone tell me who they are?
Unless they changed something, or somebody was being a smartass, there is no idleban, just idlekick and fast-rejoin ban
I was banned and the ban message was 'idle'
Then somebody was screwing with you :)
I see... Can you inform me as to who some of the leaders of the clan are?
No iago, Kp added idleban also.
Quote from: ShadowEmpire on August 05, 2003, 09:33 AM
I see... Can you inform me as to who some of the leaders of the clan are?
No, because that information is on the site as well. Just think of it this way: "no, you may not join".
Quote from: Raven on August 05, 2003, 11:07 AM
Quote from: ShadowEmpire on August 05, 2003, 09:33 AM
I see... Can you inform me as to who some of the leaders of the clan are?
No, because that information is on the site as well. Just think of it this way: "no, you may not join".
Meany.
The other leaders are Adron and Skywing. Adron prefers to talk with all the candidates, at length, before me or Skywing, so you should first get with him. Once you have Adron's approval (or disapproval, or not have approval) then Skywing will be glad to spend a few hours with you. He's mostly bored and doesn't have anything to do, so be sure to talk lots to keep him entertained. Tell him about your life, your ambitions, and be sure to discuss all your favorite TV shows with him .. he loves watching TV.
There is no idle ban. Someone is messing with you.
Yeah ok Grok, f*ck the web-site, it serves no purpose. Noone should have to actually click on more than 2 links to get their information; it's much easier to just post it on the forum.
Cheese with that whine? Who cares. ::)
There *is* an idleban, as was mentioned in this thread. Since it became apparent from the logs that almost everyone idle used automatic rejoin anyway, I installed a variant DLL a week or so ago that alternately kicks/bans for being idle. Seems to work nicely. I had assumed everyone liked it, but now I wonder if they just didn't realize? :p If there's a general concensus this is a bad idea, it's quite easy to revert it back in the source. Also, as always, idle* only affects people the bot doesn't know anyway (i.e. not members and not people who have F).
Quote from: DarkMinion on August 05, 2003, 01:56 PM
Cheese with that whine? Who cares. ::)
Everyone likes to whine sometimes. You whined when your friends got banned. Not only that, but you through a hissy banning fit as well. ;D
Quote from: Raven on August 05, 2003, 01:55 PM
Yeah ok Grok, f*ck the web-site, it serves no purpose. Noone should have to actually click on more than 2 links to get their information; it's much easier to just post it on the forum.
If you're at www.valhallalegends.com, everything is one click away. If you're on the forum, you have to click more than 2 links. Start making more sense!
It's not about that iago, a while ago (before you were in), there was a much stricter policy toward those who sought entry into the clan. Asking about entrance instead of reading the site entirely resulted in one always being denied. The site is there for a reason, so people who seek entry should read the site first instead of asking questions that were already answered on the site.
I did read through the website, I guess I just missed the part with the leaders. In addition, it doesn't state how you should present yourself as a candidate, so I just decided to use the forum. Forgive me if I am incorrect, however. Darkminion, I just want to mention that I was not complaining or presenting my grievences to the forum by mentioning that I was idlebanned, in case you were under that impression. It seems to me that by posting a thread about joining this clan, I in turn started a little argument, heh. Regardless, I will get to know Adron, then Skywing and Grok. Thanks for posting that reply Grok. Also, if someone could unban me so I could do so. The account is ShadowEmpire, otherwise I will just wait. Look forward to meeting you all, I'll talk to you guys later. Good evening!
At any rate, no!
Quote from: Raven on August 05, 2003, 01:55 PM
Yeah ok Grok, f*ck the web-site, it serves no purpose. Noone should have to actually click on more than 2 links to get their information; it's much easier to just post it on the forum.
Heh, you didn't actually *read* my post.
No Grok, I actually did read your post. All the information he needed he could've gotten off the site if he just looked hard enough. I mean come on, the leaders are at the top of the members list for crying out loud! And all the information about what it takes to join is on the site as well; it's not like the information is hidden! I do admit, I guess I was a bit touchy, but I mean come on, people have been treated more harshly than this for "lesser" reasons and you never seemed to mind.
I think the main difference is that this guy is coherant. He speaks in full words and full sentences, and makes his point rather clear. That alone is enough to deserve respect, in my opinion.
Feel free to add my icq/msn/aim.. they should all be listed left of my post.
