Dew. EU

Approved or denied ban requests are archived here.

Moderator: ENT Staff

DrCoxie
Aura Tree
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:22 am
Been thanked: 1 time

Dew. EU

Postby DrCoxie » Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:27 pm

Replay Link: https://entgaming.net/findstats.php?id=9752418
Game Name: [ENT] HELLHALT TD #68
Your Warcraft III Username: DrCoxie
Violator's Warcraft III Username: Dew.
Violated Rule(s): Trying to deceive me about kicking rules
Time of Violation (in-game or replay): 44 minutes
Any further thoughts: I'm reposting this request because within the reasons for denying my first request there were two errors, it was stated that "..and in no way did green state you'll be banned directly."- this is false as proven by "(46:42 / All) Dew.: votekick now u do tho, or get a nice ban, either way" "...or get a nice ban..." that's not directly telling me I'll get banned if I don't vote !yes?

It was also stated "While west may have had limited proof on this AFK, what green was saying wasn't false. You are required to !yes when a game ruiner is present" yes, correct, if he was leaking and showed up as afk using the !afk command green wouldn't have been lying. However he said, as proven above, that I have to vote !yes even though I clearly stated my doubt on whether he was really afk, THIS constitutes a clear attempt at deception regarding the conditions under which I have to vote !yes as per "You are free to refuse to votekick someone when there is lack of evidence/visible rule violation. However, communicate your decision via all chat, too.".
Further more: "You are obligated to !votekick any player that has broken any of ENT's rules. If someone or several indicate that a particular player is game ruining, you, as a player in the game, are obligated to question/check about the situation/claim." states that I have the OBLIGATION to check greens claims.

The evidence here is clear and Dew. was in fact trying to make me vote yes even though I was not convinced of the validity of the vote. Not only that but he tried to persuade me to disregard part of the very rule he bases his whole case on "...you, as a player in the game, are obligated to question/check about the situation/claim."

The original request:
viewtopic.php?f=24&t=116821&p=455670&hilit=drcoxie&sid=4a82de0cedd159935707c8018741f16d#p455670

User avatar
FalenGa
Oversight Staff
Posts: 7857
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 2:38 pm
Location: Mars
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 138 times

Re: Dew. EU

Postby FalenGa » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:14 pm

The 2 following statements sum up this topic perfectly,

(44:20 / All) Dew.: required to kick afk/gameruiner fyi blue

(44:20 / All) DrCoxie: No I'm not, game ruiner yes, rules say nothing about afkers


Going afk is a game ruining offense. So, in other words, yes. You are obligated to kick any afk players.

Dew wasn't lying about the rules, and yellow confirmed in all chat that orange is afk. At this point you failed to kick, which could get you banned, if reported.

Request denied.


Return to “Processed Requests”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 35 guests