Tell me why some rules are followed and some aren't?

[Rogue]

wow..you're all a bunch of faggots!! do you realize you're arguing over a fucking gay ass game?!? go to the club or go to the park and look for chicks!! This game blows and it's not worth all this stress you guys put on your teen lives...ffs GO GET SOME PUSSY! :grin:

[Kolar]

...

Any decision on the part of the host, whether it was backed up by a TWL Op or not can be appealed. TWL Ops then make a final decision on it. That's the process.

[PjOtTeR]

Any decision on the part of the host, whether it was backed up by a TWL Op or not can be appealed. TWL Ops then make a final decision on it. That's the process.

The decision was made by the TWL ops... And it is not that -final- gets to reschedule the game, but it is the way how... Whenever they made the decision to play it at that instance, atleast be firm about that decision... Either say: Yes -final-, the game will be played next week...
or: No -final-, you have the game right now...
It doesn't really matter which one you pick at that instance because the rule is kinda vague... but after you picked one, atleast stick with it...
Don't be giving out free chances of winning...

[Zingy]

Don't be giving out free chances of winning...

(I'm going to copy-paste what I responded to the similar question you asked in the thread: "Appealing -F-'s appeal")

I understand where you're coming from, and here's my response:

If round 3 had been won by -F- instead of Pirates and both squads had consented to playing the round 3, then there would have been no grounds for an appeal because 4.03 says that the game will be replayed only if both squads agree to continuing to play at that time. But this obviously isn't what happened so we can put this scenario aside.

Ok now lets pretend -F- didn't want to play the round 3 but Pirates did want to play (which is what happened during the game), and lets pretend that -F- won. If -F- had made it clear before the round that they did not want to play, and the host made the wrong decision and allowed round 3 to take place then i believe that Pirates would have had the grounds to appeal because as you said, if -F- had lost they would have had the chance to appeal because they said outright that they did not want to play to have an "insurance" in possibly getting an appeal. I think you would have been able to appeal because that is the only way that rule 4.03 would have been able to provide equal protection for both of the squads and not have allowed one squad to take advantage of the situation.

Since -F- didn't want to play, and Pirates did, but the game was still over the 30 minute mark, then that means that ops's decision to continue playing was what caused the problem that means that it is fair that the round 3 that should not have taken place was voided.

I don't think the rules are unfavorably helping -F- because had you lost round 3, you would still have had the ground to appeal, even if it was -F- that had made the request to replay at another time (because like I said, that would be the only way for the squads to have equal protection under the rules).

(Again, an unbiased opinion, just analyzing the events that happened and how they relate to the rules.)