rank changes made

[Pedobear 0]

Today, some changes in the ranks were made:

PUPIL: pupils can now draw, with a limit of 500 blocks
MASON: masons drawlimit got a buff to 50.000 blocks
ADEPT: dunno if this was already there, but adepts can use /patrol
EXPERT: experts dont have a drawlimit anymore
GRANDMASTER: grandmaster got even more epic, for making these changes

sincerily, Kevin Sweijen (proud expert of All in the mined)

[Ericrb 0]

Pupils can now flood everything. Oh well, the ranks before the updates were ok. So now, I won't promote novice easily like before, nice...

Edit : 50K for mason?! FFS. I just won't promote people anymore. Fuck it. Just a reminder : We have a mason griefer. you guys just made his job easier.

[masteronion 0]

Pupils barely had any privileges, I don't think giving them back draw commands would hurt. If the 500 draw limit doesn't work, we can lower it later. Same goes for masons.

Mason griefer? Easy way to prevent that. Stop promoting blindly.

[Ericrb 0]

masteronion wrote:

Pupils barely had any privileges, I don't think giving them back draw commands would hurt. If the 500 draw limit doesn't work, we can lower it later. Same goes for masons.

Mason griefer? Easy way to prevent that. Stop promoting blindly.

Just letting you know that I'm one of the "strictest" guy in here. If it was just me, I don't think we would have this many people ranked. But that aside, we can't do anything about two sided people, also known as humans. What I mean is if they are in a good mood, they'll make so cool stuff and be respectful. On the other side, if we make them mad, they are going to grief everything. We came out with a voting system to ease this kind of stuff, but people can be nice n' stuff just to get ranked and after that... yeah.

"Stop promoting blindly" almost made me /ragequit there.

I gave my two cents.

P.S: Never saw anything about this new rank stuff, voting is useless now I guess. We are 7 experts, equally in term of power so we should all have a word or two to say on this stuff. 1 expert shouldn't be able to add something without any expert concern.

[Ericrb 0]

Kev told me he didn't make the change. That changes everything. I'll leave my post there anyways.

[Pedobear 0]

onion, we try to NEVER promote blindly, but adepts cant see the info of others
I know your reason for it, but they still cant see hours and stuff
and even with voting from 2 adepts, its still blind.

and eric, the mason griefer will be found, Im thinking bout one already,
and if you would ragequit bout that little a comment? jeez

im sorry I posted this topic, I thought it would be informational, but it only gave problems,
I wont do these anymore

sincerily, Kevin Sweijen (proud expert of all in the mined)

[Ericrb 0]

Yes I would ragequit for that comment. I take this server seriously and mind other people's fun. Working my ass out to give some suggestions and rules. Getting that kind of comment after all this stuff made me stop making suggestions in the future. I'll still kick n' ban some noobs but I'm out for giving my two cents. If there's a vote, I'll vote but I won't defend my opinion.

"Blindly" was just too much. Anyways I'm over it, this is going to be a qq topic. Wait, I already made it one.

[masteronion 0]

Eric, I wasn't aiming that comment towards you. In fact, fuck it, it was poorly worded to begin with. Forgive me.
All I'm trying to say is be wary of who you promote.
And if it's a problem for adepts, then we can give them /info.

[Ericrb 0]

masteronion wrote:

Eric, I wasn't aiming that comment towards you. In fact, fuck it, it was poorly worded to begin with. Forgive me.
All I'm trying to say is be wary of who you promote.
And if it's a problem for adepts, then we can give them /info.

Cheers.

[Pedobear 0]

well, I trust the adepts, they wont do harm with it, most probably even dont know they can do harm with it.
in the next update you are gonna do, please add it in

[TheCraftsman 0]

kevinsweijen wrote:

well, I trust the adepts,

You trust me? Oh noes! Very bad idea XD

btw I surrendered all my forces, a post will soon follow on the other thread.

[Moufisto 0]

Don't like.

the cuboid on the pupils totally destroys the idea of the rank.
the idea of pupil WAS to restrict early players of harmful commands until we can see for ourselves that they can be trusted with it later, as opposed to giving them a rank with all the commands they need for chaos and trusting them to not destroy the first past - restricted world they see.

and if we did a bad job picking people, you did a bad job picking us.
but that's not the case, and you know that..

