Jump to content
unfrail

Ethical Admin Server Certification.

Recommended Posts

TL:DR. Good communities last a long time, and they grow.

 

We want this game to be a place to work together and make friends and have a damn good time for everyone.

 

A certification by OWI that would flag established and compliant servers as "ethically administered" would help newbs not get trolled and turned off by perchance joining a bad server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a good idea but as a server admin myself and a member of a clan that has established rules, I will testify that said rules are often interpreted differently by both fellow admins and players. Admins will interpret rules differently and treat players according to their understanding. The same goes for players. At some point in time admins and players will butt heads. Admins will take action. Who will judge whether a said action was ethical or warranted?

If there are only a dozen or so servers with this certification, it might work. But if there were hundreds, it could be an administration nightmare for the developer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1). Legitimate ban's based on server rules. IE No racism, hacking, harassment etc. Not just banning because server admin is losing or mad that he isn't doing well.

2). Hold's admins, regulars and new players to the same standards

 

 

Honestly that's really all I look for. An "Ethical" admin is one who is about keeping the game fun for everyone and protects the players and server according to their set of rules. I personally dole out more warnings then ban's because I give everyone a chance to correct their actions.

 

But I also think this could become a bureaucratic nightmare to keep track of lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a good idea but as a server admin myself and a member of a clan that has established rules, I will testify that said rules are often interpreted differently by both fellow admins and players. Admins will interpret rules differently and treat players according to their understanding. The same goes for players.

Not looking for broad server ruleset, but simply to define a base set of ethical behaviors that could be expected from administrators, and by allowing server filtering based on this, there would be incentive to meet said baseline.

 

 

1). Legitimate ban's based on server rules. IE No racism, hacking, harassment etc. Not just banning because server admin is losing or mad that he isn't doing well.

2). Hold's admins, regulars and new players to the same standards

 

 

Honestly that's really all I look for. An "Ethical" admin is one who is about keeping the game fun for everyone and protects the players and server according to their set of rules. I personally dole out more warnings then ban's because I give everyone a chance to correct their actions.

 

But I also think this could become a bureaucratic nightmare to keep track of lol

 

You got the basic idea. I'm not looking to rewrite the Hammurabi Code, but just a few basic things that a server proprietor would be responsible to hold his admins to. Admin abuse happens on occasion, and it can really make the game painful for new players. As for the bureaucracy, I can see the potential. Perhaps my method of validation is not ideal as it warrants individual inspection.

Another option would be to have server ratings, where a server could be rated on 4-5 elements with 5 stars. Examples would be;

 

Noob Friendliness           (were people in this server's clan patient with newcomers and assisting the players in learning?)

Performance                   (Does this server perform well with poll rates and bandwidth? please use net_graph 3 to observe stats before ranking)

Team Communication      (Do the server's team members interact with server guests and encourage communication and teamwork?)

Admin Ethics                   (Did you observe the the fair treatment of server guests by the servers' admins?)

etc.

You would get community wide aggregate ratings on servers. Servers could be filtered based on these ratings. It would take some effort to bring servers up to par, but you could simply vote your own team's servers up with 4-5 people to get it into the 5-star pool, and how long it stays there would be dependent on how well you admin and manage your server.

Certainly some options, but I think if we could derive an effective measurement, it could be good for the community as it would help new players find the cream-of-the-crop servers to cut their teeth on. Nothing against more casual servers that wanna mess around, but perhaps we can ensure the projection of the ideal standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's possible but there is an old saying that a happy customer is reluctant to say anything, but an angry customer will shout as loudly as possible for all to hear.

 

It's not a bad idea it would just be hard to get reasonable players to vote over scorned ones. But over time the odds are that will even out. IMO I think it's just hard to read if it would work well or not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would absolutely love to have a server certificate similar to PR. That if certain servers are reported breaching the rules, that said R-Con (server license management) will deal with it. And if necessary can revoke server licenses if problems continue.

I might even like this to get even further. Every server will get a feedback thread on these forums, which will be moderated and used properly.

 

IMO if this is done properly, it will make Squad a awesome game with awesome servers only. Where people enforce the game play in actively administered servers and will work on feedback from players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is certainly a reason I put this in the Discussion thread and not the Suggestion thread. ;)

 

The ideal I had going into this, with the server certification, was this;

 

  • Community defines very basic list of what can be expected from ethical servers.
  • Server proprietors grill their admins to ensure they rgr-wilco
  • Players are aware of ethical expectations, and join servers where they can expect fair play.
  • A player who feels like he is being treated unfairly would be obliged to vid-cap when he feel threatened, to obtain proof of code breach. (no proof, no case)
  • An admin who feels that it is necessary to kick would be obliged to vid-cap to prove he acted according to ethical guidelines; he warned 2x before kick etc. (no proof, no defense)
  • Some arbiter, be it community or OWI, observes the disputes and judges.
  • 2 strikes, and then server loses ethics badge or whatever is deemed appropriate.

This puts the impetus for community management on the server proprietors, and removes the direct effect of bad admins from "the game" or "the community" image.

 

It's basically body-cameras on LEOs. Works out for everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 simple rule: (from PR) play the game the way its meant to be played.

 

iirc, PR has something very similar that youre describing already. you have get a PR server license or something like theat before you can download the server (not client) files and to get that you have to prove youre willing to play PR the way "its meant to be played". not sure what the mechanism or criteria are. a dev im sure could explain this much better than i

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its a super tough thing to decide that we have discussed quite a damn bit. #1 we are hoping to control the initial in flow by gettjng the established community and pr base in servers and playing before the torrent of potential players. work out admin bugs and create a base set of servers that at the very least knows how the game is meant to be played.

one danger of course is going to release with not enough servers available for the player count.. that would be a public suicide we wpuld rather avoid as well. it will be interesting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ps. we plan to have a server admin round table pre release as well. make sure everyone we trust is on the same page

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In most circumstances player population in "bad servers" always decline. The natural order of things keep shit servers empty, unless of course you are more inclined to that type of fckery. I for one will be extremely unhappy if this nazi approach delays the amount of active servers in my country.

 

This could potentially restrict the immediate growth of the community, cause backlash, poor ratings and is something I would expect from a mod. What's next, if you want to host a server, you can only host through "our preferred" companies?

 

This would be understandable for early access/beta to nudge out the bugs and kinks.

 

There are still bad admins in PR, there are also very little servers people actually play on. Players will ultimately decide which servers get populated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on how streamlined the server application and certification process is, I think I would be okay with it. It would be a very effective way to ensure the quality of servers. At the very least I'd like to see a private forum or form of communication network (preserved in the record) where server admins and devs can dialogue and resolve issues with ease.

And @Sbat, I can understand your perspective, but I don't think slippery slope argument is the right way of discussing the issue; the devs have shown for the past 10(?) years that our trust is well placed, I'm confident, regardless of this discussion, that they will do what is best for the community

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on how streamlined the server application and certification process is, I think I would be okay with it. It would be a very effective way to ensure the quality of servers. At the very least I'd like to see a private forum or form of communication network (preserved in the record) where server admins and devs can dialogue and resolve issues with ease.

And @Sbat, I can understand your perspective, but I don't think slippery slope argument is the right way of discussing the issue; the devs have shown for the past 10(?) years that our trust is well placed, I'm confident, regardless of this discussion, that they will do what is best for the community

 

The biggest diffference is that the last 10 years are based on a mod. A commercial game is an entirely new kettle of fish, especially with money involved, being too lenient or too 1984 can end a game quickly.

 

It would be better to allow for anyone to host a "Community server" but to have to apply for a Certificate to have an "Official server".

 

Gives people an incentive and allows for regulated ethics without alienating the new commers, unique groups and variety of servers. Not every clan/group or micro community are going to want to play as seriously as the vets/hardcore fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest diffference is that the last 10 years are based on a mod. A commercial game is an entirely new kettle of fish, especially with money involved, being too lenient or too 1984 can end a game quickly.

 

It would be better to allow for anyone to host a "Community server" but to have to apply for a Certificate to have an "Official server".

 

Gives people an incentive and allows for regulated ethics without alienating the new commers, unique groups and variety of servers. Not every clan/group or micro community are going to want to play as seriously as the vets/hardcore fans.

 

To be clear, that's all I was suggesting. Let anyone host. But for newbs who have been unfortunate to chance a server with shit admins, there could be something of a "recommended" server, where admins are inclined to validate their actions for the sake of ensuring good service.

I'm not looking to turn this into a right-wing totalitarian mechanism, simply a "certification" that a server and its admins are willing to not be 7-year olds an kick people because they're learning or join the wrong squad or arent already a part of the "cool club". And if servers want to operate that way, I'm all for letting them, but with an interest to facilitate new comers to find servers more aligned with what this game is attempting to achieve in its community; a team centric operation.

Either way a counter point is always worth considering, and I appreciate your thoughts. I didnt mean to let on that it would be anything more than a check box for people to filter servers by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest diffference is that the last 10 years are based on a mod. A commercial game is an entirely new kettle of fish, especially with money involved, being too lenient or too 1984 can end a game quickly.

 

It would be better to allow for anyone to host a "Community server" but to have to apply for a Certificate to have an "Official server".

 

Gives people an incentive and allows for regulated ethics without alienating the new commers, unique groups and variety of servers. Not every clan/group or micro community are going to want to play as seriously as the vets/hardcore fans.

thats a really good idea i think. maybe have beside just "official" have an icon or something to make official servers (the "good" ones) stand out in the server browser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

smh. :blink:
 

 

thats a really good idea i think. maybe have beside just "official" have an icon or something to make official servers (the "good" ones) stand out in the server browser.

That is a good idea. At least I think it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's up to game mechanics to guide people into the most effective play styles. If admins need to tell people how (not) to play then the game isn't designed very well. It's a game, don't tell me how to play it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's up to game mechanics to guide people into the most effective play styles. If admins need to tell people how (not) to play then the game isn't designed very well.

This. Absolutely this. This should be stickied into the suggestions forum, as it applies to all aspects of game design.

 

But in the case of servers with bad admins (eg. admins who verbally attack players, selectively enforce rules depending on what suits them, don't make any attempts to balance the teams, etc.) then it's not a case of poor game design. It's just bad admins. I think that bad admins are an exponentially bigger problem for games like PR/SQUAD than games like CounterStrike, because the former has a small niche playerbase that needs to congregate on a small number of 100-man servers. The server license system of PR is a good start, but maybe more stringent requirements would be nice to encourage servers to respond to feedback/complaints.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's up to game mechanics to guide people into the most effective play styles. If admins need to tell people how (not) to play then the game isn't designed very well. It's a game, don't tell me how to play it.

 

Right. Let a random community with people who never played PR start a server for PR now. Imagine the server full of people that have no idea what they are doing, and then imagine only one or two admins on

 that also have no idea what kinda game it is. But because it's a community, they ''need'' to have a server...

 

Now, imagine you trying out Squad for the first time, not knowing much about it. Then you join that server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Let a random community with people who never played PR start a server for PR now. Imagine the server full of people that have no idea what they are doing, and then imagine only one or two admins on

 that also have no idea what kinda game it is. But because it's a community, they ''need'' to have a server...

 

Now, imagine you trying out Squad for the first time, not knowing much about it. Then you join that server.

 

How would I join a PR server when playing Squad? I don't really understand your concern either way. Everybody will be new to Squad, gameplay will evolve however the game's design will allow for and guide it. I see 0 problem in 100 clueless people playing and learning Squad together. Much better than joining an "established" server with specific admin enforced game style where milsim nerds shout at you for not reading a 50 page manual they put together or playing an outdated mod they come from.

 

If admins need to enforce specific game style then the game isn't designed very well. Or, it can be played in different ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

who said "milsim?"

who said "game style"?

"Ethics (also moral philosophy) is the branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct."

Im talking servers that will assure that people can learn. assure that you *wont* get kicked because youre a noob, or because you havent gon full mil-sim.

severs that will guarantee people are treated with respect by admins, since admins hold a lot of leverage on peoples gaming experience.

It has nothing to do with enforcing a style of play.I dont understand where you could get this from my OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

who said "milsim?"

who said "game style"?

"Ethics (also moral philosophy) is the branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct."

Im talking servers that will assure that people can learn. assure that you *wont* get kicked because youre a noob, or because you havent gon full mil-sim.

severs that will guarantee people are treated with respect by admins, since admins hold a lot of leverage on peoples gaming experience.

It has nothing to do with enforcing a style of play.I dont understand where you could get this from my OP.

 

I wasn't really replying to your OP, I was just commenting on people being afraid of "the game being played wrong" etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to be clear, Im all for servers of CS:GO players trying to make this a large scale run n gun, or shanking fests, or fuckin Role Playing or whatever.

If anyone can host a server, then this is going to happen, and thats great. Like you said, people should be able to play this game as they like.

If i DO join a run and gun, and I start building fobs and get kicked without warning or player comms, thats going to be a little frustrating, possibly more-so for players new to the game.

What im suggesting is a reasonable guarantee that you will be treated with respect by the servers proprietors, and that if you ARE going to get kicked, youre warned with sufficient time to alter your behavior, and that you're told why you are being kicked, if it comes to that. This should be because of server rules, let them be as they may, and not because "he sounds like hes a 10 yr old prepubescent" etc.

Whats more, Im not trying to force this ethics on any server or admins. Its there for those interested, and all it does is flag the servers in the server browser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to be clear, Im all for servers of CS:GO players trying to make this a large scale run n gun, or shanking fests, or fuckin Role Playing or whatever.

If anyone can host a server, then this is going to happen, and thats great. Like you said, people should be able to play this game as they like.

If i DO join a run and gun, and I start building fobs and get kicked without warning or player comms, thats going to be a little frustrating, possibly more-so for players new to the game.

What im suggesting is a reasonable guarantee that you will be treated with respect by the servers proprietors, and that if you ARE going to get kicked, youre warned with sufficient time to alter your behavior, and that you're told why you are being kicked, if it comes to that. This should be because of server rules, let them be as they may, and not because "he sounds like hes a 10 yr old prepubescent" etc.

Whats more, Im not trying to force this ethics on any server or admins. Its there for those interested, and all it does is flag the servers in the server browser.

What if the server rules say "no 10yr olds"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×