maybe you can be honest with people and prove when i blame some1 for my low elo ? i would also like if you prove when you ignored me for real reason
as long as you dont share links or quotes i find your posts just as empty bullshitting
Attitude?
Moderator: LIHL Staff
-
- Aura Tree
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2018 1:45 pm
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 6 times
- Meshtar
- Treant
- Posts: 470
- Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2014 3:21 pm
- Has thanked: 79 times
- Been thanked: 81 times
Re: Attitude?
MrStrawberry wrote:Since u are trying to be some sort of voice of the reason here, be honest then. In recent months i saw u arguing with multiple people too much, and blaming others for your low elo. Now u got it up again, and there u are, miles of post are here. And i saw some peopl ignoring u, including haza, or myself, and it was never for no reason.
Im not attacking u, my point is everyone here can have a bad day/month or whatever. But my report is clear - he ignored me for no reason.
A captain, yellow spot, ignoring player in like 3rd or 4th level for no reason, is obviusly a no go.
Also i dont have some history with him witch would make him do that.
I am trying to stay focused on the issue and not get personal, as hard as that is with some people, you included. if I didn't, I would probably have enough material for a whole book, thus ruining my essay limited posts. So I will dodge all personal jabs and stings, including those ridiculous ones that I post only when I got good elo, which everyone here knows is not true. I troll the forum regardless of my elo and I proved it more than enough over all these seasons.
Anyway, back to topic, ignoring for no good reason happens all the time, plenty of time. Acting on it without a properly defined and clear rule would create problems and would put moderators in even more spotlight and possible bias accusations which we all want to avoid. I made myself clear when I said I don't support these unwarranted ignores and that we should maybe do something about it, but not like this, from case to case. Sadly, we proved we can't function with common sense and good faith, so we need a more detailed rule which specifies exactly when you can ignore another player. So let this go and start a topic about how that rule should be written.
-
- Aura Tree
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2018 1:45 pm
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 6 times
Re: Attitude?
You are not allowed to use !ignore in such a way that you are unable to teamplay anymore.
@meshtar
It is already written, and its not too hard to judge cases on it.
U say that ignoring for no reason happens all the time, and for u, that is okay. For me, thats not okay, for me its pure tk.
So lets just agree that we dissagree.
-
- Armored Tree
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:01 am
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 11 times
Re: Attitude?
I don't know when and how this rule was implemented but i think that the previous one is better so far : 'do not ignore more than one of your teammate'.
Saying that 'x' ignored 'y' for no reason is already a nonsense, most of time it avoids potential conflicts and by definition unnecessary flames.
The rule u guys posted here is the apology of tk, and it's also a nonsense because what does 'unable to teamplay anymore' means? If two players ignoring each other, the teamplay is already degraded, and it's up to the two others to make sure that both of ignored ppls are aware of calls. If they are focused and wanna teamplay, they will do.
So you put the responsability of a potential rule break on ppls who have been/have ignored nobody, after what you can determinate if the one who ignored have break a rule.
Damn it, too many words to explain a simple and common thing, Anda and Mesh leave ma mind pliss.
Saying that 'x' ignored 'y' for no reason is already a nonsense, most of time it avoids potential conflicts and by definition unnecessary flames.
The rule u guys posted here is the apology of tk, and it's also a nonsense because what does 'unable to teamplay anymore' means? If two players ignoring each other, the teamplay is already degraded, and it's up to the two others to make sure that both of ignored ppls are aware of calls. If they are focused and wanna teamplay, they will do.
So you put the responsability of a potential rule break on ppls who have been/have ignored nobody, after what you can determinate if the one who ignored have break a rule.
Damn it, too many words to explain a simple and common thing, Anda and Mesh leave ma mind pliss.
-
- Treant
- Posts: 298
- Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2017 12:25 pm
- Has thanked: 22 times
- Been thanked: 52 times
Re: Attitude?
Denied.
Was pure tilt game after 4/5 and the chat turned quite toxic. Calling in that environment is unrealistic. Here's a little snippet of the chat to demonstrate:
(11:13 / Allied) MrStrawberry: abandoned ?
(11:14 / Allied) HazarDous: ++
(11:16 / Allied) MrStrawberry: what that even means ?
(11:22 / Allied) HazarDous: means lose faith
(11:22 / Allied) MrStrawberry: means u tk on purpose for what da fuck ?
(11:28 / Allied) HazarDous: nono
(11:30 / Allied) HazarDous: i cant push
(11:30 / Allied) HazarDous: or i die
(11:31 / Allied) MrStrawberry: why da fuck am i playing this game then ?
(11:38 / Allied) MrStrawberry: fu man rlt
(11:39 / Allied) Ace_of_Spades: we can always
(11:40 / Allied) Ace_of_Spades: sell
(12:00 / Allied) MrStrawberry: man fuck all of u rly
I feel that the ignore was used to stop himself flaming- a reasonable use of it and certainly not anything worthy of an unvouch.
Was pure tilt game after 4/5 and the chat turned quite toxic. Calling in that environment is unrealistic. Here's a little snippet of the chat to demonstrate:
(11:13 / Allied) MrStrawberry: abandoned ?
(11:14 / Allied) HazarDous: ++
(11:16 / Allied) MrStrawberry: what that even means ?
(11:22 / Allied) HazarDous: means lose faith
(11:22 / Allied) MrStrawberry: means u tk on purpose for what da fuck ?
(11:28 / Allied) HazarDous: nono
(11:30 / Allied) HazarDous: i cant push
(11:30 / Allied) HazarDous: or i die
(11:31 / Allied) MrStrawberry: why da fuck am i playing this game then ?
(11:38 / Allied) MrStrawberry: fu man rlt
(11:39 / Allied) Ace_of_Spades: we can always
(11:40 / Allied) Ace_of_Spades: sell
(12:00 / Allied) MrStrawberry: man fuck all of u rly
I feel that the ignore was used to stop himself flaming- a reasonable use of it and certainly not anything worthy of an unvouch.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests