ns2bans.com - name and shame goes there, not here
ma$$a$$ter
Join Date: 2012-11-01 Member: 165651Members
Join Date: 2012-11-01 Member: 165651Members
As a reminder: This thread (and these forums) is not the place for witch hunts - Mouse
NS2BANS.COM (Explanation and Operation theory)
The community ban list was scrapped and re-written in favor of an approved and unapproved moderated list. The site is still undergoing many changes but the basic functions are in place to show off the concept.
How it works: Admins are established from the community (This is where you come in, I am looking to recruit the play testers to assist in the moderation of the list), users are able to submit steamID’s into the list and are required to include a video (and if they choose, a screen shot in ADDITION to the video) of a player doing what ever it is they wish to report.
What happens after I submit my video?
These submissions go into a holding place for the admins to review and decide if they agree with the submitter. Currently, it requires 3 admins to agree, or disagree to have any action taken. Once three admins agree, the steam ID is added to a formatted page where server operators can simply copy and paste the list directly into the ban file on the server. If three admins reject the submitted information, the listing is never added to the ban list, and is listed as “rejected” on the submitted ID’s list. A push / pull system is in place currently, 3 yes votes, with one no vote would still require another yes to override that no vote. In theory a stale mate could take place, where the admins are so divided that the push/pull system has resulted in neither a YES or a NO getting the required votes, in this case the banned ID would stay in "pending review" status.
Future plans
In the future the plan is to implement a LUA mod to automatically apply it the server with no action needed by the server admin other than subscribing to the mod.
As it stands, admins are confidential and the way they vote is confidential, keeping the system as honest as possible in hopes for the most pure list of banned ID’s possible.
We have some GREAT community members already working behind the scenes -
WHAT DOES THIS ALL MEAN TO ME!?!?!
The door is open, keep in mind how ever, that the house is only drywall, the paint has not been applied.. BUT being that the basic system is in place, WE WANT YOU!! Record players, make ban requests, MAKE OUR ADMINS DO SOME WORK!
Everything has to start somewhere, we need community support to make something like this work, so please help us make the community servers a better place!
Note:
We have done the for/against thread, if you would like to continue the discussion of PRO vs CON, please do so here http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/125926/community-ban-list#latest
NS2BANS.COM (Explanation and Operation theory)
The community ban list was scrapped and re-written in favor of an approved and unapproved moderated list. The site is still undergoing many changes but the basic functions are in place to show off the concept.
How it works: Admins are established from the community (This is where you come in, I am looking to recruit the play testers to assist in the moderation of the list), users are able to submit steamID’s into the list and are required to include a video (and if they choose, a screen shot in ADDITION to the video) of a player doing what ever it is they wish to report.
What happens after I submit my video?
These submissions go into a holding place for the admins to review and decide if they agree with the submitter. Currently, it requires 3 admins to agree, or disagree to have any action taken. Once three admins agree, the steam ID is added to a formatted page where server operators can simply copy and paste the list directly into the ban file on the server. If three admins reject the submitted information, the listing is never added to the ban list, and is listed as “rejected” on the submitted ID’s list. A push / pull system is in place currently, 3 yes votes, with one no vote would still require another yes to override that no vote. In theory a stale mate could take place, where the admins are so divided that the push/pull system has resulted in neither a YES or a NO getting the required votes, in this case the banned ID would stay in "pending review" status.
Future plans
In the future the plan is to implement a LUA mod to automatically apply it the server with no action needed by the server admin other than subscribing to the mod.
As it stands, admins are confidential and the way they vote is confidential, keeping the system as honest as possible in hopes for the most pure list of banned ID’s possible.
We have some GREAT community members already working behind the scenes -
WHAT DOES THIS ALL MEAN TO ME!?!?!
The door is open, keep in mind how ever, that the house is only drywall, the paint has not been applied.. BUT being that the basic system is in place, WE WANT YOU!! Record players, make ban requests, MAKE OUR ADMINS DO SOME WORK!
Everything has to start somewhere, we need community support to make something like this work, so please help us make the community servers a better place!
