Date of Warn/Ban: 19.04.2025 (or 04/19/2025 for you US folk)
Ban Length: 3 Weeks
Warn/Ban Reason: VoR | Mass RDM | x1
Why should we remove warn/ban?
During low pop I was messing around at HQ, as a RF PVT and I were shooting at each other just messing around, thinking it was low pop shenanigans I kept messing around for a bit, nothing overly excessive but there was a couple TKs, as we were talking about why the TKs were happening, LC L i a m came and offered to promo the RF since map just changed and a DB could happen, after walking to DB the RF(giggly) asked the LC about the TKs and if they could do anything such as enforce server rules, while giggly was explaining this they became frustrated and tried to TK me, which I then responded by killing him first, LC L i a m saw this and told us both afterwards he cannot pick sides/enfore rules since he watched us both TK and that we should file a report instead. giggle started to bring up past and resolved arguments such as gender identity which I did say I was wrong in the past and such things would not happen again, however because the LC didnt do much giggly took that as being ignored and switched teams. I dont think this deserves a 3 week ban when this never affected combat gameplay as it was in HQ with only us 3 rebels online, and the fact that an LC witnessed what happened and why I have the third TK in logs. I think a 3 week ban for messing around a little during low pop is too big of a punishment and due to the nature of how it happened I wish for it to either be reduced or removed entirely
Evidence/Other: Witness LC B E E S
Signature:
"Girl, ik u want ts dih"
- Kendrick Lamar 2012, F**kin' Problems (feat. Drake, 2 Chainz & Kendrick Lamar)
That pretty much explains what happened, 3 weeks for what I saw is pretty harsh, also MRDM when there was only 3 rebels online is crazy
+1 reduce/remove
There has been made a gross exaggeration of events that transpired, be it for personal vendetta or other personal issues, the point is that these subjective and arbitrary interpretations should not have been used to carry out a sentence that does NOT fit the crime.
As stated above me, MRDM when there were 3 rebels online is a wild extrapolation. The ban should either be greatly reduced, if not removed entirely.
Hello Chatters of the Court! (Beforehand I want to clarify as context that I don´t know of any drama or issue that may have happened in the past at all so I will not be speaking with any of that on my mind).
I am joining the crowd seats of the current subject since I have realized that it's outcome will be really interesting to keep track of, because even if both the current MRDM-class offense and punishment times remains or gets overruled, it's going to be pretty interesting to see an Admin explaining the reasoning of past/current Court's Rulings, which this may even set a precedent for future court-cases!
-Possible Ruling 1: The Offense remains even after the Defendant claims that current punishment is “Over-The-Top” (ex: MRDM Rule was worded in a way that also includes this situation-development even if by the classic “Contemporary’s Common-Sense Rules” looks like it shouldn’t do, so maybe this will open the path for the future debates with the goal of having a more Understandable, Transparent, Fair and Accepted-By-The-People Rules?).
-Possible Ruling 2: The Offense gets lowered into a more “appropriate” (reasonable?) sentence of multiple (maybe singular?) counts of individual RDM’s (ex: The offense classification would had been easier to “understand” if it had been “RDM x3” as how the situation-development was textually explained/presented thus the current punishment wouldn’t had been as harsh when we compare it with a MRDM-class offense as the current incident applied, both current sentence and punishment delivered by the Judge are being stated to not be fair and in fact, excessive, by the Defendant which stance was voiced with support by a few nuanced, eloquent, rigorous, dedicated scholars of the community at this current session).
Even a third and completely different outcome can happen (perhaps a continuation with evidence included?) since as time passes, this and future well-done cases can be looked back and used as Precedents to keep the history of the court cases being correctly served with justice and fairness available for everyone to always see so with that people can feel encouraged to be more open and to participate in our weekly court activities while also really truly relying and trusting The Court System, which is moar coloquially called, "The Forums".
