[Timothytea] Von_Carstein - Dumb Ban Appeal

User avatar
Ragolution
Member
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:39 am
Contact:

Re: [Timothytea] Von_Carstein - Dumb Ban Appeal

Post by Ragolution »

There's a point to be made about the spirit of the law, here, but neither the spirit nor the word seem to be lined up with banning people for making ribald sex jokes or talking about how they just fucked the janitor in the halls, otherwise I might think Cit had devolved into a nunnery. And while, on the one hand, Von was overly confrontational about the concern, you're punishing them for being annoyed someone was trying to police them over a vaguely work-inappropriate conversation. It's not as if they were rude and confrontational in an AdminPM. It's not like Snowdragon01 is on the admin team. I'll say I have enough faith in Vlad to presume that, had it gotten even steamier, he might have either changed topics or moved somewhere else... But it wasn't even allowed to get to that point. There's a thousand better ways to have gone about this, on both sides of the fence, but talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Strictly speaking, the wording of the rule, as written is '...players should not be forced to read your erotic scene...', then I'm extra not seeing how this was escalated to a ban. From my interpretation, it clearly revolves around the idea of a sexual roleplay scene and not just someone making dirty jokes at the expense of those around them. In this case, I don't believe Von was acting in bad faith of the rule... he probably just didn't think a slightly heated conversation qualified as ERP, which to be frank, is something I'd agree with. It's oriented around 'scenes', as it's written, but I'll be waiting for a bit more context on Carstein's previous ban before I suggest anything else.
Snowdragon01 wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 12:19 am
Upon asking them to stop I was given a very bad attitude and told they would talk about feteshis(sic) in detail.
They then ignored it and started talking about hotdogging another and "leg up full frontal."
You also didn't ask them in LOOC, you decided to provoke and antagonize them in say chat, so by the written rule you have absolutely no protection when it comes to 'informing' them that you thought their conversation was too sexual for public areas. You may have missed that in the rule you're quoting. I'd recommend you read the rule in question before you try to throw it at the wall again. Rule 10, sub 10.
Public ERP - Public scenes are defined as scenes easily visible to the public whether from sprite-nudity or from non-subtle emotes in a public location. You must comply if someone asks you to take your scene elsewhere in LOOC, whether by using subtle or finding a semi-private or private location. Players should not be forced to read your erotic scene while walking through the halls or their own department. If a majority of a non-important semi-public room (like bar clubroom or library game room) is in on a scene, find somewhere else instead of attempting to break it up - even if you do not like their scene.
Even if it was considered a scene, verbalizing to someone in say isn't the same as trying to ask them to move somewhere else/simmer down in LOOC. Much like a Prayer/Subtlemessage isn't the same as an AdminPM. I personally don't think that what they were doing constitutes a 'scene', but I will add that I think the wording on that rule should really be refined to either specifically refer to graphic sexual acts, or just any lascivious content whatsoever. And, honestly, if that becomes the case, it's a little bit of a dick move to punish someone who retroactively violated the rule that was just changed.

Also, I'm gunna say it, since I'm not an admin anymore: Of course it was this dude. Of course it was. You're all completely and legitimately entitled to tell me 'Rag your opinion doesn't matter, you haven't played on this server since 1999' and scold me for Peanut Gallery-ing, but you fuckin' know exactly what I mean with this shit. I swear it was one thing or the other at least once a week. No, not Von. Not Teak.

From my perspective this kind of seems like weaponized rule lawyering, possibly even done on someone else's behalf, and honestly, don't take this the wrong way; but if I was gunna perma Carstein, I'd find a better reason for it. I can't begrudge anyone not liking anyone else, hell I hate Ana Bowchief, but I'd prefer that people either be honest and say 'yr banned because i hate u >:(' or be evenhanded about how punishments are delivered. Admins do have the 'Quality Control' slash 'Community Standards' ban up their sleeve for reasons like this. I might be wrong on this, but I've always encouraged people to hand off responsibility when they feel they're getting salty, emotional or overinvested. All nitpicking does is show people how easy it is to get on your bad side, but I'll save the lecture on 'How 2 Be Goodmin' for my CitAdmin Gospel Volume 2. Available on Amazon in late 2022.
Last edited by Ragolution on Wed Aug 11, 2021 2:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
If you don’t stand for something, you will fall for anything.

