Continuous The Forum Court (Hound v. Thunder: Deliberation

Colonel Thunder

Renowned Blunderer
Member
Bob, did you or did you not make a post in the "suggestions and requests" channel of the Danger Games Discord in order to resolve your concern?

Furthermore, why are you seeking payment of an additional 100 Danger when 50 Danger has already been granted to you as a settlement (see your attorney's screenshots above)? Did you not receive the 50 danger promised to you as compensation for the inconvenience?
 

The Hound

Just Monika
Member
(mach entertainment decided to cut off part of my post because I'm on mobile, so to avoid looking suspicious by editing it here's my whole post, I apologise Judge Easy for this disruption)

I did not, because this was neither a suggestion or a request, this was a complaint. Furthermore when I brought forward my complaint you never instructed me to post it anywhere else.

Considering I rejected your "cookie" payoff I had no idea whether I was paid anything. My first response which you can see was to explain what I would deem an acceptable settlement.
 

Easy

Right Honorable Justice
Member
@Jeroth

Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, answering all relevant questions posed by either attorney fully and accurately, to the best of your ability, no matter how tangential the relevance and however self-incriminating the answer may be, or else accept, before all forumers previous, future, and current, that your own worth is no greater than that of a gay-ass, baby-ass, stupid-ass, worthless-ass Czech pride stinking bitch?

The court is advised that failure to answer this query in the affirmative does not preclude witnesses from testifying or attorneys from operating. Failure to answer the presiding Justice's direct address, however, does, until such time as a worthy answer has been provided.
 

Tirin

God-Emperor of Tealkind
Moderator
Delightful. Mod-Mayor Jeroth, I will assume that you are aware that my client donated Outlast: Whistleblower to TC, being that you are a moderator of TC's stream. I would ask you to answer the following questions, if you're willing to do so.

1) Do you believe that Thunderclaw treated Bob unfairly regarding his donation, especially with regards to customer service?
2) To the best of your knowledge, for how long did Thunderclaw play the Whistleblower DLC portion of Outlast on stream? Was it played across more than one stream?
3) Given the evidence submitted on the previous page, do you think that Thunderclaw believes he treated Bob unfairly regarding his donation?
 

Easy

Right Honorable Justice
Member
Order.

Moderator @Jeroth has until 19:40 EST tomorrow, the 17th of October in the Year of Our Lord 2018, to begin to submit testimony.
 

Jeroth

Mach Ambassador
Moderator
Moderator @Jeroth has until 19:40 EST tomorrow, the 17th of October in the Year of Our Lord 2018, to begin to submit testimony.
I'd like to formally apologize for my absence. We've been understaffed at work and between my increase in hours, interviews for promotions, flirting for dates and leading raids, and pumping sick iron at the steel church to Gym Jesus @The Hound ; this slipped my mind. You also know about my dramatic flair.

1) Do you believe that Thunderclaw treated Bob unfairly regarding his donation, especially with regards to customer service?
2) To the best of your knowledge, for how long did Thunderclaw play the Whistleblower DLC portion of Outlast on stream? Was it played across more than one stream?
3) Given the evidence submitted on the previous page, do you think that Thunderclaw believes he treated Bob unfairly regarding his donation?
1) I believe Thunderclaw is a masterful bamboozler as proved in the previous trial. I do believe that he is treating Bob unfairly after his kind-hearted donation towards TC.
2) I will admit; I'm unfamiliar with the game and I am uncertain of which content was Outlast and which was Whistleblower. Reviewing TC's video archives shows that he streamed Outlast on: April 18th, May 7th and May 26th.
3) Knowing Tyler's history as an accused bamboozler, I would like to say: that man has no remorse. He is aware of what he is doing, but believes it is not unfairly in his own eyes. Tyler has a history of bending the rules, such as maliciously bamboozling me and refusing to pay me back; inflating the cost of the party because "too many people can throw a party" and setting a moving goalpost for his viewers, and this situation with Bob. I am also aware that there was a special intro regarding the donation along with Shadow being featured as a co-host throughout each stream, which shows a clear favoritism and bias.
 

Tirin

God-Emperor of Tealkind
Moderator
I have no further questions for Riyant, Your Honor. I think his testimony is quite clear regarding TC's transgressions, both related and unrelated to my client.
 

Colonel Thunder

Renowned Blunderer
Member
Given that this case does not regard charges of bamboozlement, I do not see how the prosecution's first question, nor the witness' answer, have meaning in this trial. Furthermore, I do not find the witness' apparent low prioritization of our most esteemed court to lend well to his seriousness and lackluster testimony.

I'm here for the facts.

1) Mayor @Jeroth, to the best of your recollection, how many streams were there of the Whistleblower DLC? If you had to choose dates (perhaps among the ones you named) which one(s) would they be?

2) Why do you believe that raising the price of a stream party constitutes a "bending of the rules"? Precisely what rules or agreements were infringed upon here?

3) How does Shadow's role in the Whistleblower DLC Party constitutes "favoritism and bias" in a way that violates the terms and agreements of a stream party?
 

Jeroth

Mach Ambassador
Moderator
1) As I said, I am uncertain of the dates for whistleblower. My attendance to your streams were spotty during those days due to them typically being done on Thursdays when I was running D&D.

2) I suppose "bending the rules" isn't applicable considering you willingly can change them at any time. With that aside, the party being a moving goalpost is something that you cannot deny.

3) The only three parties to my knowledge were: My Jojo Party, Shadow's Oulast, My D&D Party. For the first one, I'm willing to look past it since it simply wasn't really a good party; I just wanted to shove Jojo onto everyone. For the D&D party, I was involved, however, that is due to the nature of the game. Shadow's party had a unique opening to his stream of Outlast and spanned over multiple episodes with him co-hosting. Even for the whistleblower DLC, Shadow was probably involved in co-hosting. I would tackle the "Favoritism and bias" as Bob unable to co-host in his own party.
 

Colonel Thunder

Renowned Blunderer
Member
No further questions, your Honor. It is clear that this witness is misinformed at best.

1) I submit to the court the following images showing a record of my Discord conversations with Shadow. Because the way Shadow participated in the Outlast streams was through Discord, they are proof of the dates of Whistleblower being played.

discord1.PNG
discord2.PNG


You can see at the bottom of the second image that our message/call log did not resume until August 14th, 2018 at which point we discussed another matter regarding an Overwatch stream. There were no further calls, and no mentions of Whistleblower after this point.

Furthermore, the prosecution's and this witness' testimony is unreliable. Their guesses as to when the Whistleblower stream or streams took place was many months off of the actual date, July 26th, 2018. This calls in to question the other "facts" they have shared.


2) There are no official terms and conditions regarding my right to change the amount of Danger required for awards. The witness is correct in saying there are no rules for me to break here. After several viewers attempted (and continue to) game the system to acquire danger faster, I responded by raising the Danger required for multiple rewards as a disincentive to unfairly gaining Danger over others. I desire to keep the Danger economy fair and balanced. Naturally, everyone who already had enough Danger for parties at that time were allowed to cash in their Danger for a party at the original cost. I am a fair businessman, even when dealing with those who seek to use my platform for selfish gain.


3) Firstly, I do not see how the witness' perceived unequal treatment of party rights is relevant to a case concerning Bob's perceived grievance of Danger owed. But if I must entertain this gesture, let me remind the court room of the clear terms and conditions of cashing in a party, shown in both the description of the award, and the message that is generated when a party is cashed in.

party1.PNG
party2.PNG


The witness, who is the only one other than Shadow to have had a party at this time, never requested a special opening in the discussion on what the party would be. Furthermore, further episodes have been sought for one of the witness' parties (the D&D Party) but has been delayed due to 4 schedules needing to align. And lastly, only the first stream of Outlast was Shadow's party. There were no special openings on further Outlast streams. More Outlast streams with Shadow co-hosting continued due to the necessity of my having a verbal guide through the game, as well as the fact that we both found the setup agreeable. The continued Outlast streams were not a part of Shadow's party.
 

Tirin

God-Emperor of Tealkind
Moderator
Your Honor, I'll respond to TC's closing argument in similar fashion.

1) This evidence is circumstantial at best; it does not preclude the possibility that TC and Shadow discussed the streams of Whistleblower or any other content in group DMs, private channels or servers, or etc. Furthermore, TC's is willingly misinterpreted - Riyant noted that Outlast (though does not specify Whistleblower) was played on May 26, May 7th, and April 18th, a fact which is supported by his list of stream videos. There is no hard evidence for a specific date on which he played Whistleblower, though all testimony points to the fact that he did so with some indicating that it may have been two streams. Given that July 26th was a Thursday and there is no stream information recorded until the following Friday on August 3rd, we have no definitive evidence whether TC played it for one or multiple streams.

2) Thunderclaw is well known to engage in unfair business practices; whether or not there are "rules" for him to break within a written ToS should not be taken as a determinant of his unfairness or lack thereof, because a business engaging in such practices is not the final arbiter of whether or not they are unfair to begin with. TC is continuing to falsely claim that he desires to keep the Danger economy fair and balanced when we have seen that this is far from the case and is not at all his primary concern re: failing to deliver my client Danger owed. TC clearly failed to properly advertise his terms of service to viewers and has shown careless willingness to change them for the sake of his own convenience over viewer satisfaction. He further claims to strengthen the Danger economy... by inflating Danger, making stream rewards harder to access for casual or less-active viewers.

3) Thunderclaw asked this question and is now questioning the relevance of the answer. I would like to ask the Right Honorable Justice to hold him in contempt of court for his inappropriate outburst and attempt to taunt the witness. It is, however, woefully clear that he treats some viewers with obvious bias as though it's going out of style.

In closing, your Honor, I request that you do the right thing: order Thunderclaw to compensate Bob his Danger, as well as compensate for emotional damages and the time of the Court. He has failed to do his due diligence in keeping his viewers informed, deliberately taken his own Terms of Service in a fashion harmful to his viewership while ostensibly negotiating in good faith, proceeded to question my client's honesty in making this complaint despite Bob asking for nothing but what he felt he was owed, and accused myself and my client of wasting the Court's time while taking days to address simple answers to his questions and even to find a representative (before settling on himself).

There is a proven precedent for TC giving Danger in return for games, and his testimony under oath acknowledges that the language used in his donation policies is unclear; this lack of clarity is responsible for Bob's mistake to begin with. Even if one were to assume that TC should not return the Danger as a matter of good customer service and that his behavior has been otherwise faultless, he admits that the statement should certainly be updated owing to the confusion (and thus harm) it has caused- and I submit that if he will not compensate Bob in Danger, he should do so in cash the cost of the Whistleblower DLC.

The prosecution, as it were, rests.
 

Colonel Thunder

Renowned Blunderer
Member
Your Honor, I believe the facts speak for themselves.

Despite court extensions granted to the prosecution, a literal time deity acting as representative, and the testimony of two witnesses including our own Mayor, no significant evidence has been presented regarding a breach of my terms of service or reasonable expectations. I have acknowledged what is at worst a minor lapse of customer service, and outlined the proposed action plan accordingly in addition to the 50 Danger already granted Bob for his misunderstanding.

I trust that the court will not set a precedent of attempting to right every perceived instance of less-than-ideal service at the sweat of an honest creator. Such a ruling would surely backlog the court indefinitely, and actively disincentive forumers from creating content of value to the community.

The defense, as it were, rests.
 

Easy

Right Honorable Justice
Member
DELIBERATION HEREBY BEGINS.

All forumers in good standing* are hereby authorized to cast their votes with the format: Vote in Favor of [PLAINTIFF / DEFENDANT] for the next seven days, to be concluded next Monday at 23:50 (p.m.) EST. Exceptions are: Myself, @Tirin, @The Hound, @Colonel Thunder.

*And qualifying Australians.
 

Tirin

God-Emperor of Tealkind
Moderator
Your Honor, I would like to request that@BlookyHannah, as TC's metaphorical and quite possibly literal partner in crime, is also listed as an exception as I have no doubt that, if cast, her vote will have nothing to do with the merits of the case but solely personal preference for TC.
 

Regis

Well-Known Member
Member
I Vote in Favor of TC, a man free from sin and wrongdoing who has been maliciously slandered and denigrated in what was once a holy pillar of Law and Justice, i.e., The Forum Court.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom