so your interpretation of the rules taxonomy is that it repeats itself in quick concession? that is a very very slow way to write a rule. so realistically here you are telling me there is a problem with the original writing of the rule(s) and do not have the capability to do anything about it.
the way I understand the taxonomy, is that there are two definitions written to describe multiple situations, not one. one being where damage was done intended to kill, the latter, and the other being where harm was done to the CT's control of the round, the former, possibly leading to the ability for a T to rebel.
To me that seems like a more useful, thoughtful, consideration of the language used when writing the rule(s).
Being able to kill a Prisoner for throwing a grenade at them if there was a reasonable attempt to harm or kill the Guard. The same applies for when a Prisoner is chasing a Guard and knifing at them.
if you throw any grenade, and miss, but its close and was obvious it had the intention of hitting a CT, you are KOS.
you are directly contradicting the wording of the server rules.
go fix them instead of telling me they are broken rules. im not here asking about your problems in your role at sg, I'm here asking for something that improves a T"s ,and the team as a wholes, quality of life.
in relation to the suggestion I made, which now revolves around gunplanting as you brought that up.
so to reiterate,
you are trying to find extra meaning to the original post, maybe you think i want to overthrow JB and be the new @All Tsor @Dominicso i can return it to its once great state.
I JUST WANT TO HAVE FUN WITH THE REAMAINDER OF TIME JB HAS LEFT, THIS SEEMS LIKE A WAY TO HAVE MORE FUN. TRY SEEING THE OP FROM MY ANGLE, NOT YOURS.
Uhh what? The validity of the statement stands, I changed the definition I gave in my OP.
sorry, I am rather frustrated that the LSM is so tangential, and unwilling to see a valid argument.
Right but all rules are currently up to admin discretion, why would this change anything about that? I personally wouldn't ask an admin to punish for that. Is it the fact i proposed a rule change in my OP? Is that why its so controversial?
and actually most of his arguments are highly hypothetical, worst case scenario arguments.
why are people so scared of grey areas.
you can rarely 100% prove a T's intention unless they affirm it. Instead we accept lesser proof as a whole, actionable, intention.
I heard the argument in the last thread about it, which I read and saw inconsistencies in previous writing on the reasoning behind rule changes in the past. I'm not here to have a point blatantly repeated. I'm here for a review of the last decision, which instead I got copy pasted the last verdict.
so you are telling me they aren't a real problem, but the whole reason the interaction was removed is bc it was seen as a problem.
Write it as lethals are not allowed to be dropped to T"s. I don't care how the rule is worded, I think that T"s should be able to drop grenades amongst themselves. (excuse my short wording)
admin discretion is a thing, make just lethals a part of gunplanting. my op wasnt a suggestion I had a final solution, but it was asking for it to be addressed by someone who can find one.
i have re worded the original post to consider the arguments presented to me by you and by scrolls. sorry if my wording stepped on toes, and was not accurate to my intentions.
I didn't post it intending to argue on the forums with anyone, id think there would be some sort of discussion amongst those it concerned, followed by a nicely detailed response. not to be shut down on the spot. so if you can see that you will see why the following was somewhat unorganized.
With consideration to what has been told to me,
T's should be able to drop nades amongst themselves. gunplantng is not currently a serious issue or something that is abused. A vast majority of the time JB is populated zero two is on the server to enforce rules, as well as other more junior staff.
so far the only problem with this proposition has been that;
staff will have to enforce,
and that not all nades are equally harmful.
staff always have the decision to enforce, to tag, to play like a normal person.
make the change revolve solely around dropping HE nades.
I ask for whoever it is replying to now also see the profit in what has been said by me in this thread, albeit it took time to come to a more reasonable post, and to add to what i have asked for here, not to take away from it.