[SOLVED] 203573-20356

[MonkeyIsland]

@TheWalrus,
It's not about that I don't believe you. Actually I do. But it's about 3 other people who assumed it was TUS. Voiding a game like that, is simply a disrespect towards them and I'm not even mentioning the obvious hole it creates for future possible abuses. (1 out of 4 people could simply deny acknowledgement and cause the game to get void)

@Komito,
I think you would do great if you worked for some news agency. You could make some catchy news headlines out of simple events.

So technically I could grab 2 friends, play a funner with some newcomer who doesn't know any better, report it as TuS as long as me and the 2 other people agreed on TuS?

None of the 4 people involved on these matches are TUS newbies nor W:A newbies.

My parents don't know but I gave permission to the other 2 guys to take stuff from their house and sell it on ebay, this makes it ok?

That's not similar to a 2vs2 match, but to answer your example, yes. If your parents follow up the process, they will eventually have to deal with what their son did behind their back.

So if 3 guys have sex with a drunk, passed out woman, even though she was unaware it would make it ok because the 3 guys all agreed?

So a foursome sex is like a competition? Like 2vs2 competition? Whose side the drunk woman is on?

[TheKomodo]

@TheWalrus,
Voiding a game like that, is simply a disrespect towards them and I'm not even mentioning the obvious hole it creates for future possible abuses. (1 out of 4 people could simply deny acknowledgement and cause the game to get void)

By not voiding it you are creating a way for people to cheat, now that people know they can get away with this, who is to stop people from doing it? (3 out of 4 people could simply say they agreed to TUS in order to get free points).

Notice how I used your own arguement against you?

You are sacrificing the innocent person, the victim, instead of helping him.

If you delete the game(which you should) nobody loses anything, if you keep the game, you ruin the impressive BnG streak walrus has worked hard for.

So technically I could grab 2 friends, play a funner with some newcomer who doesn't know any better, report it as TuS as long as me and the 2 other people agreed on TuS?

None of the 4 people involved on these matches are TUS newbies nor W:A newbies.

Not only is your comment irrelevant to the point I made, the level of skill or experience of a player is irrelevant to them agreeing/being aware of an official match.

My parents don't know but I gave permission to the other 2 guys to take stuff from their house and sell it on ebay, this makes it ok?

That's not similar to a 2vs2 match, but to answer your example, yes. If your parents follow up the process, they will eventually have to deal with what their son did behind their back.

Being similar to a 2v2 match is irrelevant, it's the logical reasoning behind Senators statement which I was attacking.

If the situation was the same, that being walrus was the parents and the other 3 guys were messi, AnGsT and Degox, and that walrus has evidence he has been wronged, he would be victorious and the 3 criminals would be arrested.

Not only is it possible to prosecute family, it happens all over the world regulary.

So if 3 guys have sex with a drunk, passed out woman, even though she was unaware it would make it ok because the 3 guys all agreed?

So a foursome sex is like a competition? Like 2vs2 competition? Whose side the drunk woman is on?

My example portrays rape, I think you can figure it out.

[Senator]

By not voiding it you are creating a way for people to cheat, now that people know they can get away with this, who is to stop people from doing it? (3 out of 4 people could simply say they agreed to TUS in order to get free points).

How would all 3 cheaters get free points again? That's not irrelevant

In this case messi didn't confirm his partner is on radar and paid the price for it (he lost as many points as Walrus did).

You like examples so here is one:

You and Walrus are looking for 2vs2 tus bng on AG
I agree with VoK in PM that we will play but VoK won't say a word about tus to u
I say "wait I ask VoK" to u on AG and a moment later "ok let's do 2vs2 tus bng"
Then we lose the game and VoK says he thought it was a funner

Hands up who would have confirmed from VoK individually that he is aware he is playing tus?

This Walrus case is a bit different though and MI makes or made the final call.

[TheWalrus]

@TheWalrus,
It's not about that I don't believe you. Actually I do. But it's about 3 other people who assumed it was TUS. Voiding a game like that, is simply a disrespect towards them and I'm not even mentioning the obvious hole it creates for future possible abuses. (1 out of 4 people could simply deny acknowledgement and cause the game to get void)

What I want to know is when were the rules changed, and then not updated on the league rules page?  The game does not conform to what you clearly lay down as a TUS game on the rules page, (when were the agreement rules changed, where not all parties have to agree anymore?)

[MonkeyIsland]

@TheWalrus,
Maybe the rules are not clear on that matter. The rules are about agreement on both "parties". If messi also claimed that he didn't know it was TUS. Then we had a clean case of disagreement.
I've PMed Degox and Angst and pointed them to this topic.

@Komito,

By not voiding it you are creating a way for people to cheat, now that people know they can get away with this, who is to stop people from doing it? (3 out of 4 people could simply say they agreed to TUS in order to get free points).

Notice how I used your own arguement against you?

Using someone's own argument against them is when you point to a more obvious outcome that is more likely to happen that they missed it in the first place. My argument (one member complaining about not knowing TUS) has happened several times on TUS while yours (3 out of 4) has never happened. 3 people must deliberately plan to lie to hurt another member which is much less likely to happen. Therefore you didn't use my own argument against me because you pointed to a rare outcome.

If you delete the game(which you should) nobody loses anything, if you keep the game, you ruin the impressive BnG streak walrus has worked hard for.

People have put their time and energy for those games. Simply removing them is like ignoring their effort.

We're not enemies here. Messi simply agreed for the games to be deleted. We could come to an agreement instead of making dramatic examples.

[Hurz]

hihi

[TheKomodo]

You like examples so here is one:

You and Walrus are looking for 2vs2 tus bng on AG
I agree with VoK in PM that we will play but VoK won't say a word about tus to u
I say "wait I ask VoK" to u on AG and a moment later "ok let's do 2vs2 tus bng"
Then we lose the game and VoK says he thought it was a funner

Hands up who would have confirmed from VoK individually that he is aware he is playing tus?

This Walrus case is a bit different though and MI makes or made the final call.

I wouldn't play unless I seen all players confirm TuS, if by some weird reason I did, I would accept the game should be deleted, because i'm not a bad person with poor morals and bad judgement.

@Komito,

By not voiding it you are creating a way for people to cheat, now that people know they can get away with this, who is to stop people from doing it? (3 out of 4 people could simply say they agreed to TUS in order to get free points).

Notice how I used your own arguement against you?

Using someone's own argument against them is when you point to a more obvious outcome that is more likely to happen that they missed it in the first place. My argument (one member complaining about not knowing TUS) has happened several times on TUS while yours (3 out of 4) has never happened. 3 people must deliberately plan to lie to hurt another member which is much less likely to happen. Therefore you didn't use my own argument against me because you pointed to a rare outcome.

Sorry MI but you are unequivocally wrong here.

I used YOUR arguement against you, I used the same logic and reasoning that you did to show that it's unfair either way, which proves your arguement is flawed and therefor cannot be used.

It doesn't matter 1/4 or 3/4, it's still wrong, either way, you should learn to accept that.

If you delete the game(which you should) nobody loses anything, if you keep the game, you ruin the impressive BnG streak walrus has worked hard for.

People have put their time and energy for those games. Simply removing them is like ignoring their effort.

We're not enemies here. Messi simply agreed for the games to be deleted. We could come to an agreement instead of making dramatic examples.

Who cares if they put their time and energy into those games?

They should be 100% certain EVERYONE involved is playing a serious League match before reporting, you shouldn't reward their ignorance.

They made the mistake, not walrus.

Even if messi, angst and degox don't agree to void this game, it should still be void.

[Senator]

What we learned here:

[Riaan-Marais] TUS Confirmed
[William1977] tus confirmed

I still didn't get answer to the question how would all 3 players benefit from cheating someone, though.

[Sensei]

[Riaan-Marais] TUS Confirmed
[William1977] tus confirmed

Was waiting for this 

[TheWalrus]

What we learned here:

[Riaan-Marais] TUS Confirmed
[William1977] tus confirmed

I still didn't get answer to the question how would all 3 players benefit from cheating someone, though.

Why don't we make this the standard?  Who knows, 2 goofy south afrikans could usher in a whole new era at TUS.  However this goes, whether games are deleted or not, nothing has really been solved yet, the root problem remains.  I'm more interested in this NOT happening to someone else, now that I know how frustrating it is.  "TUS confirmed" would leave no doubt as to each player's intentions.

[TheKomodo]

I still didn't get answer to the question how would all 3 players benefit from cheating someone, though.

Answer that yourself, write a book, make a movie, I don't care because it means nothing to me and has nothing to do with the point I made.

[DarkOne]

I was asked to post here, so here's my 2 cents

Wally didn't even know who his partner was in the first game. No matter how relaxed you are about leagues, if you're playing league, you always know who your partner is.

There's no proof that shows Wally knew it was a TUS game. Burden of proof is on the person making the claim, i.e. The people that claim it was a tus game and won.
I see no logs posted (which, btw, we ask for in the rules if I recall correctly) and I'm certain we have precedent where we told people to make sure everybody involved knew it was a league game.

Imo, void.

Couldn't be arsed to read the responses in this thread, since they didn't contain logs, so sorry for the laziness there  I did read the logs in the games, though.

[Hurz]

[DarkOne]

I see no logs posted (which, btw, we ask for in the rules if I recall correctly)

Afterthought, I found the part where we asked for it. It's actually in the sticky called "READ THIS BEFORE POSTING". (caps didn't help, apparently )

When you post a complaint, please help us with these guide lines. They will save us a lot of time, so we can solve complaints faster.

• ...
• 5. If someone reported a funner, post logs.

[...]

@5: Logs can be found in your user/logs directory. It stores all conversations from game lobbies, for example: [attachment=1]

This isn't a court room, we make our decisions based on the factual information that's presented to us, not primarily by opinions. Partly, because some people can't help themselves and deliver a quite lenghty oration and to be blunt:

[TheWalrus]

logs were already uploaded to TUS's surrogate, senator. 

But just because I like you, Marc:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HfQL2QL4vox1ttK6FKVkS4Nb9qVz93UyMYHQ612DjH8/edit?usp=sharing