Clarification for Rules on Luring

But how is it you don't understand them (for example) but everyone for years got what luring was. I mean, the rules are already clear - Using a reason to get someone to you so you can kill them is luring and illegal

 

It is not entirely objective, it is subjective to the interactions of players that give indications as to the intentions and the interpretation of those interactions by the person judging it. Yet again back to the police officer example; when you get pulled over based on how you drive he can attempt to judge if you are aggressive, agitated, rushed etc. He will never know exactly what you are thinking, but he will interpret your actions and try to infer your emotional and mental state from that to make a proper decision about how to handle that. The same applied to staff, they can not know what your intentions but rather they speculate as to the intentions and determine if those intentions coupled with the rules are part of that situation.

Now you are right there is no good way to write the rule so that everyone understands it equally, which is why there is always the option to talk to a staff member about a situation and your intentions so they can accurately judge before hand how they would handle it and respond accordingly.

We are not arguing the same thing, you are trying to make general set of rules regarding what is illegal and what isn't and that simply doesn't work. That is the problem people are talking about now which is that writing a set of rules which covers every situation which can't be done.

Now you say "If it's very clear that you are going to die and you die, it isn't luring. If nobody mentions you dying and you get killed, it IS luring". So for instance an ultimate is flying around building and some rando tp's to him just because. The ultimate accepts and the rando dies. Did the ultimate lure? Under your rules yes because the guy tp'd and no one mentioned he was going to die. Furthermore, if you want to say then luring doesn't apply to when you tpa to someone then I can think of situations that would prove that false. The fundamental problem is if you want to go through and outline every situation the rules page would be 50,000 lines long just for luring. The only reasonable way to have a set of rules that is both clear and concise if to make them generic and interpret-able.

--- Double Post Merged, Sep 13, 2017, Original Post Date: Sep 13, 2017 ---

Thank you for making my point in 2 lines.

 

IMO that IS luring. I don't see why it wouldn't be... ?

 

Explain to me how he lured him. Please.

 

Whatever the case, I'm sure the mods won't do anything about this. I don't see a point in wasting my time anymore, I have schoolwork I need to do.

--- Double Post Merged, Sep 13, 2017, Original Post Date: Sep 13, 2017 ---

Let's say the Ult said "come check my build" and tpa's yaboi7 to him. yaboi77 dies. The Ult said "check my build" so he killed another player under false pretenses. Luring. Now, you voted the rules don't need changing. By the current definitions, yaboi77 was killed by another player under false pretenses. Objectively Luring. (rip pretty much all ults)

So the mods will most likely ignore this because it isn't their problem or someone causing a ruckus in /g. It's up to the Ult to give the other player back their items and nobody cares. That's the way things work. But it doesn't always work out.

Here's a similar situation:

BaTaReIka_LoVe was this really annoying player who was on recently. She kept evading the censor, using b's and q's as g's if you know what I mean. I didn't care, I thought the mods would fire the ban hammer. They didn't. I wanted to see her in /L and maybe talk to adrian so I tpa'd to her. I had to resend cause she tp'd and I thought it was the anticheat bugging (like it usually does) so I resent. I went to the restroom, and came back to a death message. She tpa'd me to an ocean while I was afk. So... false pretenses, player killed, (albeit intentionally this time) and of course, no action despite a modreq. Luring? by the current definition, yes.

But does it matter what the rules say if the moderators don't enforce them? The mods NEVER help with luring in my experience, and so I believe any change, and consequentially, this thread, are mundane.

Sidenote: I am not trying to bash the mods or make trouble with Reggles. I see it's an area in which the server could improve. Why let a good server stay good? Meep can be great if we work together to solve problems like this.

 

That is not the situation I described. Please explain how a rando just tp'ing to me and falling to his death is me luring.

 

Why is he tping to you?

 

Just because he saw me talking in shout, happens frequently to me.

 

why would you send a tpa then go afk? You never know where you will be tped to

 

Well... I really don't know. Probs he'll whine to mods. If you didn't accept tpa's while flying it wouldn't be an issue, but I do understand how you could forget. I understand this is a grey area... you got me, I don't know.

 

How could I forget what? That he can't fly or that I'm flying? Am I meant to memorize every other ult's name so I know who can fly and who can't?

 

Well considering I thought she was in towns, I assumed Legend would be safe... I figured hey, what can happen if I'm in the restroom for like 60 seconds? I didn't lose anything important, it just rustled my jimmies to see this person go unpunished repeatedly... I'm sure some people thought the same when I was being a toxic jerk though, so maybe this is karma of some kind idk.

--- Double Post Merged, Sep 13, 2017, Original Post Date: Sep 13, 2017 ---

I meant you could forget that you were flying. If you've been ult for a long time, I assume you stop thinking about it so much.

 

Does that mean I lured the person? By your definition I did right?

 

I said I don't know.

 

Ah, okay. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

This is being read into way too much

Bob says selling diamond and tps tom to him and either kills another regardless of circumstances, luring
Tom decides to stand on a cactus or swim in lava and dies after being tpd its not luring in bobs case as long as bob did not in any way direct them to the cactus or lava unfairly

If tom tps john to the location and john kills bob, john is responsible for the kill and tom may be depending on context

If bob accepts a tp 100 blocks in the air and tom dies because hes not an ult, luring

If tom is tpd to the ground and dies cause he fell in a marked hole as per the rules under traps, not luring

Other than these kinds of situations its a case by case basis under staffs decisions and I have not once seen anything that complicated and even if if were to appear why does it warrant a rule change

Any lurig case is easily disputed by giving items back or you could just not do it