@jhansyman said in #20:
> I am not trying to prove anything, I brought the issue up to discuss the other player also getting a warning for time abuses unrelated to letting a clock run out.
I mentioned proof because you initially wrote "It should have been a mutual warning; my warning for letting my time run out and the opponent for clearly being unprofessional." The "should have" indicates you've already determined the action in your particular case to be abuse deserving of a warning. As @Cedur216 pointed out, sometimes time addition can indeed be considered abusive (which you could then report and possibly a warning or similar would be issued). But since other possible non-abusive motivations for the action reasonably exist, some sort of proof / evidence is needed to justify giving a warning. Since you provide none and indicate no intention to do so, declaring abuse in this case isn't fair, nor is expecting a warning And even if you were to have some sort of good argument as to why this case was abusive, it likely requires a report from you for action as an automated response isn't as feasible as it is with players letting time run out (where things are more cut and dry, at least in terms for issuing a warning without any penalty).
But in general... fear not, more warnings exist for problems other than cheating or letting time run out. The TOS indicates a number of possibilities.
> I am not trying to prove anything, I brought the issue up to discuss the other player also getting a warning for time abuses unrelated to letting a clock run out.
I mentioned proof because you initially wrote "It should have been a mutual warning; my warning for letting my time run out and the opponent for clearly being unprofessional." The "should have" indicates you've already determined the action in your particular case to be abuse deserving of a warning. As @Cedur216 pointed out, sometimes time addition can indeed be considered abusive (which you could then report and possibly a warning or similar would be issued). But since other possible non-abusive motivations for the action reasonably exist, some sort of proof / evidence is needed to justify giving a warning. Since you provide none and indicate no intention to do so, declaring abuse in this case isn't fair, nor is expecting a warning And even if you were to have some sort of good argument as to why this case was abusive, it likely requires a report from you for action as an automated response isn't as feasible as it is with players letting time run out (where things are more cut and dry, at least in terms for issuing a warning without any penalty).
But in general... fear not, more warnings exist for problems other than cheating or letting time run out. The TOS indicates a number of possibilities.