Evidence Compilation for Saidin (Will be updated as Sketcheyes produces more)
Comments
-
You pointed out the weak points in his post, there are points he made that are better and worse evidence than that of the carbon situation. They aren't the same obviously.
And saidin apparently hasn't, because when he made his post earlier he acted like its just going to be overlooked because it was in 2013....
I dont feel like quoting each section because I dont want to waste my time trying to teach someone the difference. -
Edit:I dont feel like quoting each section because I dont want to waste my time trying to teach someone the difference.
You don't want to waste your time with me? You, the imbecilic buffoon who is making asinine illogical contortions of argument don't want to waste your time teaching me something? My God.You pointed out the weak points in his post, there are points he made that are better and worse evidence than that of the carbon situation. They aren't the same obviously.
And saidin apparently hasn't, because when he made his post earlier he acted like its just going to be overlooked because it was in 2013....
Thank you, but let me handle this one. Each "point" he made is factually untrue, and is just self-serving rhetoric rather than an actual addressing of the facts.This cant be comparable due to sketcheyes being an ex member and not a person in question. David was the person of interest as he was the main source of the issue. So that would leave David giving a more reliable source plus he admitted it. Sketcheyes wasnt in question so he could say whatever he wanted really.
LifeLine (the team at the time) only has ex-members. LifeLine is no longer a team. In other words, the fact that Sketcheyes, Doop, and CK no longer are on LifeLine has no impediment on their testimony.Please note the word "unreliable". If we want to conclude anything then you need to make sure your sources are 100% true.
Doop initially said "I clearly remember us ghosting."
He later changed his testimony to a variation of "I remember us ghosting, but it was a long time ago. I could be wrong. We definitely all agreed to do it, though."
Which validates Sketcheye's testimony, and gives it far more credibility even if you don't take Doop's at face value.Just because one person says "it was a joke" doesnt mean it can be the same for the other. That is what you call a misinterpretation.
In the Carbon video, every single person in that mumble channel was laughing, and treating the situation as a joke (except for David). Andrej even further supports the idea of a joke, by saying "secretly you were serious"; in other words, Andrej implies that openly things were always a joke, even if there were underlying considerations.
Now, as we now know, thanks to the admission of DavidLive, it most certainly was not a joke. However, the video by itself could very easily have been dismissed as a group of friends joking around, and could be dismissed far easier than the Kanata one.
It was only the testimony of an involved party which was enough evidence. And, lo' and behold; there are two involved parties coming forward saying that they ghosted. The only difference in the situations is that Roth and Malte lied initially trying to cover their tracks.Now if you really are being unbiased then why would you make this thread when Saidin has already went over the same stuff you have talked about? I can see that you believe Carbon should be unbanned if nothing happens to Lifeline. So we should just let anyone that breaks the rules go free?
This is when I wanted to call you an idiot.
Saidin stated repeatedly that the only evidence he saw was hearsay, and wanted to see more evidence if there was some. I posted in the thread I would get him up to speed the moment I was back home.
Edit2: Also, let anyone who breaks the rules go free? What on Earth are you talking about? Are you high? Deranged? Or just stupid? If ZZXQ says "Exertus ghosted against Bio", and then I get banned for it...and then a few weeks later, another person says their team ghosted, and this time the admins decide "Well, we need more evidence than just one person's testimony to make a decision"...should I not be unbanned? Like, my God Purvis. How on Earth is that a complex thing to understand?Carbon got caught. There was more factual and believable evidence to punish them where there is not enough for Lifeline yet as you stated.
Like what? Please, enlighten me! If I am wrong, highlight my arguments and where they are flawed.
See, I'm happy to admit I'm wrong if someone can counter my position effectively. But, you had better damn well come prepared, because I'll rip you apart if you don't make sense.
And you don't. -
Ellustrial wrote: »Edit:
You don't want to waste your time with me? You, the imbecilic buffoon who is making asinine illogical contortions of argument don't want to waste your time teaching me something? My God.
Thank you, but let me handle this one. Each "point" he made is factually untrue, and is just self-serving rhetoric rather than an actual addressing of the facts.
LifeLine (the team at the time) only has ex-members. LifeLine is no longer a team. In other words, the fact that Sketcheyes, Doop, and CK no longer are on LifeLine has no impediment on their testimony.
Doop initially said "I clearly remember us ghosting."
He later changed his testimony to a variation of "I remember us ghosting, but it was a long time ago. I could be wrong. We definitely all agreed to do it, though."
Which validates Sketcheye's testimony, and gives it far more credibility even if you don't take Doop's at face value.
In the Carbon video, every single person in that mumble channel was laughing, and treating the situation as a joke (except for David). Andrej even further supports the idea of a joke, by saying "secretly you were serious"; in other words, Andrej implies that openly things were always a joke, even if there were underlying considerations.
Now, as we now know, thanks to the admission of DavidLive, it most certainly was not a joke. However, the video by itself could very easily have been dismissed as a group of friends joking around, and could be dismissed far easier than the Kanata one.
It was only the testimony of an involved party which was enough evidence. And, lo' and behold; there are two involved parties coming forward saying that they ghosted. The only difference in the situations is that Roth and Malte lied initially trying to cover their tracks.
This is when I wanted to call you an idiot.
Saidin stated repeatedly that the only evidence he saw was hearsay, and wanted to see more evidence if there was some. I posted in the thread I would get him up to speed the moment I was back home.
Edit2: Also, let anyone who breaks the rules go free? What on Earth are you talking about? Are you high? Deranged? Or just stupid? If ZZXQ says "Exertus ghosted against Bio", and then I get banned for it...and then a few weeks later, another person says their team ghosted, and this time the admins decide "Well, we need more evidence than just one person's testimony to make a decision"...should I not be unbanned? Like, my God Purvis. How on Earth is that a complex thing to understand?
Like what? Please, enlighten me! If I am wrong, highlight my arguments and where they are flawed.
See, I'm happy to admit I'm wrong if someone can counter my position effectively. But, you had better damn well come prepared, because I'll rip you apart if you don't make sense.
And you don't.
You still dont understand...
I have been on jury duty about 4 times before and been in debate class (which I aced). I know how to look at all of the given evidence and understand what all of it means. I give multiple POV of the situation and see where it ends up. I analyzed the information and see that there isnt enough proof to say that they ghost or not.
Ya they could have ghosted but there still isnt enough info out to show it.
Come on buddy use that brain of yours. -
You still dont understand...
I have been on jury duty about 4 before and been in debate class (which I aced). I know how to look at all of the given evidence and understand what all of it means. I give multiple POV of the situation and see where it ends up. I analyzed the information and see that there isnt enough proof to say that they ghost or not.
Ya they could have ghosted but there still isnt enough info out to show it.
Come on buddy use that brain of yours.
There isn't enough proof to say for sure 100% whether lifeline ghosted or not, and he points that out.
There is however, greater than or equal to the proof that got carbon banned, which is why its an issue. -
There isn't enough proof to say for sure 100% whether lifeline ghosted or not, and he points that out.
There is however, greater than or equal to the proof that got carbon banned, which is why its an issue.
Carbon was quick because there was so much evidence that the players couldnt deny it. -
Carbon was quick because there was so much evidence that the players couldnt deny it.
the only reason they admitted it was because david did, and they would've been banned regardless
xoteks simply saying carbon got banned with a lack of evidence so ace gaming should too -
so until the two who ghosted admit it they didn't ghost?You still dont understand...
I have been on jury duty about 4 times before and been in debate class (which I aced). I know how to look at all of the given evidence and understand what all of it means. I give multiple POV of the situation and see where it ends up. I analyzed the information and see that there isnt enough proof to say that they ghost or not.
Ya they could have ghosted but there still isnt enough info out to show it.
Come on buddy use that brain of yours.
even then, that isn't enough proof. we need the audio files from them ghosting.
that still isn't enough -
Carbon was quick because there was so much evidence that the players couldnt deny it.
How? Jesus ****ing Christ, how? Outline me just two instances where the evidence of Carbon was more evidence than provided in the situation!Carbon was quick because there was so much evidence that the players couldnt deny it.
You are so ****ing stupid...refer to the above.Why did David spill then?
Wow, just...wow.
Why would doop "spill" then? Why would Sketch "spill" then? Why would CK "spill" then? Why would there be an "audio recording" then?
Just...wow. You're pathetically biased, and are trying to call me out for being so? No, just...no.
Edit: Last time I'm going to respond to you, Purvis, until you can actually formulate an argument that a ninth grader couldn't find flaws in. I can't convince every stupid person that they're wrong in the world, and certainly not on the internet. -
let's just wait for Saidin to respond to this which is what x0tek initially wanted.
People can't seem to understand that yes there is not enough evidence in the lifeline case but x0tek is scaling the case to even out with carbons which claims there is enough evidence. I don't totally agree with this but for people that don't understand the point of the thread that's what's happening. -
Ellustrial wrote: »How? Jesus ****ing Christ, how? Outline me just two instances where the evidence of Carbon was more evidence than provided in the situation!
You are so ****ing stupid...
Wow, just...wow.
Why would doop "spill" then? Why would Sketch "spill" then? Why would CK "spill" then? Why would there be an "audio recording" then?
Just...wow. You're pathetically biased, and are trying to call me out for being so? No, just...no.
You still havent shown enough proof. You can stay mad all you want, but ill stand by what I have said because that is the most logical way to go from what has been shown. No one has yet given a DavidLive statement about cheating. Its all been "ya we may of ghosted".
I hope you never go on jury or make a big decision because from what I have seen from you, I wouldnt even let you pick out what I should eat for dinner. -
let's just wait for Saidin to respond to this which is what x0tek initially wanted.
Well...I welcome all people's opinions. If it is Purvis' opinion that there isn't enough evidence, so be it.
It's when he goes "nuh uh, you're biased and wrong because of this ______" that I take issue.
I welcome everyone to post, and to rigorously go through the situations comparing them. However, if you're going to argue with me, I expect you to come prepared.
I don't believe in things unless I know how to defend my beliefs. -
Ellustrial wrote: »Well...I welcome all people's opinions. If it is Purvis' opinion that there isn't enough evidence, so be it.
It's when he goes "nuh uh, you're biased and wrong because of this ______" that I take issue.
I welcome everyone to post, and to rigorously go through the situations comparing them. However, if you're going to argue with me, I expect you to come prepared.
I don't believe in things unless I know how to defend my beliefs.
Ill believe it when I see it. Im not going to join the witch hunt yet.
yet -
wont it be enough to just know the truth
you cant expect anyone to get a ban, because it involves iceman
what are they going to do, break all ties with esg? get real
This is so, so true.
Edit: Not that it makes it right. I think they should be banned. But, it's so horrifically true. -
eQualified wrote: »Although 2 events are similar, their circumstances are not the same.
This will eventually disintegrate and the competitive scene will move forward. Like it or not.
lol i don't think this is going away anytime soon. Especially if more evidence surfaces. -
lol i don't think this is going away anytime soon. Especially if more evidence surfaces.
Man I really do hope it's not true not because I'm siding with them but if iceman really did ghost and gets caught I don't know who you can trust to cast or spectate anymore. Once again I'm not siding with them but if it's true damn there will be some serious trust issues in the companies that are partnered with z8games for leagues and such. At least there's more protection though
-
Man I really do hope it's not true not because I'm siding with them but if iceman really did ghost and gets caught I don't know who you can trust to cast or spectate anymore. Once again I'm not siding with them but if it's true damn there will be some serious trust issues in the companies that are partnered with z8games for leagues and such. At least there's more protection though
Ive told both leagues to make contracts for streamers and/or casters that would prevent them from cheating. OCG made me sign a NDA, so I dont see why ESG or ESL could do something similar. -
Ive told both leagues to make contracts for streamers and/or casters that would prevent them from cheating. OCG made me sign a NDA, so I dont see why ESG or ESL could do something similar.
Gotcha right now the whole situation is a trust pact. Kind of surprised it lasted long enough lol. -
Gotcha right now the whole situation is a trust pact. Kind of surprised it lasted long enough lol.
Im still shocked that this was all happening when I was in the same room as David to stream the matches. If I found out, I would have flipped my ****.
Categories
- All Categories
- Z8Games
- 1 Z8 Forum Discussion & Suggestions
- 15 Z8Games Announcements
- Rules & Conduct
- 2.5K CrossFire
- 710 CrossFire Announcements
- 712 Previous Announcements
- 2 Previous Patch Notes
- 320 Community
- 12 Modes
- 393 Suggestions
- 16 Clan Discussion and Recruitment
- 73 CF Competitive Forum
- 1 CFCL
- 16 Looking for a Team?
- 523 CrossFire Support
- 7 Suggestion
- 15 CrossFire Guides
- 37 CrossFire Off Topic