I can understand that, but would you pay say $10 a year, to play on a server that was punk free. Think of it as an annual membership. Maybe you get some web space too, something to spice up the deal. But, not having any jackasses mess up my game is spicey enough. IMO.
Uncanny -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Elmer Fudd Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 3:17 PM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: [hlds] How About A New Global "Ban" System no. i will not pay monthly for counterstrike On 4/13/05, Steve Tilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How abaout the Subscription based model. (eh warcry?) > Pay a few bucks per month to play on a privately owned, operated, and > administered server. > Players that get banned by a steambans style adjudication process lose > whatever they have paid to date. > > We will never know till someone trys it out. > > How many people paid $50 for WoW and continue to pay $15 per month to > play online? > Guesstimate: 50000 players times $15 times 12 equals $9,000,000 per year! > Sweet! (I'm in the wrong end of the business thats for sure.) > > And if you dare to cuss too many times on a WoW system they ban you, > cancel your account, and keep the money. > > I suspect eventually all online games will follow this lead. > > > TJ Hilton wrote: > > >15 myg0ts get on and proceed to voteban everyone else off the goodguy > >system... Myg0t wins again. > > > >-- > >TJ Hilton > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >On 4/13/05, Allen 'Uncanny' Schott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>How about a "Good Guy" system which would work the opposite of a ban list. > >> > >>I would work something like this: > >> > >>1. The player signs up, for free, at a website and is granted instant access > >>to "Good Guy" servers. Supplied info from player would be minimal to avoid > >>issues with the under 14 players and such. Just the email address (the > >>player would have to reply to activate) and thier SteamID would really be > >>all you needed. > >> > >>2. With an Admin plugin, only "Good Guy" players can join a "Good Guy" > >>protected server. > >> > >>3. All players on the server are able to police themselves, when there is no > >>Admin present, with majority votes to kick or ban (revoke "Good Guy" status) > >>with a plugin. > >> > >>4. The players could vote to start a demo on the suspected player (which > >>would be silent, all players except the suspect would vote). Maybe set up > >>the plugin to send copies of the log to the master system for review (to see > >>if the player was just being lippy and pissed everyone off, ect...). > >> > >>5. Revoked players would be able to appeal the revoked status. Set up a set > >>number of times a player may be revoked and reinstated before they are > >>ineligible to be a "Good Guy". > >> > >>I've been thinking about this for months. Now, where are the real holes? > >>Of course, it will be a pain cuz players won't want to sign up, but then > >>again, players who are tired of the hackers might find some refuge in the > >>idea. I think the best part is: The legit players can police themselves. > >>Myself, if I see a player being an ass on my team, I want him gone too. > >> > >>Thoughts? > >> > >>Uncanny > >> > >> > >> > > > >_______________________________________________ > >To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > >http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- Cheers! -- Elmer Fudd _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
