|
This thread is for discussing recent bans. Don't discuss other topics here. Take it to website feedback if you disagree with a ban or want to raise an issue. Keep it civil.NOTE: For those of you who want to find the actual ABL thread where the bans are posted. Please look in here: https://tl.net/forum/closed-threads/ |
In other news:
Xpace was just banned by EvilTeletubby. That account was created on 2011-03-15 22:22:48 and had 1656 posts. Reason:On December 16 2012 15:29 Xpace wrote:There are trolls in every stream chat, especially when it's unrestricted, not modded or isn't subs only. But really, + Show Spoiler +KOREANS GET TEH FUCK OUT OF THIS STREAM. WE ARE SENDING ANDERS BREVIK TO SOLVE KOREAN GOOK PROBLEM. THIS IS NOW A USA-ONLY CHAT. they're seriously trying too hard! What the fuck is wrong with you?!?
EDIT: I completely misunderstood that post as well, and I even read the previous page and somehow forgot - Sorry for calling you a crazy person xSpace, lol
|
On December 17 2012 00:16 ELA wrote:In other news:
Show nested quote +Xpace was just banned by EvilTeletubby. That account was created on 2011-03-15 22:22:48 and had 1656 posts. Reason:On December 16 2012 15:29 Xpace wrote:There are trolls in every stream chat, especially when it's unrestricted, not modded or isn't subs only. But really, + Show Spoiler +KOREANS GET TEH FUCK OUT OF THIS STREAM. WE ARE SENDING ANDERS BREVIK TO SOLVE KOREAN GOOK PROBLEM. THIS IS NOW A USA-ONLY CHAT. they're seriously trying too hard! What the fuck is wrong with you?!?
What a crazy person
Yeah...I read that as well...wtf is wrong with some people is right ETT.
|
On December 17 2012 00:19 TheAmazombie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2012 00:16 ELA wrote:In other news:
Xpace was just banned by EvilTeletubby. That account was created on 2011-03-15 22:22:48 and had 1656 posts. Reason:On December 16 2012 15:29 Xpace wrote:There are trolls in every stream chat, especially when it's unrestricted, not modded or isn't subs only. But really, + Show Spoiler +KOREANS GET TEH FUCK OUT OF THIS STREAM. WE ARE SENDING ANDERS BREVIK TO SOLVE KOREAN GOOK PROBLEM. THIS IS NOW A USA-ONLY CHAT. they're seriously trying too hard! What the fuck is wrong with you?!?
What a crazy person Yeah...I read that as well...wtf is wrong with some people is right ETT.
It was a mistake.
On December 16 2012 15:41 EvilTeletubby wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 15:34 frogrubdown wrote:Xpace was just banned by EvilTeletubby. That account was created on 2011-03-15 22:22:48 and had 1656 posts. Reason: On December 16 2012 15:29 Xpace wrote: There are trolls in every stream chat, especially when it's unrestricted, not modded or isn't subs only. But really, + Show Spoiler +KOREANS GET TEH FUCK OUT OF THIS STREAM. WE ARE SENDING ANDERS BREVIK TO SOLVE KOREAN GOOK PROBLEM. THIS IS NOW A USA-ONLY CHAT. they're seriously trying too hard! What the fuck is wrong with you?!? Whoa, I'm pretty sure this dude was just quoting and criticizing one of the many instances of racism on the Korean SPL chat. I don't think he was endorsing or producing the spoilered material. That place got taken over by English speaking trolls/racists the second the English stream went down. edit: On December 16 2012 15:34 Bibbit wrote:
Poor Xpace, I think he just quoted something from the stream chat to point out how messed up it is there. I guess you're better off leaving that jazz off TL altogether, quote or not! Prudentially perhaps, but there's no way that post would be given a perm if interpreted the way I think it was intended. I think ETT thought that Xpace was saying that Koreans were stream trolls before launching a racist screed against them, rather than criticizing stream trolls who were producing said screeds against Koreans. Yeah, pretty much this. I realized it right AFTER I hit the ban button. It's a stupid thing to post regardless, and he has an abysmal posting history, but I wouldn't perm based on that alone. Working to get it reversed.
|
your Country52798 Posts
On December 16 2012 23:41 Caihead wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2012 23:34 The_Templar wrote:On December 16 2012 23:23 ELA wrote:On December 16 2012 21:34 opterown wrote:
so what actually constitutes a "bad moderation" history? like how many times would you be warned/banned for you to be considered a bad/horrible poster? haha (T+P)/M = x x≪1000 = Bad T= Time on forums (days) P= Number of posts M= Moderations .... Sub 1000 posts are naturally just bad posters... just because - Or maybe it's subjective and it varies from mod to mod  4 warnings = 4 moderations. (695 + 3074) /4 = 3769/4=942.25. Cool, I'm a bad poster! I know who I'm banning if I get to top the FPL group now!
oh snap *crosses fingers and says prayers*
I'm never getting to the top, so if you get me banned I can't get you back 
|
Germany25658 Posts
According to math I am a good poster, yay.
|
Hetz was just temp banned for 1 week by KadaverBB.
That account was created on 2010-09-27 23:15:56 and had 183 posts.
Reason: In 7 days you have gathered 2 warnings and 1 ban.
Now this:
Don't eat this fat in disguise unless you want to look like inControl. The obesity risk of gaming is high enough already.
Stop posting so bad please.
I found this to be a gem.
According to the math I am an infinitely good poster.
|
your Country52798 Posts
On December 17 2012 00:45 KadaverBB wrote:
According to math I am a good poster, yay.
This formula can not be accurate, warnings and bans are worth the same amount... and 90 day bans=2 day bans.
I'm totally going to work on another formula.
|
On December 17 2012 00:47 The_Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2012 00:45 KadaverBB wrote:
According to math I am a good poster, yay. This formula can not be accurate, warnings and bans are worth the same amount... and 90 day bans=2 day bans. I'm totally going to work on another formula.
How dare you....
|
Germany25658 Posts
There are definately some holes in it, especially because dividing by zero sucks ass.
Also, what if somebody has like 2k good posts and then suddenly goes completely apeshit and gets himself permbanned.
With your formula he would still be remembered as a good poster...
|
On December 17 2012 00:53 KadaverBB wrote:
There are definately some holes in it, especially because dividing by zero sucks ass.
Also, what if somebody has like 2k good posts and then suddenly goes completely apeshit and gets himself permbanned.
With your formula he would still be remembered as a good poster...
It was a joke, because something like that is completely subjective
I could have made a formula that would quantify the amount of respect lost for Naniwa for the amount of probes he pulls against Nestea as well :D
|
|
|
Germany25658 Posts
I know it was a joke dude, I was just poking holes in it 
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On December 17 2012 00:47 The_Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2012 00:45 KadaverBB wrote:
According to math I am a good poster, yay. This formula can not be accurate, warnings and bans are worth the same amount... and 90 day bans=2 day bans. I'm totally going to work on another formula.
On December 17 2012 00:53 KadaverBB wrote:
There are definately some holes in it, especially because dividing by zero sucks ass.
Also, what if somebody has like 2k good posts and then suddenly goes completely apeshit and gets himself permbanned.
With your formula he would still be remembered as a good poster...
(1 - X)(T+P) / (M + 1)
M = 0.1 x w + 0.5 x D + 1 x W + 3 x M + 9 x Q
w = warning
D = 2 day
W = 1 week
M = 30 day
Q = 90 day
X = perm
or something like that.
|
your Country52798 Posts
On December 17 2012 01:00 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2012 00:47 The_Templar wrote:On December 17 2012 00:45 KadaverBB wrote:
According to math I am a good poster, yay. This formula can not be accurate, warnings and bans are worth the same amount... and 90 day bans=2 day bans. I'm totally going to work on another formula. Show nested quote +On December 17 2012 00:53 KadaverBB wrote:
There are definately some holes in it, especially because dividing by zero sucks ass.
Also, what if somebody has like 2k good posts and then suddenly goes completely apeshit and gets himself permbanned.
With your formula he would still be remembered as a good poster... (1 - X)(T+P) / (M + 1) M = 0.1 x w + 0.5 x D + 1 x W + 3 x M + 9 x Q w = warning D = 2 day W = 1 week M = 30 day Q = 90 day X = perm or something like that.
Just make M the number of days you are banned + warnings * (some constant)
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On December 17 2012 01:01 The_Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2012 01:00 imallinson wrote:On December 17 2012 00:47 The_Templar wrote:On December 17 2012 00:45 KadaverBB wrote:
According to math I am a good poster, yay. This formula can not be accurate, warnings and bans are worth the same amount... and 90 day bans=2 day bans. I'm totally going to work on another formula. On December 17 2012 00:53 KadaverBB wrote:
There are definately some holes in it, especially because dividing by zero sucks ass.
Also, what if somebody has like 2k good posts and then suddenly goes completely apeshit and gets himself permbanned.
With your formula he would still be remembered as a good poster... (1 - X)(T+P) / (M + 1) M = 0.1 x w + 0.5 x D + 1 x W + 3 x M + 9 x Q w = warning D = 2 day W = 1 week M = 30 day Q = 90 day X = perm or something like that. Just make M the number of days you are banned + warnings * (some constant)
You would have to multiply M by some constant as well or alter the threshold for being a good poster or it will very quickly become basically impossible to be a good poster off only a few mod actions.
|
You guys are such nubs. If you are going to make a formula, at least make it a partial differential equation where the user has to solve the answer. Hint: If you can't solve it, you are automatically a bad poster.
Here's the equation:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/QDKXW.png)
L = period = current time - time of joining
u(t,0) = 0, u(t,L) = total ban time
u(0,x) = 0, u(L,x) = total posts
Jump discontinuities in t at ban times.
Solver fourier series. If bn > 4, you are a bad poster.
Oh and lambda = total number of bans, mai bad.
|
your Country52798 Posts
On December 17 2012 01:04 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2012 01:01 The_Templar wrote:On December 17 2012 01:00 imallinson wrote:On December 17 2012 00:47 The_Templar wrote:On December 17 2012 00:45 KadaverBB wrote:
According to math I am a good poster, yay. This formula can not be accurate, warnings and bans are worth the same amount... and 90 day bans=2 day bans. I'm totally going to work on another formula. On December 17 2012 00:53 KadaverBB wrote:
There are definately some holes in it, especially because dividing by zero sucks ass.
Also, what if somebody has like 2k good posts and then suddenly goes completely apeshit and gets himself permbanned.
With your formula he would still be remembered as a good poster... (1 - X)(T+P) / (M + 1) M = 0.1 x w + 0.5 x D + 1 x W + 3 x M + 9 x Q w = warning D = 2 day W = 1 week M = 30 day Q = 90 day X = perm or something like that. Just make M the number of days you are banned + warnings * (some constant) You would have to multiply M by some constant as well or alter the threshold for being a good poster or it will very quickly become basically impossible to be a good poster off only a few mod actions.
On December 17 2012 00:58 The_Templar wrote:edit@above post: I don't care, I love making formulas for no good reason This is a little more accurate, I think.. W=Warnings B=Cumulative Ban Length (days) P=Posts D=Days on TL x= (P+D)/((B+W)^2+15) If x>5 you're a good poster. If you just joined you're automatically considered a bad poster 
I did something very similar to what you did, except I changed the threshold and the moderations weigh more heavily, and the formula does not seem to be bad.
|
Well according to the original formula, which can be the only good one because it isn´t fucking convoluted, I´m a good poster.
(826 days + 1348 posts)/1 = 2174
Got my warning for "What you posted is equivalent to posting "too long; didn't read (tl;dr)", and is being treated as such."
Someone posted about oversaturation of SC2 tournaments and used more technical statistics terms than regular english, for a matter which can in my humble opinion very easily be described in laymans terms.
I will never regret writing it.
[I believe that if you are really smart you can describe complicated things in an easy way. Using hard to understand words just to use hard to understand words is stupid]
edit: I forgot to write never and said the exact opposite of what I meant^^
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On December 17 2012 01:12 Caihead wrote:You guys are such nubs. If you are going to make a formula, at least make it a partial differential equation where the user has to solve the answer. Hint: If you can't solve it, you are automatically a bad poster. Here's the equation: L = period = current time - time of joining u(t,0) = 0, u(t,L) = total ban time u(0,x) = 0, u(L,x) = total posts Jump discontinuities in t at ban times. Solver fourier series. If bn > 4, you are a bad poster. Oh and lambda = total number of bans, mai bad.
Who knew you needed a maths degree to be considered a good poster.
A more sensible formula:
(1 - X)(T+P) / (D/6 + W/12 + 0.5)
T = days on tl
P = number of posts
D = days banned
W = warnings (equal to 1/2 a day)
X = perms
threshold for being a good poster is above 1,000
Max days of being banned for various values of (T + P):
1,000: 3 days
2,000: 9 days
5,000: 27 days
|
On December 17 2012 01:26 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2012 01:12 Caihead wrote:You guys are such nubs. If you are going to make a formula, at least make it a partial differential equation where the user has to solve the answer. Hint: If you can't solve it, you are automatically a bad poster. Here's the equation: L = period = current time - time of joining u(t,0) = 0, u(t,L) = total ban time u(0,x) = 0, u(L,x) = total posts Jump discontinuities in t at ban times. Solver fourier series. If bn > 4, you are a bad poster. Oh and lambda = total number of bans, mai bad. Who knew you needed a maths degree to be considered a good poster. A more sensible formula: (1 - X)(T+P) / (D/6 + W/12 + 0.5) D = days banned W = warnings (equal to 1/2 a day) threshold is still at 1,000 Max days of being banned for various values of (T + P): 1,000: 3 days 2,000: 9 days 5,000: 27 days
It's a rhetorical test, you know, if you take the time to investigate and research the post and conclude that it's stupid before posting you are automatically a good poster. If you actually post that your bn is less than 4 you are automatically a bad poster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
