After speaking to both you and Jack about this incident I've decided to deny this report.

Jack did his due diligence by checking that the base owner, dont kill me pls, was in fact AFK before force-selling all the base doors. He also ensured that no other players were inside the base at the time of the doors being sold.

Should the doors have been owned by other, active players, then it would be a different story. Jack - or any staff member - is not required to follow up on any other potential base users unless they are in the base (and doing something) at the time of investigation or they are a named owner of a door within the base.

It might be worthwhile stacking owners on doors in the future, so you do not have your bases taken away from you in niche situations like this.

I have not found any explicit misconduct or abuse from this report; no further action will be taken.

After speaking to both you and Jack about this incident I've decided to deny this report. Jack did his due diligence by checking that the base owner, dont kill me pls, was in fact AFK before force-selling all the base doors. He also ensured that no other players were inside the base at the time of the doors being sold. Should the doors have been owned by other, active players, then it would be a different story. Jack - or any staff member - is [b]not [/b ]required to follow up on any other potential base users unless they are in the base (and doing something) at the time of investigation or they are a named owner of a door within the base. It might be worthwhile stacking owners on doors in the future, so you do not have your bases taken away from you in niche situations like this. I have not found any explicit misconduct or abuse from this report; no further action will be taken. [center]#Denied[/center]