Nayser
Junior Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:04 am
Contact:

Re: [Timothytea] Von_Carstein - Dumb Ban Appeal

Post by Nayser »

You may have missed two critical words in said quote.
erotic scene
I believe when it is written erotic scene in server rules it implies exactly erotic actions, not innuendo jokes.
Amber Reesh chirps, "Look I don't know what this weird shit you're talking about but some of it sounded sexual. Just going to say if you do get to that point then yeah."
Right here you pretty much said "If there will be a scene leave please." This is a proof you clearly knew there wasn't a scene and for some reason decided to ahelp anyways. The only reason I could think of why you did it was just malice, you were upset about being told to fuck off IC. As far as i'm aware you were already permabanned once for metagrudging the exact same person you got in trouble, so this only further confirms my conclusion.

It just happened that there was a coincidence of player not liking another player and ahelping them when there was an admin that also dislikes ahelped player. I'd say in a situation like this ban is almost certainty, even if it's unjust.

zI-H482
Member
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 7:36 pm
Contact:

Re: [Timothytea] Von_Carstein - Dumb Ban Appeal

Post by zI-H482 »

There’s a few important points under rule 10 that I want to bring up. Namely, parts of parts 2, 4 and 10:
  • This is an adult server with adult content. Understand that you’ll be exposed to this sooner or later - however, it is not the whole point of the server, and it is not to be shoved down players’ throats.
  • Do not involve unwilling players with situations around adult content.
  • Players should not be forced to read your erotic scene while walking through the halls or their own department.
It is a misconception that there needs to be a scene to involve someone unwilling in adult content. As a hypothetical to illustrate what I mean, if someone is going on about how gassy they’re feeling in earshot of another person who is uncomfortable with that and has said as much, they’re falling afoul of rule 10 even if there’s no textfucking going on.

As has been brought up a few times in this appeal, the reality of Citadel is that people will hear lewd and crude things over comms and catch glimpses of scenes they much rather have wanted not to. If someone is not alright with that happening, this is not the server for them. However, this is supposed to be tempered with some consideration because not everyone is comfortable with the same things; there’s fetish content, (Cock & Ball Torture, From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia at En dot Wikipedia dot Org), that really gets under people’s skin and so we try to strike a balance with rule 10 that leaves a space for this without forcing people to confront it.

So, when Amber Reesh said “I don’t know what you two are doing but if it’s anything sexual please leave,” and “Look I don’t know what this weird shit you two are talking about but some of it sounded sexual. Just going to say if you do get to that point then yeah,” (sic) it was a reasonable request even if it wasn’t over LOOC.

To note, we have the part about complying about requests over LOOC bolded for emphasis as it’s a non-negotiable requirement of the rule for Public ERP, but the rule is more than just that.

The way you responded to them was bullshit. As you said yourself, you were intentionally being rude and, honestly, if the issue was just being rude in response to rudeness, that’d be a different matter. We neither mandate nor expect everyone to get along, and you can respond to insults with insults of your own.

Yet, I will probably need more context than what I’m seeing to take what Amber said as them being rude first when they overheard stuff like (as an example of one of things they brought up and wasn’t captured in your own screencaps):
(Suvar Anatoli Usuarzan) "Why are you rubbing your butt on Tennis Balls, huh?"
(Lolli Whirlbel) "Rubbing?"
(Lolli Whirlbel) "No, no."
(Lolli Whirlbel) "I put it inside the donut."
(Suvar Anatoli Usuarzan) freezes, contemplating those words before slowly bringing one of his paws up to promptly give one thumbs up, “Awesome.”
Was that and other things you two talked about constitute a scene? No. But it was sexual, flirtatious banter. So when they asked for you two to move if you were *actually* going to fuck, it doesn’t seem like it was unprompted nor deserving of the very aggressive response you gave where you basically threatened in no uncertain terms to break rule 10 by trying to get under their skin with fetish content.

