[LTD] SRB-CETNIK@europe.battle.net, kif@europe.battle.net

[Tmaen]

Replay Link: https://entgaming.net/findstats.php?id=9316917
Game Name: [ENT] Legion TD Mega 1200+ #9
Your Warcraft III Username: 257er
Violator's Warcraft III Username: SRB-CETNIK, kif
Violated Rule(s):

Do not threat or mock community members and do not ddos or dox them.

Do not flame, rage, troll, or insult other players excessively.

Do not ruin the game on purpose:

1. Do not ghost by leaking information to your enemies/opponents.

Time of Violation (in-game or replay): 12:02

Any further thoughts:

Both of my TEAMMATES SRB-CETNIK and kif were overall toxic in this game (See the chat protocol)

Even kif i had to !ignore because of his constant flame and spamming :

(08:01 / Allied) kif: u kidding oj?
(08:02 / Allied) kif: wtf
(08:04 / Allied) kif: are u doing man
(08:06 / Allied) kif: -rolls
(08:10 / Allied) kif: fucking shit man
(08:13 / Allied) kif: nightmare+nm
(08:15 / Allied) SRB-CETNIK: DDD
(08:15 / Allied) kif: and push har
(08:17 / Allied) kif: lmao
(08:19 / Allied) 257er: !ignore kif
.
..
...
(13:57 / Allied) kif: he tked last game too
(14:00 / Allied) kif: sad he ignored me
(14:04 / Allied) kif: i wanna flame this guy bad
.
..
...
(21:37 / Allied) kif: whats that?
(21:40 / Allied) kif: what a faggot

Also on 12:02 SRB-CETNIK ghosted my starting units for no reason and leaked information to the enemy team with it.

(11:55 / All) SRB-CETNIK: lol
(11:58 / All) SRB-CETNIK: say a guy
(12:02 / All) SRB-CETNIK: who start with WC

Also on the first review from @KiwiKiller[QQ] he just explained me basically (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=109688)

I deserved the flame (for what reason? any explanation here?) and it was "not ghosting".

I cant comprehend this review so if my teammates flame me non stop it's my own fault? I got banned a few days ago for the exact same action while i was not flaming so hard like them both did see @AmnoN review here viewtopic.php?f=24&t=109533

And when they ghost information it'is not ghosting since we had a few creeps in mid and they could maybe saw the wc? It's still ghosting whenever the enemies saw it or not, he still is ghosting xD The rules clearly states it all there is nothing written like "If the enemey saw maybe your units ghosting/leaking information is totally acceptable". According to this stated logic even a ghosting on Ygg was not a ghosting, when the enemy team maybe could know it because of the killspeed on level 1.

It really seems to me that the Banrequest will be measured individual on the reviewers choice and mood, not based on general rules and how they should be used and interpreted.

Therefore i really like a second opionon on this and if the second reviewer comes to the same validation, would you mind to explain it, instead of closing it instantly.

[KiwiKiller[QQ]]

1st of all, it can hardly be considered like leaking information to the enemy when they already know this information.

2ndly, 2 negatives do not equals a positive, we are not in your maths class. I could have either banned both of you or issue a warning to both of you. I choose the last. Tell me if you would have liked to be banned aswell.

[AmnoN]

@tmaen There is a BIG difference between this case and the one that I processed: You flamed on the one that I processed, but the ban was primarily for not sending with your team/ refusal to cooperate.

As @kiwikiller[qq] said, it is not ghosting if they already know what units you have. Also, you told me in your appeal:

I am really sorry for the flame it was an emotional outburst of me because my teammate forced a send agains the will of my and my teammates will. I wasn't even banned once for flaming so i am confident to never do it again

and the toxic behaviour goes against that commitment/ explanation.

Denied