Dinkleberg's GMod
new rule? - Printable Version

+- Dinkleberg's GMod (https://www.dinklebergsgmod.com/site)
+-- Forum: Community (https://www.dinklebergsgmod.com/site/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: General Discussion (https://www.dinklebergsgmod.com/site/forumdisplay.php?fid=18)
+--- Thread: new rule? (/showthread.php?tid=912)

Pages: 1 2

new rule? - Daggergrace - 03-07-2017

So when did we establish a rule that if someone says their proven you have to believe them?

RE: new rule? - Dildo Shwaggins - 03-07-2017

(03-07-2017, 03:49 PM)SIX Wrote: So when did we establish a rule that if someone says their proven you have to believe them?


Huh?

RE: new rule? - Everyjuan - 03-07-2017

Jesus kid are you going to make a thread about everything? You had no proof i wasn't proven, i had ID'd ACE's body and said i was proven. you're just looking for reasons.


Also when did we establish the rule that shooting into the air is t baiting? you know, the one you just tried to enforce. the one where you jumped above my head in front of my gun and tried to get hit. the one where you told "call me stephanie" that if they shot me for it you would look away. gg kid.

RE: new rule? - Daggergrace - 03-07-2017

(03-07-2017, 03:54 PM)Everyjuan Wrote: Jesus kid are you going to make a thread about everything? You had no proof i wasn't proven, i had ID'd ACE's body and said i was proven.  you're just looking for reasons.


Also when did we establish the rule that shooting into the air is t baiting? you know, the one you just tried to enforce.  the one where you jumped above my head in front of my gun and tried to get hit.  the one where you told "call me stephanie" that if they shot me for it you would look away.  gg kid.

I had no proof you WEREN'T proven, there was no proof you WERE proven, just cuz you ID his body doesn't mean you're proven. I could do the same thing as a T, in fact I do. And yeah, if you're gonna fuck with me, im gonna fuck with you, that's how it works, I attempted to kill you logically, also, yeah, I didnt know if he was a T or not so if he wanted to kill i was gonna walk away, ya know, since I wouldn't know and I have no reason to stick around anyway. You just love to make me look like the bad guy by wording things weird huh? 

So i killed you because you whipped out a TP in front of me and used it without a valid reason of being proven.

RE: new rule? - Everyjuan - 03-07-2017

I had a valid reason, I said it in chat. You told me I should have pasted the damage logs. Stop making up rules on the spot. Not my fault you're trigger happy.

Also I have screenshots of you being the one saying there are ways around every rule, and telling admin chat that people should just jump in front of people that ARENT t baiting to make it t baiting so you can kill them.

You're failing at this, kid.
[Image: N8u7B8l.jpg]

RE: new rule? - Daggergrace - 03-07-2017

(03-07-2017, 04:06 PM)Everyjuan Wrote: I had a valid reason, I said it in chat.  You told me I should have pasted the damage logs.  Stop making up rules on the spot.  Not my fault you're trigger happy.

Also I have screenshots of you being the one saying there are ways around every rule, and telling admin chat that people should just jump in front of people that ARENT t baiting to make it t baiting so you can kill them.

You're failing at this, kid.
[Image: N8u7B8l.jpg]

so clearly you don't understand sarcasm, and yes, can you really say there ISN'T  a way around every rule, I said that to bring it to attention. And I did not say kill you for T baiting, if I really meant what I said when I jumped in front of your shot I would've shot you there and then, so what does that tell you. Also, I said they could kill them for that, AS A T, and say you were T baiting, HMMM DOESNT THAT SOUND FAMILIAR, and I would have to believe it, because I didnt see it. YOU'RE VALID REASON WAS THAT YOU KILLED A T, JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY YOU ARE DOESNT MEAN ME OR ANYONE HAS TO BELIEVE IT, AND WHEN YOU WHIP OUT THAT TP THAT DOESN'T HELP YOUR CASE. btw cuz I know you people like to do this, I am not mad, the caps is for extra reference. You know how many times I killed an innocent before he ID's my T buddy's body and then ID it myself and say I'm proven, the action of IDing a T boyd doesnt mean I have to believe you. I am allowed to kill you if you claim to be proven without solid proof.

RE: new rule? - Everyjuan - 03-07-2017

That's not sarcasm, that's you being bad staff. Considering you tried the same thing then teamed with a T.

If you don't understand the rules of TTT maybe you shouldn't be staff? It seems to be getting to you.

RE: new rule? - the man what to eat that fruit. - 03-07-2017

daggergrace mate.. just walk away... it's not worth it... you're embarrassing yourself...

RE: new rule? - Daggergrace - 03-07-2017

Everyjuan imma just leave it here...you're wrong

RE: new rule? - blakeman1 - 03-07-2017

6 of your 15 posts is about something relating to the rules and who is right and who is wrong. This just seems very excessive to me.

I also found this in you Trusted application by @Drew: "No. Just yesterday, you abused your donor powers by kicking someone who had just rdmed you (while he was still alive). In fact, we were just talking about what to do with you in admin chat. You're not getting staff any time soon. App denied."

You didn't want to take no for an answer, so you bought staff without realizing the changes you have to make. I don't think you should have DTmod; but this is only from what I have seen on the forums, I have not seen you on the server.