No rule violation

Looking for your appeal? Approved or denied appeals are archived here.

Moderator: ENT Staff

User avatar
donotpingme
Forest Walker
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:10 am
Has thanked: 13 times

No rule violation

Postby donotpingme » Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:36 pm

Your Warcraft III username: donotpingme
Realm/Gateway: uswest
Why are you banned: ghosting
Why you should be unbanned: This is completely unreasonable ban request. Another player on my team attempted to votekick me for ignoring him after he was flaming as he insisted that I needed to up my income when he was pushing too hard and I was holding. When the other team asked why I was being votekicked I explained that they wanted me kicked because they were at 7/3 and they could see they were already leaking all and because I refused to push they tried to kick. Now when I have to explain myself to the other team to stay in the game it is not ghosting. And how is it game ruin when after much difficulty we won the game and I had the highest lumber upgrade?

User avatar
Hutzu
Protector of Nature
Posts: 4117
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:48 pm
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: No rule violation

Postby Hutzu » Fri Aug 18, 2017 4:13 am

You didn't need to tell their lumbers to defend yourself. A simple "I want to hold while they want me to push" is enough. There was no reason to throw in their lumber upgrades.

User avatar
donotpingme
Forest Walker
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 2:10 am
Has thanked: 13 times

Re: No rule violation

Postby donotpingme » Fri Aug 18, 2017 2:37 pm

What was their reason for attempting to votekick me illegally as you are banning me for responding to the action. And you are also neglecting to mention that I did hold the team for the entire game for the WIN. Was it not those who were flaming me and attempting to kick me, pushing waaay to hard despite the fact that they were leaking hard in both the red and blue lanes. You say I didn't have to mention their lumber rates. Yes. Yes I did when we were in about round 4 and even if you were in a cross situation the lumber rates were Way to high for their level. And while they were way undervalued and leaking out of control they were attempting to kick me for taking measures to compensate. They were trying to throw the game early and you are supporting banning me for alerting the other team (who was deciding to kick me or not) that we had issues with those who were pushing the vote. If someone is being votekicked because they are undervalued you have no problem with anyone communicating he only has 300 val but you are setting a precedent that you cannot respond to an illegal votekick by stating that the other players are pushing waaaaay to hard and listing at level 3 that they are at 7/3. I did not post any other information about them during said game and I was not giving important info to the other team. You are abusing semantics to push a ban for your buddy I believe. I request that another admin review this ban. The fact that ANY admin reviewed this case and did not immediately reject it / reverse the decision to ban shows that you are prejudiced.

Adamh91
Forest Walker
Posts: 119
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 1:35 am
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: No rule violation

Postby Adamh91 » Fri Aug 18, 2017 4:05 pm

Don't try to bullshit your way out of a ban..
You say he was 7/3 on level 3, he was 6/0
On level 5 he went 7/3 as he had engi and wouldn't hold, and you also had immo, so what is wrong with that?

Plus, he has reason to complain if you have immo, and you refuse to push and stay 3/1 on level 7. Especially if you are building ents and sentrys.
see pics.

@Smurfster
Attachments
wc3.png
wc3.png (638.32 KiB) Viewed 343 times
wc2.png
wc2.png (176.4 KiB) Viewed 343 times
wc1.png
wc1.png (193.46 KiB) Viewed 343 times

User avatar
Hutzu
Protector of Nature
Posts: 4117
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:48 pm
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: No rule violation

Postby Hutzu » Fri Aug 18, 2017 7:40 pm

@donotpingme TL;DR

If you cannot understand the fact that saying their lumbers is against the rules, then you need the timeout and think about it. Denied.


Return to “Processed Appeals”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 47 guests