Easy answer: You were reported for self-confession. All other times it was other people accusing you of illegal mods. In those cases, the staff then watch and get video of the player before taking action. This time, you self-confessed.
He has been accused of illegal mods, but he's joked about him using them before. This time he was banned. Why is this time any different than the others?
Perhaps I misunderstood your post. When I read it I thought you meant that if UHC became player-ran, players would not have to follow EMC rules. Did I misread it or was that what you were saying? I apologize if I did misread it.
Didn't you like confess to using illegal mods with like evidence and you accepted that you would be banned?
Another easy answer. He was reported for his self-confession. He's never outright been reported for stating he uses illegal mods. I don't have spare time to read every little thing that goes through chat. If it's not reported, then it wasn't seen or it wasn't deemed that staff needed to get involved. The one time I know of that he did this previously, it was a much clearer joke and the staff present DIRECTLY warned him not to do it again or he'd get punished. He did it again. He got punished. Pretty clean cut to me.
At the risk of being called a flip-flop (one time critical, now in support).. watch me no care. Guys.. (and girls, sorry Aya): less stipulation means more freedom for us. That's not saying, it's a fact. Try to prove me wrong, I dare ya. Seriously. However: less rules also means more burden on us players. <gasp> we actually have to think about stuff before we do it. Freedom is a precious thing, yet on the same hand also easy to abuse. If you got an alt, and if you're serious about it and thought things over you know. Most of the fun Aya and me had here would not have been possible if every little detail of the rules was typed out. I back up my claim with sharing, once again, that I even got warned by a senior staffer about my doings. I prefer freedom over..... any other server than EMC. Because IMVHO that is what you're asking for.
It wasn't an attempt to get himself banned. He recorded a video of this, he'll post it when he gets back home on Monday. k
I think that this is a good analogy for this: So if you are playing soccer or football would you go out onto the field and yell "Hey everyone, I'm using steroids!" ?
Not a good idea, but there is no punishment. There would be an investigation (conflicting reports from Admins whether one was conducted). And if you were, THEN you would be punished.
What was it for if you don't mind me asking? If you would rather the answer be private you could PM me.
No. That is not true, and you know that. I have PM'd you where I admitted to self confession months ago and you didn't think twice of it. I posted this on my profile a while ago: You asked for the staff member's name, and when I complied you said: So not only did you recognize that I was self-admitting hacks, you ADMITTED the rule was unclear and that you needed to clarify it further. From the conversation there, is it not at least reasonable that, because you talked to the staff member about warning me for self-admitting, I understood that to mean "self-admitting is fine?" I mean, you recognized that I did it and I wasn't in trouble, the staff member who warned me was talked to... I'm just trying to understand it all.
Eviltoade is my witness here... (sorry Toade). I'm preparing a blog post. Touching a delicate subject and in order to do that I preferred to being allowed to abuse a command. I didn't just do that. At the risk of sounding WAY arrogant here (trust me, I realize as much): I am convinced that I could have gotten away with it. Who cares about a mere false /report, if the mods realized it was me they'd warn me. Yah; and I still didn't do that. I asked Toade, he asked Krysyy. Common sense people! No offense but still.... Edit: ok, thats awkward Toade
I appreciate the clarified rules as it will help in future situations. However, I feel like this thread has turned into a "I'm on PenguinDJ's side/I'm not" thread though, which I'm surprised hasn't been taken to PM rather than argued about here. It doesn't really help anyone's case to cause drama or discuss publicly.
Perhaps from the officials there would be no punishment, but what about from your coach/team officials? I do not know sports very well, so I am going out on a limb here. If you as an athlete publicly claim you are using steroids, and cause drama and an investigation, it seems there would be a punishment for the time and money wasted and for not only causing drama in the media for yourself, but drama for the entire team. These organizations do not like negative media being directed at them, nor their players who are a representation of the media team. So, I personally believe that there would be punishment in some form for this action, even if it was just being "benched" (or whatever the term is ) for a set period of time. But again, I don't know sports, and it is a multibillion dollar industry, and when money is involved we all know that decisions are usually made in favor of the option that makes the most money, not the one that would be most ethical or logical.
Just wondering, but how much effort does it take to launch an investigation for illegal mods? I've seen staff ban people for mods in minutes, but that was when they were online. Does it take longer when the member is offline?
