Page 1 of 2

TA ethics

Posted: 02 May 2006, 22:17
by NOiZE
Years ago poosticks made a nice page about ethics and i wanted to share:

http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/poosticks/ethics.html

Posted: 03 May 2006, 06:52
by Candleman
Good "speel," but the colors hurt my eyes.

I Agree with most of the things he says.

Posted: 03 May 2006, 06:59
by Zoombie
If your dumb enough to be caught with your pants down, then you deserve to get kicked in the but!

This is war, folks, not some....vidio game!

Posted: 03 May 2006, 18:49
by Min3mat
Good "speel," but the colors hurt my eyes.
"spiel"

Posted: 04 May 2006, 00:51
by Candleman
I figured it was spelled wrong, but I didn't know the right way to spell it and therefore decided not to try.

Posted: 04 May 2006, 14:58
by Hellspawn
Wouldn't techincally be "Spiel"? :P Not sure, since my german suqs ^^.

Posted: 04 May 2006, 15:26
by HAARP
It is.

Posted: 05 May 2006, 18:14
by SwiftSpear
The only thing I don't agree with there is the smurfing thing.

The reasons are two fold, firstly I don't think it's really plausable to have "two smurfing players against eachother in a true test of skill", because I think most smurfs only really play people they know to be good while smurfing. Why would gary kasperof hide his identity from my little brother to play chess with him? My bro doesn't know who he is anyways. If you're hiding your identidy you are hiding if from someone who cares enough about the game to know who you are, therefore you're playing against people you know, not random names you've never seen before.

Secondly, and this is admitantly biased, smurfs make moderating harder. Make no mistake, you can be easily tracked down, but at a glance you've effectively swooped under our outskirt radar. Personally I don't like people who want to make this comunity a worse place then it is, and in my opinion making a moderators job harder then it has to be without a good reason is making the comunity worse then it has to be. To me "I wanted to humilate this guy who hates me by beating him without him even knowing it was me!" is not a good reason to make the job of moderators harder.

I've seen before in the NS comunity well known players smurfing because they would be harrassed otherwize, and in that case I fully support smurfs, but that being said, this comunity is more tight nit then that and we'll deal with harrassment if it's reported to us. That stuff doesn't get tolerated here.

Posted: 05 May 2006, 21:17
by Min3mat
i smurf occasionally (on the lobby). its kewl. noob bashing and surprising expert players with a one chev account is fun. i mean they are liek "you have been ingame less than 10 hrs, surely you dont know the balance/L/R mclick interface etc?" and you say. ":)="
hehehe smurf = win

Posted: 08 May 2006, 16:23
by Targ Collective
Smurfing is unethical purely because you are lowering your opponent's expectations. That is not good tactics, that is deliberate concealment and lies. Tactics are in-game stuff.

Only in certain circumstances such as the one SwiftSpear suggested would smurfing be tolerable.

Black Ops should be kept to jammers and cloakers.

Posted: 08 May 2006, 18:07
by Min3mat
Smurfing is unethical purely because you are lowering your opponent's expectations. That is not good tactics, that is deliberate concealment and lies. Tactics are in-game stuff.
/me sends ninja monkeys to distract Targ Collective whilst flanking him with a unit of light cavalry. /me assures him this isn't tactics
honestly. don't even try. just uninstall spring.

Posted: 08 May 2006, 19:24
by Decimator
Generally, Min3mat, I'll go easy on a one cheveron to avoid ruining the game for them. That is why it's bad form to smurf.

Posted: 08 May 2006, 19:34
by Drone_Fragger
I see nothing wrong with smurfing, Unless its smurfing someones who already uses that name. (For example the person who renamed his account to Deicmator and started spamming Racist abuse). If you aren't going to polay to your highest ability anyway, You souldn't play people.

Posted: 08 May 2006, 19:55
by Forboding Angel
Drone_Fragger wrote:I see nothing wrong with smurfing, Unless its smurfing someones who already uses that name. (For example the person who renamed his account to Deicmator and started spamming Racist abuse). If you aren't going to polay to your highest ability anyway, You souldn't play people.
YA know, some of us here actually try to encourage new players to keep on playing, and helping them learn while we slowly pummel them.

Jesus dude, it's no wonder newbies get so upset with this community.

Posted: 08 May 2006, 20:22
by Min3mat
Generally, Min3mat, I'll go easy on a one cheveron to avoid ruining the game for them. That is why it's bad form to smurf.
losing = learning
and i always tell them how to watch the replay (no the replay tab dont work in this release :()

Posted: 10 May 2006, 11:24
by Targ Collective
So smurfing can be a teaching aid? I can see that. But a better way of going about it is a 2v2, with two vets and two... less experienced... individuals.

Posted: 13 May 2006, 19:37
by Deathblane
Also smufing can bugger up team ballence. Not that the chevron rating means that much but it's nice to try and make the sides even.

Posted: 13 May 2006, 22:00
by SwiftSpear
Deathblane wrote:Also smufing can bugger up team ballence. Not that the chevron rating means that much but it's nice to try and make the sides even.
Ya, that's pretty much the most annoying thing ever. Virtually everyone balances teams by chevs so if there's one smurf in there it totally breaks everything and you get 100% steamrolls. Not fun for either side.

Posted: 13 May 2006, 23:17
by Min3mat
some ppl ENJOY noob bashing ^__^

Posted: 13 May 2006, 23:23
by krogothe
Min3mat wrote:some ppl ENJOY noob bashing ^__^
And they are all AWESOME ppl!