TOPIC: [SSRP Moderator] Jack Bushross's Application

RP Name:
Jack Bushross

Time Zone:
BST

Link to Steam Profile:
steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198076285377/

SteamID:
STEAM_0:1:58009824

Current Gametracker Profiles:
Server 1 - www.gametracker.com/player/Jamie/darkrp.zarpgaming.com:27015/
Server 2 - www.gametracker.com/player/Jamie/darkrp.zarpgaming.com:27025/
Server 3 - www.gametracker.com/player/Jamie/usa.zarpgaming.com:27015/

Estimated Server Time:
1000+

Languages I speak:
English

Explain "Random Death Match" and give an example scenario:
Random death match is when you kill another player for an invalid rp reason. For example, Player 1 kills Player 2 for staring at him from across the district.

Explain "New Life Rule" and give an example scenario:
New life rule occurs when you die in a district. A timer begins to count down from 3 minutes at the top of your screen, during that time you must not return to the district or make any sort of interaction with it, as well as forgetting your previous life there from when you were alive.
An example of this is when, a player is raiding a base in warehouse for example, and he gets killed during that raid, he may not return to the district or interact with it for 3 minutes.

Explain how you would handle the following situation:
Player x accuses player y for RDMing him, the console log shows that player y killed player x.

I would handle this issue with these steps:

- I would teleport to the player and inform him that I will be looking into the issue.
- Teleport Player X to a roof.
- Check through the logs to see who the player was killed by.
- Ask for Player X's side of the story.
- After hearing Player X's story, I'd teleport Player Y to notify him that he is needed for a report against him.
- After teleporting Player Y to the same roof as Player X, I would then ask to hear Player Y's side of the story.
- If the stories contrast with each other, then I would ask Player X for proof to back up his accusations.
- If Player X provides sufficient proof, then Player Y would be warned, but if there is a lack of proof, Player Y will not be warned.

Explain how you would handle the following situation:
Player x accuses player y for breaking NLR, the kills are pretty close together in console (a few lines apart) at a peak time.

I would handle this similarly to how I would handle the RDM report, and I would do it in the following steps:

- I would teleport to the player and inform him that I will be looking into the issue.
- Teleport Player X to a roof.
- Ask for Player X's side of the story.
- After hearing Player X's story, I'd teleport to Player Y to notify him that he is needed for a report against him.
- After teleporting Player Y to the same roof as Player X, I would then ask to hear Player Y's side of the story.
- I would then proceed to check the logs of NLR to see if Player Y has broken NLR.
- If Player Y had broken NLR, he would be warned but if he did not break NLR, he would not be warned.
- Alternativly, if I did not have the logs, Player X would have to provide proof of the occurance.

Why I should be chosen(we recommend around 150 words):
I believe that I should be chosen mainly to the fact that the server has greatly increased in the amount of players who're playing, and because of this, there are more frequent rule breaks occuring on the server. I feel as if I can help contribute to the server by reducing the number of players breaking rules as well as staying on top of reports made against other players in game.
I am usually very active on the server so there would be no issue regarding reaching the minimum required amount of F1's and more.

Jamie lad

He knows rules well, his activity is amazing, big

You have a recent punishment but I recall the person who gave it to you telling you to apply so I guess I am am willing to overlook it

cant even bhop

You've changed

yes

I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully.

Good luck!

Stop rdming with your m202s pls ty

Owns number 1 gang hell heck yes

Bunnyslippers69 wrote: FRICK FRACK HECK

Rick Johnson wrote: I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment though

Kyber wrote:
At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though

Good luck!

Rick Johnson wrote: Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sure

Kyber wrote: Although racism is serious, he did say a racist word in our gangs chat. It is clear he did not intend to use it in any sort of malicious way. Also, do we really need to be so strict as to deny a person due to having a recent that has 2 hours left.

Kyber wrote:
I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol