xGShadowSpy

I get banned a lot so I would just expect -1's

^lol

Roflmao borderlines rules often as well.. and the problem with borderlining is that sometimes you step too far over the line and get banned for a week :cat:

If he did in fact kill more than 2 he should be happy it's only a week ban and not perm

+/- 0 because I wasn't there and your evidence of a spray on the floor is astonishing!!!

The screenshot of the spray on the floor is only to show where it took place, not to prove anything.

I don't think it should be allowed. Choosing Race as an LR option shows up in chat to the CTs "<name> has chosen race, watch for where the start and end points are". This technically would initiate LR.

Until it says "Shadowspy has chosen to do .... with ..." my LR didn't officially start, If you think I shouldnt do it I wont but as of right now theres not actually a rule against it. The rule is against doing an lr with someone then rebelling.

Its basically telling the CTs you chose an LR and to get with you. I would consider it starting an LR.

CTs have to be with Ts no matter what, even if it's not race

EDIT : @@DarkWolf6052 Then what's the point of saying the first part of that sentence?

Also for their opinion on this,

@@Gkoo @@Hidingmaster @@Forest

I don't think it should be allowed. Choosing Race as an LR option shows up in chat to the CTs "<name> has chosen race, watch for where the start and end points are". This technically would initiate LR.

Until it says "Shadowspy has chosen to do .... with ..." my LR didn't officially start, If you think I shouldnt do it I wont but as of right now theres not actually a rule against it. The rule is against doing an lr with someone then rebelling.

someone seems mad :rage::rage::rage::rage::rage::rage::rage::netex::netex::netex::netex::netex::netex::netex::netex::netex::netex::netex::netex::netex::mad::mad::mad::mad::punch::punch::punch::punch:

I am fine with this. I didn't agree with the ban either

@@Forest

+0/-0 for now as there were atleast 2 freekilled as i was one of them i was looking down i saw half of darks spray under me imo it was a valid ban and was disscused between me @@DarkWolf6052 @@John and @@GanjaMonster i personaly would have done it for a day or two but they agreed apon a week so this is just my opion ima leave it as is for now i may or may not change my opion later on

Im not blaming anyone, Im sure they just followed what darkwolf said, not out to make anyone look bad.

Just trying to get him unbanned (Or atleast shortened)

+1, looks good.

Division:

In-Game Name:

Steam ID:

Information:

This isnt official, but if you want to be technical yes they are different. As far as I'm concerned, when it comes to people wardening if they say stairs instead of ramp, or ramp instead of stairs, all the Ts already know what he's talking about(Everyone always goes there), the only people who yell tarp are people trying to troll the warden.

Segway will dominate all the Countries in his search for supreme victory

No, thats an admins job. You're job is to create and enforce new ideas that make your respective division better than the other ones.

 

Enforcing rules is what a moderator does, if you want to be a glorified moderator than be an admin.

 

Division Managers, as blatantly as the title says it, manage a division. You need to work within your division to make your admins and moderators better and leave the petty problems to them, as it is not your concern.

With as inactive as some of the staff has been, we pretty much are juggling everything right now.

And i dont mind doing the petty things, it helps you have better communication with staff and members.

I just looked at the staff list and counted how many people are actually active on CSS (I'm on every day I know this stuff) and out of the 39 mods and admins, only about 19 are active, though I understand a lot of them have reasons like school.

My activity is still pretty low because im playing too much league and school is gay as fuck and shit, will be more active on the weekends than the weekdays.

@@Gkoo @@DarkWolf6052 @@Forest mmmk

@@Hidingmaster

How dare you forget jesus

I get forgotten a lot around here. Its k he might have been inactive when you got promod, idk

My activity is still pretty low because im playing too much league and school is gay as fuck and shit, will be more active on the weekends than the weekdays.

@@Gkoo @@DarkWolf6052 @@Forest mmmk

@@Hidingmaster

How dare you forget jesus

+1, you might smell too much, but you're active, know the rules, and don't really cause problems on the server.

A:8

M:7

Smelliness: 11/10

@@Hidingmaster Yeah, but any CT can try to use the excuse "Oh I saw him so I dont have to say it" and unless the T who he killed was an admin we cant do anything about that (Unless we see that he didnt see the T)

And who does it hurt if a CT isnt rebel hunting under reasonable suspicion? We know if they are dicking around, and they will be slain for it. I just dont see the point of arguing this for the 100th time when its really not the big of a deal.

