Mr. Richard wrote:
Sally wrote:
You are not putting any facts forward only your recollection of the situation especially when you can't even get the "facts" straight at seem to add more to the situation every other post you make, facts would be evidence driven and 100% accurate. How can you be certain it was Dutch who shot at you(if they did) when you don't see names at such a distance? You go on about injustice, yet Jawson already stated he'd be willing to remove the punishment if you can provide some actual evidence and the one time you don't have something saved is the time it actually has any value towards your case, pretty funny.
I genuinely think that sinzz doesn't grasp the basic understanding of what a "fact" is - Oftentimes he would imply that something is "factual" without bringing forward anything that would prove his statement correct. A good example would be a recent RA in which he reported someone for "raiding" (the user in question was literally just standing at the front door of his property for a few seconds which is all that can be seen in the video), but proceeded to imply that the user had also "called the elevator", "broke the door", "searched the base", etc - Despite not proving any of these allegations; Yet he still proceeded to label his claims as "factual", even though they were nothing but pure conjecture.
I reckon the same can be said for this situation.
I say it's stupid because the duration of the clip is already very low "30 seconds" to justify anything rather 18 seconds out of 30 which does not show all the context secondly I said what happened zannie a been very vague on this moreover his clip is mutated it also shows who wants to hide things maybe that putting the sound in this clip gives very important information on the context all of this makes this report misleading it is not only my opinion but the fact how it was settled makes me doubt more than anything else
Crazy that you cut your clip when we know ur clips are like 10 minutes to not show urself breaking rules