EPT- posting frequency (arbitary active "rule") -> he posted more than for example Etellex did
.- not contributing enough -> see above, who says what you need to contribute in order to it be "legit" play?
TL Mafia Ban List 3.0 - Page 46
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Message Blazinghand if you request a ban please ^_^ Also when the game you're sitting out is over! | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43269 Posts
- posting frequency (arbitary active "rule") -> he posted more than for example Etellex did .- not contributing enough -> see above, who says what you need to contribute in order to it be "legit" play? | ||
|
justanothertownie
16319 Posts
On May 21 2016 00:45 raynpelikoneet wrote: This is not a fucking game. This is to make people judge things correctly and not make absurd decision or rules like you yourself did?!?!?!?!? There is nothing absurd about any decision damdred made. You are just trying to "prove" to everyone how unfair the banlist is once again because that has become your thing to do recently. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43269 Posts
On May 21 2016 01:02 raynpelikoneet wrote: - self voting -> was allowed - posting frequency (arbitary active "rule") -> he posted more than for example Etellex did .- not contributing enough -> see above, who says what you need to contribute in order to it be "legit" play? | ||
|
justanothertownie
16319 Posts
On May 21 2016 01:02 raynpelikoneet wrote: - self voting -> was allowed - posting frequency (arbitary active "rule") -> he posted more than for example Etellex did .- not contributing enough -> see above, who says what you need to contribute in order to it be "legit" play? He did not even post enough to fulfill the HARD activity requirement (not even talking about the arbitrary one) at times and was warned for it. | ||
|
justanothertownie
16319 Posts
I don't have to. Self voting being allowed does not contradict the wincon argument like I explained to you multiple times by now. You are just being an ass to be an ass right now. You have no arguments. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43269 Posts
On May 21 2016 01:04 justanothertownie wrote: He did not even post enough to fulfill the HARD activity requirement (not even talking about the arbitrary one) at times and was warned for it. Guess you won one day before you actually did because Etellex was modkilled as per the rules. Oh wait....  Dude you are literally trying to argue 3p filter guy didn't meet the activity requirements but a 2p filter guy did.. | ||
|
justanothertownie
16319 Posts
On May 21 2016 00:59 raynpelikoneet wrote: I am going to try once more. If you think he played against his wincon at least explain to him and everyone else why he played against his wincon and why is that not acceptable. You have not done so. If you don't do that, he will most likely see you (and TL Mafia) as a place where if you are not good enough you are not allowed to play (trust me, i had this feeling from my first game because of certain things). I already did that in another thread. Explaining to him what was wrong etc. etc. doesn't have anything to do with the punishment. He should be treated like any other player who joined that game would have. That's the price for joining a normal game instead of a newbie game. And it's just a warning anyways for fucks sake. | ||
|
justanothertownie
16319 Posts
On May 21 2016 01:06 raynpelikoneet wrote: Guess you won one day before you actually did because Etellex was modkilled as per the rules. Oh wait.... What does this have to do with anything? If you want Etellex to be warned argue your case. I don't remember if he actually violated the activity thing like fazers did. | ||
|
Rels
France13467 Posts
On May 20 2016 23:18 Damdred wrote: As for Sandroba well that's a tough one tbh, he replaced into a slot he should get a warning as well probably at least. I'll think about it and amend my initial post and message bh when I decide. I'm against a punishment towards sandroba because he was a replacement. He did something hard (replace into an ongoing game) to help the game. He does not deserve to get warned for his inactivity IMO. BTW no punishment towards DrParnassus ? The dude just disappeared. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43269 Posts
On May 21 2016 01:07 justanothertownie wrote: He should be treated like any other player who joined that game would have. agreed, 100%. why no warning for sandroba, palmar, or etellex then? all of those guys were clearly playing against their wincon for what you / damdred have said. | ||
|
justanothertownie
16319 Posts
On May 21 2016 01:08 Rels wrote: I'm against a punishment towards sandroba because he was a replacement. He did something hard (replace into an ongoing game) to help the game. He does not deserve to get warned for his inactivity IMO. BTW no punishment towards DrParnassus ? The dude just disappeared. This doesn't make any sense. It doesn't matter if he replaced or not. You could argue that's even worse. Noone is doubting the fact that the only reason he didn't turn up to play is that he roled mafia. | ||
|
Rels
France13467 Posts
On May 21 2016 00:35 Artanis[Xp] wrote: It can definitely be playing to your win condition to lynch someone you almost certainly believe is town if the rest of town wants to murder them. -No further distractions -Validates that his arguments are genuine If no one wants to listen despite any of your best efforts it can even be best to get lynched just so people take your arguments seriously. Not the ideal scenario by any means but it can be the least bad option. As for the game: I tried coaching Fazers a little bit and honestly he just doesn't know exactly what to do, plus he doesn't have enough time to play the game. He said he intends to obs a few games first to see what people do and learn from that which sounds wise to me. Did he fuck up, play terribly and such? Yes, but he didn't do it intentionally. He figured removing himself from the game would be a benefit to the town, and didn't realize that fighting his lynch would create more information that could lead to getting the last mafia. If we want to have any new blood at all, we need to give the newbies time and not cast them away with ban list action when they do everything wrong the first or even second time. I agree with the idea behind this post - but I think a warning is fine. It has no consequences as long as Fazers doesn't get warned again, and now he learned the amount time he needs to commit to a game. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43269 Posts
On May 21 2016 01:08 Rels wrote: BTW no punishment towards DrParnassus ? The dude just disappeared. I'll be 100% honest here. Didn't expect anything else, especailly when he rolled scum. The dude is a joke. | ||
|
justanothertownie
16319 Posts
On May 21 2016 01:09 raynpelikoneet wrote: agreed, 100%. why no warning for sandroba, palmar, or etellex then? all of those guys were clearly playing against their wincon for what you / damdred have said. Nope. None of them pushed for their own lynch. Sandro probably deserves a warning for inactivity. Palmar did what he could with the time he had which was way more than you seem to remember. | ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
And jat is righy, this is a crusade to you so you will argue just to argue over a warning not even a ban just lol | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43269 Posts
| ||
|
Rels
France13467 Posts
| ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
So i could we mafia start in that. But meh that's a tough one. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43269 Posts
| ||
|
Rels
France13467 Posts
| ||
| ||