Who does it hurt? You most likely know how it turns out on the server when someone reports a CT and we say that we cant do anything about it, but ill act it out anyway.

P1= The person reporting

P2= admin

P3= The offender

______________________

P1 : P3 did _________ , Slay him

P2 : We didnt see it, so we can't do anything about it

P1 : Thats bullshit, he did ______ and you aren't going to do something about it?

P2 : Theres nothing we CAN do about it

*P3 dies*

P1: P3 Wtf the fuck why did you _______

P3 : *Gives a bullshit reason that admins cant do anything about*

P1 : That bullshit you know thats not what happened

__________________________________

Then it turns into some huge arguement, back and forth cussing, disrespect etc.

THATS who it hurts.

Also I think it SHOULD be changed, but w.e.

All im saying is that if it won't be changed atleast add the rule to the motd saying "If you see a T rebel then you do NOT have to say you are rebel hunting", because right now it's not in there, which is why I made this thread.

@@Hidingmaster Yeah, but any CT can try to use the excuse "Oh I saw him so I dont have to say it" and unless the T who he killed was an admin we cant do anything about that (Unless we see that he didnt see the T)

From the MOTD - "Before Rebel Hunting, the CT MUST announce PUBLICLY that he is rebel hunting(Over mic or PUBLIC CHAT, NOT TEAMCHAT)" This is what the rule says, if this is true then you should add "Unless CTs SEE the T rebel" to avoid confusion.

I understand, but Hunting and Pursuing are two completely different things. Hunting means you do not know the whereabouts of a Rebel; whereas when you are pursuing one because you saw them, you know of their whereabouts.

If I go hunting(irl), once I see that animal that doesn't turn the act of "Hunting" into "Chasing.", and making me a Chaser instead of a Hunter.

I just think if this is true that if you see a T you dont have to say it that it should be added to the MOTD to avoid cofusion with other mods too. I'm not the only one who thought you still had to say it if you saw them.

Oh, okay.

 

@@Matsi I was on my iPad, thanks for your consideration though.

Huh? o_O

Because you rated his thing dumb, thats why he said that

You don't have to say rebel hunting anymore at all.

You have to announce that you are Rebel Hunting if it is under the assumption that there is a Rebel.

@@xShadowSpyx You don't need to announce it if you are 100% sure there is a Rebel because you physically saw them. Remember that this rule is in effect so that CTs aren't just running around solely on assumptions. They need a logical reason to look, but they don't need a reason to chase down a Rebel they physically saw.

This is what the rule says, if this is true then you should add "Unless CTs SEE the T rebel" to avoid confusion.

@@Rhododendron Give the server access to all of the DMs/DL plox :D

DMs dont handle that sort of stuff

Rebel hunting, A few people told me recently "You don't have to say you are rebel hunting if you see the T run away."

Is this true? It was never enforced like this and it doesnt make sense so I didn't think so. If it's true I think it should be changed since the CTs are still leaving the Ts and should announce that.

If you're not going to believe me... believe the DM...

 

It was unintentional and thus not slayable.

It's still wrong, I have no problem going against that. Unintentional baiting is slayable, but most wont slay for it unless people complain.

Lol, vector (Im assuming)

I didn't say I slay people for accidental baiting, I said its slayable. So they CAN be slayed, depending on the situation, and the admin/mod.

I didn't say you did, I just said accidental baiting isn't slayable and that people shouldn't slay people for it...

• Baiting
  This server does not allow baiting. This includes both Ts knifing CTs that are too close and CTs being too close to Ts. If you are killed for knifing a CT that was too close to you it is not a freekill. A CT cannot go into a cell with a T in front or near it. If a CT is intentionally running through Ts, or standing within knifing distance they will be slain/teambanned. Notify a mod/admin about a baiting CT by typing @Baiting in team chat and if possible the CT’s name and a small explanation.
   
  
• If a CT is intentionally running through Ts, or standing within knifing distance they will be slain/teambanned.
   
  
• If a CT is intentionally running through Ts, or standing within knifing distance they will be slain/teambanned.
  
• intentionally
  

...I'm bored

If you look at all of it, it also says "This includes both Ts knifing CTs that are too close and CTs being too close to Ts."

-1 -2 -3 -4

-5 -6 -7 -8