I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you.alex kirk wrote:[
If the rules are stupid, and the more LOGICAL choice is to do something that goes against those stupid rules, then it's justified. Simple.
I would never, ever dispute over rates if I lost by that much.
If the rules are stupid then change the rules. No one ever goes into a court room and says this law is stupid. (Yes I'm quite aware this isn't a court room, but the same principal applies). If someone gathered evidence in a murder trial, even if it so blatantly showed the defendant to be guilty, if it was obtained illegally it can not be used.
In order for the rules to maintain their legitimacy they must be enforced. That is the only appropriate logical response. It's impossible to evaluate impartially what is a stupid rule and what isn't. Therefore the only way to protect everyone is for the rules to be clear and for the rules to be followed. If they are not followed there are consequences. The only acceptable exception to this is if the team who was rated against (or any other violation for that matter) decides to "drop the case"
If we aren't going to follow any rules we may as well just play 12 mans and not have a league. If that is the case I'll just go back to playing CS instead. I've always enjoyed the competition and structure of playing in a league, that is what is fun about it for me. I don't want that to go away.