ruko is a seniormin that already told you the spirit of the rule, shes in council like all seniormins and has the authority to say how a ruling goes, if you dislike it become council.nothing more to say @gameadmins
that is rukos personal interpretation of the rule, not what the ruling says, it seems like ruko is really stretching the definition of it to get me noted, which i just think is weird
btw im just gonna say that kate is lying about the reason. kate went around the station valid hunting the whole game, and bragged about it in OOC chat how many people they killed, just gonna put that out there. me being shot to death for simply having gloves is an example of them valid hunting
1 Like
yes i bragged that the 5 metagrugers that piled on me on round end got sent to hell by buckshoot. and i was actively asking the ai “where is the wizzard” “im the chap i nullify his timestop”
damn me standing in engineering not doing anything must’ve been some serious metagrudge for you to go into engineering and shoot me to death 4head
1 Like
no but you where valid.again this is nothing of value and is turning the report into a shitpost burning pile @gameadmins.
lol no i wasn’t. ruko and i have been talking in dm’s and i don’t know if this counts as leaking so i won’t post any logs unless i have rukos permission, but once again rukos reasoning for it being counted as “stealing” has been nothing but circular logic, not only that but going back on previous statements. ruko has gone back and admitted that i didn’t steal anything in this thread, somewhere near the thread got locked, and then after i point out the ruling only applies to stealing goes on to say that i was stealing because simply being in possession in the item counts as theft. that’s right, finding it in a dead body in maint is considered stealing according to ruko and therefore makes you valid. they said something in the spirit that if the original owner didn’t give it to you, it’s theft. and if that’s their interpretation, i raised them this, no one owned the krav maga gloves that round, there was no one to steal it from, there were zero members of security that round. the only person that had access? the guy with the captain role that came in and let me have it. he is the only person that owned those gloves that round.
ruko goes onto say that the council ruling has ALWAYS been interpreted as “having it = valid”, but said that was their personal interpretation before that, in this thread im pretty sure. rukos conflicting statements on the matter along with constantly changing the definition of stealing is confusing to me. the council ruling, very clearly, does not say simply possesing this item makes you valid. and once i brought that up, ruko retracted their statement of me not stealing it and said that i somehow stole it despite all the factors listed above. i would just like some clarity on this guys
1 Like
no, thats everyone interpretation of it, one word doesnt change the spirit of the ruling and someone that WASNT captain letting you in is the same as stealing it. stop spinning this wheel.
one word doesn’t change the spirit of the ruling? go and look at it, the ENTIRE ruling is based on stealing. stealing is used multiple times, and the entire ruling is under the category “THEFT”
“Rare or unique items such as the Wardens krav maga gloves, compact combat shotgun, or traitor objectives, are always self antagonising when stolen from someone or for no reason, unless there is an immediate purpose or need to steal said item. If the player cannot provide a valid reason, it is self antagonising behaviour.”
it’s pretty fucking clear that it is only for theft, hence why the category is under “theft”, hence why the two rulings above it only deal with theft, hence why this ruling uses the word STEAL and STOLEN. but go ahead bruh say its one word and semantics :^)))
1 Like
no it isnt. what you are doing is rule lawyering, ignoring the spirit of the rule and going unga because of one word. stop writing essays is uneeded.
and there he goes ignoring my argument, lol stay mad
1 Like
you are the one reporting 
you asked me to report you in ooc
1 Like
because you wouldnt stop trowing homophobic slurs at me
lol, that was literally only hentaisatan. once again, mystery events that never happened, you said yourself you disabled OOC so how would you know what i even said? try again damn
1 Like
because the conversation lasted 30 minutes or more, i disabled ooc after 10 or 15 mins when i was gang penned and didnt have time for your shit.
(conversating was ooc salting about how bad of a person i was and how they would metagruge me by the by)
what? the gang round was the round after.
1 Like
Admiiiiiiiiins stop these clowns
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
yes thats the round where ooc salted for 30 minutes 
correct.
i wasn’t part of that, i deadass killed myself at roundstart so i could go and write this player report, go and check the time. even before that, i defended you when they said they wanted to metagrudge you and when they said you shouldn’t be mentor. i deadass don’t care about how you play you told me to make this player report so here i am doing it
also you still just ignored how the ruling is under the “theft” category, how the other two rulings above it only deal with theft, and how the word “steal” and “stolen” is used, but no it’s just one word right 4head
1 Like