Hidingmaster

Steam_0:1:43243066 Congrats to all except gkoo.

+1 A:y/z M:a/a Do we really need a reason for easy?

Again, it may have just come across as being disrespectful, and you may have never had the intention. You don't have to suck up and beg for it, we know you want to be unbanned, it was just the way it came across to me, especially on the first page. From your stand point respect may mean one thing, and from my perspective it may carry a completely different meaning. When this first started I simply had stated my opinion and wanted to leave it at that, all this bullshit is completely useless. Let's just leave it at the fact that there were misunderstandings along the way. Anyway, I will +1 for the unban, and I really don't see the need to put him on probation for CS:S or anything. Just give him the unban, he knows very well what will happen if he screws up. Make it easy on everyone, shorten the ban and get on with life.

I never said you denied the fact that you did anything, but rather you don't seem to show that you actually care about what you did. And of course we want our way... I put -1 because that's what I believe to be the best choice. I dont understand why your making it seem like we are trying to be ignorant jerks to you, it's just our opinion. From what I've seen you say in this thread, I consider some of it to be disrespectful, but that's from my perspective. I could be completely wrong, and if you didn't mean to show disrespect then I understand that. But be aware that we are all entitled to our own opinions and perspectives will always be different. Like I said, I have nothing against you, but I made my decision based on what I interpreted. I don't see the need in continuing this argument, it'll be an endless circle. I wish you luck.

The issue I have is not with you personally, not one bit. I understand and am well aware of the time and money that you have invested into xG. The issue arises with the lack of respect that I am seeing from your replies. You claim that you've put in more hours than the four of us combined, who the hell cares? Gkoo has dedicated a great amount of time in bettering xG too. The difference is that he hasn't clearly broken the rules and is looking for remorse. I really don't appreciate when people try to use excuses to cover their ass after they clearly screwed up. Own up to it, I don't care if it was late and you were bored. You knew very well what would happen if you massed. I also understand that others have done the same thing as you and have had their bans shortened. Those people are not you, and with people posting that as the reason to allow the request to go through.. Well I really don't see that as a legitimate reason. I believe in giving people second chances, but they gotta realize that respect is necessary. I know you won't be playing on CS:S ever, but it still affects the entire community. But when you bash on people that I care about (gkoo, John, dark), I'm not going to take it lightly. I think you were a great member, and still could be, but why not just apologize for it, show understanding when someone disagrees with you, and let the community accept this protest. You know very well that it is easy to get bans removed here, but the second and argument starts, the -1's flow.

Forest. This better not be a side effect of global warming. SAVE THE FOREST

The reason that people get unbanned after they intentionally mass is because they show a little respect when they put up their request. You've posted less than respectful replies to those who are part of the CS:S division, you be disrespectful to one person and you affect everyone. It was a bad idea to argue with John, Gkoo, and Darkwolf; there's no way now that you will get unbanned. I'm sure that the four of us will make sure it doesn't happen. -1

When I joined back in the day, I think the year was 1967, we never had any of this "You must ask permission to rebel hunt" bull crap. Life was easy and relaxed, and I could rebel hunt whenever I had reasonable suspicion. I don't know why we changed it in the first place, but putting the rule in as this makes the most sense. It is how it was back in the day, and it worked perfectly fine. Although I would alter it from "under reasonable assumption..." to "under reasonable suspicion...", it just sounds better.

No. He wanted to join the clan xH. We hate xH, thus we hate you. -1 Although i guess ill make an exception, because you are active and respectful +1 M: 9/10 A:9/10

Well if we wanted to be all realistic, if a guard was killed by a prisoner, even alone, than it would be pretty obvious to the rest of the guards.

It really depends on personal preference as both are really good phones. You can argue all day that one is better than the other, but I think it comes down to whether you like iOS or android software.

I guarantee that if you get on jailbreak, show that you are both active and respectful, then the community will be much more willing to unban you. There is more than enough evidence to keep you banned, although show us that you truly have changed and we may show some pity after all this time. -1

And he has bad grammar. +1

Ew. +1 M:9/10 A:9/10 I guess you kinda play, you know... been a long time player. Is kinda good at stuff, and whatever. In other words, will be a great member.

Wow, y'all don't know the rules. Obviously the 1st picture isn't vent camping because he is crouched. There's a clear difference between the two. Standing = Vent camping / Crouching = NOT vent camping. Its just common sense.

To start off, his prior bans aren't really showing any previous issues. There are 2 things for freekilling, both of which were a long time ago and were most likely his first few times playing. There's no proof for or against any harassment, rudeness, or immaturity so I don't see any reason to consider that from this protest. Overall, he's been here a hell of a long time, has taken many leadership roles, and is overall a good member. There's no reason to keep this ban, who cares if a someone got on the account and mass fk; he took responsibility for it. I know that he's claimed this before, but everyone knows that if this is an excuse it simply won't work again. Sitting here and arguing over who said what doesn't solve anything; y'all need to calm down. +1 for the unban, at worst make it shortened.

Only thing I would suggest changing is add the part where you put the link to the full motd to the very top, it makes sure there is no excuse for the rule breakers. If its at the bottom they may legitimately miss it and not realize there is more, plus putting it at the top makes it easier for anyone who wants to access it.

