Case to unban Tit and Kynesie

[WickedCossack]

I'm surprised there was never a proper apology on this, ban would have been over at 1 year mark imo if so.

Don't think anyone needs to make a case for them, if they want to participate they can do it themselves ...

[somp]

If you apologize, it's totally fake and hypocratic. if you don't there is no remorse.

secondly, kynesie and tit seem to be somehow married and responsible for each other as h2o is listing kynesie's crimes applicable to tit too?
if kynesie's background matters, why aren't bans different too?

Oh, I'm probably hypocratic for saying this cause I rage quitted epl. Sorry guys.

You never cheated so it's a completely different case. Are you still mad with the admins/admin decisions?

This is what I'm saying. Instead of arguing against what I said (h2o logic is totally flawed) you bring the discussion to me. Bravo! Just like last time.

[amiggo1999]

If you apologize, it's totally fake and hypocratic. if you don't there is no remorse.

secondly, kynesie and tit seem to be somehow married and responsible for each other as h2o is listing kynesie's crimes applicable to tit too?
if kynesie's background matters, why aren't bans different too?

Oh, I'm probably hypocratic for saying this cause I rage quitted epl. Sorry guys.

You never cheated so it's a completely different case. Are you still mad with the admins/admin decisions?

This is what I'm saying. Instead of arguing against what I said (h2o logic is totally flawed) you bring the discussion to me. Bravo! Just like last time.

Can you eloborate on this, I don't understand what you mean

[somp]

I pointed out: The most popular opinion(s) of this thread have, in my opinion, big flaws

1. Why should apologing mean anything when it's perceived anyway as hipocratic or no remorse. And when there is no way of knowing whether he is really sorry. Anyway, the whole idea of relation between "apology" and punishment is just ridiculous.

2. Assuming "old crimes" should make the bans longer, why are people bundling tit and kynesie and why aren't their case separated. Tit never streamed with maphack on. I don't know about other cases but he also never lagged as hard as kynesie. If their bans are identical, it should be assumed they do not matter.

Now, after stating this is, in a shorter version, I assume that people either
1) Ignore the message
2) Ignore the message and bring the subject to me, like you did miggo.
Because in ESOC circlejerk the arguments are irrelevant. What matters is who writes, and against whom. Only some, in my opinion intelligent people here, like Callen, can actually see the message, and not the user who writes it.

In real circle jerk A and B always support each other, as long as the ideal outcome is the same. No matter what the arguments are.
Then anyone else, who asks legit questions is ignored or ad hominems used. This is what I expect and what I get.

[deleted_user]

I pointed out: The most popular opinion(s) of this thread have, in my opinion, big flaws

1. Why should apologing mean anything when it's perceived anyway as hipocratic or no remorse. And when there is no way of knowing whether he is really sorry. Anyway, the whole idea of relation between "apology" and punishment is just ridiculous.

2. Assuming "old crimes" should make the bans longer, why are people bundling tit and kynesie and why aren't their case separated. Tit never streamed with maphack on. I don't know about other cases but he also never lagged as hard as kynesie. If their bans are identical, it should be assumed they do not matter.

Now, after stating this is, in a shorter version, I assume that people either
1) Ignore the message
2) Ignore the message and bring the subject to me, like you did miggo.
Because in ESOC circlejerk the arguments are irrelevant. What matters is who writes, and against whom. Only some, in my opinion intelligent people here, like Callen, can actually see the message, and not the user who writes it.

I agree with you here mate, that's not a good logic to connect one's sins to other

[amiggo1999]

I pointed out: The most popular opinion(s) of this thread have, in my opinion, big flaws

1. Why should apologing mean anything when it's perceived anyway as hipocratic or no remorse. And when there is no way of knowing whether he is really sorry. Anyway, the whole idea of relation between "apology" and punishment is just ridiculous.

2. Assuming "old crimes" should make the bans longer, why are people bundling tit and kynesie and why aren't their case separated. Tit never streamed with maphack on. I don't know about other cases but he also never lagged as hard as kynesie. If their bans are identical, it should be assumed they do not matter.

Now, after stating this is, in a shorter version, I assume that people either
1) Ignore the message
2) Ignore the message and bring the subject to me, like you did miggo.
Because in ESOC circlejerk the arguments are irrelevant. What matters is who writes, and against whom. Only some, in my opinion intelligent people here, like Callen, can actually see the message, and not the user who writes it.

I agree that they should be treated individually and not seen as the same person/group, makes sense. Only reason I'm asking whether or not you are still upset about the admin decisions is because to me it always seems as if you are always unhappy about what they have to say, or how they choose to act.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Ye, "apology" shouldn't matter.

[amiggo1999]

I think apology is probably less important than recognizing and admitting faulty behaviour. Usually is more authentic imo.

[fightinfrenchman]

I think apology is probably less important than recognizing and admitting faulty behaviour. Usually is more authentic imo.

I mean that's part of what a real apology is

[somp]

@amiggo1999 If you really want to know, I'm not mad, not playing any aoe has actually made life better and achieving more stuff. They kinda did me a favor. I actually agree that their ban is still justified and should probably still continue, but not because of ridiculous arguments stated above. Still, they probably deserve to know when it ends.

Anyway, I still think, like I did before, that ESOC shouldn't probably be admined by a teenager and almost a teenager and admin line up should be brookg-mitoe-someone. I also think that my ban was really unfair compared to all other decisions, but I don't think I'm mad.

[fightinfrenchman]

@somp Personally I don't think you should be banned, but that's just because I forget why you got banned in the first place. You should have done something more memorable like Tit/kynesie did

[somp]

I forfeited from epl after finishing my series, tho I was ready to continue next afternoon. But it was probably bad idea, monstertrucking opponent would have probably led to removal from epl and shorter ban.

[fightinfrenchman]

Would you have forfeited if you knew that by doing so you'd lose a free vacation?

[deleted_user]

#freesomali

[amiggo1999]

@amiggo1999 If you really want to know, I'm not mad, not playing any aoe has actually made life better and achieving more stuff. They kinda did me a favor. I actually agree that their ban is still justified and should probably still continue, but not because of ridiculous arguments stated above. Still, they probably deserve to know when it ends.

Anyway, I still think, like I did before, that ESOC shouldn't probably be admined by a teenager and almost a teenager and admin line up should be brookg-mitoe-someone. I also think that my ban was really unfair compared to all other decisions, but I don't think I'm mad.

Yeah focusing on rl really does wonders. I had a similar situation when I got mad after our showmatch
I do agree that it would be correct for banned Tit/Kynesie to be given knowlege of how long their ban will last.

[chronique]

Yeah focusing on rl really does wonders. I had a similar situation when I got mad after our showmatch
I do agree that it would be correct for banned Tit/Kynesie to be given knowlege of how long their ban will last.

Until 15 october

[aaryngend]

I didn't even keep up with all this drama but wasn't it decided that their ban will last at least one year? Maybe up to 1.5 years?
That's what I vaguely remember. The incident that culminated in a ban happened in May 2019, so we are a little over the 1 year mark.
I think once aoe3:DE launches (which is incredibly soon tbh) we should make a new case about this. Concides very well with their ban and a new beginning.

I also think that people who have no idea about all the incidents shouldn't demand too much - they just lack too much information - let the officials of ESOC handle this.
We trust the ESOC Staff!

[Astaroth]

I also think that people who have no idea about all the incidents shouldn't demand too much - they just lack too much information - let the officials of ESOC handle this.
We trust the ESOC Staff!

What makes you the authority on this? Speak for yourself.

Also frankly hilarious signature, I honestly still don't know what your problem with me is, I don't recall flaming anyone unprovoked before that thread and I don't even know you. But I'm glad to know that I apparently have a fan.

[aaryngend]

I also think that people who have no idea about all the incidents shouldn't demand too much - they just lack too much information - let the officials of ESOC handle this.

What makes you the authority on this? Speak for yourself.

Are you really asking me why I think that someone who doesn't know much about a topic or subject shouldn't loosely demand things that he doesn't know the full story of?
Do I have to explain the basics of common sense here?

[Astaroth]

We trust the ESOC Staff!

What makes you the authority on this? Speak for yourself.

Reading helps, if you are going to post so arrogantly.

It's also kinda funny how you seem to hate my guts, for whatever reason, yet you don't even dare to acknowledge it.

[aaryngend]

We trust the ESOC Staff!

What makes you the authority on this? Speak for yourself.

Can you stop mixing two completely different arguments with each other? Me trusting the ESOC staff has nothing to do with my opinion that people should restrain themselves a bit from forming too high of an opinion on a matter if they don't know the whole story.

Reading helps, if you are going to post so arrogantly.

I didn't post arrogantly.

It's also kinda funny how you seem to hate my guts, for whatever reason,

Does it matter if I hate your guts or not? This thread is about Tit and kynesie's ban, not some petty arguments between you and me

yet you don't even dare to acknowledge it.

I must be missing the "daring" part, as I see none

[Kaiserklein]

If you apologize, it's totally fake and hypocratic. if you don't there is no remorse.

It doesn't have to be fake. I remember apologizing after I rage quit the first TWC tourney semi finals, and it was a real apology, cause I felt stupid about what I did.
Certainly better than just saying nothing and showing no remorse anyway.

secondly, kynesie and tit seem to be somehow married and responsible for each other as h2o is listing kynesie's crimes applicable to tit too?
if kynesie's background matters, why aren't bans different too?

I mean, kynesie literally said he didn't want to be unbanned unless tit was also unbanned. How could bans be different then? That's their own making.

[somp]

@Kaiserklein
The idea of punishment is to to prevent the same from happening again. I understand that often apologies are genuine but if they automatically shorter bans, then they surely do not remain genuine

Where has he said that? I have missed. IF old "crimes" matter (they should not magically appear to matter) then Tit ban should be shorter enough anyway. So how's kynesie's statement relevant anyway? And why should his "request" be relevant anyway, nobody forces him to sign up even if he would remain unbanned.

[Hazza54321]

Soppy bollocks!

[Kaiserklein]

@Kaiserklein
The idea of punishment is to to prevent the same from happening again. I understand that often apologies are genuine but if they automatically shorter bans, then they surely do not remain genuine

It shouldn't automatically shorten bans. Let's just say it's still a nice thing to do, and not doing it won't help their case.

Where has he said that? I have missed. IF old "crimes" matter (they should not magically appear to matter) then Tit ban should be shorter enough anyway. So how's kynesie's statement relevant anyway? And why should his "request" be relevant anyway, nobody forces him to sign up even if he would remain unbanned.

He's said that to the admins when they discussed it privately with him iirc.

I think they'd have offered to unban Kynesie earlier than Tit for 2 reasons. First because Kynesie actually did type something on ESOC (not quite an apology, but an explanation at least), while Tit just kinda disappeared then. And then because he was the one smurfing, despite being already qualified, which didn't bring anything to him directly, while Tit was the one benefiting from the "crime". What Kynesie did is arguably not as bad, or at least it's less despicable (however stupid it was, he was kinda just trying to help a mate, at the end of the day).

And Kynesie's statement was relevant because it was sort of a soft blackmail to try and get Tit unbanned. See it as "the fans love Kynesie, they want to see him back in tourneys, but for that we have to unban Tit too". I don't think the admins appreciated that too much.


I could be wrong on some points though, I'm not ESOC staff.