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

[Geisterfaust]

Can you prove on a valid randomized sample of players actively playing GTA in public sessions, participating in freeroam sale and source activities that unprovoked vote-kicking will lead to retaliation from them to the possible vote-kickers? Please share your methodology, this article may help.

Personal experiences, isolated groups of like-minded friends may not be treated as valid source for sampling. Without statistics you can only talk about yourself and why are you that important? Maybe you're playing the game with your legs or upside down and even rock the crew with the same tastes. It does not mean you're common.

 

You can only be regular when irregularities are defined which requires statistics.

[Big Molio]

Can you prove on a valid randomized sample of players actively playing GTA in public sessions, participating in freeroam sale and source activities that unprovoked vote-kicking will lead to retaliation from them to the possible vote-kickers? Please share your methodology, this article may help.

 

Personal experiences, isolated groups of like-minded friends may not be treated as valid source for sampling. Without statistics you can only talk about yourself and why are you that important? Maybe you're playing the game with your legs or upside down and even rock the crew with the same tastes. It does not mean you're common.

 

You can only be regular when irregularities are defined which requires statistics.

 

Statistically speaking, vote kicks trigger me into retaliation around 9 times out of 10, or 90% of occurrences. However, I've done the maths, and sadly there is a 00.00% probability of you seeing this post because you have me on ignore.

[We Are Ninja]

Can you prove on a valid randomized sample of players actively playing GTA in public sessions, participating in freeroam sale and source activities that unprovoked vote-kicking will lead to retaliation from them to the possible vote-kickers? Please share your methodology, this article may help.

 

Personal experiences, isolated groups of like-minded friends may not be treated as valid source for sampling. Without statistics you can only talk about yourself and why are you that important? Maybe you're playing the game with your legs or upside down and even rock the crew with the same tastes. It does not mean you're common.

 

You can only be regular when irregularities are defined which requires statistics.

If this is directed at me, then we may be misunderstanding each other. I'm not arguing statistics or statistical practices. I'm asking a hypothetical question about a specific instance/phenomenon: How is it possible that the absence of any action can trigger a reaction? If I'm not mistaken, that's impossible. A reaction in response to non-action is not a reaction at all. It's an action.

Edited February 7, 2018 by We Are Ninja

[Black-Dragon96]

disputing that voting to be kicked cannot be proven to cause retaliation is incorrect as it does for me

It can be proven! In fact I already did.

See:

Ok, another little example:

A player joins a solo public lobby with 2 other people in there. The 2 guys decide to kick the newly joined person for no specific reason.

Case 1: The newly joined person decides to start fully loaded to avoid the kick, lets out a battlecry and rapidly kills the two other guys as revenge for trying to kick him.

Case 2: The newly joined person sees the votekick message, shrugs and leaves the lobby.

 

In both cases the other 2 guys tryed to kick the newly joined player but only in Case 1, where the votekicked person decided that he wants revenge, a revenge attack did happen. It is clearly seeable that it did not matter what the 2 guys did, because they did the same thing in both cases yet with diffrent results. The reason why we have diffrent results is the choice of the newly joined person. He himself decided the he wanted (or in case 2 did not want) revenge and because of that the revenge attack happened (or in case 2 did not happen).

The votekick can not be the the direct cause of the retaliation, because it happened in both cases yet in only one case a revenge attack happened.

The retaliation only happened when the votekicked person (thats you) decided that he wants revenge and pulls the trigger.

Sure the other person (the kicker) gave a "reason" but you decided to pull the trigger. Thats why its your and only your responsibility that the revenge retaliation did actually happen.

Go ahead, prove me wrong.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Black-Dragon96

[Nyamber]

I am a "valid sample"

One person is no where close to a valid sample...

[dragosani00]

I am a "valid sample"

 

I'd call it a day, arguing on internet forums is like the special olympics - everyone thinks they're a winner. You, I, Ninja and probably any other person with common sense reading this can see what we're getting at and now we're all just going around in circles, might as well let the entitlement apologists 'win' and let them go home happy.

[Geisterfaust]

 

Can you prove on a valid randomized sample of players actively playing GTA in public sessions, participating in freeroam sale and source activities that unprovoked vote-kicking will lead to retaliation from them to the possible vote-kickers? Please share your methodology, this article may help.

 

Personal experiences, isolated groups of like-minded friends may not be treated as valid source for sampling. Without statistics you can only talk about yourself and why are you that important? Maybe you're playing the game with your legs or upside down and even rock the crew with the same tastes. It does not mean you're common.

 

You can only be regular when irregularities are defined which requires statistics.

If this is directed at me, then we may be misunderstanding each other. I'm not arguing statistics or statistical practices. I'm asking a hypothetical question about a specific instance/phenomenon: How is it possible that the absence of any action can trigger a reaction? If I'm not mistaken, that's impossible. A reaction in response to non-action is not a reaction at all. It's an action.

 

No, it was not directed at you by any means. If you're interested in my opinion, pre-emptive kicks are annoying but we should thank R* for this kind of toxicity. Removing vote kicking alone won't solve the problem, I think. MC gameplay is too primitive: it should be possible and encouraged monetary to steal supplies and stock, don't damage it. R* will never do that of course, because they want us at non-stop idiotic war.

 

 

 

Statistically speaking, vote kicks trigger me into retaliation around 9 times out of 10, or 90% of occurrences. However, I've done the maths, and sadly there is a 00.00% probability of you seeing this post because you have me on ignore.

 

No, I removed anyone from my ignore list because I was bored. I just hope that women wearing short skirts or yoga pants are not triggering you into rape. Being that you're hetero or bisexual of course. Because there are some people who believe that the way people dress or behave is valid excuse to f*ck them straight away.

Edited February 7, 2018 by hei3enberg

[We Are Ninja]

No, it was not directed at you by any means. If you're interested in my opinion, pre-emptive kicks are annoying but we should thank R* for this kind of toxicity. Removing vote kicking alone won't solve the problem, I think. MC gameplay is too primitive: it should be possible and encouraged monetary to steal supplies and stock, don't damage it. R* will never do that of course, because they want us at non-stop idiotic war.

Ah. Fair enough.

 

*Quietly fades back into the shadows*

Edited February 7, 2018 by We Are Ninja

[Tonguegirl]

 

I am a "valid sample"

One person is no where close to a valid sample...

 

Unless there's only two people

[Geisterfaust]

 

 

I am a "valid sample"

One person is no where close to a valid sample...

 

Unless there's only two people

 

There is no point in that. Whatever you're trying to prove sampling 1 out of 2 does not requires sampling by definition, because you can fulfill statistician's dream: poll entire population instead of wasting your time sampling and worrying about quality (and you should actually in that case, but I won't get into that since it's quite boring and ridiculously off-topic)

[Guest]

Can you prove on a valid randomized sample of players actively playing GTA in public sessions, participating in freeroam sale and source activities that unprovoked vote-kicking will lead to retaliation from them to the possible vote-kickers? Please share your methodology, this article may help.

 

Personal experiences, isolated groups of like-minded friends may not be treated as valid source for sampling. Without statistics you can only talk about yourself and why are you that important? Maybe you're playing the game with your legs or upside down and even rock the crew with the same tastes. It does not mean you're common.

 

You can only be regular when irregularities are defined which requires statistics.

I can prove that a votr to kick me will cause me to retaliate. That's all we need to do to dispute your earlier comment stating that neither can prove either. I can by using my own play style as an example.

 

In general, I cant speak for all players and cant claim all players play this way - I know they don't. Statistics or no statistics you cannpt claim voting to kick doesnt cause retaliation when at least 4 people in this discussion have admitted it does.

 

I am a "valid sample"

 

I'd call it a day, arguing on internet forums is like the special olympics - everyone thinks they're a winner. You, I, Ninja and probably any other person with common sense reading this can see what we're getting at and now we're all just going around in circles, might as well let the entitlement apologists 'win' and let them go home happy.

I genuinely am interested in what others have to say though with the exception of black dragon who is now being ignored for obvious reasons.

 

The poll in here is wrong though. It shouldnt be asking about changing the kick feature but more asking who does what when receiving a vote to be kicke IMO

 

Can you prove on a valid randomized sample of players actively playing GTA in public sessions, participating in freeroam sale and source activities that unprovoked vote-kicking will lead to retaliation from them to the possible vote-kickers? Please share your methodology, this article may help. Personal experiences, isolated groups of like-minded friends may not be treated as valid source for sampling. Without statistics you can only talk about yourself and why are you that important? Maybe you're playing the game with your legs or upside down and even rock the crew with the same tastes. It does not mean you're common. You can only be regular when irregularities are defined which requires statistics.

If this is directed at me, then we may be misunderstanding each other. I'm not arguing statistics or statistical practices. I'm asking a hypothetical question about a specific instance/phenomenon: How is it possible that the absence of any action can trigger a reaction? If I'm not mistaken, that's impossible. A reaction in response to non-action is not a reaction at all. It's an action.

This is exactly what I've been trying to explain to black dragon etc. Yet it seems to be too hard to grasp. Hopefully your explaination helps get there (though I doubt it)

[Ice_cold2016]

What i tend to do. I always let vote kickers know that vote kicking is counterproductive. I was friendly but now you have vote kicked me i'm unfriendly and going to smash your sh*t to bits until you rage quit. F*ck em.

 

 

[Hécate-II]

I'm very disappointed this Savage hasn't destroyed your broomstick, I hope these guys will really improve at flying this awesome attack chopper and also be much much more proactive, so they can defend efficiently their vital space and make money.

 

Poor Savage :-(

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

If you claim to be "friendly" or "peaceful" yet you grief those who try to vote kick you, well, maybe you aren't friendly or peaceful after all.

[Big Molio]

No, I removed anyone from my ignore list because I was bored. I just hope that women wearing short skirts or yoga pants are not triggering you into rape. Being that you're hetero or bisexual of course. Because there are some people who believe that the way people dress or behave is valid excuse to f*ck them straight away.

 

Bizarre and overly emotive straw man fallacy from a supposed man of science and critical thinker.

[D9fred95]

As a response to the poll, I say keep it vote kicking the way it is. GTAO doesn't get to be a special exception in gaming when so many other multiplayer games have kick functions.

 

The only issue with getting kicked in GTAO is if you're doing business work which is the fault of R* who demands PVP along with PVE in sessions filled with jets, Oppressors, Deluxos, HL's and explosive snipers. Otherwise it's an inconvenience unless Cloud Simulator decides to kick in again.

[Geisterfaust]

If you claim to be "friendly" or "peaceful" yet you grief those who try to vote kick you, well, maybe you aren't friendly or peaceful after all.

Long time ago back on Xbox 1 I actually started Fully loaded because some randoms joined my session and started vote kicking me. They left after 5-6 minutes, but I learned my lesson that I wasted my time. Never actually wanted to play fully loaded or kill any of these idiots and lagging out to my own public solo would have been faster.

 

 

Bizarre and overly emotive straw man fallacy from a supposed man of science and critical thinker.

Don't have any arguments with you. Keep writing PMs though, just make them longer, that way you may post less sh*t in other places.

Edited February 7, 2018 by hei3enberg

[Big Molio]

Don't have any arguments with you. Keep writing PMs though, just make them longer, that way you may post less sh*t in other places.

 

A rather petulant reply considering that you could have just qualified that post of rather poor taste. I suppose that's a lot to ask though round these parts.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Big Molio

[We Are Ninja]

If you claim to be "friendly" or "peaceful" yet you grief those who try to vote kick you, well, maybe you aren't friendly or peaceful after all.

That makes no sense. The most peaceful person, or the most docile animal will fight back when they're being attacked.

 

You, and your fellow preemptive kickers, seem to be unable to grasp the obscene hypocrisy in believing that players are somehow in the wrong for not passively respecting your wishes to be left alone in a public lobby, when you refuse to respect their wish to be left alone in a public lobby. You all aggressively deny literally all players the very same courtesy that you expect others to give to you.

 

Your case in particular is telling because your crew has the gall to ask any player that lands in your lobby to leave because it's a "crew lobby", and typically doesn't resort to kicking unless they refuse. What if a player responded to your request by instead advising you all that it was "his lobby" and asking you to leave? Would you? No, you wouldn't. You ask players to do something that you literally refuse to do. Then you guys act like they're the problem... It was you that initiated conflict in the first place. The preemptive kicker literally takes the first swing, but gets upset at the idea of someone swinging back.

 

And when someone does, when someone griefs the lobby or brings all their friends in, you say that preemptive kicking is justified. That makes no sense. A reaction can't justify the action that preceeded/caused it. But an action does beget a reaction. This is essentially Newton's Third Law in action.

 

Black Dragon's ineptitude is clear at this point, but I've always considered you to be one of the more intelligent, more rational members on this forum. I simply can't wrap my head around your logic.

Edited February 8, 2018 by We Are Ninja

[Big Molio]

If you claim to be "friendly" or "peaceful" yet you grief those who try to vote kick you, well, maybe you aren't friendly or peaceful after all.

 

[Black-Dragon96]

Statistics or no statistics you cannot claim voting to kick doesnt cause retaliation when at least 4 people in this discussion have admitted it does.

So, because 4 people (out of the 100 thousands of people playing gta online) claimed something its a fact now. What kind of sh*t do you have to take to believe something like that?

So, me NOT chosing retaliation when I got voted to kick because I didnt want revenge despite getting votekick without a reason now somehow did not happen because 4 people said getting votekick directly causes revenge.

The personal decision, of the person who gets votekick, to hunt and kill the votekickers gets totally ignored.

 

So apparently, by Mr Spacemans (and some other peoples) logic you no longer have free will when you get votekicked. You will automaticly go to hunt and kill the people who tryed to votekick you. You are basicly remote controlled by another person.

Not your free decision to hunt and kill the votekickers (your wish for revenge) but the act of getting kicked (the action of another person) causes you to pull he trigger.

Wow just wow.

Seriously, I want some of the dope that these people smoke.

 

 

Also, lol on getting ignored by him now. Well if you dont like other peoples opinions...

Quite sad actually, I actually enjoyed our discussion. Oh well...

Edited February 7, 2018 by Black-Dragon96

[Yellow Dog with Cone]

 

If you claim to be "friendly" or "peaceful" yet you grief those who try to vote kick you, well, maybe you aren't friendly or peaceful after all.

That makes no sense. The most peaceful person, or the most docile animal will fight back when they're being attacked.

 

You, and your fellow preemptive kickers, seem to be unable to grasp the obscene hypocrisy in believing that players are somehow in the wrong for not passively respecting your wishes to be left alone in a public lobby, when you refuse to respect their wish to be left alone in a public lobby. You all aggressively deny literally all players the very same courtesy that you expect others to give to you.

 

Your case in particular is telling because your crew has the gall to ask any player that lands in your lobby to leave because it's a "crew lobby", and typically doesn't resort to kicking unless they refuse. What if a player responded to your request by instead advising you all that it was "his lobby" and asked you to leave? Would you? You wouldn't. You ask players to do something that you literally refuse to do. Then you guys act like they're the problem... It was you that initiated conflict in the first place. The preemptive kicker literally takes the first swing, but gets upset at the idea of someone swinging back. I've used the word 'entitlement' several times in this thread, but...

 

And when someone does, when someone griefs the lobby or brings all their friends in, you say that preemptive kicking is justified. That makes no sense. A reaction can't justify the action preceeded it. But an action literally commands a reaction. This is essentially Newton's Third Law in action.

 

Black Dragon's ineptitude is clear at this point, but I've always considered you to be one of the more intelligent, more rational members on this forum. I simply can't wrap my head around your logic.

Don't get me wrong, you're in your right to choose to fight back from being unfairly (or otherwise) kicked from a lobby, but doing just that doesn't better that kicking in the first place. And yeah, I have agreed in the past that kicking players indiscriminately is a dick move and a catalyst to turn players into griefers at least temporalety.

 

We used to actually lag out from a lobby when things got too hot with "change date glitch" on PS4 but sadly it got patched. Now, unless you're on XbOne, have dedicated software on PC or just have a killswitch, it's not so easy anymore to lag out on demand, at least on PS4. The MTU method still works, but while it's possible to fill a lobby with it, said connection is very unstable.

 

The thing is that at least we choose to ask as politely as possible, yeah, I know that it's basically an ultimatum and yeah, there's some crew members that go straight to grief randoms to make them leave, but believe me, we know the bad reputation that crews like the one I'm in have and at least we have the courtesy to just ask, instead of going straight to kick or grief.

 

You're right in thinking that getting griefed in relatation for being kicked is our comeuppance, I agree with that. Sadly, most crew members will think "maybe I should have kicked faster" instead.

 

Sorry you have that impression from me, but believe me that I'm self-aware enough to know that what we do is wrong, never have denied it, never have justified, I have just explained why it happens and who's the real responsable from this ossue and the only ones who can really fix the issue, which is R*. There's only three outcomes from this outrage:

 

- Nothing happens, crews keep kicking, players keep griefing in relatation, this topic reaches 100 pages until is locked or whatever.

- R* unlocks full CEO/MC work in Invite/Crew lobbies, very unlikely.

- R* either locks full CEO/MC work behind populated Public lobbies, takes action against crews that kick players or just deactivates the Kick function. This would be the worst outcome of all, players will grief you outright to make you leave or even would go to extremes like booting you out or worse. People will go to great lenghts to play as they wish.

[effenG]

"Long time ago back on Xbox 1..."

 

Five years was, like, way back a long time ago for you? Ahh, I see. I think I'm starting to get the picture, now.

Edited February 7, 2018 by effenG

[We Are Ninja]

 

 

 

If you claim to be "friendly" or "peaceful" yet you grief those who try to vote kick you, well, maybe you aren't friendly or peaceful after all.

 

 

That makes no sense. The most peaceful person, or the most docile animal will fight back when they're being attacked.

 

You, and your fellow preemptive kickers, seem to be unable to grasp the obscene hypocrisy in believing that players are somehow in the wrong for not passively respecting your wishes to be left alone in a public lobby, when you refuse to respect their wish to be left alone in a public lobby. You all aggressively deny literally all players the very same courtesy that you expect others to give to you.

 

Your case in particular is telling because your crew has the gall to ask any player that lands in your lobby to leave because it's a "crew lobby", and typically doesn't resort to kicking unless they refuse. What if a player responded to your request by instead advising you all that it was "his lobby" and asked you to leave? Would you? You wouldn't. You ask players to do something that you literally refuse to do. Then you guys act like they're the problem... It was you that initiated conflict in the first place. The preemptive kicker literally takes the first swing, but gets upset at the idea of someone swinging back. I've used the word 'entitlement' several times in this thread, but...

 

And when someone does, when someone griefs the lobby or brings all their friends in, you say that preemptive kicking is justified. That makes no sense. A reaction can't justify the action preceeded it. But an action literally commands a reaction. This is essentially Newton's Third Law in action.

 

Black Dragon's ineptitude is clear at this point, but I've always considered you to be one of the more intelligent, more rational members on this forum. I simply can't wrap my head around your logic.

 

 

 

Don't get me wrong, you're in your right to choose to fight back from being unfairly (or otherwise) kicked from a lobby, but doing just that doesn't better that kicking in the first place. And yeah, I have agreed in the past that kicking players indiscriminately is a dick move and a catalyst to turn players into griefers at least temporalety.

 

We used to actually lag out from a lobby when things got too hot with "change date glitch" on PS4 but sadly it got patched. Now, unless you're on XbOne, have dedicated software on PC or just have a killswitch, it's not so easy anymore to lag out on demand, at least on PS4. The MTU method still works, but while it's possible to fill a lobby with it, said connection is very unstable.

 

The thing is that at least we choose to ask as politely as possible, yeah, I know that it's basically an ultimatum and yeah, there's some crew members that go straight to grief randoms to make them leave, but believe me, we know the bad reputation that crews like the one I'm in have and at least we have the courtesy to just ask, instead of going straight to kick or grief.

 

You're right in thinking that getting griefed in relatation for being kicked is our comeuppance, I agree with that. Sadly, most crew members will think "maybe I should have kicked faster" instead.

 

Sorry you have that impression from me, but believe me that I'm self-aware enough to know that what we do is wrong, never have denied it, never have justified, I have just explained why it happens and who's the real responsable from this ossue and the only ones who can really fix the issue, which is R*. There's only three outcomes from this outrage:

 

- Nothing happens, crews keep kicking, players keep griefing in relatation, this topic reaches 100 pages until is locked or whatever.

- R* unlocks full CEO/MC work in Invite/Crew lobbies, very unlikely.

- R* either locks full CEO/MC work behind populated Public lobbies, takes action against crews that kick players or just deactivates the Kick function...

 

 

This would be the worst outcome of all, players will grief you outright to make you leave or even would go to extremes like booting you out or worse. People will go to great lenghts to play as they wish.

 

First of all, I apologize if my post sounded vitriolic. That wasn't really my intent. Secondly, I appreciate your willingness to acknowledge responsibility, and for clearly expressing your rationale (even though I can't say I agree with it 100%...).

 

That said, I'd much, much rather a crew attempt to grief me into submission/out of a lobby than to abuse the kick feature. At least that way, I'd have a fighting chance, even if it was a small one. If I get kicked, I have no recourse. There's literally no fighting it.

 

That said, I have to point out that griefing a player that enters the lobby in an effort to drive him out, makes those members of your crew the very players that they're trying to avoid. They grief/kick players so that the players don't grief them. They're trying to avoid griefers when they themselves ARE griefers. That isn't merely instigating conflict at that point, it's literally being the very same players that they claim to abhor. They're punishing players for potentially being what they themselves actually are.

 

That does not compute at all.

Edited February 7, 2018 by We Are Ninja

[Guest]

If you claim to be "friendly" or "peaceful" yet you grief those who try to vote kick you, well, maybe you aren't friendly or peaceful after all.

 

I never said friendly, I said non-hostile. Back me into a corner or even just be hostile towards me and I will turn, and that is my prerogative.

[Guest]

 

Statistics or no statistics you cannot claim voting to kick doesnt cause retaliation when at least 4 people in this discussion have admitted it does.

So, because 4 people (out of the 100 thousands of people playing gta online) claimed something its a fact now. What kind of sh*t do you have to take to believe something like that?

So, me NOT chosing retaliation when I got voted to kick because I didnt want revenge despite getting votekick without a reason now somehow did not happen because 4 people said getting votekick directly causes revenge.

The personal decision, of the person who gets votekick, to hunt and kill the votekickers gets totally ignored.

 

So apparently, by Mr Spacemans (and some other peoples) logic you no longer have free will when you get votekicked. You will automaticly go to hunt and kill the people who tryed to votekick you. You are basicly remote controlled by another person.

Not your free decision to hunt and kill the votekickers (your wish for revenge) but the act of getting kicked (the action of another person) causes you to pull he trigger.

Wow just wow.

Seriously, I want some of the dope that these people smoke.

 

 

Also, lol on getting ignored by him now. Well if you dont like other peoples opinions...

Quite sad actually, I actually enjoyed our discussion. Oh well...

 

Carry on making yourself look stupid by all means.

 

If 1 person out of the 7.6 billion on the planet reacts to an action in a specific way then it cannot be denied that that action has caused the reaction.

 

What you fail to grasp is that it doesn't work the other way around.

 

If I punch you in the nose and punch Voodoo Hendrix in the nose but only one of you bleeds does that mean punching you in the nose wasn't the cause of you bleeding? Hell, let's kick it up... if I punched every single person in the world in the nose and it was only your nose which was bleeding, does that mean my punch wasn't the cause of you bleeding? No. It clearly was the cause. The same applies here.

 

It isn't about free will, you are clutching at straws with that one. I've not stated that my reactions are uncontrollable, they are very much controllable. I still have the same free will I always have. I could choose not to be a dick however I choose to offer the same amount of courtesy to those who voted as they showed me. I choose to stoop to the level of those who attempted to bully me out of a lobby. Where did I say or even imply free will is revoked?

 

I cannot react to an action if the action has not been made. I cannot react to a vote to kick if that vote has not been cast. The action of voting causes the reaction of retaliation. How in the blue hell are you not grasping this simple concept?

 

By all means, attempt to justify your ridiculous and wild claims/accusations by using even more ridiculous reasoning that's just irrelevant, you only make yourself look even more stubborn and inept.

 

You are not being ignored because your opinion differs. I accept that you play GTA Online differently to me, I accept you don't retaliate to vote kicks (I wonder if you retaliate to being shot at though), I accept you either dislike or simply cannot compete in PvP, I respect those opinions of yours and don't attempt to change them. Your inability to comprehend even the simplest of logic along with the obvious attempts to bait/troll/flame/belittle/dispute without justification anyone or anything which goes against what post are the two main reasons. I've been through it with you before, your constant refusal to consider you may be incorrect is, quite frankly, baffling. After proving you incorrect a number of times elsewhere with the MC vehicle buff claims which you disputed, even after video evidence (on the grounds of videos of lizard men of all things) amongst countless other things it is pointless wasting my time attempting to discuss any topic with someone that narcissistic and pig headed.

Edited February 8, 2018 by Guest

[KazzMajol]

The only time the kick feature is not lame is when you actually get to employ it to get rid of some griefer who is causing problems for everyone.

 

When i get that notification my favorite thing to do is walk over to the wireless router, unplug the cat5 cable, count to seven, plug it back in, then go wave good-bye to all the a-holes who used to be in my session as they all leave simultaneously.

 

And then i launch Fortified or Plowed again.

[Bobfakkel]

Any none friends who joins my session gets votekicked when im with friends. Im not in the mood to wait and see if they are friendly or not or if they gonna use up VIP work time. Make your own solo session.

 

Some even try to sell or source(cant get kicked in such a mission) so we just blow them up then. Mission fail and bye.

 

Now I know this was never the intention of this system but it doesnt work vs griefers also. Full lobby and a handfull know it even excists so youll never get enough votes.

[Ice_cold2016]

If you claim to be "friendly" or "peaceful" yet you grief those who try to vote kick you, well, maybe you aren't friendly or peaceful after all.

What? I'm friendly but if someone is a d*ck to me i become unfriendly. You friendly to people who p*ss you off? If they don't try and vote kick me for no reason i would not go anywhere near them and would even help them if they needed it. I'm always helping others on GTA. Just now i helped a low rank guy get his supplies back from a high rank griefer and delivered them back to him. I'm always doing stuff like that. But vote kicking for no reason is low in my book. They deserve a punch in the head for it.

Edited February 8, 2018 by Ice_cold2016

[Guest]

Any none friends who joins my session gets votekicked when im with friends. Im not in the mood to wait and see if they are friendly or not or if they gonna use up VIP work time. Make your own solo session.

 

Some even try to sell or source(cant get kicked in such a mission) so we just blow them up then. Mission fail and bye.

 

Now I know this was never the intention of this system but it doesnt work vs griefers also. Full lobby and a handfull know it even excists so youll never get enough votes.

Not asking to argue but can you see the hypocrisy in what you do?