My case for amendment of rules 2 and 3

[OkaPoka]

Do not bring outside influences into the game - this includes threats, bribes, wagers, promises, "trust tells", alliances, etc. Using knowledge from previous games is perfectly acceptable, but try not to carry grudges from one game to another.

Replacements, while sometimes necessary, also serve as an outside influence. As such, do not tell other players to replace out. Do not publicly threaten to replace out of a game. If you do need to replace out, do not publicly discuss your reasons or anything else, as you are no longer a player in the game. PM your game moderator if you are considering replacing out or have concerns and believe another player should be replaced out.

are these rules 2 and 3?

[OkaPoka]

well i was going to say i don't feel like you would've been in violation of those rules but implo seems to imply otherwise

and implo is probably a better judge of the rules than i am

[OkaPoka]

What makes this different from activity/elitells. Is it the specificity then? If we invent the bugtell and define it as this situation, can i run around saying x is scum cuz bugtell?

[OkaPoka]

just to clarify bugspray, an activity tell isn't about private topics

its that a very smart person once upon a time figured out that for a lot of people, being active elsewhere on site but not in the game present was scum indicative. it was like a step up from the lurktell, someone (ellibereth probably, at least the elitell is named after him) noticed it was super scummy for someone to be specifically lurking in game x while doing stuff in game y or chatting it up in thread z.

now id reason that arguably the elitell, is kinda bringing in outside influence because you are snooping around and developing a read based on not game x related stuff, but this is/was a super common tell and there weren't any consequences leads me to believe that it is okay to bring in 'outside' influences as long as its 1) generalized to not reference the stuff a specific game i.e. person is active elsewhere on site vs person is posting in specifically thread y and 2) it is something that everyone can check really quick (everyone can check someone's activity equally, vs activity on the discord that not everyone is in)

which is why i wonder if we generalize a situation like yours to something like a 'bugtell', where its scummy/opportunistic to push someone who is getting banned would be a passable alternative. i get not allowing quoting specific posts in other threads, especially since its in a restricted area, would constitute as an outside influence that is 1) not generalized and 2) not equally accessible. but say hypothetically jake (sorry jake) and i were in a game and jake launched a push on someone who just got banned, would it be legal if all i said was "JAKE SCUM BECAUSE BUGTELL!" and everyone understood what that meant? and if they didn't could i explain what a bugtell meant in a general manner?

[OkaPoka]

just to clarify bugspray, an activity tell isn't about private topics

its that a very smart person once upon a time figured out that for a lot of people, being active elsewhere on site but not in the game present was scum indicative. it was like a step up from the lurktell, someone (ellibereth probably, at least the elitell is named after him) noticed it was super scummy for someone to be specifically lurking in game x while doing stuff in game y or chatting it up in thread z.

now id reason that arguably the elitell, is kinda bringing in outside influence because you are snooping around and developing a read based on not game x related stuff, but this is/was a super common tell and there weren't any consequences leads me to believe that it is okay to bring in 'outside' influences as long as its 1) generalized to not reference the stuff a specific game i.e. person is active elsewhere on site vs person is posting in specifically thread y and 2) it is something that everyone can check really quick (everyone can check someone's activity equally, vs activity on the discord that not everyone is in)

which is why i wonder if we generalize a situation like yours to something like a 'bugtell', where its scummy/opportunistic to push someone who is getting banned would be a passable alternative. i get not allowing quoting specific posts in other threads, especially since its in a restricted area, would constitute as an outside influence that is 1) not generalized and 2) not equally accessible. but say hypothetically jake (sorry jake) and i were in a game and jake launched a push on someone who just got banned, would it be legal if all i said was "JAKE SCUM BECAUSE BUGTELL!" and everyone understood what that meant? and if they didn't could i explain what a bugtell meant in a general manner?

just to clarify one step further

im saying that i realize outside influences are against the rules

but elitells are to an extent, an outside influence

so the way i reason that the reason an elitell is fine is because it is 1) generalized 2) information is accessible for all players

so would a 'bugtell' be fine if we could 1) generalize it 2) from equally accessible information

[OkaPoka]

heavy is the head that wears the crown teehee i enjoy these mod perspectives

[OkaPoka]

yeah i think that's how it works

[OkaPoka]

ive seen plenty of people say x is active elsewhere but not here so they are scum by elitell and i think that's okay

[OkaPoka]

i like ss's train of though - just don't let players in game x to react to bans in outside of game x until its done

because arguably it could be suspicious if certain people didn't react you know what i mean

[OkaPoka]

Isis is taking datisi to the family farm as we speak sadge