{Ban List} RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177
Register

User Tag List

Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1

    RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177

    Account Name: RachylMellow
    Account ID: 1-S2-1-8062177
    In-Game Name: Rachyl & Balthy

    Crimes Committed: Game-throwing

    Your Account Name: Exeter

    Summary:
    Picks the name "Rachyl & Balthy" and rolls Consigliere in slot #9. Her teammates are #5 (Consigliere) and #4 (Godfather).

    N1: Investigates Balthy (#11) and discovers that he is a Vigilante.

    D2: PMs Balthy immediately, telling him to shoot #5 (Consigliere) because he is evil. Balthy replies by asking what role RachylMellow is. RachylMellow replies that she is a Consigliere. Balthy responds by declining, saying that it's a gamethrow and he doesn't want RachylMellow to get banned.

    The rest of the game proceeds more or less normally. However, RachylMellow strangely decides to take no night action from N3 onward until the game ends on D5 with a Town victory, despite participating in day chat and votes.

    * * *

    There are three points I want to raise:
    1. Rachyl investigates, approaches and informs Balthy that #5 (her teammate) is evil, based on OOG relations.
    2. Rachyl reveals her real role without hesitation when asked, despite being on opposing teams.
    3. Balthy does not act upon Rachyl's information by shooting her or #5 at night.

    1. There is nothing inherently wrong with RachylMellow investigating and approaching a player she knows because "meta has always been a part of the game".

    There is nothing inherently wrong with telling the Vigilante that #5 (Consigliere), her own teammate, is evil, since it could be a ruse to buy credibility for herself later in the game.

    However, that this act was a carefully thought-out strategy is unlikely due to point 2.

    2. RachylMellow is gamethrowing by revealing her evil alignment to a known member of the opposing faction, confirmed through her own investigation.

    It is clear at this point that she intends to gamethrow by helping the Vigilante.

    3. Based on his reaction to RachylMellow's words, it seems that Balthy does not doubt the truth of what RachylMellow told him.

    However, he refrains from shooting #5 (Consigliere) or her anyway, possibly to avoid being accused of cheating, or in his own words ("I don't want you to get banned") to avoid implicating RachylMellow for gamethrowing.

    What I wish to emphasise here is that RachylMellow's attempt to gamethrow, which Balthy chose not to play along with, has already altered the game beyond its natural course by influencing Balthy's decisions.

    That the Town ultimately won anyway without RachylMellow's information does not excuse her attempt to gamethrow.

    * * *

    INTENTIONS
    If all had gone as RachylMellow intended, her information would have secured the Town 2 out of 4 evils by D3 (Town lynches one and Vigi shoots the other), which would have given Town a massive advantage no matter how bad the Town later turned out to be.

    Additionally, I believe that even if Town had been on the losing end, Balthy would STILL have kept his gun and mouth quiet to the end of the game anyway, simply so as to not be accused of cheating, and so as to avoid implicating RachylMellow for gamethrowing.

    The problem is that Town won the game swiftly anyway through a combination of luck and skill, so there was no real difference to the outcome. But because you punish based on intent, not actual outcomes, I hope you will consider my arguments above.

    That Balthy chose not to play along and avoid cheating/gamethrowing accusations was his intent.

    That RachylMellow wanted to gamethrow by helping the Vigilante against her own team was her intention. Balthy's refusal to cooperate does not change what she was trying to do.

    Additionally, I don't think that RachylMellow's intentions were changed by Balthy's advice, because she strangely chooses not to take any night actions from N3 onwards, give her findings to her Godfather at any point in the game despite his prompts, or give a proper defense on trial.

    This is unusual, even for her - I can attach a number of replays where she is "playing properly" and you will see that she is fully capable of cooperating in night chat and creating plausible and passionate defenses.

    All of this indicate that she is STILL trying to help Balthy by giving Town an advantage, going against her own wincon, despite his refusal to act on her information.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by Exeter350; October 29th, 2018 at 01:44 AM.


    Your friendly neighbourhood Asian.

  2. #2

    Re: RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177

    SC ID VERIFICATION

    RachylMellow: Correct. 1-S2-1-8062177

    Respective Hotkeys

    RachylMellow: 2

    Was the Game Result altered?

    Previous Offenses

    RachylMellow: Griefing http://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showth...hlight=8062177
    Intentional Game-Throwing & Griefing http://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showth...hlight=8062177
    Griefing & Reactionary Gamethrowing http://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showth...hlight=8062177

    On her other account:

    Reactionary Gamethrowing (On Hold) (November 2015)
    Gamethrowing (Watchlist x3) (September 2017)
    Gamethrowing (Watchlist x4) (February 2017)
    Leave Train (Watchlist x4) (April 2017)
    Minor Griefing (Watchlist x2) (May 2017)
    Gamethrowing (Watchlist x6) (May 2017)
    intentional Gamethrowing (Banlist x2) (June 2017)
    Leave Train (Banlist x2) (September 2017)

    Player Offenses

    RachylMellow: Intentional Gamethrowing

    Summary

    Names / Roles: Rachyl names herself "Rachyl & Balthy" and gets Consigliere as her role.

    Night 1: Rachyl checks "Balthy, Rachyl's Friend" and finds out he's a Vigilante.

    Day 2: Rachyl PMs 11 "shoot 5, he's evil". 5 is another Consigliere, her mafia partner. Balthy asks her "what's your role?" and Rachyl answers "Consigliere". Balthy tells her "noooo, it's gamethrow bad idea, I don't want you to get banned". Rachyl responds "okey". --

    Night 3: Rachyl does not perform her night action. The GF shoots Balthy.

    Day 4: Rachyl says "BALTHY NOOOOOOOO". She is trialed and her only defense is "*Cries*". She is innoed.

    Town wins on Day 5.

    Recommended Action

    RachylMellow: Ban List x4, also to be applied on her other account (1-S2-1-7711094)

    Additional Notes
    Thank you for the report! Feel free to report more players if you think they’re breaking the rules!

    I apologize for not having taken into account her other account and its large record of offenses. This is a pretty clear Intentional GT attempt, only stopped by Balthy.
    Last edited by Gyrlander; October 29th, 2018 at 05:32 AM.


    Thank you Anonymous Donor

  3. #3

    Re: RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177

    No problem! To sweep her track record under the rug was most likely the reason why she created a new account anyway. This report where she was given a BLx2 for inciting a leavetrain and she begged to have a lighter sentence for so small an offense, probably alerted her to the effect her track record was having on her punishments, so she created a new account to avoid that.

    By the way, I'd like to bring your attention to her reaction in that same report when Mesk denied her appeal. Taken alone, that belligerent reply may just have been hot air, said in a fit of anger, but combine that response to her track record and I think you'll agree it's pretty indicative of her attitude in general. She is an unrepentant griefer who has been patiently given plenty of chances to change her ways, but she still chooses to behave in such a disruptive manner.

    I hope her attitude will be taken into consideration for future punishments as well.
    Last edited by Exeter350; October 29th, 2018 at 09:28 AM.


    Your friendly neighbourhood Asian.

  4. #4

  5. #5

  6. #6

    Re: RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177

    Quote Originally Posted by Rachyl View Post
    [CENSORED] you exeter! Im never playing this stupid game ever again!!!!!
    I doubt it. You've said similar things in the past but you come back every time, using a smurf to evade your rightful punishment. But it's ok. I'm here to report every smurf that you make.

    Also, this is only the tip of the iceberg. There are a lot more reports to come.

    You break the rules, you get punished.

    When I tried to settle this the peaceful way, you should've listened. You didn't. Now here we are.

    I would say "Next time, learn how to talk things out" but if the reports go the way I think they will, there won't be a next time. Your days of blatant rule-breaking are as good as over.
    Last edited by Exeter350; November 9th, 2018 at 11:57 AM.


    Your friendly neighbourhood Asian.

  7. #7

  8. #8

    Re: RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177

    Quote Originally Posted by dude54 View Post
    why you do not punish balthy as well?.
    Balthy warned that it was game-throwing and did not want to be apart of it. (yet info known becomes too late)

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJack View Post
    Look what you have caused. Seems like everyone who posted is now confused about their own gender and are venting their frustration into opinions.

  9. #9

    Re: RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177

    Am I extreme to think that a temporary banlist is too lenient for someone with such a crime record?
    I noticed that people with multiple crimes end up with a watchlist despite demonstrating no intention of stopping their behavior.
    I have no use for these bloodless minnows. Bring me a prey that will sate my bloodlust. I hunger.

  10. #10

    Re: RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177

    I agree with that sentiment.

    For instance, Rachyl is currently attempting to smurf in order to evade her punishment AND bankhacking to (I assume) give that account her old points and achievements. However, she did not succeed in doing so in the replay that I used to file a report (which is still pending).

