Warning Dispute (Blackdown)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Messages
494
Reaction score
354
Points
470
Location
The garden
Punishment Type: Warning
Appeal Type: Dispute
Which staff member issued the punishment?: Blackdown
How long were you banned/blacklisted for?: Not Applicable

Your Steam Name: 3izu
Your Roleplay Name: Carlo Montanari
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:1:56013197

Why were you banned/blacklisted?: 2.5 - User killed someone because they ran into another car, believing they were trying to kill their friend. However, it was clear that the user had simply driven too fast around a corner causing the accident in the first place.

Why should this appeal be considered?: Sorle was never killed by me, however, I shot up his car. Sorle was called out from the slums raid, you can see in the video that I was in the car being given this information that Sorle participated in this raid. I then gave this information to my organization, we went around looking for them. From the information we were given, Sorle participated and this made him KOS, regardless of him going full speed or not. He was going to be killed at the end of the day because of the information we were given.

You can see in the video that I only shot at his car, Edisom killed him as he was acting on the information given to him.


It would be unfair that I would be warned for something I haven't done. We were also told that this Action Request would be closed on December 29th where no one received punishment and somehow that decision was changed 13 days later.

Additional Information: https://gyazo.com/c0081aef9e85b2a0d1bdbf19afe8af2f
 
Messages
2,649
Reaction score
6,128
Points
1,055
Location
Leeds
The shooting of the vehicle is still inherently in direct breach of 2.5 as it is done with intent to eject & kill quite evidently, as there was no individual placements of bullets and it was in an erratic spray, further supporting the warning. Regardless of intent, the shooting of the vehicle is a breach of 2.5 & Edisom was not at fault for miscommunications presented to him.
 
Messages
494
Reaction score
354
Points
470
Location
The garden
  • Thread starter
  • Staff
  • #3
The shooting of the vehicle is still inherently in direct breach of 2.5 as it is done with intent to eject & kill quite evidently, as there was no individual placements of bullets and it was in an erratic spray, further supporting the warning. Regardless of intent, the shooting of the vehicle is a breach of 2.5 & Edisom was not at fault for miscommunications presented to him.
Regardless, I realized my mistake that you're KOS even if you didn't go full speed. You would still be killed because you were called out at Slums.
Me receiving info on the situation marking you as a target:
 
Messages
2,649
Reaction score
6,128
Points
1,055
Location
Leeds
Regardless, I realized my mistake that you're KOS even if you didn't go full speed. You would still be killed because you were called out at Slums.
Me receiving info on the situation marking you as a target:
Was still an invalid KOS regardless of what was stated in the AR, as they claimed I entered the building however I did not. Being in the vicinity is all that can be deduced from that video therefore the KOS is invalid. This is not what you were acting upon.
 
Messages
1,002
Reaction score
2,030
Points
755
Location
North of Ireland



After reviewing all the evidence provided in both the dispute and the AR, we have decided to deny this dispute.
Firstly, you had said in the AR that your reasoning for shooting out the raptor was because he attempted to run Edisom over but never mentioned Sorle being KOS in your reasoning. “Edisom killed him as he was acting on the information given to him” is what you said in the dispute however, you said this in the AR, “You weren't going to be killed until you drove on the wrong side of the road and from what it looked like tried to run over Luca, from there on you were mag dumped” which indicates to us that you are contradicting yourself. At the time he had hit into the car there was a very slim chance you would have realised that it was the person that was KOS and the justification for you doing so was flawed. However, the wording of the warning will be reworded as such:
2.5 - User wrecked another players car, believing it was attempting to kill their friend but it was evident that the player had taken the corner too fast and was just an accident.
Reviewed with @A1L
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top