Ban Dispute (Megasaw)

[RoosterJack]

Punishment Type: Ban
Punishment Subtype: Server Ban
Appeal Type: Dispute[Evidence]
Which staff member issued the punishment?: @Megasaw
How long were you banned/blacklisted for?: 5 Days

Your Steam Name: RoosterJack
Your Roleplay Name: Jack Araw
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:1:124418552

Why were you punished?: 2.5, 3.4 - User shot a player unconscious without a valid reason in front of a police officer, causing the user to get detained. The user then shot and killed the same player after the player got revived, claiming they had valid reasoning when they did not, again breaking 2.5.

Why should this appeal be considered?: The reason for punishment, and the reasons stated in the punishment, are valid and correct, if not for a few stipulations;

2.5: "The user then shot and killed the same player after the player got revived, claiming they had valid reasoning when they did not, again breaking 2.5"
The excessive negativity, the reason stated for killing the player (Mason Helms) twice without reason, did have a reason for the second time which was substantial enough, that I felt it necessary to continue.
Disregarding my own personal vitriol toward the person killed, I actively searched out the scrutiny and opinion of a Community Manager for their opinion on the situation, which were explained as thoroughly as one can amidst assuming they have a KOS threat against them (surprisingly in-depth)
The decision was not made without input from a higher staff member, whose input steered the direction of such actions. This was to ensure the action carried through did not break any rules, but according to the admin creating the punishment, this was also invalid, as KOS on yourself does not result in your having KOS on the other person.
This rule stipulation, personally, makes no sense at all, and seems daft especially when the person who has KOS on you is known for retaliating with KOS, and would also personally concern 3.4 if you simply disregarded that fact and continued, therefore putting your life at risk by ignoring the potential KOS on yourself.

3.4: "User shot a player unconscious... in front of a police officer"
Watching the clip provided, and considering the amount of time the police officer takes to catch up despite myself getting caught on every single possible thing in bazaar, I did not kill the player "in front of a police officer." This wording makes it out that I have done it directly in front of an officer, when in fact I actively avoided this as shown by distracting the officer, and also could not be possible considering the officer was not able to catch up until I had already stopped inside my bazaar shop.

Punishment Length:
In direct messages with the staff member, the staff member actively acknowledges the lack of warnings and bans, and generally clean history concerning 2.5 and 3.4 for the extent of up to 7 months for each charge, despite active play.
The admin then disregards this, and uses my own playtime as a reason to extend the ban beyond a warning ("a warning wouldn't be appropriate considering your playtime"), to a full 5 days ban.
This, considering the admin themself acknowledges a clean history, seems like a large step between a warning and a ban, and to myself seems excessive.

Punishment Management:
Also concerning how the report was dealt with, the report was brought up over 2 hours after the incident itself, where the admin tried and failed to request the right player for a demo request.
They requested the wrong Jack for a demo, and then asked me to get back in game, creating an inconvenience for myself as I had already gotten off the game for the night.
The admin also supplied false information in the report, blaming another player involved for the action of 2.5.
This resulted in me correcting him on his mistake, which he then took as his own material to strengthen the punishment, to disregard as a connected incident, and actively dismiss error carried through. This resulted in a higher punishment as it was treated as two seperate incidents, whereas one incident would simply not have happened if the first incident did not happen.
These were connected incidents, which were acknowledged by the admin as simply "we don't really do an 'error carried forward' since it's a disregards of the rules twice".

I'm not asking the ban to be completely removed, as that would be quite drastic.
As according to the admin, the punishments extends beyond a simple warning in their scrutiny, which I can deal with, but I feel as though 5 days ban for considering a user's playtime is extremely excessive, and a large jump.
All I ask is some reduction in the punishment, as I feel it is excessive.

 

[Acerius]

We will assume that you are contesting the validity of the ban and not just the ban length, in which case your dispute is denied. If you wish to have the length reviewed independently you must create a Staff Complaint as this is not dealt with via a Dispute.

Let us break this down and look at the first scenario:
Mason and Tage have a somewhat mediocre fist fight which is quickly dispelled by a police officer. Both players did do some damage but not to the extent where either of them would have been severely injured or near death. Once the police officer begins walking away, it is quite clear that Tage seems relatively content that his life is not at risk. Mason also stands in a corner away from Tage, not showing any further aggression. You then proceed to turn around without any prompt or request form Tage whatsoever - when there is no further aggression or other indication that anyone is being threatened or has their life in danger - and shoot Mason. Let us look at the ban components:

• 2.5 - the reason that this situation warrants 2.5 is that your escalation in shooting Mason and killing him is unjustified. Firstly, because the fist fight caused little injury and gave no indication that Tage's life was at risk, and secondly because after the first fight Tage showed no clear desire to have Mason killed nor indicate that he felt that his life was in danger.
• 3.4 - the reason that this situation warrants 3.4 is that you did this crime very near to the Bazaar Walkway whereby the officer who had just walked off would have seen and heard you commit the crime, which they evidently did as you were swiftly detained. You should not be committing violent or serious crimes in direct eyeshot of police officers. It is clear that this would have been avoided and - likely the 2.5 element - as had you of thought about the situation for a bit longer or even spoke to Tage, you would've likely come to the conclusion not to kill Mason.

Given that you did not have sufficient reason to kill him the first time, you did not have sufficient reason to kill him the second time. This already classes it as 2.5. However, let us look at the second scenario in the imaginary world where it might have been okay:
Mason is revived as you failed to commit to finishing off the job you had set out to do. You and Mason see each other on multiple occasions throughout while you were detained. Mason makes no attempt to point you out to the police officers on-scene as the person who killed him. When you are freed following intervention from other players, you and Mason also continue seeing each other, and Mason shows no aggression or threatening behaviour towards you whatsoever. Let us look at the 2.5 element for this scenario - there are two main points:

1. Trying to kill someone again almost immediately because you failed to finish the job is in of itself not a valid reason to do what you did.
2. In order for the second killing to have been valid in any scenario, Mason must have demonstrated a clear desire to kill you. This could have been verbally - either to yourself directly or overhead with others - or through actions, such as going to go retrieve a gun and then following you around, eventually gunpointing you.

We also add that you spoke to a Helper at the Bazaar who actually advised you of the above and said it was highly unlikely that you have a reason to go and kill Mason. Just because Tage spoke of a scenario where for him it was permitted does not mean it is okay for yourself as every situation has nuances and differences. You should be consulting a member of staff - preferably the moderation/administration team - and not just ordinary players when it comes to the rules.

The points you raise regarding 'punishment length' and 'punishment management' as you describe it is not a matter for a dispute as mentioned at the beginning. In future, please read the stickied Appealing a Punishment - Information thread before lodging an appeal.

Reviewed with @Collier