eSVau double standards / abuse of league admin power

[griffin1987]

griffin it's quite clear you hold a grudge against anyone who uses the -giveup command. I could argue with you how illogical and senseless your complete refusal to give up in some cases is, but at the end of the day you're perfectly within your rights to choose whether to give up or not. As Prog said however, this also works in reverse, you can't simply kick people for using the -giveup command, as they are within their rights to do that as well.

That being said, while you are within your rights to do this, in some cases this is also "provocative behavior" which can no doubt lead to conflict. If we take gozo's case as an example, his team kicked him primarily because he refused to giveup (the kick system also recognized he was "feeding" I assume). If that were taken into account alone, then his entire team may have deserved a ban. However many ban requests have been thrown out because the players "breaking the rules" were often provoked by others, this is particularly true with flaming ban requests. In this case the admin probably saw it as such. In other words a "no giving up ever" policy could easily be classified as "REPEATING IDIOT BEHAVIOR," since it serves to create conflict, which is explicitly against the guidelines.

If you have such a big problem with the -giveup command, then you should use the forum to suggest it be removed entirely, not hate on the players that use it.

As for people who are claiming esvau has double standards for not posting a request himself and letting another admin confirm it. Don't you realize it takes only one admin to confirm a ban request anyway? What if one of the players in that game submitted a ban request for griffin's "unsocial behavior" and then esvau confirmed it. You've got the same number of admin's reviewing the case so anything on "admins must post their own requests to be reviewed by other admins" is completely invalid.

1. Yes, I dislike people typing -giveup. I've seen that in the first 5 minutes of the game more often than not, and think it's just dumb. Think about sports for example: How often do you see a football team giving up? What happens if one of the player decides to giveup? -> He will probably be taken off court by the coach (and swapped with another player)

2. As per your logic it's repeated idiotic behaviour if I join a game to play it and then continue playing it, while it's perfectly normal that you join a game to play it and then try to end it early on. I leave it to the readers to decide if that sounds logical.

3. The "being provoked" thing can be taken as something reducing the punishment, but saying it's okay if you get provoked is a self-righteous argument. Look at the law for example - do you think you could kill someone without being punished if he provoked you? Do you think you would get less punishment (jail/money) for doing something against the law if you said that you "were being provoked"?

4. Please read all posts before you write something. I even put links in my posts to threads where I suggested the -giveup command being removed MULTIPLE TIMES. It's not helping anyone if you just randomly comment something without reading the background information.

5. If someone else submitted it and eSVau approved it, I would still be discussing this here probably, but NOT because of abuse of power. The ban request would have taken the correct path and there would be no discussion about abuse of power. And your argument if logically irrelevant, because the discussion is not about "there has to be 1 admin reviewing it" but "it has to be publicly posted with replay, and there has to be 1 admin reviewing it, which may not be the player or part of the game". That's the reason why it has to be posted with replay. And if you think about it, it makes sense, because anyone who is part of a game can't make an unbiased judgement (except for maybe spectators, but there aren't any in league games), while if an admin does it who wasn't part of the game, there can be an unbiased (or at least as unbiased as possible) and fair judgement.

Also, if you would've read my past posts, you would see that I already said I don't care about the ban anymore, it's only about the abuse of power now.