Players are voting for you to be removed from the session. Improve your behavior or you will be kicked.

[Guest]

@KWF It's you (not you personally, you as in those who want clear sessions) who want the empty session so surely it should be you who lags out if others join it. You are forcing others out with no regard to save yourself some time at the cost of theirs. I guess selfish can be added to the list of nouns too.

 

As I said way way back a few pages, if you are going down the selfish, entitled, "this is my session" route be damn sure the vote to kick works or be prepared for retaliation. There's no denying that either (kick or retaliate) is childish and could be avoided with simple and polite messages which, generally, do not happen. If you do send those messages, there's no beef here.

 

 

 

@BlankDragqueen

Did you read all of them or just that one I linked to multiple times? There are more "rules" you agree to than the one list I linked to.

 

However you said "It only inhibits them from playing in that session". What do the "rules" state? I believe it states any online service, which includes the public session you may be in and voting them out of.

 

The pop up doesn't say "you can kick out people you don't like" at all. The host of a job can kick players since jobs are able to be open or closed and changeable. A job lobby is not the same as a public freeroam session.

 

My post was not personal interpretation but by the simplest definition of the terms used. Inhibiting any player from any online service is against the terms, much like inhibiting them to enjoy it - which we all know griefers constantly break that rule. Kicking is by definition against the rules for any reason whatsoever by definition. Kicking is a feature given to us yet often misused, it is there to remove unwanted players from a session if they are causing problems, it is not there to remove unwanted players from a lobby as soon as they enter it, before they can cause any problems, this is interpretation of the "rules" and how relaxed Rockstar are at enforcing them.

 

It wont say what is allowed when it has listed what isn't allowed. The guidance for the kick feature will not be in any terms, you can use it however you like provided you do not break any terms from the software, developer, publisher or online gaming service provider.

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

Yesterday I was told that "selling Shark Cards is the purpose of GTA Online". Kifflom!

FTFY.

 

Now on topic, you can blame us all you want for being kicked unfairly, surez but we aren't responsible for the game sh*tting itself for no reason and getting you stuck on the clouds or sent back to Story Mode, that's something that's beyond both ours and your control.

 

You can get the same result when joining someone's session and that someone would not be responsible too.

 

Blame R* for being cheap as f*ck and still using prehistoric P2P servers in 2018, yeah, I can't believe it either.

[Hécate-II]

Tryhard using mod menu teleported me out my Hunter when I was playing Headhunter and he caged me, I managed to join an activity and respawned right near my facility, but f*ck, I was unable to enter inside and wanted to obliterate him with the Orbital Strike(never ever tested this crap, but against such scrub its totally justified).

 

He got rightfully votekicked , sorry for being entitled and not wanting be caged by script kids. Typical case where players fix the mess caused by R* incompetence at creating a decent anti-cheat system for PC.

 

[Black-Dragon96]

@BlankDragqueen

 

Looks like we hit a nerve.

 

Did you read all of them or just that one I linked to multiple times? There are more "rules" you agree to than the one list I linked to.

I read everything I could find about that multiple times.

 

However you said "It only inhibits them from playing in that session". What do the "rules" state? I believe it states any online service, which includes the public session you may be in and voting them out of.

Like I said, by that logic kicking a scriptkid or other cheater would be a violation of the terms of service, because it inhibits them from playing the game.

 

My post was not personal interpretation but by the simplest definition of the terms used. Inhibiting any player from any online service is against the terms, much like inhibiting them to enjoy it - which we all know griefers constantly break that rule. Kicking is by definition against the rules for any reason whatsoever by definition. Kicking is a feature given to us yet often misused, it is there to remove unwanted players from a session if they are causing problems, it is not there to remove unwanted players from a lobby as soon as they enter it, before they can cause any problems, this is interpretation of the "rules" and how relaxed Rockstar are at enforcing them.

Yes it is your personal interpretation, based on the wording in the terms of service.

There is no rule clearly stating that you are not allowed to vote kick a person without a specific reason. Not in the terms of service, not in the eula, not in the code of conduct and not when you use the kick button. The kick button is there to remove unwanted players, nowhere it is stated that they have to be a problem. The definition of a problematic player or a player causing problems is also up to your personal definition.

 

It wont say what is allowed when it has listed what isn't allowed. The guidance for the kick feature will not be in any terms, you can use it however you like provided you do not break any terms from the software, developer, publisher or online gaming service provider.

Well and nowhere it is stated that it is not allowed to kick a player without a specific reason.

Its not restricted in any terms so you cant break any terms and you are free to use the kick feature however you like .

Edited January 30, 2018 by Black-Dragon96

[Guest]

 

@BlankDragqueen

Looks like we hit a nerve.

 

 

Did you read all of them or just that one I linked to multiple times? There are more "rules" you agree to than the one list I linked to.

I read everything I could find about that multiple times.

 

 

However you said "It only inhibits them from playing in that session". What do the "rules" state? I believe it states any online service, which includes the public session you may be in and voting them out of.

Like I said, by that logic kicking a scriptkid or other cheater would be a violation of the terms of service, because it inhibits them from playing the game.

 

 

My post was not personal interpretation but by the simplest definition of the terms used. Inhibiting any player from any online service is against the terms, much like inhibiting them to enjoy it - which we all know griefers constantly break that rule. Kicking is by definition against the rules for any reason whatsoever by definition. Kicking is a feature given to us yet often misused, it is there to remove unwanted players from a session if they are causing problems, it is not there to remove unwanted players from a lobby as soon as they enter it, before they can cause any problems, this is interpretation of the "rules" and how relaxed Rockstar are at enforcing them.

Yes it is your personal interpretation, based on the wording in the terms of service.

There is no rule clearly stating that you are not allowed to vote kick a person without a specific reason. Not in the terms of service, not in the eula, not in the code of conduct and not when you use the kick button. The kick button is there to remove unwanted players, nowhere it is stated that they have to be a problem. The definition of a problematic player or a player causing problems is also up to your personal definition.

 

 

It wont say what is allowed when it has listed what isn't allowed. The guidance for the kick feature will not be in any terms, you can use it however you like provided you do not break any terms from the software, developer, publisher or online gaming service provider.

Well and nowhere it is stated that it is not allowed to kick a player without a specific reason.

Its not restricted in any terms so you cant break any terms and you are free to use the kick feature however you like .

 

No nerves hit here I'm afraid, pretty sure I've always refereed to you as that when I reply to your wall of quotes without quoting. It's easier to remember.

 

Kicking a script kid is proper use of the kick function, you are using it for it's intended purpose, which is to remove players with unwanted behavior from the session provided the majority agree with you. You can justify the vote if they are behaving in such a way that is unwanted. Purely joining a session, regardless of what planet you are on or what you are smoking, can never justify a vote to be kicked. Standing still doing nothing is no grounds to justify a vote to be kicked. Ganging up with friends to bully players from sessions is misuse of the feature. You brought up the TOS and claimed it wasn't in there, I showed you it was. It doesn't alter the fact that it's hypocritical to complain about other players behavior when you bully players or misuse features to remove them from a public session that you somehow feel you own.

 

Clearly you have not studied law, there's little point in continuing that "argument" unless you understand it on a legal level. It's not personal opinion or personal interpretation, I have simply posted the information in the TOS, that information is defined, part of which defines that you are not allowed to inhibit other players from any online features.

This simple line, in it's simplest form, is as it is written - "any", look it up. Argue all you like about the inconsistency and conflicting scenarios based on this, it doesn't change what it means by definition. Furthermore, it is impossible for a single player to kick another from freeroam - we could build on that aspect but I fear it'll be lost you.

 

The entire thing about the inhibiting of any player to use any online service covers the kick feature terms "argument" you are trying to put forward, keep up. Using it to remove a player breaches the TOS therefore it is redundant to list that it must not be abused to remove players who pose no threat to your use of the online service.

 

 

Fact is, you made a claim about the terms of service which was not researched (or ill researched) and false. There's little point in focusing on that here since you obviously have zero experience either in terms of services, EULAs or anything legal and binding.

 

Regardless of any TOS, and even if they did include the redundant list of what you can do, it's still a dick move, selfish, entitled and arrogant to instantly kick players who pose no threat to you or your planned activities in a public freeroam lobby. It's childish and bullying. If players want to play that way then they need to be ready for the, just as childish, consequences.

 

Short of the game being changed, which shows no signs of happening, only by stopping with the bullying and unwarranted kicking will this issue stop. That isn't going to happen based on the arguments given in this topic and therefore neither will the retaliation. The game may be rated M but the players certainly aren't mature.

[Guest]

Now on topic, you can blame us all you want for being kicked unfairly, surez but we aren't responsible for the game sh*tting itself for no reason and getting you stuck on the clouds or sent back to Story Mode, that's something that's beyond both ours and your control.

To be clear, I'm not blaming you for that however it is a consequence of a kick which you either do not give a damn about or have not considered.

 

What you are doing is similar to punching a stranger in the face for no reason and running away to hide.

What we are doing is chasing you with the intentions of showing you that being punched in the face isn't nice.

 

I get it. Some will come and punch you in the face but surely in a large controlled session you can see that happening. xxx is off the radar, xxx has enabled ghost, jets popping up or whatever. You have time to deal with it then rather just hit everything that comes near you. I have no problems with controlled sessions kicking those out to destroy their product, I have problems with unjustified kicking of anyone who enters regardless of their intentions.

[Black-Dragon96]

It doesn't alter the fact that it's hypocritical to complain about other players behavior when you bully players or misuse features to remove them from a public session that you somehow feel you own.

Well this fits you and your griefer friends in here too. You admitted that you attack cargoshipments on a regular basis aka. bully other players. So by that logic your complaining about people kicking you is hypocritical too. I mean you even missuse features like fully loaded to prevent the kick.

 

It's not personal opinion or personal interpretation, I have simply posted the information in the TOS, that information is defined, part of which defines that you are not allowed to inhibit other players from any online features.

Saying that kicking without a reason is inhibiting other players from online feature however is your personal interpretation. Edited January 30, 2018 by Black-Dragon96

[CosmicBuffalo]

I definitely do not see this as problem. Is it morally wrong to send a random person back to the clouds? Yes. I agree that people who kick do not have the moral high ground but we are playing a game that sells an in-game yacht for 100. It was in the game already. Yeah they had to make some effort and R* should be paid, but clearly a shady deal. But we all play anyway. Screw the moral high ground in this game, its a game about theft. The line is clearly blurry on voting to kick as its being abused. But not nearly as much as passive mode, teleporting, car dupes, and all the rest.

Edited January 30, 2018 by GenericGTAO

[We Are Ninja]

Tryhard using mod menu teleported me out my Hunter when I was playing Headhunter and he caged me, I managed to join an activity and respawned right near my facility, but f*ck, I was unable to enter inside and wanted to obliterate him with the Orbital Strike(never ever tested this crap, but against such scrub its totally justified).

 

He got rightfully votekicked , sorry for being entitled and not wanting be caged by script kids. Typical case where players fix the mess caused by R* incompetence at creating a decent anti-cheat system for PC.

I see no problem with this. At all. In that instance, he gave you an extremely legitimate reason to kick him.

[FukNRekd]

Saying that kicking without a reason is inhibiting other players from online feature however is your personal interpretation.

No, it's not.

 

You're just too stupid and stubborn to believe anything anyone says that contradicts you. Even when it's written in plain engrish.

 

You're such an insecure lowlife that you are afraid to be proven wrong even to the extent you are willing (and happy) to make yourself look the fool in defending it.

 

It's a nice look for you, btw.

 

Member was warned for this post: Don't flame people, especially if you're not going to add anything to the discussion. -RedDagger

[We Are Ninja]

^ Relaaaaaaax. The mods are gonna come in here and start regulating if things get all insult-y. Some people are simply more self-centered than others. It is what it is.

Edited January 30, 2018 by We Are Ninja

[Black-Dragon96]

^ If the mods believe that my post are against the rules I will gladly remove them myself or edit them so they are within the rules.

 

 

Saying that kicking without a reason is inhibiting other players from online feature however is your personal interpretation.

No, it's not.

 

You're just too stupid and stubborn to believe anything anyone says that contradicts you. Even when it's written in plain engrish.

interpretation (noun): "an explanation or opinion of what something means"

(source: google search)

 

If he says that vote kicking without a reason falls under inhibiting players from accessing gta online he is clearly giving his opinion about what the rule means because nowhere in any part of the terms of service is said: "votekicking without a reason is inhibiting other player from accessing online".

The entire rule is open to interpretation by anyone who reads it because nowhere is clearly stated what falls under inhibiting players from accessing gta online.

 

You're such an insecure lowlife that you are afraid to be proven wrong even to the extent you are willing (and happy) to make yourself look the fool in defending it.

Well I may make myself look like a fool (i dont believe thats the case but hey, you have the right to have your own opinion), but atleast Im not insulting people just because they have a diffrent opinion. That being said, I did not expect anything else from you. Good day sir. Edited January 30, 2018 by Black-Dragon96

[Big Molio]

Like a circle in a spiral, like a wheel within a wheel...

 

The whole thing boils down simply to which you think the most heinous, getting stuff stolen / destroyed or voting-to-kick, and neither side will ever likely see the other side's point of view.

 

Like those Jews and Muslim folk.

 

It's like the Passive vs Ghost Org argument. Which do you think the worst offence?

 

Being seen and not able to be killed, or not being seen and being able to be killed? Invisible or invulnerable?

 

I get passive players insulting me whilst I'm OTR unable to comprehend that they have taken similar steps to protect themselves.

 

I think vote kickers are pansies basically, and deserve having all their goods blown up forever. I've even had these fools try and kick me from races.

 

Me! A clean racer! And all just because I'm better than them.

Edited January 30, 2018 by Big Molio

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

I also think that griefers are assholes that don't deserve to play the game in the first place. Opinions, opinions.

[RANDOMv2]

The first thing I do when going into a room with 1-3 people in it is to send out a group message stating that I will not mess with them. This usually results in replays saying thanks and everyone stays out of each others way.

[NoUnicodeCharacters]

The only practical use of kicking is to get rid of that one guy who griefs everyone else, or when people are cheating in player made games. So when I get the message, I know whoever did it is just abusing it and/or mad because I am winning. The sad thing is it never gets used properly, mostly because for whatever reason, people don't go out of their way to kick, even when I message the rest of the lobby to do it. There should really be a forced tutorial on how to kick because I get so many people that reply with "how do i kick" and I'm definitely not explaining the whole process.

 

this just happened to me for the first time in five days, usually its 3+ times per day. Loaded into a session with two others in the same mc and got the kick message about 30 seconds in. first off, i think its a petty ahole move especially when you are actively checking the player list to kick anyone ASAP. i never ever mess with anyone so its infuriating for me to have to load up another session just because some little pssy cant take someone else coexisting in their session. but really, the actual problem is that r* only lets you do certain things in public sessions so you have to lock one down instead of just loading up a private one. When I see the message the only thing I do is kick the person I suspect/know did it. But from now on, I'm going to start headhunter and grief them for the next 20 minutes.

[Nutduster]

Like a circle in a spiral, like a wheel within a wheel...

 

The whole thing boils down simply to which you think the most heinous, getting stuff stolen / destroyed or voting-to-kick, and neither side will ever likely see the other side's point of view.

 

Like those Jews and Muslim folk.

 

It's like the Passive vs Ghost Org argument. Which do you think the worst offence?

 

Being seen and not able to be killed, or not being seen and being able to be killed? Invisible or invulnerable?

 

I get passive players insulting me whilst I'm OTR unable to comprehend that they have taken similar steps to protect themselves.

 

This is tangential to the thread, but I wanna reply to this because I see it all the time. I lean on OTR pretty hard myself, partly because I am a lone wolf usually and don't like fighting on radar against multiple people teamed up against me; and partly because I much prefer stealth assaults over the predictable, boring standoffs that come from two players on radar both trying hard not to die. I run into a lot of tryhards who either go passive the moment I go OTR, or kill themselves repeatedly until they know where I am. I find this deeply lame.

 

Using passive and EWO to win fights are exploits of game mechanics not intended for that purpose, period. And I don't think there's much of a comparison. Passive makes you literally invincible, and EWO abuse is nearly as bad. Off the radar is just that. You can still be physically seen - even more so now that the game has thermal vision - and you can be killed. A smart player can predict your approximate spawn locations and likely movements. If they are using one of the many vehicles with homing rockets, they will still lock onto anything you drive. And finally, they can always counter you with off the radar themselves - it's just a $500 call to Lester.

 

If anyone here responds to OTR or any other normal position of disadvantage by going passive until they have the upper hand again, please know that you're a weak exploiter, and the only party I judge more harshly than you is Rockstar for allowing this garbage to exist in the first place. Four and a half years later, and people are still flipping the invincibility switch to win fights. SMH.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Nutduster

[Nutduster]

I also think that griefers are assholes that don't deserve to play the game in the first place. Opinions, opinions.

Maybe - but you have to admit that this game flat-out caters to griefers, and especially has since the CEO stuff was added. The design decisions they've made are indefensible unless you admit that they are basically fine with letting assholes run the show. Complaining too much about griefers in GTA is like complaining about all the drunk jackasses in a dive bar.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Nutduster

[Rabid Vulpix]

 

Yes they encourage adversary modes too, keyword encourage....not force or require.

Encouraging different options in which players are free to choose from by their own personal preferences, rewards....not punishments given for whatever action is chosen.

I've grown tired of adversary modes but sometimes still find entertainment in intercepting big business runs in free-roam.

It's an element R* presses in their game & it's one I choose to participate in, your point has no weight to it given I have the choice to take part in whatever encouragements I desire.

Destroying supplies gives you like 2k. Most of the time you're attacking people who are completely defenceless too, and it only takes a matter of seconds to destroy their supplies.

 

I won't even go into the dozens of OP weaponized vehicles you can use. So, does that not sound like the most braindead gameplay out there?

 

If you really think attacking any old random making sales is a fair fight, you're an idiot. If you realise it's unfair but still do it, you're a griefing asshole.

 

The only cancerous douchebags are the people who whine & gripe about the style of in-game mechanics, yet still play the game rather than play something else.

Sorry, I'll stop complaining. The game is 100% perfect. It's not like the majority of the playerbase quit because of how sh*t it is, years ago. It's a perfect game. How could anyone dare make a complaint.

 

Anyway, off I go back to destroying mailvans and garbage trucks with my fighter jet! Such fun! Totally not griefing

 

 

- I did not say it was fair/balanced, I did not say it pays well, I stated the game is designed to encourage that behavior.

If you are given weaponized vehicles & aircraft, & encouraged/rewarded even a little by the actual game for "Griefing", you're just playing the game as it's built.

 

- Please remind me where I even remotely suggested the game was 100% perfect & that people don't have the right to complain.

Insulting players whom just go by the direction by how the game tilts the mechanics is pointless, if the game discouraged it/punished players then yes.

 

 

 

 

 

The only cancerous douchebags are the people who whine & gripe about the style of in-game mechanics, yet still play the game rather than play something else.

Well that description fits your kind too. I mean you whine & gripe about getting kicked and the way votekicking works.

Just because I dont agree with the design of certain gameparts that does not mean I should stop playing. I very much enjoy playing the game my way, even with all the flaws the game has. Its actually one of my favourite and most played games.

 

More it less it just shows how people vent their anger & frustration out on other players who enact on how the game is built to be played.

A sandbox game like gta online has no specific way to be played. You can play however you want as long as it is within the terms of service. There is no reason regulation on the kick feature so technicly the people who kick someone just because he joined are still within the terms of service.

 

I also do not see a reason why people should not be allowed to voice/vent their anger about design choices. I mean your voicing/venting your anger about the kick feature too.

 

- Yes I have whined & griped about it.

My main concern isn't when players are kicked for disrupting business, it's when a player is kicked from a lobby merely for EXISTING in that session.

I know there will be butthurt CEO's when their product is destroyed & they will lash back via vote kicking, not my cup of tea but it happens.

Yet the feature is used in the same regard even before any sign of aggression even occurs, which is ridiculous.

There's a difference between "Hey I've been notified & alerted of a business to destroy." & "Hey I just joined this session to work peacefully".

However the kicking feature has no restrictions, thus the point of it exploited for however players see fit.

 

- You're not playing the game however you want when you vote kick someone for simply being in your session, you're forcing another player out of play, that's it.

& yes it's a sandbox game I know what that means, this sandbox game has an incentive for you to make things harder for other players.

There is no reason why people should not be permitted to voice/vent their frustration out about the game, however it needs to be put on the game & R*, not other players.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Foreverpast

[Ghoffman9]

How I see it, a vote kick only inconveniences you for like a minute at most. The bad sport points don't really matter anymore, you basically have to intentionally do a bunch of sh*t in a very short period to get tossed into a bad sport lobby these days. They made it harder because of all the weaponized personal vehicles where blowing them up is the only means of stopping the player using it to attack you.

Due to blowing up the vehicle being the only means of stopping many of these weaponized personal vehicles, lots of people would end up in a bad sports lobby for simply defending themselves. Knowing this they made it a lot harder to get put in a bad sport lobby, so complaints about the bad sports points does not really hold water anymore. If you play the game as normal without going out of your way to blow up every personal vehicle you see, you will never get put in one.

 

I been kicked many times in the past, I understood why and was not bothered. I simply found another session a few seconds later and went back to my usual business.

Lots of people don't just kick because they fear of what the other player might do. Many do it simply to keep the connectivity of the session low. With each player that enters the session, the connectivity of that session goes up. It triggers a slippery slope that results in many other players joining in short order, making your private session not so private anymore. Turning that session into your typical never ending deathmatch nonsense you see in a public session.

I seen it many times in action myself.

[Black-Dragon96]

@Foreverpast

 

I agree with you, votekicking on sight is a dickmove no questions asked.

I do however think hunting and destroying cargo (even if its encouraged and rewarded) is a dickmove too.

In both cases someone is destroying someome elses enjoyment. Neither the kicking on sight nor the countergriefing for getting kicked will make the problem go away.

 

Like I said earlier, I only use the votekick against scriptkids and the members of a scriptkid and tryhard crew with the tag dogz.

I believe that messaging people who join and, telling them that this is a friendly session and to not kill anybody, as well as leaving friendly lobbys alone if your looking to cause some havok, is the way to go. That way we can all enjoy the game how we like.

 

In the end the one too blame is indeed R*, for not allowing these missions to be done in privat. If they would be allowed there we would not have this problem.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Black-Dragon96

[Guest]

 

It doesn't alter the fact that it's hypocritical to complain about other players behavior when you bully players or misuse features to remove them from a public session that you somehow feel you own.

Well this fits you and your griefer friends in here too. You admitted that you attack cargoshipments on a regular basis aka. bully other players. So by that logic your complaining about people kicking you is hypocritical too. I mean you even missuse features like fully loaded to prevent the kick.

 

 

It's not personal opinion or personal interpretation, I have simply posted the information in the TOS, that information is defined, part of which defines that you are not allowed to inhibit other players from any online features.

Saying that kicking without a reason is inhibiting other players from online feature however is your personal interpretation.

 

1) That's a moot point. It's also factually incorrect since I don't even play on a regular basis, since DD I haven't attacked anyone without provocation and before DD it certainly wasn't a case of attacking on a regular basis.

"We" misuse VIP work, sure but who instigates it? Who causes us to have to misuse VIP work to at least give ourselves a chance to fight back when we have been unfairly and often without reason voted to be kicked? I'm not saying, nor have I said, that both parties misuse features of the game. The fact is, if misuse of the kick feature didn't happen then neither would abuse of the VIP work in retaliation.

 

2) Not at all. Kicking without reason does inhibit a player from use of the online features. You cannot possibly be denying that. A single vote, no, it doesn't but multiple players ganging up and misusing the feature on a player who poses no threat does. >50% session population votes will remove the player from the session and therefore inhibits their use of the online feature.

[Lonely-Martin]

^ Obviously doesn't read much. You are passionate here dude, but clearly don't read about and know the game, lol.

 

That's what shows you as a troll. You show no interest anywhere other than this PvP/PvE argument. Because, if you'd read around, or played the game more generally rather than hiding among friends to not see it, you'd know for fact many start fully loaded the second they can ALL THE TIME THEY CAN!.

 

This site has many singing that song too bub!. (I'm not against the playstyle, as Its clearly valid. But still is as low as one can go. To play that way, and to create gameplay like that, lol).

 

And no, it doesn't inhibit players accessing online. It moves them to ANOTHER session. If it put you on an actual time-out, you'd have a point, lol. Naughty step, lol. So fix your internet/bitch to R* if it's a frequent issue that your stuck in the clouds. That fail/part of the game can come from session changing for whatever reason. Got sod all to do with others, that's just bad luck. I agree though, R* should address that. It plagues this game.

Edited January 31, 2018 by KWF1981

[Guest]

^ Obviously doesn't read much. You are passionate here dude, but clearly don't read about and know the game, lol.

 

That's what shows you as a troll. You show no interest anywhere other than this PvP/PvE argument. Because, if you'd read around, or played the game more generally rather than hiding among friends to not see it, you'd know for fact many start fully loaded the second they can ALL THE TIME THEY CAN!.

 

This site has many singing that song too bub!.

 

And no, it doesn't inhibit players accessing online. It moves them to ANOTHER session. If it put you on an actual time-out, you'd have a point, lol. Naughty step, lol. So fix your internet/bitch to R* if it's a frequent issue that your stuck in the clouds. That fail/part of the game can come from session changing for whatever reason. Got sod all to do with others, that's just bad luck. I agree though, R* should address that. It plagues this game.

Who said accessing? We are talking at a very basic level as detailed in the documents which were brought up with claims that they don't state that kicking is "illegal". You are twisting words, first claiming that the word deny was involved and now accessing which is not the case. It's "inhibiting" and "use of any online service". On a very basic level, taking the words written for what they mean, kicking a player is inhibiting them from use of that public session which is an online service.

 

What topics I post in is not really anyone's concern but mine, right? It's certainly no concern of yours where I post and last I checked there was no rule to say I couldn't post only in a few topics which interest me. If you look, you will see I have posted in other topics too which have not been met with instant disapproval - those posts generally don't require pages of explanation and correction therefore don't get as many replies from me.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Guest

[Lonely-Martin]

Who said accessing? We are talking at a very basic level as detailed in the documents which were brought up with claims that they don't state that kicking is "illegal". You are twisting words, first claiming that the word deny was involved and now accessing which is not the case. It's "inhibiting" and "use of any online service". On a very basic level, taking the words written for what they mean, kicking a player is inhibiting them from use of that public session which is an online service.

What topics I post in is not really anyone's concern but mine, right? It's certainly no concern of yours where I post and last I checked there was no rule to say I couldn't post only in a few topics which interest me. If you look, you will see I have posted in other topics too which have not been met with instant disapproval - those posts generally don't require pages of explanation and correction therefore don't get as many replies from me.

 

Says it all. You seek to have everyone play your way only, all other ways are 'wrong'. You reek of this. Even looking to correct us now, lol... Kifflom brother brother, Kifflom!.

 

Even popped up in a clothing thread bashing folk that indulge choices there too, basically said 'we don't need the sims in GTA' there too, lol. For someone that actually can express themselves like an adult, I expected more. Can't win 'em all - f*ck, even Big Molio gets the 'different strokes for different folks' logic, good god. You're right, participate at your leisure, but when you show up for nothing but to bash elements of GTA that you profess will have no effect on you and your (hiding) crew, then bash roleplayers with the PvE guys, clearly doesn't accept other playstyles because of the 'online means PvP' bullsh*t, stifling, and clearly ignoring that PvE thrives (even after 2 years of bollocks), it really does say it all my man. You're boring now, you're too stubborn, defiant, we must see and play GTA:O your way. Nothing more to say, I'll never agree, lol. (Please note, this is based off of many discussions of late with you, like a few in this thread, we remember previous chats, and that add to this I put - It's clear you'll never accept other ways of playing without a daft fight, fair play. I concede that, as I don't wish to get drawn in further by Blasterman's English cousin, lol -Top Gear joke). Anyway...

 

It's not the players fault, hardly is. It's R*'s, through the game they created, the lack of enforcement, and restrictions, and poor communication with us players. Players with poor internet bring their own trouble here too.

 

Peace out.

[Guest]

 

Who said accessing? We are talking at a very basic level as detailed in the documents which were brought up with claims that they don't state that kicking is "illegal". You are twisting words, first claiming that the word deny was involved and now accessing which is not the case. It's "inhibiting" and "use of any online service". On a very basic level, taking the words written for what they mean, kicking a player is inhibiting them from use of that public session which is an online service.

 

What topics I post in is not really anyone's concern but mine, right? It's certainly no concern of yours where I post and last I checked there was no rule to say I couldn't post only in a few topics which interest me. If you look, you will see I have posted in other topics too which have not been met with instant disapproval - those posts generally don't require pages of explanation and correction therefore don't get as many replies from me.

Says it all. You seek to have everyone play your way only, all other ways are 'wrong'. You reek of this. Even looking to correct us now, lol... Kifflom brother brother, Kifflom!.

 

Even popped up in a clothing thread bashing folk that indulge choices there too, basically said 'we don't need the sims in GTA' there too, lol. For someone that actually can express themselves like an adult, I expected more. Can't win 'em all - f*ck, even Big Molio gets the 'different strokes for different folks' logic, good god. You're right, participate at your leisure, but when you show up for nothing but to bash elements of GTA that you profess will have no effect on you and your (hiding) crew, then bash roleplayers with the PvE guys, clearly doesn't accept other playstyles because of the 'online means PvP' bullsh*t, stifling, and clearly ignoring that PvE thrives (even after 2 years of bollocks), it really does say it all my man. You're boring now, you're too stubborn, defiant, we must see and play GTA:O your way. Nothing more to say, I'll never agree, lol. (Please note, this is based off of many discussions of late with you, like a few in this thread, we remember previous chats, and that add to this I put - It's clear you'll never accept other ways of playing without a daft fight, fair play. I concede that, as I don't wish to get drawn in further by Blasterman's English cousin, lol -Top Gear joke). Anyway...

 

It's not the players fault, hardly is. It's R*'s, through the game they created, the lack of enforcement, and restrictions, and poor communication with us players. Players with poor internet bring their own trouble here too.

 

Peace out.

 

I seek to discuss things which interest me. Twisting words again, or just not quite understanding something once again regarding the whole correcting thing... and this is a prime example of what I meant about correcting you - you either misunderstood what I meant (therefore I attempt to explain to correct this misunderstanding of yours) or you just love to twist words.

 

Please, point out, in all of 326 items found if you look at my user activity, how many posts do I attempt to force opinion or play style? Next DLC thread - nope. YFW - nope. Hardest DD mission - nope. Old events, things you didn't know, tryhard rebreathers, no no and nope. Trophies, B&M, heist failures - 3 more nos. Out of the first 10 topics only this one, and only through your misunderstanding or twisting of words, can it be construed that I've attempted to force opinion or play style. So please, excluding this topic and you may as well exclude the petition one since you've done the usual twisting of sh*t in there too, point out, in the other 324, where I've forced opinion or play style. You'll find I've merely stated opinion, albeit sometimes bluntly.

 

Play my way? Where, specifically in this topic but other topics also if you want to "derail it" have I said that reacting to a vote to be kicked is the only way? Scroll back a few pages, I clearly stated that both voting to kick and reacting to it are childish.

 

This topic is not about how to play, it's about voting to kick and how it causes people to react. Stop voting will stop the reactions. Stopping reacting to it will not stop the votes (reacting to it wont either).

 

Once again you are either twisting things or getting them ass about face, as usual. This is what I was on about correcting, not play styles or opinions. I've never said someone's opinion is wrong (if I have it was in jest) nor their play style. If anything I've questioned the play style or opinion and pointed out the flaws or hypocrisy but never intended to state someone's opinion/play style is wrong.

 

Finally, look at the topic as a whole. Look at the stubbornness from everyone involved. I get it, it's just those who go against you who aren't allowed to be stubborn, right?

[Lonely-Martin]

^ Bait denied, bye.

[CosmicBuffalo]

One of the last times I was kicked from a session. I had to go back to story mode. I then had restart my game after trying twice to get back online. XB1 if this happened regularly it would be a problem, but it has been well over a month for me and I play everyday, and I session hop.

[Guest]

^ Bait denied, bye.

Awesome. Twist sh*t and when called out you just f**k off until next time you want to twist sh*t.

 

Bait, no dude, asking for you to back up the sh*t you're spouting. And you call me a troll, pathetic.

[Black-Dragon96]

1) That's a moot point. It's also factually incorrect since I don't even play on a regular basis, since DD I haven't attacked anyone without provocation and before DD it certainly wasn't a case of attacking on a regular basis.

I seriously doubt thats the case

 

"We" misuse VIP work, sure but who instigates it? Who causes us to have to misuse VIP work to at least give ourselves a chance to fight back when we have been unfairly and often without reason voted to be kicked?

And who causes the votekickers to "missuse" the votekick feature?

The cheap jet/opressor/deluxo griefing, marksman dancing, explosniping, passivehopping, suiciding scrubs who destroy cargo for sh*ts and giggles.

Many people are simply fed up with that kind of bullsh*t and just want to enjoy their gametime in peace. If they cant get this peafe through normal ways they are going to take it by force.

 

I'm not saying, nor have I said, that both parties misuse features of the game. The fact is, if misuse of the kick feature didn't happen then neither would abuse of the VIP work in retaliation.

If the people at R* would have made cargo missions in invite only, neither of these problems would exist.

 

2) Not at all. Kicking without reason does inhibit a player from use of the online features. You cannot possibly be denying that. A single vote, no, it doesn't but multiple players ganging up and misusing the feature on a player who poses no threat does. >50% session population votes will remove the player from the session and therefore inhibits their use of the online feature.

It does not. They get moved to another session where they can access any online feature they wish. No online feature gets blocked by getting votekicked.

If the player who gets votekicked would get banned automaticly then it would be true but in the current state of the kick system your interpretation is false.