Action Request On MidoTheCigar

[Mathias]

Your Steam/In-game Name: MatStar | Matt Arjama | @MatStar

His/Her Steam/In-game Name: MidoTheCigar | Imed (something) | @MidoTheCigar

His/Her SteamID: STEAM_0:0:85304339

Why Should This Player Be Punished:
Player forgot to deal with a CCTV camera during a kidnapping.

He also pulled his gun out for a NPC to see and didn't deal with the NPC before later hand. Even though you did deal with the NPC, you gave him more than enough time to contact the authorities, therefor risking your own life.

Smudger couldn't seem to find any sort of /me record of Mido actually disabling the camera. If you did shoot the camera Mido, we all would prefer you posting your POV of the car park.



Evidence (Demo Required): http://demo.ovh.eu/en/29a122304342cb628b94ab399eaf4b6f/
Tick: 19000

YouTube Video for all the people that wants to comment on this:
(Rendering)

@Smudger

 

[MidoTheCigar]

I dealt with the NPC and yea I forgot to deal with the camera, I am sorry I forgot about it, I was in a rush.

 

[Mikey]

Hey MatStar thanks for the AR!

The video shows us that he was holding a pistol in his hands, and the NPC, which is facing towards the entrance of Fredy's had enough time to panic, call 911 or any other way to inform the authorities.

This also means that if the NPC did indeed call the authorities and the police responded to the call they would have most likely shot the person, i believe that the person did not have any reason to swing around with his pistol, if he was getting chased by the police for example he shouldn't stand in front of a NPC which would inform the police. if he was getting chased he should hide.

Therefore he broke rule:

6.3 NPCs- When role-playing within the vicinity of NPCs (Non-Player Characters, for example, the NPC that resides within Fredy’s Bakery, the City Hall, etc.), NPCs must be treated as regular players, where possible; for example, if a player has used just committed a serious crime in the suburbs within the vicinity of the storage NPC they must threaten and/or take the NPC into consideration. Another specific example is if a player is involved in a bank robbery and is visiting the hospital to receive treatment from the NPC the aforementioned player should ensure his and the NPC’s lives are not in immediate danger.

3.4 Putting your Life at Risk - Players must at all times act realistically, meaning that any actions taken that may put a player’s In-Character life, freedom from imprisonment and/or general wellbeing at risk must be done so in a realistic fashion, for realistically good/beneficial reasons and in such a way that can be justified as reasonable.

If MidoTheCigar has anything to add, please let me know!

 

[jay_]

Alright, So he admitted to not disabling the CCTV and killed the NPC Way too late. In that time the NPC Could of called the cops and he would of been shot or arrested. Not killing the NPC until the last minuet is a breach of

6.3 NPCs- When role-playing within the vicinity of NPCs (Non-Player Characters, for example, the NPC that resides within Fredy’s Bakery, the City Hall, etc.), NPCs must be treated as regular players, where possible; for example, if a player has used just committed a serious crime in the suburbs within the vicinity of the storage NPC they must threaten and/or take the NPC into consideration. Another specific example is if a player is involved in a bank robbery and is visiting the hospital to receive treatment from the NPC the aforementioned player should ensure his and the NPC’s lives are not in immediate danger.
And Also 3.4

Not disabling the CCTV Camera would be putting his life at risk. The CCTV Monitor would of seen him do all these things and have a clear shot on his face. With that information the user would of been warranted and tracked down by police. Also police and Swat would of arrived on Scene if there was a Dispatcher. A Breach of

3.4 Putting your Life at Risk - Players must at all times act realistically, meaning that any actions taken that may put a player’s In-Character life, freedom from imprisonment and/or general well being at risk must be done so in a realistic fashion, for realistically good/beneficial reasons and in such a way that can be justified as reasonable.

 

[Thomas DeSimone]

He broke the rules, but it was a mistake and he's being a good sport about it, I think just a warning will do.

 

[DilanTheSkrub]

Matt, we are sorry for the rules we have broken. It was early in the morning, and we weren't thinking properly. It was a rookie mistake which everyone will make once in a while, and we hope you forgive us for what we did. You are a kind person and a respected member of the community, so I think that you, being you, will have the heart to forgive us.

 

[Ash]

Accepted,

MidoTheCigar, has received a warning for 6.3 and 3.4. In addition, the user also received a PM ensuring that the user understands the rules broken completely.