@Fritz_Fokker I agree that without passing it would be harder to do a normal flagrun and score. But let's not forget, actually no passing at all has been the standard for like always, and Rugby has just simplified the game immensely. It's not surprising that experimenting to change that might upset lots of people who didn't ever play ictf like it was meant to be played.

However this isn't the end-all be-all. Many nice suggestions have arisen in this thread, and I'm eager to try those out as well, soon.

Right now the rules have been adapted to suggestions again and go as followed:

• a set max-passing distance depending on map size, but possible into all directions
• the flagholder now sees everyone he can pass to with an overhead indicator

Maybe this already works better than before, maybe it doesn't. If all goes wrong everything can still be changed back as well. While I see that everyone is very passionate about their preferences, I don't think personal attacks will help either of our cases, so let's be patient and keep trying out new stuff instead

I suggested this to create a middleground between scoring easy flags from the top position multiple times and no passing at all.

The hard truth is that the concepts of Rugby and CTF are fundamentally different, and any attempt to combine them will break parts of the mechanics of either of them. You can either turn full Fusilli and switch the flags and allow passes to simulate actual Rugby, or you have plain instactf without any passes.

What I suggested is basically normal ictf with the option to swap flags with your fellow teammates. I agree that it now is more difficult to move the flag across the map, because you actually have to run again yourself.
I see that many people on the server disagree with this stance and would like back the original Rugby, because they have gotten used to it over the years, and there's nothing wrong with that. In the end it comes down to laying open your personal preference, which is what this thread is for.

Rugby mode has become a big part of public Sauer, as it runs on the only still regularly frequented ictf server - Rigatoni Rugby. Though it does bring enjoyment to land some clutch, last second passes with your team, the mechanics themselves turn out to be really flawed on second thought: It is rare nowadays to play open maps like wdcd or capture-night without having the enemy team suddenly score a billion times in a row. It only takes a slight skill imbalance to have the better team completely dominate the round until the inevitable early 10-x knock-out.
This has led to many players complaining about Rugby - some also calling for its abolishment - as the current ruleset breaks the game: there's not much left of Capture The Flag if you effortlessly pass from tower to tower on face-capture, only to find yourself in intermission 3 minutes later. The only strategic element here involves standing still in as open a spot as possible and waiting for your flag to arrive. Not exactly a strong achievement, and the opposite of what the gameplay dynamics are about.

Instead of removing Rugby completely now, there is a way to both get rid of the flagscore massacres, and to preserve the option of throwing in a pass when tactically appropriate. On the server a new patch is going live which will adapt the original Rugby rules.
That means:

Passing is only allowed backwards and sideways.
If you have the enemy flag and try to pass it towards your home base, you will keep the flag instead. Shooting the flag to the left, right and back is still possible.

If this is implemented, players in fact have to cross the map with their flag again, while the remaining element of Rugby allows them to throw it to their nearby and level teammates in defense. Lazy long-range scores are eliminated and the game itself returns back to the roots, Capturing The Flag.
I think that the change could dramatically improve the experience on most maps, and incite more tactical passes as well.

Love the original "Rugby" and don't change anything? Put Rugby into the next trash can and burn the can? Curious to try the proposal? Leave a comment below!

When I praise other mass murderers, and advocate for other hateful ideologies, why does that not provoke the same reaction?

It does provoke the same reaction in me. There are many violent movements and ideologies, and if you just publicly praise those (or other horrific leaders) on a game server, well I don't know if I could understand that in any other way than trolling.
But again, that's a blurred line and anyone can take the incentive when he/she deems it necessary.

Another factor why on some issues there is no proper reaction to trolls might be "unintended" ignorance. Not every master knows every ideology or their figurehead (and therefore, cannot judge appropriately), so it may seem like there is a double standard when in reality there is none.

I'm well aware of the story a-monster is referring to.
If you're making shit up and try to convince people, in a very detailed fashion that is, that a person has commited a crime (which didn't happen), this is at least defamatory if not outright libel, and in my mind this has no place on the server.
Now you could argue that it's just an online game with nicknames and such, but a player's reputation can be ruined through constant silly trolling like this, which is why I say that a ban is appropriate here.

Other than that, on the topic of chat on the server, I'm pretty laid back:

Here are my thoughts on the points @Sweeper brought up:

Are people that write religious bullshit, leftist propaganda, or crude conspiracy theories, better than a nazi troll?
What about endless conversations between certain people?

I think there's a blurred line somewhere between the normal range of ideas & opinions and trolling. This means we shouldn't try to draw a red line here, because it would be too difficult to do so.

Every master can act on their discretion here, although I would prefer it if the Sauer chat is just left the Sauer chat. Just because you have access to #mute but disagree on substance, doesn't mean you should mute. Let em talk. Don't like a spammy console? You can use /ignore <cn> too.
People write religious bullshit, leftist propaganda, or crude conspiracy theories?
You're free to disagree with them! Don't want to discuss? /ignore <cn>.
If the conversation does not turn excessively vulgar, let em talk.

When should somebody be muted or banned?

I mute in three cases: Spamming (a full console is not spam in my mind), other people asking for a person to be muted, and yeah, nazi shit/libel/persistent trolling whatever you want to call it.
Muting should suffice in all cases, and I never ban anyone for speech.
Repeated, lying offenders like the person described above deserve a kick though. Or two.