Awp/Autosnipe Restriction Votes

**Axeager** · 03-23-08, 10:46 PM

I had a real quick question tonight about the specific restriction votes. Tonight on dust2 night the majority of the server started to AWP and Autosnipe. There was no complaints however a vote was cast to restrict the weapons, understandable. The votes did not pass and the weapons were not restricted. So about literally 2-3 rounds later another vote was cast for the Awp and Autosnipe restriction. I got very frustrated simply because the majority of the server seemed as if they didn't want it restricted, but the restriction votes rolled in twice without maybe 1 or 2 people complaining. Is there a limit to how closely votes can be placed in accordance with eachother.

Edited to take out Kill Messages

(ADMIN) started a RCon vote -Awp Vote
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for No
Voted for No
Voted for No
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for No
Voted for No
Voted for Yes
Voted for No
Voted for No
Voted for No
Voted for Yes
Voted for No
Voted for Yes
Results are in, 17 votes cast
Option 'No' has won the vote
Command will not be executed
*DEAD*

c?Vulcan30 : nice one Deadeye
*DEAD* tCz. Deadeye : ty
*DEAD*

c?Vulcan30 : especially with pistol
*DEAD* tCz. Deadeye : glock powa
*DEAD* The White Joker : votekick
*DEAD* { BD } Axeager : lmao the vote didnt pass
*DEAD*

c?Vulcan30 : racist against the usp?
*DEAD* mint : yeah not cool
*DEAD* ZIMBA : vote kick the white joker
*DEAD* tCz. Deadeye : I'm a jihadhist
*DEAD*

c?Vulcan30 : haha
EAD* The White Joker : sry, u were afk
*DEAD* ZIMBA : its ok man
*DEAD* mint : another awpvote please! lol
*DEAD* ZIMBA : just went 2 get some food
*DEAD* { BD } Axeager : lmao NO!
*DEAD*

c?Vulcan30 : food?!?!

c?Vulcan30 : not allowed on this server
ZIMBA : ye
{ BD } monstercam : cry baby
(ADMIN) Follow the call
*DEAD* tCz. PuNiShEr^ : asl;fjkaskld
*DEAD* tCz. PuNiShEr^ : lucky basterd!@
*DEAD* { BD } Axeager : rank
Player { BD } Axeager is ranked 83/842 with 5223 points, 713 kills, 494 deaths, kd ratio 1.44
*DEAD* tCz. PuNiShEr^ : god damn cake eatin aslkdfj;laskd
*DEAD* tCz. ß.Š. : HA
(ADMIN) started a RCon vote - Awp Vote
Voted for No
Voted for Yes
Voted for No
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for No
Voted for Yes
Voted for No
Voted for No
Voted for Yes
Voted for No
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
*DEAD* { BD } Axeager : WTF another awp vote!?
*DEAD* tCz. PuNiShEr^ : vote
Voted for No
ZIMBA : lucky me
psymbience : LUCKY

?
(ADMIN) First vote was AUTO
Results are in, 16 votes cast
(ADMIN) accepted vote
Option 'Yes' has won the vote
Executing RCon command voted for
Weapon [awp] is restricted
*DEAD* tCz. PuNiShEr^ : WTF!
*DEAD* tCz. PuNiShEr^ : asl;kfjkl;as
(ADMIN) started a RCon vote - AutoSnipe Vote
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for No
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for No
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for Yes
Voted for No
Results are in, 12 votes cast
Voting failed, not enough players voted

(ADMIN) Is there a problem axe?
*DEAD* { BD } Axeager : I was under the impression votes weren't allowed to be repeated so quickly
(ADMIN) you assume wrong

As you can see two Awp or Autosnipe votes were placed well within a few rounds of eachother. I did talk to the current admin on the server and he said it was allowed so I'm here to basically just make sure that no lines were crossed.

**DuDDy** · 03-23-08, 10:58 PM

admins are not supposed to spam the votes like that unless they are getting constant messages through ma_chat. that is the only way that i could see an admin putting up the votes so close together.

**vafaskillz** · 03-23-08, 11:02 PM

We have seen similar events like this happen and only one instance was an admin's fault. He spammed the AWP vote 4 consecutive times in four rounds. In this particular instance, I do not see it as spamming a vote. The admin simply put a vote up again at the request of some unhappy regs. If the same players wanted to keep the awp/auto, then it would have turned out that way and the gun would have remained in play.

**ALPINESTAR** · 03-23-08, 11:03 PM

Many times you cant see the requests because you are either alive and they are dead, or threw what duddy stated "admin" messages. Most times its only between admin and the player requesting... kinda like an anonymous vote.

**rock_lobster** · 03-23-08, 11:45 PM

Honestly, you really cant say that "The people would have voted the same way the 2nd time around". The voting system is skewed sometimes by the fact that you vote accidentally while switching to a weapon or what not (Granted Im sure that's not what happend this time, but just for conversation sake). Call me crazy, but if there are repated requests for weapon restrictions, then is it allowed to have repeated requests to have weapons re-instated? By the theory vafa/tony listed, this would be acceptable. Mind you I'm not trying to stir up shit, this is actually a question I've wondered about for quite sometime, but just blew it off.

**Axeager** · 03-24-08, 12:37 AM

Well granted that is all probably true. It just seemed so extremely quick to put another vote up so soon. I mean if the first vote as you say may have been faulty, couldn't the second vote have been faulty too?

**BIGAG** · 03-24-08, 12:42 AM

I was on at this time and from what I remember the admin put up a AUTO vote because there were more than 2 auto's on the CT team. The vote did not pass. Your posted section on the conversation does not show how many rounds had transpired. I believe 3-4 rounds (not positive). Then, the admin put up the AWP vote. After the AWP vote came the other AUTO vote. I believe you have the votes mixed up. It went AUTO (vote failed), AWP (passed), AUTO (Passed). I'm not trying to defend the admin here but I just wanted to get the right info out there.

AG

**CanadianPersian** · 03-24-08, 08:48 AM

i don't really know why you're making such a big deal out of this. the first vote was really close, 8-9 (it's not like the vast majority wanted it banned) and then someone asked for it to be put up again a couple of rounds later....that makes perfect sense to me.

**BigHub** · 03-24-08, 10:19 AM

i pulled the logs and reviewed everything last night after it happened. Totally justified on the admins part. 3 to 4 rounds transpired between votes and they were all requested.

**Axeager** · 03-24-08, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by BIGAG

I was on at this time and from what I remember the admin put up a AUTO vote because there were more than 2 auto's on the CT team. The vote did not pass. Your posted section on the conversation does not show how many rounds had transpired. I believe 3-4 rounds (not positive). Then, the admin put up the AWP vote. After the AWP vote came the other AUTO vote. I believe you have the votes mixed up. It went AUTO (vote failed), AWP (passed), AUTO (Passed). I'm not trying to defend the admin here but I just wanted to get the right info out there.

AG

First vote was Awp because you can clearly see someone asking for another Awp vote after the first one.

Well I was just making sure, no harm intended.