I believe that flags are transitive. If you don't like it or agree with it, don't flag to me, it's simple.
If you don't know what I mean by transitive flags, read from monte's excellent discussion, pasted below for your convenience:
in my experience there is a community of dicers who strongly believe that flags are transitive, i.e. if a flags to b, and b flags to c, then a is implicitly flagged to c. however, there is also a significantly-sized community who believes the opposite, that in this scenario, a is allowed to fight c for 1st/3rd, while b sits still for 2nd.
if you are player a:
if you fall into camp 1, your best finish is a high dom 3rd.
if you fall into camp 2, you beg player b to sit still, because, hey, you dont want his 2nd place, and you will fight for 1st/3rd with player c.
if you are player b:
camp 1: you inform player a that he is implicitly flagging 3rd. basically, it is your role to defend the person you flagged to. because if he starts to die, it is your duty and honor to flag out before him. so if player c dies, you get 3rd, and he gets 2nd. so you must fight for him if anyone tries to kill him, even if that potential killer has flagged to you already and is currently begging you to sit still for an unchallenged 2nd.
camp 2: you sit still for an unchallenged 2nd.
player c:
camp 1: as soon as you see someone offer a flag to player b, you (smartassedly) say, "thank you player a, i accept that flag." when player a is dumbfounded, because he didnt flag to you, you explain the transitive property, and inform him that you will demand that player b help you kill player a if player a decides to try to attack you.
camp 2: honest this hardly ever happens that someone in 1st will volunteer to join a 1/3 fight, because there is little to nothing to gain. the only time ive seen this happen is when its obvious that player c has a huge advantage, and he will gain more points from dom by engaging in a 1/3 fight which he is 99% sure to win.
