The online racing simulator
Naming & Shaming Policy Question
(13 posts, closed, started )
#1 - amp88
Naming & Shaming Policy Question
I've seen a few times where people have posted on the forum saying that a user has wrecked them and they've posted an mpr of the incident only to be told you can't post a replay because it's "naming & shaming". I don't see anything about it in the forum rules, so I'm wondering if we're allowed to post pictures of incidents where people have wrecked us.

edit: Following Bob's post I've made the required changes to this post. Thanks for the info, Bob.

I've now attached the MPR to this post. Take a look at the top 10 drivers from timecode 0:37 to 0:45.

Thanks.
Attached files
questionabledriving123.mpr - 1.2 MB - 80 views
woah, maybe he doesn't like you amp
Maybe he thought he could take that turn in 125 mph
As far as I'm aware, the "official" stance here is as follows...

Not allowed:
* Direct naming and shaming, e.g. "userxyz is a wrecker noob, everyone ban then now!"
So, if you would, please remove the username from your post.
* Screenshots like you have posted. My main issue with yours is that there is no indication that the car being followed has the licence name you mention in your post, as only the customisable racer name is being shown. Given that we can never be 100% sure we are looking at licence names, and the lack of complete context (although unlikely, it's possible that car had been rammed from behind and got a big speed boost - the replay would reveal all the facts), I would prefer if the images were removed also.

Allowable:
* Posting a message with an mpr containing the bad driving, with a rough description of what and where in the replay people should be looking at (e.g. third corner at 5min 20 sec), thus server owners can make up their own minds as to whether they want to pre-emptively ban the user. Also, people can check if this was a one off accident (everyone makes mistakes now and then, being suddenly distracted and braking 2 seconds too late can appear to be blatant wrecking), or if the driving was consistently of a low standard.
#5 - amp88
Ok, thanks for the clarification Bob. I've made the required changes to the OP.
This hasn't actually got anyhing to do with anything, but..:

If I decided someone was a wrecker and banned him from my server. But (!) nowdays insim applications, namely airio would make it possible for me to easily link multiple servers and thus with a simple command I'd be banning the person in question from all of my servers. Not that I couldn't do that manually for each server of cource.

Now say I had 30 servers. Would I be banning the person from lfs completely (since I understood 30 servers in a month or something is the figure for a master server ban)? Is there anything in the license user agreement thingy that prohibits me from doing that and would it be technically possible?
Isn't bans.ban shared between all servers running from a single executable? If so, it'll only be one ban, if not, maybe it is 30 bans straight up.
WHAT?

k
Quote from hyntty :Now say I had 30 servers. Would I be banning the person from lfs completely (since I understood 30 servers in a month or something is the figure for a master server ban)? Is there anything in the license user agreement thingy that prohibits me from doing that and would it be technically possible?

No, the master ban only applies if you get banned from the 30 servers while you're on them. And there's nothing in the user agreement about server management, you can do with it what you like
Not including the username would mean people need to watch the replay to actually see who the offender is, so they can then decide for themselfs who is at fault. Otherwise people would just read the post and assume the OP is right because they posted a replay to back themselfs up. Although in my experience, if you complain about people like this, you ultimately end up being the bad guy, because for some reason a lot of people think complaining about cheaters/wreckers is worse than actually being one.

As for this incident, I don't see how the offender could have the audacity to claim innocence.
Quote from ATC Quicksilver :
As for this incident, I don't see how the offender could have the audacity to claim innocence.

+10000

if he had just overshot the bend then fair enough, but full throttle with no attempt to slow down, then say he isnt at fault? come on, be serious!
For historical reasons, here is a thread created by NOFEAR which is identically named to this one where he attempts to protest he was treated unfairly by me (despite the fact he was banned by a public vote).
Oh, dmwright with one of his 100 wrecking accounts again.

One of the biggest tools in LFS, tbh.
This thread is closed

Naming & Shaming Policy Question
(13 posts, closed, started )