Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Post edit history

Possible Admin abuse?

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
1/19/2015 12:43:29 PMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
Before After
1 From the CoC: 1 From the CoC:
2 \n 2 \n
3 [quote]6. No cheating 3 [quote]6. No cheating
4 \n 4 \n
5 ... Also be careful what you say when you are spectating, do not give away intel.[/quote] 5 ... Also be careful what you say when you are spectating, do not give away intel.[/quote]
6 \n 6 \n
7 Given that FFA is based a great deal on diplomacy and deception between players, pretty much anything said by a spec that's at all game related shouldn't really be allowed. 7 Given that FFA is based a great deal on diplomacy and deception between players, pretty much anything said by a spec that's at all game related shouldn't really be allowed.
8 \n 8 \n
9 Telling the players who is winning and who controls what territory is entirely unreasonable. 9 Telling the players who is winning and who controls what territory is entirely unreasonable.
10 \n 10 \n
11 tl;dr: Yes, what @[G0G0]Dancer did is in fact against the code of conduct. 11 tl;dr: Yes, what @[G0G0]Dancer did is in fact against the code of conduct. He was warned, he kept talking, he got kicked from the game.
12 \n
13 I commend the final part of the CoC to your attention:
14 [quote]Abiding by moderator penalties
15 \n
16 Making forum threads complaining about how unjust one's penalty was and insulting the moderation/administration team is one of the most common reactions by trolls to moderator action. It is also strongly anticorrelated with the original penalty being found on review to be, in fact, unjustified. Don't do this. [/quote]