Epicmafia

runwithfire

over 10 years

What's worse- assuming mod is serious in verdict, or making bad decisions and joking your way through it

deletedover 10 years

runwithfire says

Joke verdicts are funny, imo

is that why all your reports had them?

deletedover 10 years

you had 2 chances at getting the joke and whiffed on both of them

runwithfire

over 10 years

Joke verdicts are funny, imo

deletedover 10 years

runwithfire says

While I'm here who made notes never expire

that's the joke

runwithfire

over 10 years

While I'm here who made notes never expire

deletedover 10 years

That sentence right there is the reason why you should've voted to OT to a note, since that's what you would have a done, that's why there's 3 or two mods or whatever who handle appeals and vote on what THEY would have done, and then the result is made.

MOD 1 gives a violation
player appeals the violation

MOD 2 reads the appeal, the persons defense, and the game and votes what they would have done given the circumstances.

MOD 3 does the same thing MOD 2 does and then it's handled.

You, vilden, MOD 2. Just said you wouldn't have given a violation so you should have voted to OT then let MOD 3 also decide what they would have done.

deletedover 10 years

i mean isp is isp but a note could be anything, it could even be isp

runwithfire

over 10 years

How is that out of context vilden, it is the only relevant thing you've said about this report

deletedover 10 years

notes never expire, just like my intolerance of trolls.

runwithfire

over 10 years

So the reason for no OT, even though you disagreed with the verdict, was that a note is worse punishment than ISP, and it'd be rude to ediz

deletedover 10 years

Devante says

I agree helsinki that it's ironically funny that zovea got this violation, and i agree that he would probably report someone for the same play, but i would also have the same stance that this should at the most be a note, unless of course the person has a REPORTED history of game throwing, ISP'ing, or playing under the influence and using it as an excuse.

we're not supposed to give notes for gold heart games. in-game violation notes are really only for new players and super super borderline cases in which the mods just want to keep track of a certain behavior in case the player is habitually doing it

vilden

over 10 years

^ lame quoting out of context

deletedover 10 years

vilden says

if I took on the report initially, my verdict would've been different

pranay7744

over 10 years

he does have a history of trolling though. I dont understand why you are protecting this guy so much.

deletedover 10 years

in case you guys forget: appeals are just reports, but with a twist.

deletedover 10 years

I agree helsinki that it's ironically funny that zovea got this violation, and i agree that he would probably report someone for the same play, but i would also have the same stance that this should at the most be a note, unless of course the person has a REPORTED history of game throwing, ISP'ing, or playing under the influence and using it as an excuse.

deletedover 10 years

vilden says

yeah, @slow, I guess it's a matter of etiquette. I didn't feel strongly enough that ediz was WRONG so I didn't OT. That being said, if I took on the report initially, my verdict would've been different

haha well then i think you did the appeal wrong, IMHO

deletedover 10 years

man vilden just activated slow's trap card i'm excited

vilden

over 10 years

yeah, @slow, I guess it's a matter of etiquette. I didn't feel strongly enough that ediz was WRONG so I didn't OT. That being said, if I took on the report initially, my verdict would've been different

deletedover 10 years

Devante says

vilden says

@devante, I didn't give him the vio, I agreed with ediz's verdict since a counter-argument is weak. By policy I almost HAD to sustain it.

You just changed the details btw. A case where someone guns incorrectly because he "didn't know who the bp was" when the bp claimed would deff be an isp vio. But if someone intentionally doesn't gun the BP like you said before, there must have been some circumstance or reason why he didn't. This probably wouldn't be a vio, it depends.

it's stupid to give someone who has no history of trolling a game a violation like this, people make mistakes. He made a mistake, let's recall how many times jasprar for example said "OMGZ MODZ ARE HUMANS TOO THEY MAKE MISTAKES RELAXXXXXXXXX".

actually, zovea has an extensive history of terrible play, and this is just the first time he's been modded for it using his own logic

deletedover 10 years

You also claimed that you sustained it in the appeal because notes don't expire implying you did him a favour, when in fact notes do expire. In this case he should've gotten a note and told to try to avoid playing games when under the influence of anything since your judgment might be impaired, then we wouldn't be here right now.

deletedover 10 years

appeals at their core should really just be "what would i have given this report if i was the first mod to look at it".

helsinki says

slow is here

yaa lol

deletedover 10 years

vilden says

@devante, I didn't give him the vio, I agreed with ediz's verdict since a counter-argument is weak. By policy I almost HAD to sustain it.

You just changed the details btw. A case where someone guns incorrectly because he "didn't know who the bp was" when the bp claimed would deff be an isp vio. But if someone intentionally doesn't gun the BP like you said before, there must have been some circumstance or reason why he didn't. This probably wouldn't be a vio, it depends.

it's stupid to give someone who has no history of trolling a game a violation like this, people make mistakes. He made a mistake, let's recall how many times jasprar for example said "OMGZ MODZ ARE HUMANS TOO THEY MAKE MISTAKES RELAXXXXXXXXX".

deletedover 10 years

slow is here

What?