Buttersquanch Second Offense Tampering Punishment

[ValorX77]

Butters, what we you doing?!?

[Toasty]

we didnt say who he tampered then either

But in the two you linked you did... consistency!!

[White Cornerback]

we didnt say who he tampered then either

"a while ago, we received a complaint of Buttersquach tampering a player under contract with the San Jose Sabercats. After reviewing the various evidence, we have come to the conclusion that Buttersquach did try to convince a player under contract to join the New Orleans Second Line. The conversation was initialized by the player, but Buttersquach clearly continued it and added new talking points with the purpose of persuading the player in question to join the Second Line. For this reason, we have decided to punish Buttersquach with the following:"

VS

"We recently received a complaint regarding user Buttersquanch tampering a player currently under contract. After reviewing the evidence, the Head Office voted unanimously (5-0) that Buttersquanch did, in fact, try to convince a player to request a trade. Buttersquanch heavily suggested that his team would be interested, going so far as to tell that player that he would even mention it to his GM. For this reason, we have levied the following punishment toward Buttersquanch:"

Difference is night and day

[SweetJamesJones]

Leave that man alone

[Toasty]

Leave that man alone

He shouldnt tamper and then they would.

[ADwyer87]

"a while ago, we received a complaint of Buttersquach tampering a player under contract with the San Jose Sabercats. After reviewing the various evidence, we have come to the conclusion that Buttersquach did try to convince a player under contract to join the New Orleans Second Line. The conversation was initialized by the player, but Buttersquach clearly continued it and added new talking points with the purpose of persuading the player in question to join the Second Line. For this reason, we have decided to punish Buttersquach with the following:"

VS

"We recently received a complaint regarding user Buttersquanch tampering a player currently under contract. After reviewing the evidence, the Head Office voted unanimously (5-0) that Buttersquanch did, in fact, try to convince a player to request a trade. Buttersquanch heavily suggested that his team would be interested, going so far as to tell that player that he would even mention it to his GM. For this reason, we have levied the following punishment toward Buttersquanch:"

Difference is night and day

im not sure i see the difference here

[TeyonSchavari]

I want to cry :'(

[White Cornerback]

im not sure i see the difference here

"a while ago, we received a complaint of Buttersquach tampering a player under contract with the San Jose Sabercats. After reviewing the various evidence, we have come to the conclusion that Buttersquach did try to convince a player under contract to join the New Orleans Second Line. The conversation was initialized by the player, but Buttersquach clearly continued it and added new talking points with the purpose of persuading the player in question to join the Second Line. For this reason, we have decided to punish Buttersquach with the following:"

VS

"We recently received a complaint regarding user Buttersquanch tampering a player currently under contract (With who/what team). After reviewing the evidence, the Head Office voted unanimously (5-0) that Buttersquanch did, in fact, try to convince a player to request a trade (to Austin, I'm guessing). Buttersquanch heavily suggested that his team would be interested, going so far as to tell that player that he would even mention it to his GM. For this reason, we have levied the following punishment toward Buttersquanch:"

SIGH

We know in Sec 1. What team the player is on. In Sec 2 we don't know. We don't have the context.

EDIT: I mean I can tell already who the player is, what team he's on and who's the dude that reported it but I think it might be royally unjust to not have it in the post.

[slothfacekilla]

[Dylandeluxe]