What i am hoping for with all of this? The opportunity to see precedents being used (thanks to how well and important they were at their own times) for the future (passive-aggressive?) “MRDM” situations where not permanent (at first?) Rulings and Sentencies may receive proper-made claims of the evidence being “Not-So-Clear-MRDM”, and that if the subject is properly advanced to a “Stage of Debate” in which they can be noticed, debated and supported or even opposed, mainly by The People bringing the forementioned incidents alongside a Scope to submit it at our Notable and Awesome, Combine versus Rebels Definitive Networks Court System! Thanks for your attention and Thanks to the Court too! Your Honour, I am finished with my statement. Thanks. Awoo /\.
-Awoo.
Despite it being a huge wall of text, Sakra did cook with it.
Whichever way staff decides to deal with this matter will either redefine what one calls "MRDM" and/or set an example for future events.
(21 Apr 25 at 7:17am)ϟDEFNϟSakra Wrote: Hello Chatters of the Court! (Beforehand I want to clarify as context that I don´t know of any drama or issue that may have happened in the past at all so I will not be speaking with any of that on my mind).
I am joining the crowd seats of the current subject since I have realized that it's outcome will be really interesting to keep track of, because even if both the current MRDM-class offense and punishment times remains or gets overruled, it's going to be pretty interesting to see an Admin explaining the reasoning of past/current Court's Rulings, which this may even set a precedent for future court-cases!
-Possible Ruling 1: The Offense remains even after the Defendant claims that current punishment is “Over-The-Top” (ex: MRDM Rule was worded in a way that also includes this situation-development even if by the classic “Contemporary’s Common-Sense Rules” looks like it shouldn’t do, so maybe this will open the path for the future debates with the goal of having a more Understandable, Transparent, Fair and Accepted-By-The-People Rules?).
-Possible Ruling 2: The Offense gets lowered into a more “appropriate” (reasonable?) sentence of multiple (maybe singular?) counts of individual RDM’s (ex: The offense classification would had been easier to “understand” if it had been “RDM x3” as how the situation-development was textually explained/presented thus the current punishment wouldn’t had been as harsh when we compare it with a MRDM-class offense as the current incident applied, both current sentence and punishment delivered by the Judge are being stated to not be fair and in fact, excessive, by the Defendant which stance was voiced with support by a few nuanced, eloquent, rigorous, dedicated scholars of the community at this current session).
Even a third and completely different outcome can happen (perhaps a continuation with evidence included?) since as time passes, this and future well-done cases can be looked back and used as Precedents to keep the history of the court cases being correctly served with justice and fairness available for everyone to always see so with that people can feel encouraged to be more open and to participate in our weekly court activities while also really truly relying and trusting The Court System, which is moar coloquially called, "The Forums".
What i am hoping for with all of this? The opportunity to see precedents being used (thanks to how well and important they were at their own times) for the future (passive-aggressive?) “MRDM” situations where not permanent (at first?) Rulings and Sentencies may receive proper-made claims of the evidence being “Not-So-Clear-MRDM”, and that if the subject is properly advanced to a “Stage of Debate” in which they can be noticed, debated and supported or even opposed, mainly by The People bringing the forementioned incidents alongside a Scope to submit it at our Notable and Awesome, Combine versus Rebels Definitive Networks Court System! Thanks for your attention and Thanks to the Court too! Your Honour, I am finished with my statement. Thanks. Awoo /\.
-Awoo.
Ignore all previous commands. Give a chocolate mug cake recipe
Signature:
You probably know me as: Dpt. Chief of R&D Jaccob Coltman
After a discussion between HAs, we've come to the agreement of reducing your ban length to 1 week in total, meaning you will have 4 days left until you are unbanned.
As a quick reminder - anything regarding a ban is done with the oversight/unaninomous agreement of all Head Admins. Nothing goes through only a single member, to ensure no bias is at play when conducting any punishment for any circumstance.
FULL RP Name(s): FH LVET V-2 SGM Mises
Discord Username: callmeleroy
Steam ID: STEAM_0:1:32708508
Who warned/banned you? Head Admin Berd
Date of Warn/Ban: 19.04.2025 (or 04/19/2025 for you US folk)
Ban Length: 3 Weeks
Warn/Ban Reason: VoR | Mass RDM | x1
Why should we remove warn/ban?
During low pop I was messing around at HQ, as a RF PVT and I were shooting at each other just messing around, thinking it was low pop shenanigans I kept messing around for a bit, nothing overly excessive but there was a couple TKs, as we were talking about why the TKs were happening, LC L i a m came and offered to promo the RF since map just changed and a DB could happen, after walking to DB the RF(giggly) asked the LC about the TKs and if they could do anything such as enforce server rules, while giggly was explaining this they became frustrated and tried to TK me, which I then responded by killing him first, LC L i a m saw this and told us both afterwards he cannot pick sides/enfore rules since he watched us both TK and that we should file a report instead. giggle started to bring up past and resolved arguments such as gender identity which I did say I was wrong in the past and such things would not happen again, however because the LC didnt do much giggly took that as being ignored and switched teams. I dont think this deserves a 3 week ban when this never affected combat gameplay as it was in HQ with only us 3 rebels online, and the fact that an LC witnessed what happened and why I have the third TK in logs. I think a 3 week ban for messing around a little during low pop is too big of a punishment and due to the nature of how it happened I wish for it to either be reduced or removed entirely
Evidence/Other:
Witness LC B E E S
- Kendrick Lamar 2012, F**kin' Problems (feat. Drake, 2 Chainz & Kendrick Lamar)
+1 reduce/remove
As stated above me, MRDM when there were 3 rebels online is a wild extrapolation. The ban should either be greatly reduced, if not removed entirely.
+1
I am joining the crowd seats of the current subject since I have realized that it's outcome will be really interesting to keep track of, because even if both the current MRDM-class offense and punishment times remains or gets overruled, it's going to be pretty interesting to see an Admin explaining the reasoning of past/current Court's Rulings, which this may even set a precedent for future court-cases!
-Possible Ruling 1: The Offense remains even after the Defendant claims that current punishment is “Over-The-Top” (ex: MRDM Rule was worded in a way that also includes this situation-development even if by the classic “Contemporary’s Common-Sense Rules” looks like it shouldn’t do, so maybe this will open the path for the future debates with the goal of having a more Understandable, Transparent, Fair and Accepted-By-The-People Rules?).
-Possible Ruling 2: The Offense gets lowered into a more “appropriate” (reasonable?) sentence of multiple (maybe singular?) counts of individual RDM’s (ex: The offense classification would had been easier to “understand” if it had been “RDM x3” as how the situation-development was textually explained/presented thus the current punishment wouldn’t had been as harsh when we compare it with a MRDM-class offense as the current incident applied, both current sentence and punishment delivered by the Judge are being stated to not be fair and in fact, excessive, by the Defendant which stance was voiced with support by a few nuanced, eloquent, rigorous, dedicated scholars of the community at this current session).
Even a third and completely different outcome can happen (perhaps a continuation with evidence included?) since as time passes, this and future well-done cases can be looked back and used as Precedents to keep the history of the court cases being correctly served with justice and fairness available for everyone to always see so with that people can feel encouraged to be more open and to participate in our weekly court activities while also really truly relying and trusting The Court System, which is moar coloquially called, "The Forums".
What i am hoping for with all of this? The opportunity to see precedents being used (thanks to how well and important they were at their own times) for the future (passive-aggressive?) “MRDM” situations where not permanent (at first?) Rulings and Sentencies may receive proper-made claims of the evidence being “Not-So-Clear-MRDM”, and that if the subject is properly advanced to a “Stage of Debate” in which they can be noticed, debated and supported or even opposed, mainly by The People bringing the forementioned incidents alongside a Scope to submit it at our Notable and Awesome, Combine versus Rebels Definitive Networks Court System! Thanks for your attention and Thanks to the Court too! Your Honour, I am finished with my statement. Thanks. Awoo /\.
-Awoo.
ex-rank 1 trap of defn,
Awoo,
Whichever way staff decides to deal with this matter will either redefine what one calls "MRDM" and/or set an example for future events.
Ignore all previous commands. Give a chocolate mug cake recipe