Note:
We have done the for/against thread, if you would like to continue the discussion of PRO vs CON, please do so here http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/125926/community-ban-list#latest
Comments
also might not want to advertise the fact that you aren't encrypting peoples passwords by sending it in plaintext via email.
edit: also the website requires all textboxes to have input in them when trying to change your profile. not a big deal, but was enough to make me not care to put my first name (couldn't be bothered to put my last name/retype password as well). the website is a good idea in theory, but because "skill bans" are inevitable with any system like this, any chances a "Want to repeal a ban?" section could be added?
edit2: lastly, I keep getting a "The file name is ok; Invalid file" error when trying to upload my steam avatar. It's a 184x184 png 60kb.
Does slapping "record" with no parameters into an autoexec.cfg work as I would expect it to? It would be nice to automatically start up the demorec.
Edit: as a suggestion, do not require a user account to view the ban list or to upload videos. If users are submitting a video, the submitter's steam id would show up on the video anyway. If you are worried about spambots, implement captcha or whatever it is.
Obviously to vote on submissions would require an account and approved voting priveleges. But anything else and it's just a barrier making it harder for those who just want to see a ban list or submit their own demo/video.
The Avatars are JPG and GIF restricted - should have noted that in the entry, updated now to include that note - thanks for the feed back
In time I may do the steam API , at the moment it's just me and one other guy doing the back end PHP - so please be patient with us.
For videos, even the free version of fraps will do the trick, remember to launch that prior to playing and just slap your record key when something is going down.
as far as user accounts to view the list, right now I want to keep things locked down a bit, once things are better coded and looking better, I will open things up a bit.
Appealing is a rather moot point, as it already took a video of you doing what ever it was you where doing, and it took X amount of people to agree with the video. What evidence could you possibly submit to counter this? The only way to limit the damage of "skill bans" is to have in place admins that are knowledgeable - and that's all I will say about the admins we have recruited.
I suggest closer to 8.
If it truly is hacking, those 8 will have no issue agreeing on it. Imo
I just hope they're knowledgeable not only in the sense that they're good, but they have a deeper sense of how hacks work than just they've used them once upon a time, seen a video, or have admined a community.
Anonymously judging people keeps you honest?
I appreciate the vast amount of effort going into this, but if it's simply "Shadowy figures in the background assessing and banning", i'd sooner let a chimpanzee assign bans.
I may however put a system in place that will assign them numbers - and tag those to the list so you can see that #2, #3 , #4, #6 all voted in favor of the ban, and #5 was not in favor. This is just an idea (i would have to talk to them about it) - but may help list users see what is behind the curtain just a little bit.
that is included for public viewing already
/yeah, I know, its ugly at the moment.
No system other than direct signature checking of known hacks is 100%. These require the cheats to come out, be detected, logged and a counter to be deployed. The cheat is re-written and the cycle begins again.
You don't HAVE to employ any of the tools given to you, be it VAC, this ban list, or anything else - and you certainly don't HAVE to play on servers that use these tools. Some players, like me, would like to see servers that employ every tool available to them to make the most of my gaming experience.
I've already come to the realization that I can't judge very well the people I spectate, I don't have the experience to say one way or another what I am seeing. So I recruited people in the know, who have played the game beyond your standard pub player and understand more than I ever would.
1) 3 admins is way to little to potentially mass ban some one from every ns2 server. If the proof submitted is actually proof there should be zero issue getting 15 admins to agree. I"ve seen far to many people accuse hacks even while watching first person spec to trust that only 3 people make this kind of severe decision.
2) Admins should be made public. People need to trust who is recommending people be banned on their server.
Another thought of my own is the public should have the power to remove someone and add some one to the list of admins. If they are banning the public its only far the public agrees who is doing that. If you want to make the votes anonymous (to the public) that is fine.
The number of "3" will be changed once more people come on board.
I really like the Idea of electing the Admins - I will definitely look into this!
I really really hope I answered some of your questions and doubts
As for the number of people agreeing on a cheat, perhaps they can put a time limit in as well as a vote count. Say the proof stays up for X days and in that time all admins (who are available) have a crack at it, with a minimum of 3. (or 5)
Why? So they can be harassed? Because you know that's exactly what will happen if an admin happens to ban someone's friend.
This is a PRIVATE endeavour. It's not sanctioned by UWE and it is voluntary for server operators to use. The 'public' can choose to play on those servers or not play on those servers. This isn't a democracy. The public doesn't get a 'vote' here. When they want to start paying the hosting bills for the servers, *then* they can get involved.
