TOPIC: [SSRP Moderator] Sorle's Application

Random Deathmatch, abbreviated to RDM, is when a player kills another player without a valid roleplay reason.
An example of this would be Player X walking up to Player Y and shooting him because he looked at him funny. This would be counted as RDM, as Player X did not have a valid reason to shoot Player Y.

New Life Rule, abbreviated to NLR, is a rule which states that a player may not interact with a district in which they died until 3 minutes have passed since their death.
An example of this would be Player X raiding Player Y in the Bank District and killing Player Y, but Player Y comes back and snipes him from the Fountain District. This is counted as NLR because Player Y was interacting with the district. He would also be breaking NLR if he went directly to the Bank District after his death.
There are a handful of situations in which NLR does not apply:

In approaching this situation, there would be a few steps I would take first: Once this is done, I would first explain Player X's side of the story to Player Y, then ask for theirs. I would weigh up both sides of the story, use the information provided to me in the logs, and come to a conclusion on what seems most logical. I would explain this conclusion to both parties and if either of them denied this, I would require proof. If Player X could not procure valid proof or Player Y procured counter-proof, I would be forced to end the situation and return each party to their original positions. If Player X procured valid proof or if Player Y admitted to RDMing Player X, I would speak to and warn Player Y, then return each party to their original positions.

I would take the same first steps in handling the situation as the last one, however the rest would be relatively different. I would get both sides of the story, however I would base much more of my conclusion on the logs.
If I can clearly see that Player Y died in Bank District but came back a few seconds later and killed Player X and had no valid reason to do so (Tactical Insertion Point, Defib, Bank Raid/Nuke as Police), I can conclude that NLR was broken by Player Y and speak to/warn them. If Player Y states they had a valid reason to do so, I would require proof from Player X that there was no valid reason for Player Y to be "breaking NLR". If valid proof is shown of Player Y breaking NLR with no valid reason, I would warn Player Y and speak to them about lying in sits. If invalid/no proof is shown, then I would be forced to end the sit.

However, if Player X claimed that Player Y sniped them from another district, and the logs showed that Player Y killed Player X from another district, I would require proof that the rules were actually broken. If proof was procured and it appeared to be valid, I would speak to Player Y about how you're not allowed to go into or interact with a district you have NLR in. If they did not know this part of the rules, I would inform them of it and give them a verbal warning. If they clearly knew this part of the rule beforehand, I would warn them.