+- Forerunner Gaming (https://forerunnergaming.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Server Discussion (https://forerunnergaming.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+--- Forum: Suggestions (https://forerunnergaming.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=20)
+--- Thread: "this guy is a Traitor but I am not kos'ing him" (/showthread.php?tid=4699)
"this guy is a Traitor but I am not kos'ing him" - Mougwi - 09-09-2016
This is something that has been annoying me lately, So many people will call someone a traitor, but not kos them because they don't have sufficient evidence to kos them. Is this not a form of kos off suspicion? This is nothing more than a passive-aggressive way of calling someone out.
That being said, I feel stating that "blank is a traitor but no kos" should be treated the same as RDM. If you do not have proof of someone being a traitor then you should not say anything.
RE: "this guy is a Traitor but I am not kos'ing him" - fanc typh - 09-09-2016
So basically you cant call suspicion on someone?
RE: "this guy is a Traitor but I am not kos'ing him" - nice_the_bear - 09-09-2016
so if you know for %100 that someone is a t its rdm now?
RE: "this guy is a Traitor but I am not kos'ing him" - Unpoke - 09-09-2016
You can call suspicion on somebody for literally ANY reason, including suspicion off guns or whatever else.
Nobody can KOS off you saying "but don't KOS them" lol, I hope you can piece together why, so it's not KOS off suspicion.
RE: "this guy is a Traitor but I am not kos'ing him" - Mougwi - 09-09-2016
I did not say you can't call someone a traitor on suspicion. There is a difference Fancy.
If you know for 100% percent someone is a traitor (meaning you have proof and not suspicion durp) then you should be kos'ing them, not saying "this person is a traitor but do not kos them"
RE: "this guy is a Traitor but I am not kos'ing him" - Pepper - 09-09-2016
I don't really have a problem with this but occasionally when this happens people will hang up on you and follow you around till you do something. And even if you tell them to stop following you several times they don't care they just want you to shoot them so they can kill you.
RE: "this guy is a Traitor but I am not kos'ing him" - Enchantable - 09-09-2016
I think if someone is following someone they shouldn't be able to fight back after the 3rd warning
thats dumb as fuc
RE: "this guy is a Traitor but I am not kos'ing him" - Mougwi - 09-09-2016
I love the response of everyone that does this exact thing trying to twist the words. "Suspicion on Mougwi" is not the same as "Mougwi is a traitor but do not kos him".
Hell Fancy even said in game when this topic came up that he does it hoping that everyone will join him in following that person until they slip up.
(09-09-2016, 01:56 AM)Enchantable Wrote: I think if someone is following someone they shouldn't be able to fight back after the 3rd warning
thats dumb as fuc
I disagree Enchantable, I feel that if someone shoots at you that you should be able to shoot back as long as that person is not the detective.
There is a reason why there is the stop following me x3 warning rule, and this is just an attempt to circumvent it. Of course this is assuming you are innocent, if you are a traitor light up anyone you see fit.
RE: "this guy is a Traitor but I am not kos'ing him" - nice_the_bear - 09-09-2016
(09-09-2016, 01:38 AM)tobiasxz Wrote:(09-09-2016, 01:35 AM)nice_the_bear Wrote: so if you know for %100 that someone is a t its rdm now?
are you stupid?
he said when people say something along the lines of "x is a T, but no KOS since i have NO PROOF".
then why would they say "x is a T" if they had no proof? that'd just be blatant false kos
RE: "this guy is a Traitor but I am not kos'ing him" - Mougwi - 09-09-2016
(09-09-2016, 02:01 AM)nice_the_bear Wrote:(09-09-2016, 01:38 AM)tobiasxz Wrote:(09-09-2016, 01:35 AM)nice_the_bear Wrote: so if you know for %100 that someone is a t its rdm now?
are you stupid?
he said when people say something along the lines of "x is a T, but no KOS since i have NO PROOF".
then why would they say "x is a T" if they had no proof? that'd just be blatant false kos
Because they don't have proof, they have suspicion. Is the difference between proof and suspicion really that hard to comprehend?