TOPIC: Nameful's unban appeal

Name: Nameful

SteamID: STEAM_0:0:39936835

Admin's name: Xhantium

Reason: "Verbal extremism, telling people go to kill themself, appeal on forum"

Server: TeamSpeak 3

Time: 4 days

Story: I was talking with TiGz Harper in a totally friendly way, when suddenly a drama queen came into the room and recorded me saying "kill yourself" in a totally unhurtful way and a few minutes later I was banned. Think of the situation if the drama queen didn't come in the room, the only people who would've heard me saying "kill yourself" would be me and TiGz. Who would get hurt? Nobody. So why make it such a big deal? I am asking you for a second chance and to lower my ban to 1 day. I seriously did not hurt anyone and I think that 6 days is too much for something like that. Let's be serious, I doubt any of you would get offended by such thing, you're just making a mountain out of a molehill.

Proof:

Extra information: I would like to ask ChuteUK to answer to my appeal, since Xhantium and Chris are lacking reasoning skills and hate me to that degree, they would not help me if I was about do die. If these two deny my app, they'll just prove that their community skills are not decent enough to be superadmins. (the other superadmins would deny this because they were asked to, or they wanna make me feel bad)

Nameful wrote: But how do you know? How can you that TiGz's would take it as a joke? Some people take things more serious then others do.

That being said this whole thing could be resolved easily by TiGz posting if he took as a joke or not.

Also you stated earlier that they let the "DramaQueen" get away with everything, if that was true then he wouldn't be banned as well.

He did much more than that, but I can't judge, because I lack evidence. I'm not a type of person that wants the entire community banned because of little things, so I rarely record anything, unless I really need to.
I know that TiGz took it as a joke because he's grown enough to not to even care about it. Let's wait for his answer though.

Now, i have no insight on what actually happened or how everyone felt about this, but i will say this, ANYONE telling someone that they should go kill themselves is NOT a laughing matter, what Xhantium did was correct, and if you ever tell someone regardless if it was a joke or not to kill themselves, your punishment will be a lot more severe, this is a slap on the wrist, compared to what i would of done if i was dealing with this situation myself, as i don't find anyones pain or death at all a laughing matter.

THINK BEFORE YOU SAY!

Beezy is right here, this should be lesson on future for you. Now just wait because i dont think so you will be unbanned for this ^^

If Xhantium banned you, then he should decide about this ban.

Regards,
Gregory TW!X

Like i said before, if Tigz would be offended by this (which i am pretty sure he is not) then he had to report it himself, Nameful and Tigz are good friends and they are joking around till there is no morning so i believe that it was a joke. Everyone has a different kind of humor, but like i said, if he found it offending then i am pretty sure that he would report Nameful himself.

And Matthew is pretty much right if you think about it : Who would be offended if a random Internet person says that someone should kill himself? I think that would be no one because the one who says that does barely know you.

There is 1 thing i am not sure about matthew.
The Superadmins are Neutral pretty much, so they can't really hate you and not help you if you die like you said. I agree that maybe some super admins like some people less and some people more but that's normal. If you think that you are hated by a superadmin just talk with him.

This is grade A enriched bullshit. I could make a bullshit bomb with this. I could use that bomb to blow up this bullshit thread. If TigZ found it offensive then he would have reported it himself. It is NO OTHER PERSONS' concern. Just the fact that the person who banned you didn't ask TigZ what he felt first just shows how trigger happy on the ban hammer they are (A hammer doesn't have a trigger but whatever.) I feel this whole appeal should rest on what TigZ feels about the situation. As far as I'm concerned whoever reported this did it in a malicious attempt to get Nameful banned. The biggest point here is that no communication has been made to the so called victim here. Everyone has a different sense of humor, but what was said in a seemingly private conversation (regardless of being in a public channel,) should stay in that conversation unless either recipient chooses to escalate matters.

Also, I feel you. I believe I used to be hated by a Super Admin as well, but let's not shovel more bullshit into the bullshit furnace to power the bullshit train to bullshitville.

Finally, not a reduction, you should get unbanned outright at this is an absolutely atrocious grounds for a ban.

