[Trombowen]

You guys keep throwing around "targeting" like every time you get knifed, it's targeting. Targeting is more so on the trolling end of things, where you're trying to ruin the experience of another player, something I doubt people are doing when they knife y'all. Going after specific players first is not targeting; it's a tactical decision to increase the chances for the traitors to win. For example, every time I'm a traitor, I buy vest and bold booze and immediately shoot the most skilled player I see to give me the best chances of winning the round. It's not because I'm trying to ruin their round, it's because I want to win as fast and smoothly as possible. Also, I think you guys are wildly overestimating the amount of times you actually get knifed. I consider myself really good at TTT, and I rarely get knifed, but maybe it's just me. When I do get knifed, it sucks, I know, but suck it up because it's really not that bad. Now for the "following" rule, I really don't think we should change it. I think it's an easy rule to abuse; I can see this rule getting to the point where people give warnings to stop following if someone is behind them for more than a couple seconds. I can also see this rule change being annoying to deal with in reports because of the amount of factors that you have to consider: how many warnings did he give, did he give ample amount of time, was he actually following him or just going that direction, and so on, where most of these factors would need witness testimony to confirm if you happened to be dead or just not paying attention. This rule change just adds too many uncertainties in my opinion, such as what if you're in a long hallway, and you warn someone that's "following" you? Would they have to turn around and go another way just because they were behind you at that instance? While I don't think it would change much if the rule was changed, I think we're in a stable position right now.

[Hani]

You guys keep throwing around "targeting" like every time you get knifed, it's targeting. Targeting is more so on the trolling end of things, where you're trying to ruin the experience of another player, something I doubt people are doing when they knife y'all. Going after specific players first is not targeting; it's a tactical decision to increase the chances for the traitors to win. For example, every time I'm a traitor, I buy vest and bold booze and immediately shoot the most skilled player I see to give me the best chances of winning the round. It's not because I'm trying to ruin their round, it's because I want to win as fast and smoothly as possible. Also, I think you guys are wildly overestimating the amount of times you actually get knifed. I consider myself really good at TTT, and I rarely get knifed, but maybe it's just me. When I do get knifed, it sucks, I know, but suck it up because it's really not that bad. Now for the "following" rule, I really don't think we should change it. I think it's an easy rule to abuse; I can see this rule getting to the point where people give warnings to stop following if someone is behind them for more than a couple seconds. I can also see this rule change being annoying to deal with in reports because of the amount of factors that you have to consider: how many warnings did he give, did he give ample amount of time, was he actually following him or just going that direction, and so on, where most of these factors would need witness testimony to confirm if you happened to be dead or just not paying attention. This rule change just adds too many uncertainties in my opinion, such as what if you're in a long hallway, and you warn someone that's "following" you? Would they have to turn around and go another way just because they were behind you at that instance? While I don't think it would change much if the rule was changed, I think we're in a stable position right now.

I don't know, I've recently been getting stabbed by the same person the last few days. So "suck it up" while this one person continuously comes after me? I'm going to feel targeted lol. Doesn't matter if it's malicious or not or that it's not their intent to ruin ones experience or if it's a tactical decision, I'm still going to feel singled out. I've had people tell me that they just absolutely have to take me out so they HAVE to do it, though if I or another player is blatantly being singled out then what? Oh it's a tactical decision so we should just take off that part of the rule that calls that targeting? If it's just a random guy that stabs me yeah, whatever shit happens I understand but in those instances, it's pretty.... shitty. 

Also I feel you're overthinking the whole too many uncertainties part of this because my last server allowed you to kos after warnings for following and it wasn't a problem. As long as they weren't said .2 seconds apart. It's only a matter of like a few seconds to stop following someone.

Regardless though, I personally feel there's no way to solve this whole commotion on what's fair and what's not. Lets say that the rule changes for it to be kosable for following after warnings, it's easy to track said person and run them in with a knife. Though I think the point here though is people want a chance to fight back rather than trying to dodge something unavoidable or some may find hard to avoid, maybe the jihad as mentioned. While yes some may instinctively shoot that person, that's just a small handful. Not many think to in the spur of the moment. 

At this moment I don't care much anymore as the general consensus seems to be that they don't want to change anything so you know, guess I and a few others are just shit outta luck.

[[Yellow] Travis1421]

I actually disagree that most people want the rule to stay the same. It honestly seems split down the middle(from an outsider's perspective). I think it should be polled because the arguments are valid on both sides and it seems that it's got enough interest to be changed, even on a trial run. As Hani said. Other servers have this kos following rule in place and they aren't doing too bad. The rule can also be changed back if deemed too detrimental.