This seems like a very curious situation to me. Eddie has never stricken me to be a person to display a bad attitude, and he's always gone out of his way to follow the rules, so this situation seems a little exagerrated to me. As per TheXnator's post, Eddie broke NDA and lied about it - whilst also having a bad attitude.

Although I'm not a lead team member on Deathrun, nor am I longer a lead team member on any other servers, I'd like to contribute with my own opinion on the matter. Keep in mind I haven't seen any of the evidence, so I'll be going off the basis that all the claims here are true.

First of all, if your "inactivity" is still within the reasoning of your demotion, I would argue that it is false or at the very least unnecessary. If you had good - or at least decent - activity prior to your inactivity notice, there's not a lot the team can go off unless you've been actively playing on different ZARP servers and just avoiding Deathrun (which, by all means, may be the case; in which case I believe it is valid). However, dismissing the idea that you were playing on other servers during your inactivity period, this seems like an unwarranted reasoning for the punishment.

As for the NDA, I would like to know the details of the situation. From what I'm seeing Eddie broke NDA and allegedly lied about it; however, firstly I'd like to see the evidence of the initial breach of NDA and his lies, and furthermore screenshots of his poor attitude. As I've mentioned previously, Eddie has never come across as a person with ill intent, so I find it quite difficult to see why he would act out in such a negative way that it would be worthy of an official warning. Sometimes arguments may look to be heated, but in the end, both parties are trying to convey their respective points. My guess is that during the discussion on whether or not Eddie broke NDA/-during any further discussion, the way in which Eddie conducted himself may have come across as more aggressive as he, himself, intended. I know for a fact this happens to me when I'm discussing a matter with another person, whether it's related to ZARP or not. However, most of this is speculation on my part, I'll update this post if I acquire the evidence for the situation, and express my opinion on whether or not the demotion is warranted once I have all the necessary information.

NOTE: Keep in mind I have been drinking a fair bit today so take what I say with a grain of salt.

This seems like a very curious situation to me. Eddie has never stricken me to be a person to display a bad attitude, and he's always gone out of his way to follow the rules, so this situation seems a little exagerrated to me. As per TheXnator's post, Eddie broke NDA and lied about it - whilst also having a bad attitude. Although I'm not a lead team member on Deathrun, nor am I longer a lead team member on any other servers, I'd like to contribute with my own opinion on the matter. Keep in mind I haven't seen any of the evidence, so I'll be going off the basis that all the claims here are true. First of all, if your "inactivity" is still within the reasoning of your demotion, I would argue that it is false or at the very least unnecessary. If you had good - or at least decent - activity prior to your inactivity notice, there's not a lot the team can go off unless you've been actively playing on different ZARP servers and just avoiding Deathrun (which, by all means, may be the case; in which case I believe it is valid). However, dismissing the idea that you were playing on other servers during your inactivity period, this seems like an unwarranted reasoning for the punishment. As for the NDA, I would like to know the details of the situation. From what I'm seeing Eddie broke NDA and allegedly lied about it; however, firstly I'd like to see the evidence of the initial breach of NDA and his lies, and furthermore screenshots of his poor attitude. As I've mentioned previously, Eddie has never come across as a person with ill intent, so I find it quite difficult to see why he would act out in such a negative way that it would be worthy of an official warning. Sometimes arguments may look to be heated, but in the end, both parties are trying to convey their respective points. My guess is that during the discussion on whether or not Eddie broke NDA/-during any further discussion, the way in which Eddie conducted himself may have come across as more aggressive as he, himself, intended. I know for a fact this happens to me when I'm discussing a matter with another person, whether it's related to ZARP or not. However, most of this is speculation on my part, I'll update this post if I acquire the evidence for the situation, and express my opinion on whether or not the demotion is warranted once I have all the necessary information. [b]NOTE[/b]: Keep in mind I have been drinking a fair bit today so take what I say with a grain of salt.