[snak]

Really, he should've reported the both of you, but idk why he focused solely on you.

Well like he stated at the time and your stating now, he has a choice to decide who gets slayed, so really it doesn't matter his reasoning for choosing me, he is given that right too choose.

Which again brings me back to my original post, if a rule was implemented that the person who started the RDM chain was the only one to be punished, it would clear up so much accidental RDM and undeserving slays.


Say, I randomly shoot someone, and that person kills me, and then that person gets killed, I and  ONLY I should be punished, so if I cause the death of an innocent person based on my actions, I should be punished more harshly because I caused an RDM chain.

[Mana]

Yeah but if that rule were implemented, it would be making any killing in self defense be kosable.
That's mainly why they left it at high sus/sus

[snak]

Yeah but if that rule were implemented, it would be making any killing in self defense be kosable.
That's mainly why they left it at high sus/sus

Yes this is true,  but how it sit's now, from the perspective of a third party who doesn't know if the person is lying about the self-defense is left to decide "do I believe what the person is saying and risk getting killed, or do I take action based on the fact's I do know (person killed innocent person) and risk getting slayed because of an RDMer"


How we made it work was, if this person was intentionally rdming and causing RDM chains, he was punished much harsher then someone who just accidentally rdm'd.


In life there are good intentions, bad intentions, and no intentions at all. being able to determine's someones intentions too either play correctly or is simply "trolling" is key in factoring in appropriate punishment.



But anyways, I appreicate the feedback, I'm not going to try changing rules, but rather adapting to the ones that are currently standing, I'm just trying to show another perspective which worked quite well in other places.