Jump to content

Pingster

Member
  • Content Count

    253
  • Donations

    0.00 GBP 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2
  • Teamspeak

    Offline

Pingster last won the day on November 17 2018

Pingster had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

93 Good

Profile Song

  • This user has set a profile song, however is not a Sponsor/Patron/Lifetime Donator... Donating will unlock this feature.

2 Followers

About Pingster

  • Rank
    Friend

Member Info

  • In Game Name
    Pingster

Personal

  • Location
    Ireland
  • Interests
    Gaming

Recent Profile Visitors

771 profile views
  1. You cant go 'Make it the way it used to be' and then add a 'but' .. You can't really quantify exactly what it was that made things the way they were.
  2. Simmo's friends brigadiering up in this bitch lmao made it to 4 pages.
  3. You can be a dickhead without TECHNICALLY breaking the rules, and, while it may have changed now, but poor roleplay bans rarely stuck for long, are relatively easy to argue your way out of if you provide the bare minimum to satisfy whoever ends up taking your report, at most taking a couple days discretionary ban and a slap on the wrist telling you not to do it again. Last I spoke about this, I was even told about it being difficult to ban for that. However, it's no problem kicking the dickheads out for being dickheads!!\ But yeah I need sleep bye see you in another 3 months
  4. Is kicking someone out of the faction for being a dickhead against server rules? Nope Is there a rule that says that you MUST report every single rule break that you witness? Nope So as I keep saying, just keep kicking dickheads out of the faction because they're dickheads and no one wants to play with dickheads.
  5. Having clear description of what constitutes as a dickhead substantiates nothing? Having clear checks in place that prevent the kind of power abuse that you described as being a slippery slope doesn't relate to it at all? Mate Stop And think for a second jesus fuck lmao
  6. Did you literally not read a sentence from that screenshot
  7. So as I said, just keep kicking the dickheads out, because they're dickheads and no one wants to play with dickheads. There's no slippery slopes, it's very simple, don't be a dickhead. Please stop defending dickheads, because they don't deserve it. No one is going power crazy, there is management and rest of the High Command that can and will intervene before it ever gets to that point. Your fallacies assume that there are no checks in place, that people are just going fuck all mad, but no, it's literally just dickheads being kicked out for being dickheads. Has absolutely nothing to do with roleplay, factions or anything else, just dickheads. Seriously, if you come back with one more crappy response about how this is not ok, I'll be rather perturbed that you can somehow manage to be a support member and not realise THAT WE ARE PEOPLE AND WE DON'T CARE WHAT FANCY WORDS YOU ATTEMPT TO USE TO JUSTIFY YOUR STUBBORNNESS AND INABILITY TO CONCEDE A POINT, NO ONE WANTS TO PLAY WITH DICKHEADS.
  8. The fallacious sense of "slippery slope" is often used synonymously with continuum fallacy, in that it ignores the possibility of middle ground and assumes a discrete transition from category A to category B. People leading the faction aren't dumbasses, they didn't make it to that position by being ones. Everyone knows who the dickheads are, and it's been EXPLICITLY STATED BY ALL PREVIOUS AND CURRENT HIGH COMMAND that you can do whatever you want in havoc lands as a civ if you change your name.. So long as you're not a dickhead. People are explicitly allowed to attack HAVOC and commit high crime against and in HAVOC lands, with different roleplay names. How the shit does it go from your premise 1 to premise 2 with all of this having been said and enforced? Can you demonstrate it?
  9. A slippery slope argument (SSA), in logic, critical thinking, political rhetoric, and caselaw, is a consequentialist logical fallacy[1] in which a party asserts that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant (usually negative) effect.[2] The core of the slippery slope argument is that a specific decision under debate is likely to result in unintended consequences. The strength of such an argument depends on the warrant, i.e. whether or not one can demonstrate a process that leads to the significant effect. This type of argument is sometimes used as a form of fearmongering, in which the probable consequences of a given action are exaggerated in an attempt to scare the audience. The fallacious sense of "slippery slope" is often used synonymously with continuum fallacy, in that it ignores the possibility of middle ground and assumes a discrete transition from category A to category B. In a non-fallacious sense, including use as a legal principle, a middle-ground possibility is acknowledged, and reasoning is provided for the likelihood of the predicted outcome. Was this your argument? Nah mate, it's easy, act like a complete dickhead, get thrown out. I'm honestly not sure why this concept is so difficult to understand. No one is kicking people out for attacking the faction or what they do as a civilian. DICKHEADS are being kicked out because they're DICKHEADS.
