- Messages
- 17
- Reaction score
- 7
- Points
- 110
Punishment Type: Ban
Punishment Subtype: Server Ban
Appeal Type: Dispute[Evidence]
Which staff member issued the punishment?: @Nazeer
How long were you banned/blacklisted for?: 6 Months
Your Steam Name: Ava Black
Your Roleplay Name: Ava Black
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:0:563183914
Why were you punished?: 1.6, 3.2
Why should this appeal be considered?: So, roughly 3 months ago, my friends in my Organization and I thought it would be a good idea to discuss a situation, when hearing our friend was 10, i told him to use Common fucking knowledge, and say 10 so we could act without metagaming - Admittedly he acted on those words, which was META, and gave an unfair advantage to us, so me and my bois did not raid PD, because we aint dumb.
2ish days later, Nazeer messages all of us with "Hey, Y'all metagamed, John is a fuckin snitch" and we all get banned, Now the part i am appealing today, is the 1.6, regardless of it not being mentioned in my ban reason, it's very much mentioned in the Image provided as evidence, and presumably is why i got 6 months, May i state for the record - Nobody had metagamed before then, and there was no evidence of us metagaming beforehand, and in my case, at least, I didn't know it was metagaming, because neither of us acted on it, and I read 3.2 and thought it was fine (it was 6.2). So i never lied to him.
He takes me not having read the rule properly, as Not complying, when if i didn't comply, i wouldn't have offered any evidence, he declined all of it, and gets us all banned.
I complied, my friends complied, and he states we didn't.
3.2 was fair. I wouldn't dispute that, but the Length that 1.6 added means i have to wait double, for my friend asking whether he should say 10, and then he, the instigator of the 3.2 gets us banned, and gets himself a 2 month slap on the wrist.
Additional Information: John Qick took things grossly out of context and got us banned for it, for not reporting something we didn't think was meta, If we thought it was, we'd not've done it. I get negligence isn't a valid unban reason, or dispute reason, but the above should be.
Punishment Subtype: Server Ban
Appeal Type: Dispute[Evidence]
Which staff member issued the punishment?: @Nazeer
How long were you banned/blacklisted for?: 6 Months
Your Steam Name: Ava Black
Your Roleplay Name: Ava Black
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:0:563183914
Why were you punished?: 1.6, 3.2
Why should this appeal be considered?: So, roughly 3 months ago, my friends in my Organization and I thought it would be a good idea to discuss a situation, when hearing our friend was 10, i told him to use Common fucking knowledge, and say 10 so we could act without metagaming - Admittedly he acted on those words, which was META, and gave an unfair advantage to us, so me and my bois did not raid PD, because we aint dumb.
2ish days later, Nazeer messages all of us with "Hey, Y'all metagamed, John is a fuckin snitch" and we all get banned, Now the part i am appealing today, is the 1.6, regardless of it not being mentioned in my ban reason, it's very much mentioned in the Image provided as evidence, and presumably is why i got 6 months, May i state for the record - Nobody had metagamed before then, and there was no evidence of us metagaming beforehand, and in my case, at least, I didn't know it was metagaming, because neither of us acted on it, and I read 3.2 and thought it was fine (it was 6.2). So i never lied to him.
He takes me not having read the rule properly, as Not complying, when if i didn't comply, i wouldn't have offered any evidence, he declined all of it, and gets us all banned.
I complied, my friends complied, and he states we didn't.
3.2 was fair. I wouldn't dispute that, but the Length that 1.6 added means i have to wait double, for my friend asking whether he should say 10, and then he, the instigator of the 3.2 gets us banned, and gets himself a 2 month slap on the wrist.
Additional Information: John Qick took things grossly out of context and got us banned for it, for not reporting something we didn't think was meta, If we thought it was, we'd not've done it. I get negligence isn't a valid unban reason, or dispute reason, but the above should be.
