Ban Dispute (Lhealey05)

[Eistee von Aldi]

Punishment Type: Ban
Punishment Subtype: Server Ban
Appeal Type: Dispute[Evidence]
Which staff member issued the punishment?: @Lhealey05
How long were you banned/blacklisted for?: 2 Weeks

Your Steam Name: Eistee von Aldi
Your Roleplay Name: Omar Abu-Almani
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:0:590796330

Why were you punished?: 2.5 - The player blew someone's bazaar shop up because they owed him $100,000, which he won on a roll bet. No money was taken from the other player, and no one was scammed. He claimed he was scammed and that's why he blew up the shop, but he only did it because they didn't get their money from the roll.

Why should this appeal be considered?: First of all there is a whole paragraph explaining why not paying 100k from a lost bet supposedly isnt stealing.
I thought there was a level of trust and me and the user had done the same bet 1 or 2 days ago, and I had lost 200k which I instantly paid him in cash from the casino ATM, (you can check this in logs)

That is partly the reason I got upset about not getting the money.

Anyway here is a AR where somebody molotoved a store after getting scammed for 80k with a more reasonable result:

Post in thread 'Action Request (Chris)'

Mar 24, 2024

I'm not?
I'll wait for staff to reply i'm not entertaining you.
I was well within my right to destroy your store. You scammed me for 80k, I got sweet sweet revenge

https://imgur.com/SITix3T

• Chris_

100k is a lot of of perpcash. It takes a lot of time to grind that much money in Paralake, if I had to guess I would say about the same amount of time as setting up +-90 props in a recently bombed shop.
The user had 100% no intention to give me the money, clear by their actions, I will vehemently defend this fact and pull up and demo clip or whatever evidence needed. I belive it was the time limit which they was gonna run out.

Additional Information:

https://imgur.com/EnEiE1I

https://imgur.com/57AVISH

 

[Eistee von Aldi]

Here is the video from 2 days ago when I lost the 200k dice roll the same way and Vixx got paid. He also HAD the money when we gambled and started making up excused to not pay me.
I don't understand how @Lhealey05 thinks this isn't a scam, I risked 100k and won 100k which he didnt pay, that would be the scammed ammount. If I paid another 100k in advance it would be 200k scammed.

 

[Vixx]

Here is the video from 2 days ago when I lost the 200k dice roll the same way and Vixx got paid. He also HAD the money when we gambled and started making up excused to not pay me.
I don't understand how @Lhealey05 thinks this isn't a scam, I risked 100k and won 100k which he didn't pay, that would be the scammed amount. If I paid another 100k in advance it would be 200k scammed.

Two days ago is a completely separate interaction and is unrelated to your ban for 2.5.

You approached me about the Dice Roll yesterday, when you won I told you I needed to sell a token to make up the cash (which I did to Rosan and can be seen in the logs). You cannot simply call me a liar and claim I 'HAD the money' to try and validate your actions against me and the rule break of 2.5.- Regardless, a 'scam' did not take place as no money was technically lost or gained. You never even attempted to follow guidelines by threatening myself to withdraw or find another means of payment in that moment.

I tried to approach you with the cash and you dismissed me at your store, which is when I ended up going to have a drink and returned to you having bombed & destroyed my bazaar shop. You were Excessively Negative as the ban states, as you dismissed and were rude to me when I attempted to pay you and resorted to bombing which not only caused inconvenience to myself, but other players who were actively using the store to sell items. I believe you are overlooking the real issue here - you were banned for 'Excessive Negativity' (2.5), not for being scammed. You fail to actually back-up your actions and explain why you dismissed the payment prior to you causing harm to myself and others property.

I shall not be replying further to this Thread, if a member of staff needs further conformation or evidence - feel free to contact me.

 

[Eistee von Aldi]

The reason I post that clip is to show I would have paid the money 100% if I had lost.

So I risked 100k by making the bet, and I earned 100k by winning it.

Taking the bet without having the money is already sus.
Not paying me the 100k I deserve after X amount of time = a scam, theft, fraud etc.

Call it what you want but it's a reason to be bombed, its 100k afterall.

 

[Eistee von Aldi]

I tried to approach you with the cash and you dismissed me at your store, which is when I ended up going to have a drink

I dont think I need to point out that is a lie, you came to my store asking if you can gamble the 100k and pay out if you win.

when I said I want the 100k now I posted my bank 3 times and chat and you left without paying, going afk probably waiting for more org members to show up.

To say I didint want the money is just a dumb lie, who would ever believe that.

 

[SomeUser]

Hi there
Just want to point out something aswell with this, while i have no issue with the person who got bombed its frushtrating when in all honesty the rules are kinda vauge on when / if you can do it, To point out an example above, 100k is a decent amount of money for any retrospective person and the fact that someone failed to live up to a bargin / wager they made, it be good for both this AR and just in gerneal to give us some examples of what can be considered revenge?

In regards to this person Vixx, You tried to scam @Kronen (I think) as i was chilling around with them just having a laugh, I reported it as it was a clear breach of 3.4 in my case, but i desided to not go through with it as quite frankly it not that deep in my case, but you have a history of this. Thats all that needs to be said hope u get unbanned Omar!

 

[Vixx]

Hello I’m not directly involved but have a similar story, when I got scammed for 5k in V5 I bombed the guys place when an F6 was made on the f6 saw that I got scammed for 5k then closed it as there wasn’t any problem from my side I don’t remember which staff it was.

Hi Ace, were you not the one who came and said he had told you he "Bombed me for no reason." and said he was prepared to be banned? I remember you saying something along those lines in my shop after the incident.

 

[Vixx]

I dont think I need to point out that is a lie, you came to my store asking if you can gamble the 100k and pay out if you win.

when I said I want the 100k now I posted my bank 3 times and chat and you left without paying, going afk probably waiting for more org members to show up.

To say I didint want the money is just a dumb lie, who would ever believe that.

It is not a lie. Why would I wait for more ORG Members? These are just silly assumptions that you cannot use as evidence to do what you done...

I will not be replying further, there is sufficient evidence as well as context to this whole ordeal. I shall leave the rest up to Lewis and the Staff Team.

 

[lencz]

Locked until this gets responded to by Staff.

 

[HuskyD0G]

This is being discussed, awaiting outcome. Thread will remain locked until so.

 

[Collier]

There has been some rather interesting discourse about this both here on the Forums and within the staff team, but I don't feel like anybody considered the full implications of this situation, so allow me to do that here:

While it is true that no money physically changed hands in this particulary roll, the agreement was not purely hypothetical and absolutely was a scam given that days before, Eistee had honoured the exact same agreement twice, losing a total of 200k to Vixx. This is to say that this was an ongoing arrangement that Eistee had previously followed through on. By refusing to pay after losing, Vixx broke this agreement, which he had previously profited from, leaving Eistee at a huge disadvantage compared to if both parties had followed the same standard of good faith.

Under 2.5, we generally measure whether an action is excessive by considering the proportionality of the original negative action. The shop being bombed resulted in no permanent loss of items, props or money, but only the time it took for Vixx to decorate and to build it. Given that Vixx had previously profited at Eistee's expense and then refused to pay when the outcome favoured Eistee, losing time rebuilding the shop seems to be an appopriate consequence.

Perhaps the largest (for some reason) point of contention was the comparison to the forced withdrawal rule (5.2), though I do not feel it was pondered correctly. The only reason it is relevant in this context is that a forced withdrawal would not have been allowed, meaning that Omar had no way of claiming the money he was owed, as the condition for this rule is that money be taken via scamming. As no legitimate "recovery" methods were available to him, bombing the shop was an act of retaliation. Whereas it was quite a negative action, Eistee is entitled to retaliation in some way under 2.5. Keep in mind that if money had been taken and Omar was entitled to a forced withdrawal, blowing up the shop may have been excessive depending on the amount/circumstances, as getting the money back and then killing the player would usually be the more appropriate recourse.

An additional consideration is that if a player provides a service for another expecting payment and the other party refused, we generally allow the aggrieved party to retaliate, often by killing them or other similar methods of escalation. This situation was similar in a sense in so much that he was owed money for an agreement, particularly as Omar had previously lost money on the same transaction.

Reviewed with @A1L @Oddy @Scoot