  10. Or we can just keep kicking dickheads out because they're dickheads and literally no one wants to play with dickheads. There's literally no rule against attacking the faction in their civilian slot, so long as they change their name. Just don't be a dickhead about it. Mate, why you defending dickheads PS: A slippery slope argument (SSA), in logic, critical thinking, political rhetoric, and caselaw, is a consequentialist logical fallacy[1] in which a party asserts that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant (usually negative) effect.[2] The core of the slippery slope argument is that a specific decision under debate is likely to result in unintended consequences. The strength of such an argument depends on the warrant, i.e. whether or not one can demonstrate a process that leads to the significant effect. This type of argument is sometimes used as a form of fearmongering, in which the probable consequences of a given action are exaggerated in an attempt to scare the audience. The fallacious sense of "slippery slope" is often used synonymously with continuum fallacy, in that it ignores the possibility of middle ground and assumes a discrete transition from category A to category B. In a non-fallacious sense, including use as a legal principle, a middle-ground possibility is acknowledged, and reasoning is provided for the likelihood of the predicted outcome. It's a bad argument, get it out of your system mate
  11. No, it's an action against trash person. Goes beyond what you roleplay as, if you're a genuine piece of trash, no one will want anything to do with you. You're taking something that's about freedom of roleplay and trying to apply it to people who don't deserve the time of the day. Regardless of what you pretend to be roleplaying as, no one can or will be forced to play together in the same circles as someone who just spent last 4 hours doing nothing but shittalking you and your faction while constantly attacking it.
  12. You get penalized for being a dickhead, not for attacking the faction, lol. Is there something wrong with not wanting people who act like dicks in your faction? If you, not currently a HAVOC member, applied for HAVOC while attacking it repeatedly while calling members of HAVOC shit, you wouldn't get in either.
  13. Ah look, my inactivity is showing, guess that got changed. On duty members? No, they shouldn't. Makes no sense. Off duty with different name? Go for it. And same with the other one.. I'm even fairly sure, unless it's been changed in last couple months, unless you use the same name as on duty, you don't get punished?
  14. Medic fees, paychecks and taxes. For all intents and purposes, it is a sovereign state, But that's not the point. It's fine if you don't let Sky be a governor or an on-duty HAVOC officer to vote for governor, but if Sky logs on as Cow Pie, what kind of bs is this that you can just say "Nope, you don't get to roleplay this part"?
  15. I think the bigger issue here is that if you're a member of HAVOC, you're essentially removed from being able to participate in civilian life to it's full extent. Why can't a HAVOC officer change their name and be a regular civilian who can vote or be a governor? If APC side of Altis suspects corruption with the governor, there's already a counter for that implemented, where APC may do a coup and kill 'em. And if they don't cause any reason to believe they don't have Altis citizen's interests in mind, then what's the issue opening up this part of the server to the entire server? And, ultimately, the choices of the governor affect EVERYONE on the server. If you want to have such a split from HAVOC not being able to be represented or have a voice in the matter, then whatever changes a governor does should not affect HAVOC, on duty or off duty. Let the General decide how much taxes HAVOC are going to be paying, how much they're going to earn per paycheck, how much they're going to be paying to the medics.
×
×
  • Create New...