Quote from: [RD]†ZealousR†™ on March 17, 2010, 09:01:24 am

i Always thought of houses as places people bought and tried to get everyone to go into with "everyone go to /___"
that and a place i randomly saw when i fell off my bike and landed next to [insert  house words here..anyway players who are inactive because of tests or so will be unfair to them and making a player get on every 3 days or have a 50 - 60% of losing their house. i do think you can improve your idea but i wouldn't go for it -.-

oo, no its not like that. If you want to keep your house, you would only have to get on once a year. This house resest idea would only take place once a year. 3 days before people are kicked out of their house, they will get a notice. They would not have to get on every 3 days as this only takes place once a year

So you're suggesting what already exists? Houses can marked for reset already after 1 year of owners inactivity....that's been around since the start of housing.

and what about banned people that want to keep their house? they can't just log on to make them stay with their house

It's their fault for breaking the rules in the first place, so I think they don't deserve any special treatment.

they are banned, so who cares?

ho ho ho man "who cares" i bet if your on the losing side of that your gonna be asking "who cares".

in my opinion that's ignorant to say. people are banned because they broke a rule, which means they made a mistake. a mistake shouldn't always have to cause you all of your possessions and money because you might get a second chance. ban appeals are there to get second chances after a mistake or offense and if their internet gets out or they have exams or a bunch of reasons but that again doesn't mean a "who cares" attitude.

If admins had a "who cares" attitude and you got banned...who cares? me? no, i get your house, you lose your money. and nobody cares about "Orion" the dude who got banned and lost all his stuff. eventually people get unbanned and wanna get in-game again, banned people aren't officially convicts, or dangerous or always hackers or rule-breakers, some learn their lessons, some become better people, or maybe some break the rules again and get a harsher punishments, its just alienating them by saying "who cares"

Anyway there can be a better way on this whole house time suggestion but in my eyes this would be completely messed up.

And i don't mean to call you out or sound like a douche or a jerk or give a bad first impression of me but it just kind of annoyed me when that was said.

gday mate

Oh well. Never consider things out of their context. Maybe you would realise my proposition is totally opened to ban appeal, and the time from wich you may consider someone as permanently banned/unactive is totally subjective.

I understand what have angerstd you is that I have said "who cares". I personally think if MR_X has been unactive and banned from June 2009 because he was spotted flying in his truck and has not done a ban appeal a year later, then yeah "Who cares" about him.

If you are banned and you do not want to loose your property, make a ban appeal. That's my point exactly.

In any case, I don't feel like arguing over the form(or words i choose) instead of the actual content of my post.

I think the whole point of banning IS alienation.

i see no way that your text is open to ban appeals if you say who cares.

ok if they were banned since 09 then their house would be reset anyway, its already setup like that

i was not angered in anyway i just thought i should stand up for those who are banned or have been banned

in which way is this an argument? i didn't insult you i was just stating my point

Ok again: being banned means you made a mistake, if it was meant to alienate then you could not even talk on the forums, it is a form of punishment to learn your lesson and not do the same thing. if it was meant to alienate they would put, "do not converse with MR.X because they are banned and that means they are likely to do this offense again." somewhere on the forums.

last but not least if the person has been banned for a year then yes i could agree that would be a better way to...repossess their house since they won't be on for a year.

Okok....

[RD]†ZealousR†™, my objective with the first post I made in this topic was to make "another house suggestion".
Today, in another part of the forums, I have stumbled a post from Amino himself, (which I salute) saying houses will be updated in June, and the case is pretty much closed, so I've said what I had to concerning this.

But if you may: If you play on Worldofstunt.com, you agree to the terms of service.

Hacking hurts SA-MP, but more importantly, breaks the rules.

That said, I believe being unbanned is a privilege (is that even a word in English too?), and should not be the normal thing. Making a ban appeal or not making a ban appeal is not the point. You know the rules, so I say if you choose to break the rules and get banned, you have agreed to loose whatever you might loose. You and only you chooses to break a rule, AND suffer the consequences.

Of course that would applies mostl and foremost to long time players, like those who can afford to buy a house.

Peace. And I apologize for being such a party breaker (and highjacking Evilnine's thread). And I certainly do not wanna sound like an admin or whatever, I just had to say the bottom on my thoughts on this/

P.s. Social alienation: the individual subject's estrangement from its community, society, or world.
Thats why I said: I think the whole point of banning is alienation.