If this was a joke, then you should've atleast be warned to not do it again, if you did get warned, and you did it again, I would find 4-6 days pretty harsh, a one day ban should teach him, and if he does it again longer.

I agree with Exro,
This is just childish, instead that the "witness" just asks TigZ if they are joking he's recording and sending it to an Admin. Everyone talks trash every day! If they want to talk like that with no one in a room then let them. I just get the feeling this witness guy just wants to get the staff banned. Even if his reputation gets corrupted by this. Well he does not care and just goes on with this. He's just ignoring every post and goes on like he did it like 3 times now. Well then do it, just so you know my oppinion : childish.

This is my 1st time being punished for breaking a TS3 rule.. Just saying. I understand that some people may be offended by that, everyone is different, but why ban me just because of our differences?

I appreciate your concern for the ban, but I'm going to clear some things up, and for your information: you do not determine who deals with your appeal.
Nameful wrote:
Evidently someone was hurt, as I received a complaint about what was said. We're happy that you didn't deny saying it, but you obviously did make someone upset because the complaint didn't come from you or tigz.

I will not disseminate the player who reported you as they did so in confidence.

@EMP
I'm sorry I have to disagree with you here EMP, you're definitely correct in this logic, but his ban wasn't completely regarding what was said. We came to the verdict on the basis of the fact that what he said was unprofessional and a user of the teamspeak who heard what you said was offended by the comment made.

@NamefulHold on, I'm pretty sure this is your appeal. Not a report on another player.

If you're trying to have us pity you by shifting the blame to someone else, perhaps you might have been in a better position to report the culprit rather than be the culprit if you had considered what you said before you did so.
And that's an assumption. You're in a position of trust, you can't just go assuming things.

Now Bezzy was not the player who reported you, but let's take his quotation. You're assuming that Tigz may take it as a joke, but that's only half the story. People in your teamspeak channel may have faced issues pertaining to the matter of suicide and the like, and the fact that you're on a ZARP server posessing a ZARP staff badge only makes it worse.

@ApacheAs for you, it too comes down to professionalism. The fact that not only the target of the comment may be offended and that the comment its self is being made by a role model & representative of ZARP.

Despite that Tigz didn't report it, someone else felt the need to. Whether that be offense or disappointment at the standard of communication by this staff member.
Who are you to judge? Take a look:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_of_Megan_Meier

Other people have other states of mind to what you may consider 'the norm' so please don't jump to conclusions.

@ExroI'll just copy paste my response to the similar comment:
We made an informed decision on the basis of the report. As far as I'm concerned, TigZ wasn't the player who reported it therefor it wasn't really his issue (he may have been targeted by said comment in the conversation, but it wasn't him that expressed offense/concern).

It was evidently not a private conversation, considering the player who reported it was in the channel. Regardless, it is still a distasteful and disrespectful comment made on one of our servers, thus a violation of the TOU whatever channel the comment was made in:

The ban may seem harsh, but it's far less than what we'd expect from a staff member (to be violating the TOU and behaving unprofessionally collectively).

@Smallville
You're being too specific. Anyone can go and make up some numbers but it really doesn't contribute to the situation. As far as myself and Xhantium were concerned, Nameful's behavior was unacceptable for that of a staff member (regardless of where), a supposed 'role model' to be making such distasteful comments. This elevates the punishment because we don't feel we should have to warn our staff considering they will have been selected in mind of having at least half an ounce of common sense & coherence.

---

To conclude:
Nameful's ban was a verdict reached, precursor being a user report. They may have been concerned, and/or offended by the behavior. Either way is still valid. Nameful was confronted, and confessed to the offense.

We're not here to discuss what goes on in ZARP today. The fact is that this was a staff member who is supposed to be coherent & respectful, and his actions were unacceptable - it's only fair to the person who reported him that substantial justice is reached because at the end of the day, they're the one(s) who had justified issue with what he said, and it's completely agreeable that regardless of context the comment was distasteful and heedless.

I've discussed the ban with Xhantium, and we've decided that the ban will remain. You will not be unbanned for the sake of meetings, and with regard to meetings attendance will be recorded as an informed absence (you will not be penalized).

DENIED