dwp1970
Auto-translated
couldn't stay silent :) because it's a situation that resonates with me.
in this situation, the player who provoked, and not just with a single "positive" word as he claims, but with a blatant and rude provocation, deserves disqualification first.
(trolling in modern terminology).
it's interesting what he expected in response; I'm sure he wanted exactly the kind of response he received.
I listened to Tvarina's stream and believe he behaved as correctly as possible,
within the rules, and found the mildest possible definitions
for this "positive" thing.
he deserves disqualification in the second place because he "reacted" and refused to play.
there shouldn't have been any winners in this game, in my opinion. I was almost in a similar situation and understand what I'm talking about. It's unfair that a player who supposedly competes in a certain discipline uses methods outside the rules.
in this situation, the player who provoked, and not just with a single "positive" word as he claims, but with a blatant and rude provocation, deserves disqualification first.
(trolling in modern terminology).
it's interesting what he expected in response; I'm sure he wanted exactly the kind of response he received.
I listened to Tvarina's stream and believe he behaved as correctly as possible,
within the rules, and found the mildest possible definitions
for this "positive" thing.
he deserves disqualification in the second place because he "reacted" and refused to play.
there shouldn't have been any winners in this game, in my opinion. I was almost in a similar situation and understand what I'm talking about. It's unfair that a player who supposedly competes in a certain discipline uses methods outside the rules.
