@Madda appreciate the response, the ruling has become blurred due to the specific mentioning of "passive stance", I think it's incredibly unhealthy and unfair to players for rules like this to change at the discretion of a staff member. This in my opinion probably should have already been discussed, the wording suggests it was. If the ruling changed it should read:
3.4 Enforcement
Clarified that when being gun pointed and told not to move from behind you must listen to orders regardless of your weapons stance (passive/attack).
As a player I do not demand a say in each rule, I simply ask to be informed and updated to the actual rules that we have to abide by. The passive aggressive comments by other staff on this thread are a big yikes, the whole "just dispute it and stop whining" is a horrific take in such a circumstance.
Regardless, I thank you for the quick response @Madda - It's truly appreciated.
Just to say the entire thing about having your gun in active stance was apartently overruled when it was brought to his attention by a “certain” staff member.
This staff member who isn’t being named due to the fact it could be slanderous went over 2 senior administratiors heads and went straight to boli
He’s had IRL issues combined with an unfortunate work schedule , I’ve been communicating with him actively this week and keeping him updated on the good and bad. He will be returning next week.