Quote from: ShadowEmpire on August 05, 2003, 09:36 PM
Regardless, I will get to know Adron, then Skywing and Grok.
Haha! He's getting to know me
FIRST! I win! :P
Quote from: Kp on August 05, 2003, 02:34 PM
If there's a general concensus this is a bad idea, it's quite easy to revert it back in the source.
Personally, I prefer idle kick. It makes visitors realize that they're supposed to speak their business. Also, I really don't like the current idle kick time - it's a good habit to lurk for a while before you speak. Right now we're telling people to just burst in and start speaking right away? Sounds like we're trying to teach people bad habits?
Quote from: Adron on August 06, 2003, 07:00 AM
Quote from: Kp on August 05, 2003, 02:34 PM
If there's a general concensus this is a bad idea, it's quite easy to revert it back in the source.
Personally, I prefer idle kick. It makes visitors realize that they're supposed to speak their business. Also, I really don't like the current idle kick time - it's a good habit to lurk for a while before you speak. Right now we're telling people to just burst in and start speaking right away? Sounds like we're trying to teach people bad habits?
Nah, when the burst in and talk right away, they get banned by a member! The first step in the membership test, I suppose, is to manage to speak your business before getting banned.. it's tricky :)
I thought the purpose of the bots automation was to reduce the amount of manual work required to keep the channel clean. You're saying that we're required to do more manual work because of the bot's features? Eww!
Quote from: Adron on August 06, 2003, 07:00 AMPersonally, I prefer idle kick. It makes visitors realize that they're supposed to speak their business. Also, I really don't like the current idle kick time - it's a good habit to lurk for a while before you speak. Right now we're telling people to just burst in and start speaking right away? Sounds like we're trying to teach people bad habits?
I agree about the value of idle kick, but it is rather useless when almost everyone that the bot kicks just rejoins immediately and automatically (and continues to be idle for many hours to come). I'll add an option for controlling whether to ever idleban (and default it to off ("kicks only")).
Regarding kick time, that's tunable by anyone with access to the bot. Also, frequency of check for idleness can be configured.
Quote from: Adron on August 06, 2003, 09:03 AMI thought the purpose of the bots automation was to reduce the amount of manual work required to keep the channel clean. You're saying that we're required to do more manual work because of the bot's features? Eww!
That is the purpose; I don't quite see what extra work is involved. Could you clarify?
I believe that the idle-kick is a good way to keep bots, and other annoyances free from the channel. I get kicked often for the obvious reasons and do believe that the idle-time is a bit quick, but its your bot, your channel, and your rules, so I really have no say in the matter.
I am not sure if you guys have allready jumped to this solution, or have allready implimented it, but here is my suggestion: Why not simply just add an Auto-Rejoin on Kick? It allows users to just be kicked for being idle, and at that point they should know to get their buisiness done with, or stay out. People on Auto-Rejoin can get a clue, not to rejoin, and never to come in again? And yes Adron, I am getting to know you first, but of course I wouldn't know to get to know you first if it had not been for Grok ^^;. However Adron, when would be a good time for us to meet? I am flexable when it comes to meeting times; say, how about 7:00 Eastern in channel Adron? Well, if you don't show up I'll just assume you couldn't make it in time or whatever it may be, and you can set up a time if your willing :P. iago, thanks - I'll give you a message on AIM sometime. Well, with that all said, I'll leave it for you guys to reply, heh.
Quote from: HaZarD on August 06, 2003, 01:57 PM
I think it is fair to say we are a bit off-topic at this point.
!~!HaZaRD!~!
Nah. vL members talking about vL channel is never off topic in the vL general forum.
The vL ops bot has two primary purposes. The first is to allow members guaranteed access, on their appropriately registered name. The secondary is to allow members, at will, to remove any non member from the channel by kick or ban. Unfortunately there had to be a Zeroeth purpose added.
Any other purposes are secondary by design.
I think that idle-kick and fast-rejoin-ban together are nice, but a bit spammy...
Quote from: ShadowEmpire on August 06, 2003, 02:46 PM
I am not sure if you guys have allready jumped to this solution, or have allready implimented it, but here is my suggestion: Why not simply just add an Auto-Rejoin on Kick? It allows users to just be kicked for being idle, and at that point they should know to get their buisiness done with, or stay out. People on Auto-Rejoin can get a clue, not to rejoin, and never to come in again?
We have a fast-rejoin ban implemented. It predates many of the other automatic moderation rules, actually.
Quote from: iago on August 06, 2003, 05:41 PMI think that idle-kick and fast-rejoin-ban together are nice, but a bit spammy...
Exactly. That's why idleban got implemented. :)
I still think it'd be better with a longer idle kick timeout. And 7 eastern sounds bad.
Quote from: Kp on August 06, 2003, 01:29 PM
I agree about the value of idle kick, but it is rather useless when almost everyone that the bot kicks just rejoins immediately and automatically (and continues to be idle for many hours to come). I'll add an option for controlling whether to ever idleban (and default it to off ("kicks only")).
If idle kick were to be a rare event, then the spam effect of kick + fast rejoin ban would be limited. With an appropriately high idle kick timer, idle kick will be a rare event. Solved! ;)
The option to not idleban sounds good.
Quote from: Kp on August 06, 2003, 01:29 PM
That is the purpose; I don't quite see what extra work is involved. Could you clarify?
That was just a complaint at iago's comment: "Nah, when the burst in and talk right away, they get banned by a member! "
I.e. idle kick teaches them to burst in and talk right away which we also don't appreciate, and so we are teaching them to do something bad - which as iago suggested will make a member (have to) take action.
Quote from: Grok on August 06, 2003, 05:31 PM
Nah. vL members talking about vL channel is never off topic in the vL general forum.
It's off the subject topic though, and people who would be interested in talking about the ops bot might miss it because of the misleading subject. If I wasn't so lazy, I'd split this topic so we get another one with a fitting subject.
What's wrong with people idling in the channel, anyway? If they aren't making any noise, there's no spam. Even idle-ban is noisier than a quiet person.
The only time idle-kick/ban would be good is if the channel was nearly full, so if (UsersInChannel > (MAX_USERS - 5)) { IdleKickOrBanPeople() };
If you don't like people jumping right in to speak - then why not add a ban to where when a user talks before a timer is up, they are banned. Example: ShadowEmpire joins Op [vL] - ShadowEmpire says: "sup" before 30 seconds - ShadowEmpire is banned.
Example: ShadowEmpire joins Op [vL] - ShadowEmpire says: "sup" after 30 seconds - ShadowEmpire remains in Op [vL].
That could be a good solution to your problem.
The channel is for members, not for bots. Automation should be limited to necessity, allowing an option to turn the automated feature off or on, such as how "protect" works now.
I don't like the whole concept of idle time automatically causing anything. If a guy idles for a month in the channel and no member has objected, then obviously no members who are present care that he's there.
So get rid of the idle timer. Replace it with idleban+idlekick commands that knows how long each person has been idle, and acts on them.
This puts the channel back in control of the members, where it should be.
Just stick with the idle bans. They seem to be working fine. I doubt members are that lazy to type ban user or protect on whenever they don't like someone in the channel. I shouldn't even be stating my opinion because I am not a member of [vL] but I read and many other non-members are posting along with this subject. There is always something people like and don't like just come to a agreement that fits the needs of both sides.
Quote from: Grok on August 07, 2003, 04:48 PM
The channel is for members, not for bots. Automation should be limited to necessity, allowing an option to turn the automated feature off or on, such as how "protect" works now.
I don't like the whole concept of idle time automatically causing anything. If a guy idles for a month in the channel and no member has objected, then obviously no members who are present care that he's there.
So get rid of the idle timer. Replace it with idleban+idlekick commands that knows how long each person has been idle, and acts on them.
This puts the channel back in control of the members, where it should be.
It seems plenty in the control of anybody with access if it can be turned on or off.
It is not control when bots make "seemingly random" decisions to kick someone from the channel. Just because a member can "turn that feature off" is not members controlling the channel. Instead, it is members controlling the schizophrenic behavior of the [vL] op.
There shouldn't be a feature that bans people for not saying something fast enough. If a member wants to ban someone for not talking fast enough, that's an entirely different matter.
I've been watching a conversation between several people, none who have F on their names, and suddenly [vL] starts kicking them out of the channel, and when then come back to continue chatting, they get banned.
If I complain about it what am I told? That I should have to give all those people F flag if I want them to be able to not be idle kicked.