That said, do I think what you said after actually constituted adult content? No. It’s just bawdy remarks chosen to rankle them instead of genuine adult content. It’s a dick move and it seems way out of proportion to what they said, but does it merit a permaban without even first discussing it? No, I don’t think so.

But, again, the way you responded to what they said was god-awful. From what I can see, I can’t understand how you thought that was an appropriate response to their request and, unless you’ve got a real good reason not captured in those logs, I don’t want to see something like that again.

Snowdragon01
Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 3:30 pm
Contact:

Re: [Timothytea] Von_Carstein - Dumb Ban Appeal

Post by Snowdragon01 »

Ragolution wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 1:43 am
There's a point to be made about the spirit of the law, here, but neither the spirit nor the word seem to be lined up with banning people for making ribald sex jokes or talking about how they just fucked the janitor in the halls, otherwise I might think Cit had devolved into a nunnery. And while, on the one hand, Von was overly confrontational about the concern, you're punishing them for being annoyed someone was trying to police them over a vaguely work-inappropriate conversation. It's not as if they were rude and confrontational in an AdminPM. It's not like Snowdragon01 is on the admin team. I'll say I have enough faith in Vlad to presume that, had it gotten even steamier, he might have either changed topics or moved somewhere else... But it wasn't even allowed to get to that point. There's a thousand better ways to have gone about this, on both sides of the fence, but talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Strictly speaking, the wording of the rule, as written is '...players should not be forced to read your erotic scene...', then I'm extra not seeing how this was escalated to a ban. From my interpretation, it clearly revolves around the idea of a sexual roleplay scene and not just someone making dirty jokes at the expense of those around them. In this case, I don't believe Von was acting in bad faith of the rule... he probably just didn't think a slightly heated conversation qualified as ERP, which to be frank, is something I'd agree with. It's oriented around 'scenes', as it's written, but I'll be waiting for a bit more context on Carstein's previous ban before I suggest anything else.
Snowdragon01 wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 12:19 am
Upon asking them to stop I was given a very bad attitude and told they would talk about feteshis(sic) in detail.
They then ignored it and started talking about hotdogging another and "leg up full frontal."
You also didn't ask them in LOOC, you decided to provoke and antagonize them in say chat, so by the written rule you have absolutely no protection when it comes to 'informing' them that you thought their conversation was too sexual for public areas. You may have missed that in the rule you're quoting. I'd recommend you read the rule in question before you try to throw it at the wall again. Rule 10, sub 10.
Public ERP - Public scenes are defined as scenes easily visible to the public whether from sprite-nudity or from non-subtle emotes in a public location. You must comply if someone asks you to take your scene elsewhere in LOOC, whether by using subtle or finding a semi-private or private location. Players should not be forced to read your erotic scene while walking through the halls or their own department. If a majority of a non-important semi-public room (like bar clubroom or library game room) is in on a scene, find somewhere else instead of attempting to break it up - even if you do not like their scene.
Even if it was considered a scene, verbalizing to someone in say isn't the same as trying to ask them to move somewhere else/simmer down in LOOC. Much like a Prayer/Subtlemessage isn't the same as an AdminPM. I personally don't think that what they were doing constitutes a 'scene', but I will add that I think the wording on that rule should really be refined to either specifically refer to graphic sexual acts, or just any lascivious content whatsoever. And, honestly, if that becomes the case, it's a little bit of a dick move to punish someone who retroactively violated the rule that was just changed.

Also, I'm gunna say it, since I'm not an admin anymore: Of course it was this dude. Of course it was. You're all completely and legitimately entitled to tell me 'Rag your opinion doesn't matter, you haven't played on this server since 1999' and scold me for Peanut Gallery-ing, but you fuckin' know exactly what I mean with this shit. I swear it was one thing or the other at least once a week. No, not Von. Not Teak.

From my perspective this kind of seems like weaponized rule lawyering, possibly even done on someone else's behalf, and honestly, don't take this the wrong way; but if I was gunna perma Carstein, I'd find a better reason for it. I can't begrudge anyone not liking anyone else, hell I hate Ana Bowchief, but I'd prefer that people either be honest and say 'yr banned because i hate u >:(' or be evenhanded about how punishments are delivered. Admins do have the 'Quality Control' slash 'Community Standards' ban up their sleeve for reasons like this. I might be wrong on this, but I've always encouraged people to hand off responsibility when they feel they're getting salty, emotional or overinvested. All nitpicking does is show people how easy it is to get on your bad side, but I'll save the lecture on 'How 2 Be Goodmin' for my CitAdmin Gospel Volume 2. Available on Amazon in late 2022.
No this is where I draw the line. I did not provoke or antagonize them in any way. Saying it in looc chat would have not made a difference. They would have just told me to fuck off there as well.
This response sounds like rule lawyering. Regardless if it was in looc or in game it would still break the spirit of the rules.
Not entirely sure what you mean about shit week after week but my player notes have been clean for a long while now. Last major thing I've done was smooth brain killing my own traitor freind and that was months ago.... if even this year. Maybe i did something wrong as sec but that and rest is minor.
Maybe a perma ban was to harsh however. It wasn't full on sex and refusing to leave while doing it. At the start of this I never wanted anyone to get banned and if so not more than a few days.
I was just hoping this obvious talk about what they would do to each other in the bedroom and refusing to take it else where wouldn't be allowed. "What could ve the worse that happens if I ahelp this? Best case its resolved, worse case told its fine what they did and to move on." I did not expect for this to blow up with many insults and hostilities.

Snowdragon01
Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 3:30 pm
Contact:

Re: [Timothytea] Von_Carstein - Dumb Ban Appeal

Post by Snowdragon01 »

Rago... just no. Just now realizing what you said and just no. In the past I was a bad player but since being welcomed back since my last perma (which was a while ago) I've chilled.
Rago let it go. What you remember is a spiteful player who metagrudged and overreacted violently in game. Like the first thing I did joining cit in what 16/17 is try to light the CE on fire for yelling at me releasing plasma by accident.
I no longer do this kind of stuff. I barely remember player names now anyways...
Perhaps I should have responded sooner and this would have went along better. Yes prem is way to much. I was hoping more for either warn/short ban or being told I was wrong.

Snowdragon01
Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 3:30 pm
Contact:

Re: [Timothytea] Von_Carstein - Dumb Ban Appeal

Post by Snowdragon01 »

Nayser wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 1:52 am
You may have missed two critical words in said quote.
erotic scene
I believe when it is written erotic scene in server rules it implies exactly erotic actions, not innuendo jokes.
Amber Reesh chirps, "Look I don't know what this weird shit you're talking about but some of it sounded sexual. Just going to say if you do get to that point then yeah."
Right here you pretty much said "If there will be a scene leave please." This is a proof you clearly knew there wasn't a scene and for some reason decided to ahelp anyways. The only reason I could think of why you did it was just malice, you were upset about being told to fuck off IC. As far as i'm aware you were already permabanned once for metagrudging the exact same person you got in trouble, so this only further confirms my conclusion.

It just happened that there was a coincidence of player not liking another player and ahelping them when there was an admin that also dislikes ahelped player. I'd say in a situation like this ban is almost certainty, even if it's unjust.
I don't even remember who those two players are. I do not talk to teak ever outside of the cit main channel and even then there was not ever a full conversation. How am I supposed to know that teak, the banning admin, dislikes these players?
There was no metagrudge here. If there was something going on it would've already happened months ago since I dont got patience for that stuff.

(Edited for clarity)

User avatar
Krzyzstof_K
Junior Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:39 pm
Contact:

Re: [Timothytea] Von_Carstein - Dumb Ban Appeal

Post by Krzyzstof_K »

Snowdragon01 wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 9:14 am
No this is where I draw the line. I did not provoke or antagonize them in any way. Saying it in looc chat would have not made a difference.
It's a key-bind away and I literally do this to avoid conflict when a misunderstanding arises. Just because you think it doesn't make a difference, the point is you should;But considering you just admitted that you weren't going to LOOC to begin with-I honestly wouldn't have anything else to say.