    Evidently, she does not acknowledge that she's wrong, she is not sorry, and she has no intention of changing her ways.

    In other words, she will unashamedly continue to ruin games for other players whenever the whim strikes her, and too bad for anybody standing in her path.

    What a shameless recalcitrant. I find that when people refuse to be reasoned with - i.e. you cannot employ the soft approach to dealing with them - then there is simply no choice but to take the hard approach and let them go.

    At the end of the day, there is a problem, and that problem needs to be solved. Ideally, the solution will be satisfactory to all parties involved. However in reality, one or more parties tend to make that kind of conclusion impossible to reach - usually to their own disadvantage, like Rachyl here.

    A permaban would therefore be a fitting resolution to Rachyl's long history of unrepentant rulebreaking.
    Last edited by Exeter350; November 10th, 2018 at 11:48 PM.


    Your friendly neighbourhood Asian.

  11. #11

    Re: RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177

    Quote Originally Posted by MrMostache View Post
    Am I extreme to think that a temporary banlist is too lenient for someone with such a crime record?
    I noticed that people with multiple crimes end up with a watchlist despite demonstrating no intention of stopping their behavior.
    We haven't received any reports on the big majority of players that have been watchlisted the last 2 months or so.


    Thank you Anonymous Donor

  12. #12

  13. #13

    Re: RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177

    Don't you think it's quite shameless that this whole time you've been so smug and belligerent, but when things come to a head, you try to play the pity card?

    You have been spoken to many times previously in the past, you know the consequences. You have had three years to change, you didn't. Every time somebody tries to talk you out of such behaviour, you spit in their faces.

    Maybe you should've thought about the consequences before you did what you did. Like hacking - the punishment for which, as I'm sure you know, is a straight-up permaban.

    Why didn't you just talk things out? Why didn't you just listen to reason? It would've been so much easier for everybody including yourself if you'd just done the right thing from the start.

    But you chose not to. You chose to break the rules.

    And now you apologise and expect that all your punishments and past wrongdoings will just magically disappear because you're sorry? Honestly - how dare you? Look at that long list of past offenses in the report's review; you are not the victim here. How shameless can you get? The very thought of it angers me to no end. How dare you act pitiful to take advantage of other people's compassion?

    If the punishment system is followed - as it should, if it is to retain its legitimacy - then you are about to be permabanned. And that punishment is on you and nobody else. You chose to make those bad decisions, even though you have been advised against it countless times in the past. You chose to make those bad decisions of your own accord, nobody else forced you to do so. You chose to make those bad decisions, and you were so proud of it. You have nobody to blame but yourself.

    You have been given more than enough chances for three years. You don't deserve another.

    What you do deserve is your rightful punishment.

    If you are truly sorry, then you will take the valuable lesson you have learned here to apply to other facets of your life, so that you don't trouble other people the same way you troubled us.

    But whether you choose to do the right thing or continue to wallow in your spite and stupidity is none of our concern, since you won't be a part of this community anymore.
    Last edited by Exeter350; November 15th, 2018 at 06:28 PM.


    Your friendly neighbourhood Asian.

  14. #14

    Re: RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177

    ADMINS DELETE HIS COMMENT. WHY IS HE ALLOWED TO POST HERE WHEN IM NOT ALLOWED TO POST ON OTHER PEOPLES BANS? HOW IS THAT FAIR? I DIDNT EVEN GAMETHROW ON PURPOSE I WANT AN APPEAL. GET THIS *amazing person* OUT OF MY SIGHT!!!
    Last edited by Gyrlander; November 11th, 2018 at 02:36 PM.

  15. #15

    Re: RachylMellow: 1-S2-1-8062177

    Thank you for proving my point.

    You cannot hold a discussion.

    If words cannot sway you, then actions - such as a ban - must.

    * * *

    To answer your question: I filed this report, I am allowed to comment on it. Both dude54 and MrMostache asked legitimate questions about the verdict, and Apo gave a legitimate response to dude54's query, which I assume is why their replies were allowed to stay.

    Unlike your comments on other people's reports, which I saw before they were deleted, that are of no constructive value whatsoever.

    Maybe you should try to stay on the topic at hand - which is your ban - instead of trying to find new ways to start trouble all the time.
    Last edited by Exeter350; November 11th, 2018 at 09:42 PM.


    Your friendly neighbourhood Asian.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •