Is this toxic for you? Why?

I read the <Report against degolfer222> and this response by Ashes as to why the player was slain stood out to me:

To me, this just seems so incredibly petty to call toxic, whoever threw the incendiary had already thrown it at the afk and at most what the player did by leaving and going back into the fire is double the thrower's karma loss(from ~60 to ~110), which at the end of the day whoever threw it decided to throw it at the afk and was slain for it.

More than that, there is no proof that the player even knew the incendiary was thrown by a innocent, because they were afk when it was thrown, they just left a fire that hurt most of their health and went back into it... where is the intent?

So yeah, I don't really understand that slay, don't see why Ashes calls it toxic, so I'm asking what you think of it, and specifically if you do consider it toxic too, then well, what makes it toxic to you?

 

I'd say that this is toxic, but a slay is probably uncalled for. Maybe a warning? Seems to me like the player ran into the fire for less than noble reasons, but the player's actions didn't ultimately lead to the other player being slain, as the other player had already done the damage in the first place.

 

i extremely disagree with the outcome of this report. the toxic gameplay aspect of deliberately throwing yourself into incendiary grenades is only a thing because we don't want players who only want to get others slain to cause trouble to jump into incends they could have easily avoided. having already taken the damage organically, teeku did nothing wrong by heading back into the fire. if anything, the thrower deserved to lose karma; they clearly intended to throw the incend at an afk player and kill them. karma exists to punish rdmers, and if it reduced that player's karma it would have done its job. accusing teeku of toxic gameplay and slaying them seems enormously petty and pedantic, because we're effectively punishing the player for being rdmed.

 

I literally consider nothing toxic. that being said, something like this has happened to me and it is incredibly stupid, someone did a t act and they knew what they were doing and shouldn't be surprised when another person takes damage from it. This is like someone swinging their crowbar and another person accidentally walking into them and taking damage and then slaying the person who accidentally walked into him for "toxicity". This whole problem and other toxicity slays could be avoided when anyone on the staff team uses simple logic.

 

Situation 1: Player is hit by fire, runs out, then back in — not toxic, they were RDMed to begin with, they just found life was not worth living and wanted to burn in hellfire after the misery of the RDM.

Situation 2: Player is not hit by fire initially but decides to run into it on the off chance it was thrown by an inno -- toxic.

(my opinion)

 

I think that both of this is toxic. At low health after being damaged by an incen you can easily continue with the round. Yes you have a disadvantage but there is no need to run back into the incen to purposely die.
Just report for the damage after, they will serve a slay for it.
I don't think its punishing the player for being rdmed, in this case the person threw the incen was slain and lost karma, the 'victim' decided to make the incen and rdm instead of attempt rdm, toxic. If they had stayed afk then it would have just been blatant rdm.

 

Another point was that the victim didn't know the incendiary was thrown by an innocent though, wouldn't it have been perfectly non-toxic if the thrower had been a traitor? Wouldn't even have been rdm, so no possible slay on the thrower.

He just decided to give up on his round by going back into the incendiary... isn't intent the end-all be all for toxicity?

 

Personally, I absolutely believe it is. I don't even see how there could be any ambiguity about that.

In this situation, Teeku just couldn't be fucking bothered to continue the round on low health. Walked back into a traitor's nade, an easy way to die quickly, after all he didn't have a kill bind.

Or at least, that was his intention. How could he have known the reality was different?

It's not really toxic to purposely die to a traitor if you're already going to suicide anyway. The only thing that really changes is the traitor gets a kill so really, it benefits everyone involved. So if the intent was to purposely die to a traitor, wtf is the problem with it? There was absolutely no way of knowing AT ALL that the incend was thrown by an innocent.

The person who threw the incend should be slain for RDM, Teeku shouldn't even be warned as it was not toxic gameplay.

 

Hopping a bit off the format @roy the ghost ship ship used.

Scenario A: A traitor throws an incin at an AFK and a random player walks in, leaves, and returns to be killed. The player did not know who threw the incin, but assumed it was from a traitor because it seems, to me at least, the most likely assumption that whomever would throw an incin at an AFK would be a traitor. Not an issue, the person who threw it was a traitor and it is not considered RDM. Whether the player just said fuck-it or didn't want to play the rest of the round doesn't matter really. A traitor killed the player and that is the end of it.

Scenario B: An innocent throws an incin at an AFK and a random player walks in leaves, and returns to be killed. The player still did not know who threw the incin and assumed it was from a traitor, but comes to find it was an innocent who threw the incin at the AFK when the report screen comes up. So to the player, the innocent had thrown an incin to attempt rdm of the AFK, and now you are dead too. So you report for RDM because well, an innocent killed you and that makes it RDM. Had the innocent been a traitor and you walked into the fire to die, it would have not been RDM.

Therefore, to me, I don't really think it should be considered toxic gameplay since it would have been perfectly fine if the traitor had been the one to throw the incin. I feel like the there has to in some way be intent for this to be considered toxic. I feel like I want to draw a flowchart in MS Paint, but I really don't care enough to.

I could also be wrong about some of the more detailed parts of the server's rules when it comes to the extended rules because I am not a nerd and haven't read them.

Edit: After posting this, @iii and @TragicMagic summarized it a lot better IMO.

 

If Teeku returned to the fire unknowing the person who threw it was an innocent, I don't see how he could have had the intention to earn the person an additional slay. The intention wasn't there to earn the person a slay because from his perspective a traitor was likely the one who threw the incin, not an innocent. I feel like in the end it doesn't matter if it earns the person an extra slay or reduces their karma, or whatever else. The innocent was knowingly attempting to rdm an AFK and should be responsible for the results of that action. Same way almost how if an innocent plants a C4 in c4 roulette and it kills a bunch of innocents, they get a ban pretty easily. I feel like you know the risks when you take the action and you should just be ready to take the consequences. Shit, I like to rdm sometimes when someone is delaying, but I know its rdm and I'll easily take a slay because at the end of the day, it's just a game.

 

an intention which teeku probably didn't think about. honestly, if you don't want to get a bunch of slays for rdming people with incends, it's as simple as not chucking incendiary grenades into groups of people for no reason. play stupid games, win stupid prizes. teeku should have absolutely no punishment from this, considering apparently he has little or no history with attempting to get people slain for petty reasons.

 

I guess what I was more or less trying to say was that it should not be considered toxic because I don't think a person choosing to kill themselves is toxic to begin with. Like, you can just jump off some maps if you don't want to play the rest of the round or kill yourself with an incin. Hell, anytime I find C4 I always cut Wire 1 because I know I have a 1/6 shot of defusing it and I don't care if I die based on those odds. If I die, and it's a traitor who set the C4 and killed me then it would be fine. But, if an innocent set the C4 and killed me and maybe others, does that make me toxic then for cutting the wire? To me, how the player chooses to kill themselves or risk dying doesn't matter as much as if, in this scenario, it was actually an innocent who killed them. Sorry if I am rambling, I am tired.

 

Are we to assume all damage from an unknown source is from another of our own role then? Because unless that's the case, this really doesn't work because the role of the incender was unknown.

 

not toxic end of discussion