I am very strongly against this proposal as it currently stands.
We spend at least a few hours a month on finding active ban evasions, and have yet to find a month where there wasn't a case.
We have multiple individuals actively trying to circumvent the rules we have in our server, that use multiple accounts, as well as cases of players that would hop several countries in an unreasonable timespan.
If this system is removed, and there's no replacement for it that allows us to gather the same information we need now, we would have to rely on the LFS moderation team to take over that task for us.
Not only would that delay our execution in this even more, it would also put quite a lot more work on the moderation team, as i am sure we're not the only server keeping track of who is who's alt account.
It also wouldn't protect the targeted individuals, that's a task they need to put on themselves. If they are targeted, removing the IP from LFS would not suddenly stop them from being a target.
Imo this is the same as "don't click on links you don't trust", don't join servers where you don't trust the owners.
I think just removing the ips from view, would probably cause more problems than it solves.
In our case, no, the IP bans are not that useful, but the IPs are, as we use those to look up alts, and ban those users as well.
We spend at least a few hours a month on finding active ban evasions, and have yet to find a month where there wasn't a case.
We have multiple individuals actively trying to circumvent the rules we have in our server, that use multiple accounts, as well as cases of players that would hop several countries in an unreasonable timespan.
If this system is removed, and there's no replacement for it that allows us to gather the same information we need now, we would have to rely on the LFS moderation team to take over that task for us.
Not only would that delay our execution in this even more, it would also put quite a lot more work on the moderation team, as i am sure we're not the only server keeping track of who is who's alt account.
It also wouldn't protect the targeted individuals, that's a task they need to put on themselves. If they are targeted, removing the IP from LFS would not suddenly stop them from being a target.
Imo this is the same as "don't click on links you don't trust", don't join servers where you don't trust the owners.
I think just removing the ips from view, would probably cause more problems than it solves.
In our case, no, the IP bans are not that useful, but the IPs are, as we use those to look up alts, and ban those users as well.
Input 254 doesn't appear to be doing anything here either.
From first testing, sending an SMALL_AII returns : IS_PLH - driver not found.
edit: My bad, i forgot the part i need to set the UVal, minor bug report on the packet name i guess.
edit edit: i managed to get everything working
Last edited by kipieslim, .
OutSim is limited to the user's car in multiplayer or the currently viewed car in singleplayer(replay), thus would be a bad approach if you also plan on driving yourself.
To have the AI driving while your player could also still drive, i guess the minimum would be a CompCar for the AI itself, possibly the whole MCI to make it also aware of other cars. Paths etc. in my opinion can be user implemented.
From my understanding, MCI is only available to those with admin password, which would limit the possibility for "server guests". this is false information, you need to set an interval when testing
I like this proposal, and it looks to me that it is simple enough in the current draft to allow for a lot of different possibilities.
To further describe what r3zp3k7 is talking about, I've attached a replay.
From the start, if you spectate Red. (Nirvaki.), TheDanishDude (JELLE 9990) is drifting on the parking spots.
You only hear the sound of TheDanishDude's car when he's close.
From the start, if you spectate Red. (Nirvaki.), TheDanishDude (JELLE 9990) is drifting on the parking spots.
You only hear the sound of TheDanishDude's car when he's close.
I've asked the person that banned you, he can't find his evidence, so i've unbanned you. you can join again.
your ban was a 12 hour one, you're already unbanned.
Quite fun to drive, but i think the air resistance is way off.
Has the same drag as a GTR car that has huge wings.
Has the same drag as a GTR car that has huge wings.
From my understanding, someone gets info about their ban length and reason once the ban is issued, so if the player is not online at that time, they will get the info the first time they try connecting again.
This is a system that should already be implemented and working.
Right, a bit more info would be nice to have.
EDIT:
I've written a program that does lookup based on PName myself, this is what i do:
The class i store the user data in looks something like this:
And i guess your code for the message handling should look something like this.
It's pretty messy code, so I'm sure it has some false hits, or lack of hits, so it might need some altering to your specific use-case, but it should come close.
I hope this helps.
- What Flags did you set when Initializing insim, just ISF_LOCAL, or did you also set ISF_MSO_COLS?
- Are you altering the NPL.PName or the MSO.Message at all before comparing them?
- Are you using the InSimDotNet NuGet version or the last build from Github?
EDIT:
I've written a program that does lookup based on PName myself, this is what i do:
The class i store the user data in looks something like this:
class user{
public string Nickname {get;set;}
public string CleanNickname => Clean(Nickname); //strips any escape characters left
private string Clean(string nickname)
{
Regex hashtag = new Regex(@"\^h"); //since the InSimDotNet NuGet version doesn't seem to catch this
Regex cc = new Regex(@"\^\d"); //strip any color codes
return cc.Replace(hashtag.Replace(nickname, "#"), string.Empty);
}
}
And i guess your code for the message handling should look something like this.
private void OnMessage(InSim i, IS_MSO msg){
Regex moneySentQuery = new Regex(@"[/d/s/W]{1,3}has sent money to "); //should only hit on msgs with the matching string, any possible color codes are also handled
string cleanMessage = msg.Msg.Substring(msg.TextStart); //we only want the text of the message
if(moneySentQuery.IsMatch(cleanMessage)){ //check if the MSO message has certain text
string [] subStrings = moneySentQuery.Split(cleanMessage); //split message so we can extract users
//PlayerList is some List<user> you're maintaining somewhere in your program
user FirstUser = PlayerList.SingleOrDefault(u=>u.CleanNickname == subStrings.First()); //should be Player A or null
user SecondUser = PlayerList.SingleOrDefault(u=>u.CleanNickname == subStrings.Last()); //should be player B or null
}
}
It's pretty messy code, so I'm sure it has some false hits, or lack of hits, so it might need some altering to your specific use-case, but it should come close.
I hope this helps.
Last edited by kipieslim, .
Reason : added some example code
Hi, the MSO package does not contain a name, only a PLID, which you should have stored in your program somewhere when you got the NPL.
So you get the NPL package, save the plids and it's nicknames, and match the PLID of the MSO to a PLID in the list
So you get the NPL package, save the plids and it's nicknames, and match the PLID of the MSO to a PLID in the list
While trying 7E5, I've noticed that a mod that is out of limits is being reported in chat once, but subsequent pit leaves won't show the message again, I'm wondering if that's correct.
I've also noticed some mods that are published this week, that have both LOD2 and wheel warnings.
I've also noticed some mods that are published this week, that have both LOD2 and wheel warnings.
You've posted your ban reason in a previous post on this forum. Your unban was a mistake from our side, which we corrected.
Could you add me too pls.
my username is: kipieslim
thnx
my username is: kipieslim
thnx
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG