Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Scootz

Ban appeal Holo (Wizard Nani-Sore) and dSONICb

6 posts in this topic

Wizard Nani-Sore

http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198076235159

STEAM_0:1:57984715

 

and

 

dSONICb

STEAM_0:1:50593461
 
We're PERMABANNED for the following: 
 
Harassment of other players, Spamming chat, Ignoring administration. Trolling.
 
But where's the proof? Naturally if a situation like this comes up there would be at least some evidence right? From what I am told by the source of the quote on quote "problem" they said stuff like: "ILoveBleach" which in it's right mind isn't even bad, and I was also told that they left before administration came on. So Videogames (the administrator who banned them) had no proof of what they did thus they shouldn't be permabanned for such a ridiculous reason.
Edited by General Scootz
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was informed of antagonization of another player in the server to the point where that player left the server. They proceeded to ignore warnings from Gimpy to stop their behavior.

The three acted as a group, praising each other for making another player leave, and (joking or not need not matter) insisted that the person who started the bullying should be an Admin.

Upon joining the server, chatlog from Gimpy indicates they attempted to demean my stature in the community as well. This is thoroughly supported that once I loaded in and pointed them out, they were quick to disconnect without another word.

To give context, they were calling a female player a kid, praising cancer, and trying to mock staff.

 

 

If they left before I got on, then they lied right to your face, as once I called out SONIC, both him and Wizard disconnected. I rest my case on that alone as they fled my investigation rather than defending themselves.

 

 

Copied directly from my Admin Note on their bans. The player's name will be given on private request to prevent further inappropriate behavior.

Evidence was collected from Gimpytron and Helen.

 

They can file their own appeals. Until they do so, I will not adjust the ban without Simple or Raini's approval. Being known-regulars to the server does not excuse this behavior as they know the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This reads as a matter of circumstance. We cannot take your word that the circumstances were all in favor of a necessary perma-ban. It'd be more understandable for just a ban, but when you remove a member of the community we need proof.

 

Also, "Upon joining the server, chatlog from Gimpy indicates they attempted to demean my stature in the community as well. This is thoroughly supported that once I loaded in and pointed them out, they were quick to disconnect without another word."  These two things don't add to the ban reason. If they had an issue with you then bringing it up would have had the same amount of ban regardless. You have to give details as to what the 'demeaning' is, or else we don't know if they just said that "X is a bad admin", or "x is ~explicit~ and he can come get me, and he does ~explicit lies~" and such. Only the second one is reasonable as a demeaning to your 'stature', and only because it includes lies that others would believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the reason people were admins was because they were considered to be trusted people in the community. His word should be enough as an admin. I was there when it went down, I can confirm that all of this did happen, even though my word doesn't mean much.

 

In my personal opinion, I do think the bans were justified, but I perma-ban just seems a bit harsh. Yes what they said was wrong and hurtful, even if they were just joking around, but I personally would have given a month ban at max. Then again, my opinion means nothing since I have no powers whatsoever. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After a review of the console log by Simple, enough evidence has been found to support the bans against all 3 players who were deemed in the wrong for this situation.

 

For clarity's sake, as I told Simple (and the banned) the Permanent was a placeholder to ensure this would turn into an appeal. It MUST be clarified in a situation where someone felt that greatly offended. It was not meant to stay permanent; it was meant to encourage an appeal.

 

 

Being the lesser contributors to the argument: SONIC and Wizard have had a reduction in their bans. Locking.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0