My proposition originates from the obvious problem that when a player is told to read the rules before they rejoin or come off a ban, they do not read them. It's clear they're not reading them because they come back and do the exact same thing again. Or maybe they have read them but in their ignorance have chosen not to follow them.
The suggestion is a 'general rule understanding test' which would be similar to the COP and TOW tests for example, but instead it is testing a general understanding of the rules. If they fail to achieve a high enough pass mark, they remain banned until they do so.
I think this would wipe out a fair amount of the persistent offenders who can't even understand English or who don't know how to use Google Translate to make sense of the rules in their native language. It'd also be nice if anti-cheating measures were put in place, though this would of course have its limitations, so the offenders do not get their friends to take the tests for them (e.g. the only English speaking member/leader of a team, not referring to any team in particular, takes the test for all of his members because they eventually end up banned and have to sit the test).
Clarification: Only those who have been requested by an admin to read the rules would be subject to the test. Everybody would be in a good state to begin with.
Yes. A brilliant idea if it could be implemented properly.
Im not gettin it...
Do the test for everyone , or for those who get banned?
Also , will be free?
I suggest to add a poll for see what ppl think better
I used to play some SAMP (GTA SA MP) And to join a server there people also had to do a hard test about the rules. And for years there were a minimal amount of noobs in the server.
Good idea! +1
(2016-01-27 17:30)Borja Wrote: [ -> ]Im not gettin it...
Do the test for everyone , or for those who get banned?
Also , will be free?
I suggest to add a poll for see what ppl think better
Those who are requested to read the rules by an admin, because they've broken them. So everybody is 'fine' to begin with.
Poll added.
Won't work, as simple as that
(2016-01-27 18:01)Mr.AD Wrote: [ -> ]Won't work, as simple as that
I really appreciate the effort you put into posting this. It's provided me with a unique insight as to what other readers may be thinking about the proposition and for that I can't thank you enough.
On a serious note, I'm not surprised
you in particular think it won't work. Then again, I can't imagine many people like to splash £24 unnecessarily.
The idea itself is good.
But It simply won't work as most of the Saudis are doing the tests for themselves, I'm sure that
you know fully well that.
(2016-01-27 18:09)Mr.AD Wrote: [ -> ]The idea itself is good.
But It simply won't work as most of the Saudis are doing the tests for themselves, I'm sure that you know fully well that.
Thanks for explaining your previous point. At least if they've passed the test and acknowledged they do in fact understand the rules (after all, they've passed the test) hopefully they (not just Saudis) can be banned for a considerably longer period of time, as subsequent breaking of the rules is just sheer disobedience meaning the question of 'if they didn't understand the rules because of a language barrier' is removed.
I like your idea. Instead of completely disallowing their access to the server, how about their inability to leave spectator mode until the (brief) test has been completed? An additional security measure could be implemented ensuring that the IP the test is being taken at is the same of that connected to the server at that moment in time.
(2016-01-27 18:20)Dan Wrote: [ -> ]IP the test is being taken at is the same of that connected to the server at that moment in time.
Teamviewer / teamspeak?
I said an additional security measure which implies it wouldn't completely overhaul the other possibilities but would certainly reduce them.
(2016-01-27 18:20)Dan Wrote: [ -> ]I like your idea. Instead of completely disallowing their access to the server, how about their inability to leave spectator mode until the (brief) test has been completed? An additional security measure could be implemented ensuring that the IP the test is being taken at is the same of that connected to the server at that moment in time.
My original thought would be that they can still connect to the server, but get kicked just after the InSim sends them a message such as: 'Please complete the general rule understanding test @
http://city-driving.co.uk/whatever. Your code is xyz123.' That way they wouldn't be occupying any free slots for longer than a few seconds.
Like MR AD has suggested, Teamviewer or Teamspeak is still an option. Though using that as an argument against the idea basically undermines the entire purpose of the successful COP/TOW/MED licence system that's already in place
It doesnt sounds like it is practical to make a system that has to ban/unban automatically for this specific test idea. I do agree with what Dan said about them being Auto-spectated if they attempt to join race and have yet to finish/pass the test. Maybe after a failed attempt /kick the user and end with a message telling them to report to server 2 to attempt the test again (to keep high test traffic off of server 1).
(2016-01-27 18:34)Dizzle Wrote: [ -> ]It doesnt sounds like it is practical to make a system that has to ban/unban automatically for this specific test idea. I do agree with what Dan said about them being Auto-spectated if they attempt to join race and have yet to finish/pass the test. Maybe after a failed attempt /kick the user and end with a message telling them to report to server 2 to attempt the test again (to keep high test traffic off of server 1).
What is the point in them being on any server if they can't drive because they haven't taken the test?
I think there are quite a few people who know the rules - or at least the one they're breaking - but choose to break them anyway. The test probably wouldn't be very effective for those people. A minor annoyance at best. I'm sure a kick or a ban would be more effective.
It's not a bad idea and I'm not particularly against it but I'm not sure if it will be as effective as people think.
As a side-note, I am finding it hard to create a decent set of questions and answers even in my head. Could anyone give some proper examples that could potentially be used if Elmo/Pete decide they might want to look into implementing this? Perhaps Tingle could give it a go. :)
(2016-01-27 18:43)BP Wrote: [ -> ]I think there are quite a few people who know the rules - or at least the one they're breaking - but choose to break them anyway. The test probably wouldn't be very effective for those people. A minor annoyance at best. I'm sure a kick or a ban would be more effective.
It's not a bad idea and I'm not particularly against it but I'm not sure if it will be as effective as people think.
As a side-note, I am finding it hard to create a decent set of questions and answers even in my head. Could anyone give some proper examples that could potentially be used if Elmo/Pete decide they might want to look into implementing this? Perhaps Tingle could give it a go.
Like I said a few posts up, the test would remove any uncertainty about whether or not they actually understand the rules and could potentially warrant longer bans because it boils down to sheer disobedience and nothing more than that. But the main purpose would be to just ensure that the rules are actually understood, because I think it is rather apparent that a lot of the new players do not understand them.
As for questions, I was thinking along the lines of instead of having pictures (like in the other tests), we could use video clips. Few examples:
1.) A car overtaking a chase is in the video. Questions could be what is wrong with this followed by answers.
2.) A car drifting the roundabout in a video. Question could ask is this a server rule or simply a road law being broken?
3.) A clip of the hazard sign clearly being visible on the screen, but the car doesn't reduce their speed. Questions could be aimed at what is wrong with this and/or what should be done instead.
4.) A screenshot of chat. Within this screenshot there is text not in English, disrespect and spam. Multiple choice questions about what is wrong with this would follow
I'm sure I can think of more, but they're a few I've thought of which wouldn't simply be a control + f job of key words from a question, but instead, require an understanding of the rules.
Well, this sounds like you're wanting TC to be a white listed server, where you must pass a test to be able to play, which is pretty good imo, I like it.
Even if it's just for those already banned, that would probably be better.
I also think that if the decision is made to make this test thing.
That all the players have to make it and not only the new players. Because there are not many new players coming into our server. The problem mostly is those people that come back after a while play a few minutes, be annoying and leave.