[JesseTheUndeadCowboy]

~snip~

Moderate Teaming

Moderate teaming involves situations where the teaming results in minor game disruptions. In these instances, at least one party is aware of the teaming and can reasonably expect that it will result in disruption to ordinary gameplay. 
-A detective providing a known traitor with health equipment for their exclusive use (like a bold booze, health station in a T room) is a form of moderate teaming. 
-An innocent following around a known traitor all map with neither killing the other and resulting in round delays is a form of moderate teaming. 
-A traitor giving an innocent a T weapon, with the innocent then using that T weapon to damage other innocents without any unforgiven reports being filed is a form of moderate teaming. 
-A traitor reviving an innocent and letting that innocent kill them alone to allow them to boost their score and win the map is a form of moderate teaming. The emphasis here is that there must be an actual impact on the scoring. 

~snip~

I wouldn't mind making most of these changes, but I want to touch on the three indicated. In my entire time staffing Dink's TTT, I don't think I have ever seen the two cases I struck through, and I am unsure if even listing them is really worth any benefit or if they instead just clutter an already long list of rules/staff guidelines.

Then there's the case I highlighted in red. I would argue that this case does absolutely fall under the "major game disruption" you talked about. There have been multiple instances where I have seen this case happen, and where 20+ people need to sit in spectator/dead and wait for these two teamers to die before they can resume playing the next round.

In every one of those cases, the majority of players voiced their frustration in voice and text chat about having to wait while two players just play their own game rather than the game that TTT is supposed to be. For the case highlighted in red, I think more than a warn is warranted on the first offence.

I actually appreciate that you at least being open minded about some of these changes, but you never saw a detective giving a traitor a d item? It can happen more often then you think and the keyword I think that is beneficial in the way Nicky said it was “known” meaning they know that the person they give a d item is a traitor.  This phrasing differentiates situations such as where a detective gives a person they believe to be proven a d item but it turns out later the person was a traitor. Mistakes like that can happen after all, heck even an innocent could do it after picking up d weapons and then giving who they think is proven one. Also the last parts you mentioned, where players are complaining about having to wait. Isn’t that kinda similar to delaying then which again staff usually can and have warned people about delaying using the staff text command that pops up on everyone screen, not talking about admin/ the @ chat btw. Anyway my main point is people don’t seem to enforce the delaying stuff not that much anyway from what I notice from time to time, but again it does get enforced sometimes, heck I notice people rarely even give out slays too for delaying like it says they should too. In conclusion, why is it that most or some staff don’t seem to enforce the delaying rule that much but then they want to jump straight to a ban when they realize or think it’s teaming? The way you described that last part sound very similar to delaying regarding certain situations? Hopefully what I said at least makes senses here a little and I do no mean to offend anyone here I am just asking questions and discussing which I also hope won’t be taken the wrong way. Again I do appreciate the fact that Ethan, you are at least being open to some of these changes which shows you are at least willing to discuss the issue and taking regard of others thoughts into it. Thank you.