TOPIC: [SSRP] Ban Request - Fawdaw

Name - FawDaw
Steam-ID - STEAM1:1:88238472
Evidence Of Steam-ID - Steam ID
(used steam community link because of 200 iq screenshot - still same person)
Server - SSRP S1
Time And Date (CET) - 5 PM EST 7/27/18
Reason -FawDaw stole money (500m bet, total 1b lost) using deception, and logged out after - likely to avoid being banned.
Story - The flip with him was conducted with the rules (visible in the upper-middle part of the screenshot):

FawDaw: "500m vs 500m / roll 666 / missroll = instant win for me / highest wins / no backing out / type agree to start"
[ROLL] FawDaw rolls a 35 (Max:666)
[ROLL] Jawson#RoadToHA rolls a 335 (Max:666)

He didn't include bo3/f23 anywhere in his rules which we agreed to, the only things that pertained to the roll were "/roll 666, highest wins" - to which I won (500m).
The reason I kept rolling was because most rolls we did were ft3, and just before in the console he was trying to clarify the rules but didn't include "ft3" or "bo3" in the rules ultimately. He didn't win, because without the specification of the rules it defaults to bo1 (to which I won 35-335).
(all proof included in console screenshot below)

Proof -
Other Comments - Everything which is necessary is included - but feel free to ask or check the logs if there isn't enough proof. I did pay him the 500m, but had someone else screenshot their console of the roll in chat (the reason no trade logs are shown). He needs to pay 1 billion (the total roll amount, 500m back to me for deceiving the roll which I already paid him and 500m to me for losing).

Says he doesnt know that he was doing best of 3 >> Rolls 3 times

DEADMONSTOR wrote:
It defaults to bo1 without any specification if it's ft3, the rules FawDaw was trying to incorrectly use.

That's the reason trickery is used in the ban request. He used trickery to continue the roll - because he lost on the first roll. He kept continuing the roll when he should've traded me with the money.

Before i rolled i said i forgot to add - What we are doing and verbally said ft3" and he replied with isent that what were doing - So i rolled and then rolled 3 times- and he payed- he instantly logged and i said to his "assumed friend" he could of scammed because i never specified rules but hes a nice guy for keeping to the bet
sadly it was verbal but no scammes where commited otherwise he wouldnt of rolled 3 times then in that case he gave me the money

he instantly logs back on and starts crackling on about i scammed him
- and i dident instantly log i was on for another 5 mins before saying- last bet 100m then im going off (that i lost)

FawDaw wrote: You didn't add it the second fucking time how many brain cells do you have

Butterman wrote:
i got killed when the 1st rule was set- so i went back and said them again without realizing it was still not added

FawDaw wrote:
How could I agree to something that you didn't put in original rules.

:

Jawson wrote:
you can also see in that screen shot i said are we doing bo3 / ft3 and then he verbally replied with ft3 isent that the normal rules

DEADMONSTOR wrote: Yeah, this does seem really shady from Jawson's part. He clearly knew at that point it was bo3, and he rolled three times. This seems very sketchy.

This guy got scammed and now has become a scammer

dankek wrote:
he also payed then instant logged- then when he found out he could twist he loggs back on

FawDaw wrote: How does getting killed change anything. The fact is you didn't add it the 2nd time so you should have said my bad can you agree to these rules I didn't specify if it's bo3,f23,f25,etc.

Butterman wrote:
Because i dident realise the rules where wrong untill I started thats why i asked before continuing-- a recording would help but sadly i wasent recording

FawDaw wrote: His game was laggy so he restarted his game and came back after looking at the rules he didn't see it was specified and he called you out and then you just left like 2-4 mins

dankek wrote:
Don't you mean the opposite? FawDaw posted two sets of rules, he literally just said it in this thread. If he were to win on the first roll, he would have pointed it out and stopped rolling.

Butterman wrote:
there was a witness to me asking him if were doing ft3 but i have a feeling its you @kitty?

also if i dident say were doing ft3 then why did u roll 3 times then trade me the won amount?

Also that was the 1st bet i done all day so how did the " the bets we where doing previously come from"?

Jawson wrote: DICLAIMER: I CAN'T BLOODY READ THE NAMES AND WHO POSTS WHAT, SO I'M JUST GUESSING AFTER A POINT IN THE SCREENSHOT
You see, he didn't try to trick you, the guy could've honestly missed to write that rule, and you both sort of unexplicitly understood that and continued to roll three times. Neither of you froze and looked back and said "oh look, hey it's bo1 so pay up". Bo1 wasn't explicitly stated and you both understood it was bo3 still, and continued to roll.
Like I said, this looks like a misunderstanding

I would like to point out that in our discussion you did not mention that you rolled three times, which puts your argument for this ban request under rather high scrutiny.