Warning Dispute (Gamingpeach)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Points
145
Punishment Type: Warning
Appeal Type: Dispute[Evidence]
Which staff member issued the punishment?: @GamingPeach
How long were you banned/blacklisted for?: Not Applicable

Your Steam Name: 汤米·汤普森
Your Roleplay Name: Jonathan Laquise
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:1:30911476

Why were you punished?: 3.4 for supposedly countering a raid from a distance while cops were on scene, returning a moment later to continue to shoot another attacker while cops were on scene.

Why should this appeal be considered?: As shown in the clip, I approach Southgate and check the area, with no cops visible. I then shoot one of the raiders. When I spot a police van arriving, I leave to stay out of harm’s way. The clip clearly shows that no cops were on scene when I fired and that the raider I killed was not shooting at cops, contrary to Gamingpeach’s claim.

I return to the Bazaar, *store* the M82, buy food, and then decide to check whether the raid is still ongoing. I approach a cop and ask whether Southgate is still being raided. I receive no answer, and walk closer to see for myself.

As soon as I hear gunshots, I start running away, which is clearly visible in the clip. Contrary to Gamingpeach’s claim, I do not return to shoot at another player and I am actively trying to leave the area. While running away, I get shot and crippled. I then make my way back to the Bazaar and do not return to Southgate.

Additional Information: I’m not tooooo salty about the warning itself, more so bothered by Gamingpeach making up facts to justify the punishment. No cops were present when I killed the attacker, I never returned and shot at anyone, and I actively tried to get out of harm’s way.

The most questionable part is Gamingpeach’s claim that they’ve seen a video of me shooting a player who was actively shooting at a cop. I feel my clip clearly disproves that.

I’d like to see the clip they’re referring to:)
 
Last edited:


Although the reasoning provided for this punishment is not entirely correct, you did still break rule 3.4 by hanging around the shootout. You were right behind Officers actively engaging with the situation, ending up in you getting hit by a stray bullet. You were aware this raid was active yet you still decided to approach it, unarmed.

Your warning reason has been amended to be correct.
Reviewed by @jams @ThePeak and myself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top