In order: 1) http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/867217858784285603/59453972742D76BF5B53E6EC487FA97E1ED769AD/ 2) Steam Community :: Screenshot 3) http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/867216269246549543/EB2A6A8A292DB9FA2842FEB87A8C5BBE75FFE7DF/ 4) http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/867217858784286220/778DF8589E9467A233D7D7F3B171E6E58B141EC5/ Proof of freekills: Discussion between me and John, multiple people mentioning the freekills. I don't know what more you want.. sorry I wasn't recording I guess. And isn't it supposed to be Chuck's responsibility to prove that they weren't, it shouldn't be my job to prove that we are right over and beyond showing a screenshot of the kills and the reasoning behind it.... I guarantee Chuck did not say "together" everyone knows very well that that is never said. Had he said it, there would not have been more than 5 t's in separate lines, most of them would have followed orders. Obviously I can't prove it without a recording, but both memory and logic can pretty much back those up. I don't see why this is turning into an argument, I think its clear that there was a mistake by Chuck and he deserves a shortened ban due to his long standing escapade with xG. But saying that you said "blah blah blah" and arguing that you did nothing wrong isn't the right way to go about this. If there was an issue with the ban Chuck should have posted within a reasonable amount of time, not a week or more later. And for all of you who are just +1 ing these because of ASSUMPTIONS.. well that really doesn't solve anything. You need to verify the facts before calling it one way or another. And remember, this is Chuck's responsibility to prove himself right, not mine nor anyone else that was there should have the task of proving him wrong. There are numerous issues with this ban protest on Chuck's side (not submitting mod abuse, not mentioning to anyone that the ban was unjust, he said he didn't care right after the ban, no proof or detailed description of what occured) it all comes together as being just a way to get out of it without admitting the mistake.

Yes yes that sounds correct, we were trolling and made multiple lines.

Steam Community :: Screenshot <-- So there is the one showing the killing. And @@John do you recall what caused it to happen? I'm thinking it was a warden order that was misinterpreted by Chuck, which led him to killing a bunch of T's that were actually doing it correctly..

Alright so... I can't recall the exact situation anymore, but theres a few things that I would like to say. 1) I have 4 screenshots of the killings, a little of the chat that happened prior, chat after, and me and John talking about it. (If its really necessary I can post them) 2) Chuck killed 5 people, which were all deemed as freekills by me, John, as well as the numerous people that were talking about it (one complaint is visible in my screenshots as he used admin chat). 3) It was decided that the situation was a mass freekill, and chuck was perm ct banned. 4)Chuck asked why he was banned, it was explained to him, and he said something along the lines of "I don't care" (Which is really weird for him...) 5) I haven't the slightest clue why you acted like that Chuck, you would have been fine if you would've slain yourself right away for it, or at least appropriately responded to the situation. With that being said, he is one of my most liked players and has never been an issue. I won't +1 or -1 it, I think its a decision that needs to be handled by those in higher positions. Yes it was definitely a mass freekill and a perm was used following guidelines, but the ban should be reduced.

So apparently people were actually fooled by white text, must be because im a hidingmaster... Anyway I'm back to being as active as I was before, I missed you all!

Weren't you that one guy... who did that thing? Oh wait, that was someone else. I didn't forget you. Welcome back

"If you're leaving your cell at any point, then it's safe to say you are rebelling. Why should it matter if it's coming out of ISO or any other cell in specific, you're still out of your cell when the order is given. Adding any sort of rule implying any Ts out of their cell is a rebel will change the game too much..." I think i'm misunderstanding what you are saying. leaving your cell at any point, then it's safe to say you are rebelling -- Isn't this the rule I suggested? "Being out of your cell as a T, before cell doors have opened, makes you an automatic rebel". So you are saying if you are out of your cell then you are rebelling, whether or not the warden said "Out of cell rebel". That's what the intention of the addition of this statement to the MOTD is aimed to clarify. Why should it matter ... when the order is given: So.... you're a rebel outside of cell, even if the order is given while you are outside of the cell? Again, it sounds like we are assuming any T outside of their cell is a rebel, no matter the circumstance. By what I understand, and I may be misinterpreting what you are trying to say, I believe you are assuming that any attempt to leave your cell at the start of the round is a rebellious act, thus making any T outside of their cell prior to their opening a rebel. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm not trying to argue this for any reason other than the fact that I really wish we could clarify this rule and come to a consensus once and for all, so don't take it as im just trying to argue for no reason.

Yes and no. I posted about this same exact issue, with this: Alright, so if we don't make "out of cell rebel" implied, I just want to make sure this is what happens: 1) If a t escapes his cell before of out cell rebel is called, then that T should NOT be killed and allowed to freeze or return to their cell. If they are killed, then it is a freekill. (Assuming they left their cell without entering a vent, or doing anything else that would make them a rebel. being the rule that had been decided upon. Thus if they are out of cell BEFORE anything is said, then they are not a rebel in anyway, and them being killed for the act of being out of their cell is considered a freekill. The entire purpose of my thread was to address this issue, and the first solution was to make out of cell rebel implied. Putting it in the MOTD as: "Being out of your cell as a T, before cell doors have opened, makes you an automatic rebel" will clear all of this confusion up.