In the game where you NL'd and caused mafia to force NL on lylo, you should've received an ISP vio. Your course of action put town into a certain loss, which was avoided just by veg, but veg has never been an excuse to affect a verdict of a report if a questioned deed had been done before somebody vegged.
About the game where you pushed on magicalqueen the janitor. It doesn't doesn't matter if magicalqueen was janitor, cop or whoever else, the verdict is based on your intent. From D1 itself I can see that you pushed on guiltied cop claim without claiming a pr but looking like a pr, softing pr claim. However, on D2, you admitted you hadn't known the cop. However, you acknowledged magicalqueen's cop claim on D1 saying that she's not the cop and you pushed a shot on her. Therefore, you pushed on the only cop claim you knew, just after one line she said, which was a mere cop claim. This actually proves your grudge against magicalqueen.
But the thing is, just like I explained din the other thread, I wanted magical lynched because I was the journ. I did vote her at first just to mess with her but I did not lynch her because of a grudge, that is my entire point
Either way Idrc about the vio, thanks for taking the time out to atleast look at the games
it comes down to this:
if you thought she didnt have a cop cc, why do you think shes maf as uncced cop when you had a journalist cc
But the thing is, just like I explained din the other thread, I wanted magical lynched because I was the journ. I did vote her at first just to mess with her but I did not lynch her because of a grudge, that is my entire point
Well, if your point is that you weren't serious with what you said that game, good luck convincing mods to OT the vio. As far as I know, players joking like that also don't get away without a violation, especially that the gun could be shot at any moment.
In the game where you NL'd and caused mafia to force NL on lylo, you should've received an ISP vio. Your course of action put town into a certain loss, which was avoided just by veg, but veg has never been an excuse to affect a verdict of a report if a questioned deed had been done before somebody vegged.
About the game where you pushed on magicalqueen the janitor. It doesn't doesn't matter if magicalqueen was janitor, cop or whoever else, the verdict is based on your intent. From D1 itself I can see that you pushed on guiltied cop claim without claiming a pr but looking like a pr, softing pr claim. However, on D2, you admitted you hadn't known the cop. However, you acknowledged magicalqueen's cop claim on D1 saying that she's not the cop and you pushed a shot on her. Therefore, you pushed on the only cop claim you knew, just after one line she said, which was a mere cop claim. This actually proves your grudge against magicalqueen.
But the thing is, just like I explained din the other thread, I wanted magical lynched because I was the journ. I did vote her at first just to mess with her but I did not lynch her because of a grudge, that is my entire point
Either way Idrc about the vio, thanks for taking the time out to atleast look at the games
In the game where you NL'd and caused mafia to force NL on lylo, you should've received an ISP vio. Your course of action put town into a certain loss, which was avoided just by veg, but veg has never been an excuse to affect a verdict of a report if a questioned deed had been done before somebody vegged.
About the game where you pushed on magicalqueen the janitor. It doesn't doesn't matter if magicalqueen was janitor, cop or whoever else, the verdict is based on your intent. From D1 itself I can see that you pushed on guiltied cop claim without claiming a pr but looking like a pr, softing pr claim. However, on D2, you admitted you hadn't known the cop. However, you acknowledged magicalqueen's cop claim on D1 saying that she's not the cop and you pushed a shot on her. Therefore, you pushed on the only cop claim you knew, just after one line she said, which was a mere cop claim. This actually proves your grudge against magicalqueen.
Now some days later the violation is gone. One can only assume she removed the violation on herself with her mod powers, making it double mod abuse, because she mod abused the power to remove mod abuse.
How long will this go on?
Which is why I'm not apologizing to Charley because I think she is the main problem with this website, her entire position is questionable because of her relationship to Nathan and then she does things like remove violations on her own. I hope you are teaching your kids to be more ethical than their mother
On a serious note HOW many users have complained about Chalrey in the past month alone? Like 20? I have seen so many threads of users saying the same and she is still here and its sick. I got a GT violation because charley felt like I did something unethical basically. So now that we can get vios without actually violating the SET FORTH RULE where does it stop? this is a slipper slope and this is why the site is dying.
Now some days later the violation is gone. One can only assume she removed the violation on herself with her mod powers, making it double mod abuse, because she mod abused the power to remove mod abuse.
You guys are really going to ignore the words im saying now while holding my in game words to a higher standard? How does that work? Im explaining what I was doing and you guys are just like "nope we don't care"
yes that's exactly what we're going to do, because your in game words are what you were thinking at the time and your words now are you trying to get out of a vio
Give me a different vio if you have a hard on for me but no a vio for something I didnt do thats just fking dirty and you know it. I won't stop until everybody on this site sees this because this is wild.