Appeal decision from Pandora: Denied

[Squadless]

did you ever tell people you subspace name in real life and they asked why you said "wow" after you said "apocalypse"???

[Reaver]

You still haven't given me a good reason why Eelam shouldn't be rostered - and you're inferring a lot of things about the axing, Mouses intentions shouldn't matter - it was regarded as a mistake and retracted within 24 hours. And the flimsy rule I'm referring to is the hard lock rule as it was not designed to prevent previously rostered players from staying on that roster.

You haven't given a good reason why he should be rostered. He was derostered by your captain, therefore the burden is on you to prove that a rule does apply that he should be rostered, not the other way around.

[PH]

GUYSD SHUT UYP APOLCAYSE WOW!!!11 MUST HAEV LAST WORDf

[Squadless]

You haven't given a good reason why he should be rostered. He was derostered by your captain, therefore the burden is on you to prove that a rule does apply that he should be rostered, not the other way around.

reaver, he can be rostered...just wont be able to play twl small price to pay for a lesson which is priceless

[Apocalypse WOW!]

did you ever tell people you subspace name in real life and they asked why you said "wow" after you said "apocalypse"???

Clearly you're not a fan of Francis Ford Coppola or Reggie and the Full Effect.

[Squadless]

Clearly you're not a fan of Francis Ford Coppola or Reggie and the Full Effect.

i have never felt more lost in my entire life

[demonfaze]

Sure, Mouse may of realized what he did was a mistake after the fact, but it surely wasn't an accident. The rule stats it has to be an accidental de-roster to be let back onto the roster, which obviously it wasn't. So I see no way you can get around this.

[Squadless]

Sure, Mouse may of realized what he did was a mistake after the fact, but it surely wasn't an accident. The rule stats it has to be an accidental de-roster to be let back onto the roster, which obviously it wasn't. So I see no way you can get around this.

demonfaze, i never seen you post on forums before... im making your posting my signature

[Apocalypse WOW!]

Sure, Mouse may of realized what he did was a mistake after the fact, but it surely wasn't an accident. The rule stats it has to be an accidental de-roster to be let back onto the roster, which obviously it wasn't. So I see no way you can get around this.

A man's gotta try! But yeah, I'm fighting a losing battle here.

[Na$]

There is a flaw in the rules. The only way to cover the flaw is by making assumptions and suggesting things. I will explain why Eelam should probably still be eligable to play:


1. There is no definition of the word accidently in TWL rules. It can be interpretated in different ways, meaning you can't exclude certain things from it just because you see it different. That leads us to point 2;

2. If a squadcaptain removes someone from roster but changes his mind within 24 hours its basically up to him. Besides that the player itself, Eelam, had no intention on leaving the squad which means he didnt leave volunteerly. Afterall after some thinking the captain realized that he didnt want to kick Eelam so he made a mistake by accident;

3. TWL rules also lack the rule where it is said that it is up to TWL staff to decide what is accidental and what is not;

4. Rules are set with a certain purpose. You have to wonder yourself if the rules were set to exclude people from TWL in week 10 after a squadargument that lasted less than half a day? Or were the rules set to prevent people from squadhopping etc. Eelam never left squad and never wanted to leave Pandora. I don't think the TWL rules were meant to exclude people in this situation from playing TWL.


I do understand that the majority in here thinks its not accidental. But since TWL rules do not give a definition on the word accidently you can't actually deny the appeal if you take your own rules seriously. I couldn't care less, but thats just the way it is. A simple example is for instance:
- you can't steal goods
Sure thats nice, but in lawbooks you will find also the part where it is explained what stealing is.
The lack of a good definition gives TWL staff the (unwanted) opportunity to treat squads inequally. Do you want that?

Plus one thing I am wondering: all people jump on the bandwagon to make sure Eelam don't get to play. But why? Personal gain? I don't even know Eelam but just by looking at his situation I don't think he should be excluded from TWL since he didn't do anything wrong. What happened? An argument and someone clicked the button too rapidly without thinking. Is that really such a big deal? Are we that little children that we don't give someone a second chance in a league that we all have to wait like half a year for? Give me a break. That sounds pathetic. If that what TWL rules are meant for, pff what a joke.

[concealed]

apocolypse wow! couldnt have said it better himself

[genocidal]

You don't need a definition of "accidental" to see that this was not accidental.

[AcidBomber]

conclusion: stop acting like 13 year olds and playing with the axe. is dangerous!

[Squadless]

pascone made the first post on this thread after carefull conciderations... this shouldnt even be a discussion

[eelam <tw>]

re

thank you NAS for pointing that out and thank you APOC for what you said. The reason i believe i am not in league is because 1. this deals with pandora and 2. it is me. If this dealt with -final- and with a player like Domi, we wont be having this conversation right here. IF you guys wanna read the rules anally than I can do it as well, Na$ just brought up my point. We will surely be sending in another appeal trying to overrule this. Until you can prove that mouse axed me purposely or that w/e reading me/nas/apoc share about the rule 5.08( i think ) the 24 h is wrong i should be allowed back onto roster. The onus is on staff to prove all this not us, because all of pandora including myself and mouse said it was an accident, what more do you need.