Revision of ambiguous "Common sense" rule

[Novic1]

Hello there fine sir. I would like to request that the "Use common sense" rule be revised as it can be taken many different ways. Your mod Kat doesn't seem to think the mentioned below reasons are common sense.

1. When I come on the server to enjoy myself and I do(Kudos to you) I keep getting slain twice for always kills a T by association. You see the rule of common sense states that Traitors will act like Traitors when around their buddies. So the very actions of one traitor around his fellows makes it obvious who is a traitor with him if that person does not reacte to his traitorous behaviour. Every time I do it I kill the T not killing the other T so that piece of common sense is correct. Why should I get slain for obeying the rule?

2. Ts who make it quite obvious and I mean they don't even attempt to hide that they press a T trap button. Common sense points straight to them and I kill them for it. I am right in killing them because firstly they are a T upon Id of the body and secondly I followed the rule of "use common sense". 

So can you revise this rule please. Kat has slain me enough times for keeping the law. Thanks God speed

[Kat]

You were slain rightfully the first 2 slays you received was because you rdmed a traitor that placed a mine turtle you did not see him place it therefore you're in the wrong. The second time you were slayed was because hades was sitting in a corner not doing anything and your reason for killing him (see image) which is rdm.

[Novic1]

This had nothing to do with the turtle: It had everything to do with Mysterious' behaviour as traitor revealing Hades as T. Mysterious killed Bobby and I responded; Hades did not. Therefore Hades was a T because he didn't attack Mysterious in turn and It was confirmed when I killed him. This isn't about ratting out Kat LOL it's about changing god damn ambiguous rules

Edited June 8, 2021 by Novic1

[Generic]

There is no "use common sense" Rule 
the only mention of "use common sense" is in last section of the rules and relates to using common sense when interpreting the rules.

 

Additionally, killing off association is bad because you can easily get innocent bystanders killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

You are not certain beyond a reasonable doubt that a player is a T when they don't act traitorous. Sure its suspicious, but that is as far as you could reasonable determine from it.

 

an innocent could just as easily not shoot in the above situation because they don't know what's going on for certain and are waiting until they are certain beyond reasonable doubt that they will shoot the right person.

 

[Novic1]

Thing is the rules can be taken that way. Perhaps rewording them is in order? Like rules shouldn't need to go to the forums to be discussed otherwise that means they're unclear in meaning

Edited June 8, 2021 by Novic1

[BDE]

54 minutes ago, Generic said:

Additionally, killing off association is bad because you can easily get innocent bystanders killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

You are not certain beyond a reasonable doubt that a player is a T when they don't act traitorous. Sure its suspicious, but that is as far as you could reasonable determine from it.

an innocent could just as easily not shoot in the above situation because they don't know what's going on for certain and are waiting until they are certain beyond reasonable doubt that they will shoot the right person.

 

Thats funny, considering Menace literally killed me for this very reason yesterday. His reasoning was "You didnt shoot at the T". I was standing there in a firefight and I was killed because I didnt shoot anyone. 

I happened to be a T but if I was inno, i couldve just been an innocent bystander. I reported yet he just handled his own report and didnt add any slays. 

Seems like its one rule for the owners/mods and another rule for the rest. 

Edited June 8, 2021 by BDE

[Generic]

46 minutes ago, Novic1 said:

Thing is the rules can be taken that way.

Which rules? They are pretty clear if you read them, and also under the definitions section of the rules, killing someone who is sitting still r based on how they move/talk can be RDM.

 

8 minutes ago, BDE said:

Thats funny, considering Menace literally killed me for this very reason yesterday. His reasoning was "You didnt shoot at the T". I was standing there in a firefight and I was killed because I didnt shoot anyone. 

I happened to be a T but if I was inno, i couldve just been an innocent bystander. I reported yet he just handled his own report and didnt add any slays. 

Seems like its one rule for the Mods/veteran players and another rule for the rest. 

Every case is different, and in that situation Menace might have had enough evidence to kill you. if you disagree with a mods decision/action in the future feel free to make a forums post about the issue.

 

In Novic's case, he didn't have enough proof to say for certain that Hades was a T.

 

If there are other rules you believe are unclear or should be added, you can make a forums post or add a suggestion to the community suggestions chat in the discord. Or you could ask a staff member what a rule means if you are confused about its wording.