Why not just leave it the way it is and stop complaining about trivialities that really don't matter that much? ;D
I had previously not heard views from anyone who found it desirable to listen to a batch of unknown users talking among themselves without any input from the members / channel regs. In all the occasions of that which I have witnessed, the unknown users are acting inane or discussing topics in which I have no interest (and I would be surprised if it interested others, since the topic is frequently the number of wins/losses on [vL]Grok and Winner[vL]).
Also, to address a minor point, the decision is not random at all. All automoderation is fundamentally event-driven -- the rules are only checked when the bot wakes up to process incoming traffic from the server. Thus, you can predict with pretty good accuracy when a "random" event will occur, providing no one else intervenes first or reconfigures it. :)
I realize I'm not a member, but I would rather see 'random people' talking in a channel I ran than have it be silent 50% of the time.
I agree, and I also agree with grok. It would be much better to keep track of every user's idle time and then have a .kick/banidleusers command. I think there's a degree to which automation should be avoided, apart from autobans and suchlike.
Also, once again, I'd like to voice my strong objection to protect/protectvl being turned on or off automatically.
We prefer silence. We'd rather have it blank for when someone says something intelligent and people who were afk at the time could notice it, instead of having the "good" posts be drowned out by:
[11:23:09]<*>: YONI HWO DO I USE BINARYHAT?!?!?!?!?!
[09:33:02]<*>: CAN I HAVE A BNLS ACCOUNT?
[09:34:50]<*>: YUO GUYS ARE GAY! YUO GUYS ARE GAY!
[14:33:55]<*>: SKYWNIG ARE YOU DER?!?!
[11:23:09]<UserLoser.> [insert text here]
and so on. You get the picture. ;)
Quote from: Kp on August 08, 2003, 11:52 AM
I had previously not heard views from anyone who found it desirable to listen to a batch of unknown users talking among themselves without any input from the members / channel regs. In all the occasions of that which I have witnessed, the unknown users are acting inane or discussing topics in which I have no interest (and I would be surprised if it interested others, since the topic is frequently the number of wins/losses on [vL]Grok and Winner[vL]).
Also, to address a minor point, the decision is not random at all. All automoderation is fundamentally event-driven -- the rules are only checked when the bot wakes up to process incoming traffic from the server. Thus, you can predict with pretty good accuracy when a "random" event will occur, providing no one else intervenes first or reconfigures it. :)
I don't think anybody has a problem with "randomban", more with "random bans". It's idlekick/idleban that are an issue here.
I agree that idlekicking or idlebanning people is rather bad, since it does encourage people to make noise rather than sit quietly. I'd prefer somebody to sit quietly if they don't have anything to say. Perhaps somebody should post a poll about this? I would, but I think people are tired of my polls :D
Quote from: Kp on August 08, 2003, 11:52 AM
I had previously not heard views from anyone who found it desirable to listen to a batch of unknown users talking among themselves without any input from the members / channel regs. In all the occasions of that which I have witnessed, the unknown users are acting inane or discussing topics in which I have no interest (and I would be surprised if it interested others, since the topic is frequently the number of wins/losses on [vL]Grok and Winner[vL]).
Also, to address a minor point, the decision is not random at all. All automoderation is fundamentally event-driven -- the rules are only checked when the bot wakes up to process incoming traffic from the server. Thus, you can predict with pretty good accuracy when a "random" event will occur, providing no one else intervenes first or reconfigures it. :)
We've already tried the keyword ban, ala "winbot", and that sadly turned into an attraction. So I cannot suggest banning people who talk about the wins/losses on those names. However maybe you can add filters to your client if there are certain things you do not wish to view? *win||loss*grok||winner*
Similar to what you point out, I do not feel in most cases that I am really missing anything by these people being autokicked.
However, as a member, I don't think the bot should have an opinion. ZeroBot was never voted as a member, and should not be making kick/ban decisions on its own, even if it thinks that "If a member was present, he would kick/ban this person now".
P.S. The exception being rules to which I think nobody objects? Like spam bans. I don't believe I've ever heard a member complaint about Zerobot making that decision.
Hey Grok, can we talk sometime about be joining? Perhaps we can get to know eachother better, and I can get on your good side ;)
So what Grok's saying is that we have to make ZB a member of the clan.. all we need is for 2 leaders to approve him and the members to vote on him :)
I just want to get to know everyone so I can chat with vL members in a while. Considering I dont to be banned on site. Read all the rules. So basically if they dont like you, then you get banned.
It isn't so much if they like you or not. Its whether it looks like it would be fun to ban you or not.
!~!HaZaRD!~!
Quote from: mavrick_kr on August 09, 2003, 11:48 PM
I just want to get to know everyone so I can chat with vL members in a while. Considering I dont to be banned on site. Read all the rules. So basically if they dont like you, then you get banned.
Anyone understand what he said?
The Idle Kick/Ban is good if you guys use the channels for yourselves, there are plenty of communities people can go to to learn Binaryhat, and they can come to the site to get a BNLS account, so there isn't really any need for them to be in the channel anyways.
People complain that they want to get to know members by staying in the channel. The problem is, most people are annoying/stupid...
Quote from: iago on August 10, 2003, 08:33 AM
People complain that they want to get to know members by staying in the channel. The problem is, most people are annoying/stupid...
Prettymuch that. People say they want to "get to know members" because they want to get into the clan. It takes waaaay more than that. So they hang around in the channel, and then start asking about joining, which results in a ban (those that complain about being banned don't really improve their chances either ;) ).
hehe, think of it this way you guys are very popular and have tons of adoring fans that drool at the sighting of you.
Quote from: Raven on August 10, 2003, 09:26 AM
...(those that complain about being banned don't really improve their chances either ;) ).
Doesn't hurt their chances either :P
Aye, this clan (like most "l337" clans) with even a few intelligent members is highly regarded because of the friendships of the members and the independantness(sp?word?) of it.
yep id prefer to lead a small clan with smart people over a big or semi big clan with dumb people (which i have now)
Quote
Doesn't hurt their chances either
You're right, things that don't exist really can't be hurt, can they? ;D
Quote from: Arta[vL] on August 08, 2003, 06:12 PMAlso, once again, I'd like to voice my strong objection to protect/protectvl being turned on or off automatically.
This was originally added on Adron's request. He disliked people leaving protect on overnight.
I.e. after whoever changed the settings from the defaults (no protect) has left and doesn't care any more, they will be reset to the defaults automagically.
Turning it off isn't so much the problem. It's turning it *on* automatically that pisses me off. This ties into what Grok was saying about automoderation.
Quote from: Arta[vL] on August 11, 2003, 01:25 AM
Turning it off isn't so much the problem. It's turning it *on* automatically that pisses me off. This ties into what Grok was saying about automoderation.
Is it ever turned on automatically? I thought it only ever turned off by itself?
Yes, it does. Much to my irritation.
Quote from: Adron on August 11, 2003, 03:34 AMIs it ever turned on automatically? I thought it only ever turned off by itself?
It turns to whatever mode Grok / Sky / you last set it to. :p
Really? Follows a setting made by a N flag user?
Quote from: Adron on August 11, 2003, 01:49 PMReally? Follows a setting made by a N flag user?
Right; when the bot boots, it is set to off and assumes that an N flag wants it off until it sees otherwise.
Quote from: Kp on August 11, 2003, 02:35 PM
Right; when the bot boots, it is set to off and assumes that an N flag wants it off until it sees otherwise.
It's a nice idea, but I'd actually prefer if it reset my protects as well to the off state. Would it be possible to have a separate command (for N users) to set the defaults? Setting the default state and the current, temporary, state are different operations.
I might want protect to be on during a conversation or something like that, to keep disturbances out, and then if I forget to turn it off, it would be nice if it turned itself off.
I agree with Adron. Judging from feedback I get about the bot, I'd think most members wouldn't mind if it turned itself off after a time.
On the other point, about the N flags controling the 'default' setting, I disagree. It's hard to keep a clan where the members are the most important people, and where leaders serve. By giving leaders more moderation ability than members, it starts the appearance of a power hierarchy. In a nutshell, leaders should have the ability to administrate member security, but generally the members should have equal channel moderation abilities.
I hope I said that in a way that made sense of what I was thinking.
Not even a silver bullet will be able to kill this thread.....
I completely agree, Grok. That said, I would support a command to set the default state - certainly that would be better than the current system - and I wouldn't really be bothered if i didn't have access to it :)
It's definitely important to maintain leadership as a position of service and not authority, but it's not out of line, IMO, for leaders to have access to a few extra commands besides those needed for administration. It's a question of finding a balance, I think.
You could also consider configuring / setting defaults for the bot to be "administration". It's not likely that that would be something that needs regular modifications. It could even be set in the configuration file.