Bans (Read Only) > Unapproved
Admin Target RDM, Explode me for Micing (WTF)
SheepsAholy:
--- Quote from: Travelsonic on August 11, 2011, 12:45:44 PM ---Hang on, was he annoying people with text, or annoying people with voice chat?
Though I am skeptical based purely on the evidence or lack thereof presented, I say we should make sure we are judging the validity or lack thereof of the case - evidence presented by both sides, witness and what story they tell, etc, and be careful to not let judgement subconsciously be made purely because of status or lack thereof [whether guest, reg, VIP, admin, etc].
IMO of course, if this guy wanted a stronger case, regardless of whom is involved or not, when it comes to accusations of RDMing DAMAGE LOGS ARE A MUST regardless of whether or not you are dismissing or debunking accusations of RDMing, or proving somebody did RDM you.
--- End quote ---
No matter the case, you don't piss off moo and you are to listen to everything moo says, even if he asked you to get naked.
Travelsonic:
--- Quote from: SheepsAholy on August 11, 2011, 01:24:33 PM ---No matter the case, you don't piss off moo and you are to listen to everything moo says, even if he asked you to get naked.
--- End quote ---
And no matter the case, it has been said that the rules apply to everybody - VIPs, Admins, Reg, etc - and thus IF [and remember, I use the word IF to apply a healthy dose of impartiality] it is proven that he broke the rules*, then consequences of SOME kind should be carried out regardless.
Last time I saw, lately the response to people being an auditorial pain in the ass that I've seen given is to mute them - "Oh guy X is being an ass on the mic" "Mute him." - it even says so on the site, on the splash screen when connecting to rNd servers. IF it is proven that you were killed merely for being annoying on the mic, I'd expect others to chime in to either debunk or support my notion, but it //sounds// like it could be considered target RDMing.
ON THE OTHER HAND, I think the evidence is not there to make a judgement one way or another, and to substantiate this would need something more - demos, damage logs, etc.... I mean, how do you know that you were RDM'd, and that it isn't a case of Moo being a T and killing you within the confines of the game / server rules despite acting after your death in a way that might make some people suspicious?
This is what I mean with proof, damage logs, demos, etc. Proof is everything regardless of which side you are on - defending or accused - for the case being made. It doesn't have to be the most sophisticated, intricate things, so long as it easily demonstrates solid evidence, that is, doesn't draw questions over its validity.
[*Do I need to make it clear that I'm not making a judgement in favor of either V-man or Moo? Or at least, am not ///TRYING/// to.]
+ / - 0
blαh2355:
ugh, your voice is like horrendous, so high pitched and the tone... Seriously, if you've played with him you would've want him to shut up.
Yes I know that we all can mute his mic but what if he says someone is the T?
Moo was right about everything that happened.
:thumbsdown: to this report
Sabb:
Herps have been derp'd.
Travelsonic:
--- Quote from: Dispenserneer on August 11, 2011, 05:01:47 PM ---ugh, your voice is like horrendous, so high pitched and the tone... Seriously, if you've played with him you would've want him to shut up.
--- End quote ---
TRUST ME, I've played with horrendous mic abusers - I was there in ZS when a namechanging micspammer was causing chaos and annoyance easily months ago.
I probably missed it, was he merely talking constantly? Or was he saying stupid stuff sporadically, making dopey sound effects in his mic, and pissing people off like that?
EITHER WAY, IF [**IF**] it can be substantiated that the kill was I on I, and that it was initiated merely because he talks a lot [even in spite of the ability to be muted], then it ***SOUNDS*** like malice RDM - which is not allowed either way, and Moo should be treated like anybody else who does it. BUT that again is the rub, whether or not V-Man actually can prove that the events occurred like he said, and/or if Moo can show with substantial evidence that V-Man is acting dumb [which is absolutely possible too]. So far, V-Man's case doesn't feel terrifically solid - as in not nough evidence, IMO, to support the claim.
One question does come to mind though, what do you mean by blackmail? How / what did he claim / etc? That's what confuses me, because I feel like I only got part of the story with that.
[I just hope I am at least successfully trying to be impartial in understanding, formulating an opinion on this]
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version