Donator Abuse: Jube

[Keys 24]

Name: Jube

Steam ID: STEAM_0:0:33605227

Link: http://steamcommunit...561198027476182

Server: 24/7 Dustbowl #2 | Chicago

I've recieved a lot of complains about him. He votekicks, votebans, almost anyone. I haven't seen it, untill today. Sadly I didn't get a demo of it, but a screen shot of the console log if that helps.

http://tinypic.com/r/24m96wm/5

Lotus: Jube initiated a voteban against Bongo_Muffen for "Hacking".

Jube voted for banning Bongo_Muffen.

<Voting goes on>

Lotus: Vote failed. 80% vote required. (Received 67% of 18 votes).

Bongo_Muffen : i'm hacking?

Jube : idk

Bongo_Muffen : how am i hacking?

[iASFC] Scissors : idk

http://tinypic.com/r/111qkqx/5

Lotus: Jube initiated a voteban against Benny - lft for "Hacking".

<Voting goes on>

carb0n : hes not hacking, you guys suck

Lotus: Vote failed. 80% vote required. (Received 73% of 15 votes).

These two votebans, my guess is "just because", along with about 3 or 4 votekick attempts. 1 of which actually passed. All this is a time period of about 15 minutes. Personally, if that's not abusing the system, I'm not sure what is. Like I said, I did receive quite a few messages about him from the regulars on this server for similar behaviors.

[Nano 7,892]

Just to play devil's advocate: Shouldn't we also punish all the players who agreed to kick/ban this poor innocent player? If not, then what is the difference? Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had ill intentions? Isn't he just a good Lotus citizen, keeping the servers clean from people who he thinks are hacking?

Just sayin'

[Keys 24]

Bongo_Muffen : i'm hacking?

Jube : idk

[Barqs 7]

to be an angel's advocate, every voteban should have a reasonable demo/screenshot or even some sort of logic to it; not "idk". i remember a regular player who was abusing the vote system got permbanned cause "he didnt like that player so he voteban'd him". just saying, kanye.

loves,

taylor swift

ps: yes, beyonce had the best video of all time. of all time.

[Nano 7,892]

(devil's advocate): Why should he have to know how exactly someone is hacking? Do we really expect every donator to take a class on recognizing hacks? Why not put it up to a vote if you have a concern? The % needed to agree is so high that it's unlikely to kick someone unless they really are hacking and other people have also noticed. "idk" could easily mean he doesn't know how he's hacking, but that something is definitely not right.

One could also argue that admins don't have to have a majority recognize a problem to ban, they only have their own judgement and not that of 23 or 31 others. That is why a demo is so important for them, as a hedge against bad judgement. In a voteban is it really likely that 8.5 out of every 10 people are wrong?

Barqs brings up a great example of donor abuse. However "idk" is clearly not the same thing as "I ban people I don't like"

[pockets 1,841]

I think you may be playing the devil's advocate a little too much on this one. Some players just assume whoever is being kicked for "hacking" has a reason to be banned. If I was playing on a random server, knew nothing of the donor benefits, and saw "vote ban player so-and-so for hacking" I would vote yes. If there is even a whiff of hacking, players usually want that shit to stop.

Accusing someone for hacking is not taken lightly (see our ban section for proof). Someone handing out votebans for hacking should not do it willy-nilly.

This does seem like he is abusing the donor benefits, but Mana or Afro are the two that need to deal with it.

[Nano 7,892]

I actually agree that he is probably an asshole who is abusing his powers.

I just think it's important to give people the benefit of the doubt unless there is proof otherwise . If we banned people for being assholes alone, then I'm sure a few of us (even in this thread) wouldn't be able to post right now, cause we'd have already been banned too.

I think you both made some great points. I love a healthy debate. I don't argue enough with my wife, so that leaves the internet!

[Keys 24]

Very good discussion in here. I do see both sides, but I've seen plenty of my friends, and the regulars complain about this guy, just voteban/votekicking anyone he pleases. I don't really care about the ban too much, I'd settle with his donor status being removed.

[Nano 7,892]

I'm outta' here. Mana/Afronanny / DeJa/Gotcha will decide here anyway.

Lol so true. I knew that from the first post of course but for some reason spoke up anyway >.<

[+Cactus 4,948]

In the end, there are good reasons why the voteban threshold for passing is higher than votekick, and that votebans only last 30 minutes - a voteban is really more like an extended votekick.

I do think that Jube was abusing his powers, and should probably be warned not to do it by an admin with the understanding that continuing the abuse could result in losing donor privileges.

In the end, real bans don't occur until clear proof is presented and a more qualified admin makes a judgement.

Just my thoughts on the matter.