Kick Teammember from the Wall Options

[Haich]

I'm not "Tanz", I'm Bathory and I asked a simple question in the forum, polite and apologizing in advance.

[The Malefic Trou...]

[Mi-Molles Drunk ...]

helo

Monnkey Fiend can you use that on me ? I really want to see what it does XDDDD sounds like fun

nice h-larious drawing there plane

CAT

[General Tanz]

Greatings,

There is no question that I am banned and can not play on your server with my account. I already accepted that years ago. My question to you: "Should not every person be judged by his behavior and condemned if necessary?" General Tanz has his lifelong punishment, and that is certainly true, but if Bathory and General Tanz are the same person, then this person should not show the same behavior?
Aristotle said: "The action is the character, look at the action and you recognize the character." Your server rules are exactly in this Aristotelian tradition, and that's fine, but if it's me It is humble to convey an objection: Should not your administrator judgments follow your server rules exactly? If a player commits one or more rule violations, he will be banned, but should he also be banned for compliant behavior?
Even if General Tanz and Bathory were the same person; would that only justify a ban according to your rules if Bathory showed the behavior of General Tanz or not? I understand that the ban is meant to affect the person and not just the account alone, but if someone starts from Zero and follows the rules, is this behavior not to be judged exactly as the one that led to the condemnation of General Tanz? Although Bathory was not always a prime example of chivalry rules, there was no reason for a ban, and I think you will agree with that.
The fact that Bathory was banned nonetheless is related to the "Tanz" story and that is precisely the point that, in my view, contradicts your own principle that you list on your server rule page.
Sure you could argue that the behavior can only be set up, the character, however, remains the same bad. But, pardon ..., that, too, is an assumption. Fact, however, is that Bathory showed no behavior that would justify a ban. Yes or no?
Nevertheless, Bathory was banned, and I say, not because of a rule violation, not because of racial utterances, not because of unfair play ... but simply out of revenge.

Revenge for the fact that Bathory managed to play on your server for almost two years and showed no behavior of a "Tanz". Only the Fighting- style was the same, but there is probably no deduction.
Revenge, an ugly word, it was Bathory fatal.
I could not spare myself a smile when Bucket wrote, "You should not be on the server," followed by the usual insults.
And I also have to thank you, thank you, for letting me write these lines today. In the past, we just hit our heads on the game server, today we almost have a little philosophical dispute, so, if that's not progress ..

[__ the AIRPLANE]

PhUD

Philosophy, uncertainty and doubt.

[Bucket]

Greatings,

There is no question that I am banned and can not play on your server with my account. I already accepted that years ago. My question to you: "Should not every person be judged by his behavior and condemned if necessary?" General Tanz has his lifelong punishment, and that is certainly true, but if Bathory and General Tanz are the same person, then this person should not show the same behavior?
Aristotle said: "The action is the character, look at the action and you recognize the character." Your server rules are exactly in this Aristotelian tradition, and that's fine, but if it's me It is humble to convey an objection: Should not your administrator judgments follow your server rules exactly? If a player commits one or more rule violations, he will be banned, but should he also be banned for compliant behavior?
Even if General Tanz and Bathory were the same person; would that only justify a ban according to your rules if Bathory showed the behavior of General Tanz or not? I understand that the ban is meant to affect the person and not just the account alone, but if someone starts from Zero and follows the rules, is this behavior not to be judged exactly as the one that led to the condemnation of General Tanz? Although Bathory was not always a prime example of chivalry rules, there was no reason for a ban, and I think you will agree with that.
The fact that Bathory was banned nonetheless is related to the "Tanz" story and that is precisely the point that, in my view, contradicts your own principle that you list on your server rule page.
Sure you could argue that the behavior can only be set up, the character, however, remains the same bad. But, pardon ..., that, too, is an assumption. Fact, however, is that Bathory showed no behavior that would justify a ban. Yes or no?
Nevertheless, Bathory was banned, and I say, not because of a rule violation, not because of racial utterances, not because of unfair play ... but simply out of revenge.

Revenge for the fact that Bathory managed to play on your server for almost two years and showed no behavior of a "Tanz". Only the Fighting- style was the same, but there is probably no deduction.
Revenge, an ugly word, it was Bathory fatal.
I could not spare myself a smile when Bucket wrote, "You should not be on the server," followed by the usual insults.
And I also have to thank you, thank you, for letting me write these lines today. In the past, we just hit our heads on the game server, today we almost have a little philosophical dispute, so, if that's not progress ..