Am I not entitled to my own opinions?Looking over the chat, his attempts and his general approach to his situation with you and the two RDMers (Which were definitely RDMing? Look at the log.), he did not take anything too personally and was rather quite level headed and calm. I'm not liking your attitude here though. If you deny a damn vote from a VIP, you damn better well pay attention to the chat because there will be questions asked. Regs are entirely entitled to their own opinion but they're expected to make decent judgement. By you making poor judgement in every possible way in this situation, yes, you did affect the gameplay of others as now the two people who should have been kicked can continue or evade which at least one did do. So you're not the one directly causing the problem but you're basically making an attempt at NOT solving the problem with the players, which in itself is a problem.
Am I the one who is affecting how others play the game?
I would like to think that the answer is no, but Ursus disagrees. Just because I don't keep track of the text chat he thinks that I am personally ignoring him.
When he added me as a friend, that was all he did, no questions or anything.
As for the request for a ban, how come I do not see any ban request for the actually RDMers? I think he has taken this a little too personally.
Am I not entitled to my own opinions?
Am I the one who is affecting how others play the game?
I would like to think that the answer is no, but Ursus disagrees. Just because I don't keep track of the text chat he thinks that I am personally ignoring him.
When he added me as a friend, that was all he did, no questions or anything.
As for the request for a ban, how come voting against him is worse than actually RDMing? I think he has taken this a little too personally.
In both his defense and against him he has been voting no to every cast vote... after enough say yes for the vote to pass.Wait, is he ONLY voting no when there's enough yes votes? Can anyone else confirm that?
By definition he is abusing reg status but physically what he's done doesn't change the outcome.
A demotion isn't exactly necessary but then again it's not my call.
Wait, is he ONLY voting no when there's enough yes votes? Can anyone else confirm that?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm guessing that's a yes.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
pretty much and to let it clear:He's not voting seriously though from what I understand. Which is not the impression I was given.
If you're agree with the player being kicked: vote yes
If you don't know what is going on or you're neutral to the situation : don't vote
If you're aren't agree with the player being kick: vote no
my opinion:
If he votes no when all the other regulars and VIPs (included myself) voted yes, then maybe he isn't good enough to judge situations, wich is the only duty that is asked to regulars.
If you don't keep a track of chat or anything else on the server, then you're a completely useless reg. I'd say that he needs to be at least warned.Agreed 100% but... Issue is he's been warned by three Vip's within a 6 hour time frame. So what good would another warning do... Sorry if I'm mistaken about the ingame warnings being official as well.
Agreed 100% but... Issue is he's been warned by three Vip's within a 6 hour time frame. So what good would another warning do... Sorry if I'm mistaken about the ingame warnings being official as well.If that's correct then he should be demoted.
If you don't know what is going on or you're neutral to the situation : don't voteI totally agree with memo
If you don't keep a track of chat or anything else on the server, then you're a completely useless reg. I'd say that he needs to be at least warned.
Then a solid 30-40% of our regs need, "at least warnings".I was obviously referring at this report as well.
I'm not so much pissed off by the fact that he voted no for fun as I am by the fact that he refused to explain himself.I see. The fact that he's not visiting and posting on the thread isn't very promising either. Basically just shows that keeping reg isn't a priority and therefore I doubt managing the tiny bit of responsibility that he does have would be a priority either.
Treating a votekick as an opportunity for a joke and then ignoring anyone who disagrees is not why we promote people to reg. The only purpose of the rank is to vote on kicks and bans, and that entails actually paying attention and not being a self-righteous martyr over things when you rustle the wrong jimmies.