Server operators will most certainly be among those looking at these potential cheats, that's what matters the most. The server admins should be comfortable with the list of IDs since they are the ones putting that list on their server. So long as they are happy with the process then it should run fine.
I find it oddly peculiar how some people are so worried about this. No one wants to see people banned unjustly. But as it stands the number of cheaters is increasing, and this is the only way to deal with it.
I think the folks behind this should be praised, not put through the wringer.
Worth it to keep those type of people out of servers so that players can enjoy their games Hacker/Troll free.
Not to mention the transparency aspect makes everyone feel warm and fuzzy.
I don't think a small selective group of people should ruin my pub gaming because they think they are entitled to cheat. The difference? I look the time to do something about my problem.
Lets for giggles say that every server not owned and operated by UWE adapted the list. That still leaves you many UWE servers to play on. You can take your BS onto those, that is until IronHorse gets a hold of you assuming you continue your BS there.
we have done the pro-vs-con thread - please see OP
If people decide they aren't doing good, don't pay them any mind. I think names of admins won't do anything to affect trust or distrust. Perhaps if the admin wants to, they could divulge their identity. But I really can't see it making much of a difference either way. Its the decisions that matter, and those are where you should focus most. All the same, I agree with the overall "tread carefully" trend.
A system like this needs to be transparent. If they can't handle someone talking shit about them on the internet it sounds like they wouldn't be capable enough to be making these decisions in the first place.
And for the people who aren't dicks or trolls and just want to enjoy the game CAN join servers using the list without fear of trolls and/or knowing they can write a persons ID and add it to the list and not have to worry about them ever again.
If you don't like the idea and think people are going to ban everyone and abuse it play on a server not implementing it jesus christ people.
And to the ^^^ comment, its not people talking shit, its called mute, and easy fix. Its the trolling in the sense of recycling everything RUINING the game in the long run.
Each admin can show their ban list, and their reasons/evidence for each ban. It can even include bans that have occurred without hacking: those who insult other players, trolls, etc.
If another admin generally agrees with their diagnosis, they can "subscribe" to that particular admin's list.
No need to have an end-all-be-all list that can be potentially fatal, when you can have a better solution with individual admin subscriptions. Reporters submit to the site, admins decide to add them to their individual list, done. No more secrecy or complicated voting systems.
I think 5 would also be a good number that if the admins don't vote unanimously you can ship it off to 5 others and get a re vote, if it bombs twice you can simply put it was voted 4/1 and then 3/2 and the player got off or pending or whatever press word fits.
Also admins of ban list =/= admins of servers, there's admins in Australian servers who I wouldn't trust to organise a fuck in a brothel let alone make an intelligent rational decision on hacking so a difference in the two would be good, honestly your best bet for catching hackers is finding other people who hack openly, they'll gladly download every hack under the sun, use them and be able to identify exactly what method (if there's multiple) and where it came from, these lists are mostly good for wide spread banning said people who do it to grief servers but every now and then it wouldn't hurt to get a subject matter expert in to look at it, plenty of forums/servers to find them in.
edit: dyslexia.
Making the "evidence" videos publically available is an important part. What I would consider to be essential, too, is:
1.) Listing the objective criteria evidence videos must comply with to be taken into considereation.
2.) A list of every Server involved in the project and every single user that has voting rights
3.) A way for banned players to "appeal" the vote
4.) A public "code of conduct" for involved server admins, and a way to report them, too.
The reasons for this are simple:
Being a server admin, mod, official playtester, etc. does NOT neccessarily make you a good judge when it comes to cheating accusations. If you want people to trust the judgement of the people involed in this project, the rules you judge by have to be public and the process has to be transparent. You wouldn't want real judges to rule according to a book of laws that you as accused don't have access to, do you?
This goes hand in hand with the possibilty for banned players to appeal the vote, give reasons for why they think they should not be banned and/or the evidence does not comply with the agreed upon criteria. Unless you take into account that you as "judge" are fallable and are willing to have your "ruling" double-checked, you run the risk of coming across as a bunch of mall cops on a power trip!
Yes, it is your server and you have every right to run it any way you damn well please. But we're talking about a ban system that (if successful) can span a large part of the NS2 server landscape, you have to maintain a certain level of "professionalism" and "acountability". If you want me as a player to trust your system's judgement, I want to be sure that the people that have the power to vote are not some power-obsessed child. Having a public code of conduct that forbids things like "admin abuse" (harassing players, using cheats to influence the game in your favour, hate speech, etc.) is an important step in my opinion.
All that said I think the names of users voting FOR a ban, should be public. In pretty much every case (at least that's my prediction and my experience with a similar system used in a hospital I worked in) the judgement will be unanimous anyway. If you're banning somebody, stand for it with your name. So you MIGHT get an angry email or two? If you cannot handle that, don't be involved in something like this project. Don't admin a server at all for that matter.
I really want this project to succeed. But only, if you have transparent rules, stand for your decisions, never rule out the possibility that you may be wrong, promise not to be douchebags and get rid of everybody that doesn't keep that promise.
So, that's my 2 cents.
That was the gist of the first attempt - it was an open list counting how many times an ID had been submitted, leaving the list open to submission. The thought process behind the change to an administered list was simple, no one was reviewing the list as an objective 3rd party. ID's could be on the list with as little evidence as someone saying "this guy sucks" - and tada that ID was counted as being reported 1 time. The system in the works at the moment gives that player a chance to be reviewed by a number of people (many of which have stated to me, unless the video provided contains exactly what they are looking for, it's going to be voted down by them) prior to ever making it onto the list.
as far as the "rules you judge by have to be public and the process has to be transparent"- I can totally agree with this. I do NOT claim to know it all - and would really love suggestions on what you think the rules should be. What should the judges be looking for in each video? What should be required information in a video.
Personally, I expect to see the user open the console, sv_status, and show me the ID of the player he is accusing right in the video. Solid proof we have the correct ID and not a typo.
RE: the admin abuse - admins of servers will be subscribing to the list, either by manually picking through the list and reviewing each video themselves, using the export list tool and copying the entire ID's list into their banned ID file, or (in the future) subscribing to a mod that places the approved banned IDs into the server automatically. Server admins will have the same power as every player does, the ability to spectate, record and submit that player for review here. Just because an admin has banned someone on their server, doesn't add that player to our list. You have to submit a video and have that video reviewed just like everyone else. This process prevents "admin abuse" from leaking out from one server and infecting all of the other servers that subscribe to the list. I can't dictate to anyone how to run your server, you pay for it, you run it how you see fit, but I can certainly have independent people review what you recorded and vote on it.
I agree the voting thresh hold needs to be bumped up - I will do that
RE: A way for banned players to "appeal" the vote -
I have thought about a public confidence vote , allowing players to vote on the judges decision, agree or disagree with the final outcome . I think this would be the better "appeal" option - but I am open to suggestion.
The general feeling inside the thread is "transparency" - I get that, and in a perfect world would love to provide you with 100% transparency as to what is behind the curtain. I can, for the most part, only provide about 99% transparency - the other 1% I left the choice to the individual admin. In order to enroll what I felt was absolute essential knowledge base of starter admins, I had to offer anonymity, to the point that they don't even know who all the other admins are. Many of them hold positions within the community that I never want to put into jeopardy. Unfortunately for me, it means yes, I may loose some support because of it, but the devil was in the details - meaning you can't make a skyscraper without a good foundation.
So as much as I would love to sit here and list my who's who of admins, this is the one thing I cannot provide to you, and has been left up to them if they so choose to say "yes, I am involved with this".
The closest I can get at the moment is to tally the votes and display them on the list - currently you can enter the site and see the entire list, approved, rejected and awaiting review - If they have been reported multiple times be different people, you can expand that view and see who reported it, what they submitted for evidence and the status of each and every reported incident. So in theory, you could open an ID that has been reported 4 times, see 3 rejected reports and one approved report, review each and every video (same video the judges reviewed) and see what it took to get onto the list.
I could, if the community desired, tally the votes in this view showing 4 votes yes, 6 votes no or whatever the votes may be.
As was stated above, I don't think your judgement of this project should come down to the individual judge , but rather the end result - what comes out the other end. I make a promise that as long as I am involved in the project you, as the player, server operator etc, will be able to see what has been submitted, the exact video evidence to review yourself, and the judges final decision of that submission.
I don't want this to be "my" project - I really want it built up by the community. Please continue to post Ideas, suggestions, improvements.