Ah well. just havin' my say. I'm not trying to rekindle the argument, I'm sure you have your reasons for it the changes. i skimmed through on what you guys said before, but I disagree with the pupil cuboid, and the mason change is questionable, but less of a worry to me.

And I haven't heard of this current mason griefer. Suggestions to tackle this?
when did this happen? or was this in the past but not fixed?

Please, I'll make a topic on it and wait for current details on this issue.

[Ericrb 0]

Moufisto wrote:

and if we did a bad job picking people, you did a bad job picking us.
but that's not the case, and you know that..

I love you, no homo.

We agreed to put Mason cause we wanted to make pupil drawless. If pupil can draw, the idea of Mason is totally useless.

Pupil aside, I think the draw limit of Masons is way more important. 50k is way to much and it can be abused. We can leave it a 50k, but we should double, wait, triple the requirements to promote a pupil to mason.

I'm just backing it up.

[Pedobear 0]

well, we should definatly make the requirements for both pupil and mason higher, and with that adept too
pupil to 10 hours, mason to 30, adept to 80?

[Moufisto 0]

If we raised the requirements as a whole, would that be considered fair on the people who could be considered for the promo but now denied for not fulfilling requirements?

I mean, I'd agree cause that's at least what we had to do..
but changing back at this stage, I'm not exactly thinking this through but first thing that comes to mind, is that it's gonna create problems up than it's gonna solve.

[masteronion 0]

What about decreasing pupil's draw limit to something minimal like 8, 16, 32?

[Moufisto 0]

(why have it at all?)
Sure, that may work.. they might grief like shit, but it'll be easier to pick em out since we can match their draw limit to how much they've drawn so far, and then look at what they've made and judge it from there..
ahhhhhhsurewhynot.

[TheCraftsman 0]

kevinsweijen wrote:

well, we should definatly make the requirements for both pupil and mason higher, and with that adept too
pupil to 10 hours, mason to 30, adept to 80?

I have always thought that pupil should be for novices with potential, just to keep them in the server. Higher ranks are for people that have truly proved themself.

So my idea for rank requirements:
Pupil: Have potential
Mason: 30h and a proper amount of builds.
Adept: 60h, a big amount of quality builds and a lot of responsibility.
OR 100h, a big amount of good builds and no power abuse.

This will probably INCREASE the number of pupil griefers, but I think this is kind of inevitable without making rank reqs so high that talented builders will leave the server. On top of that, it won't matter that much when we watch our pupils, and good builds can be copied to secure mason worlds.

[TheCraftsman 0]

And uh... what about a warning when you are about to promote a pupil that doesnt have mason requirements? That would kind of replace /info for adepts.

[Pedobear 0]

novices have to show us that potential by building and staying with us,
we want to keep the buildings pupils make dont we?
so if we would have SO MANY pupils we would have like 20 pupil maps.....
correct me if Im wrong but promoting so much wont do us good.
and we could torture pupils by giving them a draw limit of 3 xD

[TheCraftsman 0]

@#!@#$%#%$?!

Can someone please tell why I can't say kevin is a cruel person?

[Moufisto 0]

Because he can edit your posts to remove you saying he's a cruel person! ^.^

[Ericrb 0]

TheCraftsman wrote:

@#!@#$%#%$?!

Can someone please tell why I can't say kevin is a cruel person?

"." means Kevin is a cruel person? I removed two of your posts. I almost deleted this one too, but if I did, my post would make no sense.

[Pedobear 0]

btw mouf, we cant edit posts anymore

[TheCraftsman 0]

Ericrb wrote:

"." means Kevin is a cruel person? I removed two of your posts. I almost deleted this one too, but if I did, my post would make no sense.

You, my friend, failed to read the post subject
xD

[Ericrb 0]

Where did I failed?

I'll guess cause I have to go for a while :

If you hid what you said then it means that you didn't want us to look at what you wrote which mean you spammed. With that said, you posted a spam in "serious talk". Good boy, really.

Post title shouldn't hold any information at all unless it's mentioned in the post.