Shoutbox Appeals

[Panda]

I have seen many shoutbox appeals being done and all of them being denied but then I see @John Daymon unbanning @Walker for a much bigger issue.

Here he unbans Walker.

 

[John Daymon]

These bans were discussed with the people that were in the bans off-side, for example the ban with @Riekelt was denied on the forums but we both came to the conclusion on steam that he should be unbanned. @Walker wasnt supposed to stay banned permanent, someone banned him after he was unbanned the first time. Also Walkers ban was spoken about within the staff team however it was sadly never dealt with, and I literally just wrote "Muppet ban" as the last ban was invalid.

 

[Belg Lmfao]

'having or showing an unfair tendency to believe that some people, ideas, etc., are better than others'
Origin of biased
1605-1615
[bahy-uh s]

pls dont ban

 

[John Daymon]

'having or showing an unfair tendency to believe that some people, ideas, etc., are better than others'
Origin of biased
1605-1615
[bahy-uh s]

pls dont ban

Lmao, read what I put and you will hopefully understand. Also you will be unbanned

 

[Walker]

Don't see your point, I got banned after I leaked who was getting enforcer, which is very small and imo I wouldn't even consider it rulebreaking, just mingy. People found out moments after, infact Moron had already denied a few apps.

Also can you explain why you were banned?

 

[Robin Ljungberg]

Just letting you know , its not really the same for everyone buddy, people have done different mistakes, and as Daymon said, they most likely got unbanned after a long discussion on Teamspeak about agreements etc, so everyone haven't done the same thing, some get permabanned and some don't so don't say that hes biased etc, hes just doing his job.

Sorry for spelling mistakes lol, I'm on the phone xD

 

[Panda]

The rule still states That you have no chance of appeal. So maybe you want to change the rule then. Also @Walker how is my ban relevant to this? I haven't made a shoutbox appeal and never will.

 

[John Daymon]

The rule still states That you have no chance of appeal. So maybe you want to change the rule then. Also @Walker how is my ban relevant to this? I haven't made a shoutbox appeal and never will.

The ban basically means that you cannot apologise for it which no one has directly done / the accepts have not been accepted as apologies for example @Walkers ban was accepted as a dispute after the discussion in the staff team as he should not even have been banned up to yesterday.

 

[Walker]

The rule still states That you have no chance of appeal. So maybe you want to change the rule then. Also @Walker how is my ban relevant to this? I haven't made a shoutbox appeal and never will.

Its relevant because you made a thread complaining about shoutbox bans all for different reasons. If someone recieves a ban for causing a argument etc, but minor things like my ban are not worth a perm shoutbox ban.


I made my appeal as it was mingy to do, but IMO didn't break rules.

 

[John Daymon]

Okay time for a real reply then, as some of you are not / have not been staff members.

First of all as I've already stated a lot of the things with ban appeals are dealt with off-side, basically off the forums, for example with some players bans (people who have reached a very high warning and ban count) we usually in the staff team try to get everyone within the staff teams opinion on this so what we do is create a thread in a hidden forum for enforcers+ and try to have a discussion there, when we feel like we've gathered enough information we try to close the discussion down and then deal with it further on the non-hidden forums. Now we also speak a lot about bans on teamspeak, which is prefered as there have been times where what we've said has been leaked with screenshots, me and @Walker know this lol There are also situations where we feel at one point a ban should be permanent but at a later state it should be either decreased or just completely an unban. This is exactly what I felt about Walkers ban, I got really mad at walker for posting these things and he knows it, however when he was unbanned the next day I couldn't care less honestly, it was enough for him he got his timeout however someone rebanned him and since then he stayed ban with no real explanation to him why, I tried to not take the discussion with him as I felt that he could make an appeal on the forums, he also contacted me on steam where I gave him childish replies and no full reply really which I'm sorry for and as far as I know @Walker knows this.


Now same thing happened with Riekelts ban however it wasn't discussed the same way with staff members, it was more of less just spoken about quickly and we said no, however after @Riekelt contacted me on steam a bit afterwards I decided to try to understand his point of view in an easier way, he agreed to it being stupid by him to post that "no muslims are normal" I then asked him to agree with me about some things which he did and thus he got unbanned. Obviously you wish to discuss the rule and it's more or less supposed to mean apologise. Let's head in to Belg's ban aswell as that also has to be discussed if you want to bring it in like this, Belg was banned as he kept on going after he was directly told to stop, he disputed his ban and I agreed to it being a bit excessive to ban him from the shoutbox instead of just deleting the message.

 

[Death Howl]

Here is the so called staff member bias well let me strike you down with some logic. Apologies not disputes they are totally different.

Upon signing up on the forums you agree to follow the rules so you are expected to know that apologies will not get accepted. If you got banned you should know what you did wrong and if you want to complain about it take it up with senior administration and stop calling the staff team bias.

I know staff members well and they know me but when I break a rule they still enforce the rules no matter what you did for them. I admit having reservations on the severity of this rule however I agree to following it. If you cannot follow the rules then there is the door.

 

[Panda]

I completely understand now thank you @John Daymon for explaining me. This post was not meant in a way to disrespect you in any way just a question that has been in my head for the last month.

 

[Liam]

To be honest I should be unbanned too then.. All I said was someone was a corrupt admin as a joke and because they didn't take it as one I got banned. To me that is unfair.