And you've done plenty to antagonize people in the past, including us. It's not headlines of the most famous news article but it's out there. Your past and current behavior certainly builds a hostility complex around your figure, but that's just my own personal opinion considering the situation. (And your countless times harassing security, and I believe last night I heard you decided to go for EROG early and prep grenades and got caught by an AI and blew up security in the process at medical bay as a result of you being halted for such acts, as Amber Reesh, if I stand wrong, apologies. This is just one very recent example.)

It's nothing new in my opinion from you, you are hostile.

Trojan_Coyote
Member
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:55 pm
Location: Fort Rucker, Alabama
Contact:

Re: [Timothytea] Von_Carstein - Dumb Ban Appeal

Post by Trojan_Coyote »

zI-H482 wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 7:50 am
There’s a few important points under rule 10 that I want to bring up. Namely, parts of parts 2, 4 and 10:
  • This is an adult server with adult content. Understand that you’ll be exposed to this sooner or later - however, it is not the whole point of the server, and it is not to be shoved down players’ throats.
  • Do not involve unwilling players with situations around adult content.
  • Players should not be forced to read your erotic scene while walking through the halls or their own department.
It is a misconception that there needs to be a scene to involve someone unwilling in adult content. As a hypothetical to illustrate what I mean, if someone is going on about how gassy they’re feeling in earshot of another person who is uncomfortable with that and has said as much, they’re falling afoul of rule 10 even if there’s no textfucking going on.

As has been brought up a few times in this appeal, the reality of Citadel is that people will hear lewd and crude things over comms and catch glimpses of scenes they much rather have wanted not to. If someone is not alright with that happening, this is not the server for them. However, this is supposed to be tempered with some consideration because not everyone is comfortable with the same things; there’s fetish content, (Cock & Ball Torture, From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia at En dot Wikipedia dot Org), that really gets under people’s skin and so we try to strike a balance with rule 10 that leaves a space for this without forcing people to confront it.

So, when Amber Reesh said “I don’t know what you two are doing but if it’s anything sexual please leave,” and “Look I don’t know what this weird shit you two are talking about but some of it sounded sexual. Just going to say if you do get to that point then yeah,” (sic) it was a reasonable request even if it wasn’t over LOOC.

To note, we have the part about complying about requests over LOOC bolded for emphasis as it’s a non-negotiable requirement of the rule for Public ERP, but the rule is more than just that.

The way you responded to them was bullshit. As you said yourself, you were intentionally being rude and, honestly, if the issue was just being rude in response to rudeness, that’d be a different matter. We neither mandate nor expect everyone to get along, and you can respond to insults with insults of your own.

Yet, I will probably need more context than what I’m seeing to take what Amber said as them being rude first when they overheard stuff like (as an example of one of things they brought up and wasn’t captured in your own screencaps):
(Suvar Anatoli Usuarzan) "Why are you rubbing your butt on Tennis Balls, huh?"
(Lolli Whirlbel) "Rubbing?"
(Lolli Whirlbel) "No, no."
(Lolli Whirlbel) "I put it inside the donut."
(Suvar Anatoli Usuarzan) freezes, contemplating those words before slowly bringing one of his paws up to promptly give one thumbs up, “Awesome.”
Was that and other things you two talked about constitute a scene? No. But it was sexual, flirtatious banter. So when they asked for you two to move if you were *actually* going to fuck, it doesn’t seem like it was unprompted nor deserving of the very aggressive response you gave where you basically threatened in no uncertain terms to break rule 10 by trying to get under their skin with fetish content.

That said, do I think what you said after actually constituted adult content? No. It’s just bawdy remarks chosen to rankle them instead of genuine adult content. It’s a dick move and it seems way out of proportion to what they said, but does it merit a permaban without even first discussing it? No, I don’t think so.

But, again, the way you responded to what they said was god-awful. From what I can see, I can’t understand how you thought that was an appropriate response to their request and, unless you’ve got a real good reason not captured in those logs, I don’t want to see something like that again.
This is my full opinion on this whole debacle tbh.

User avatar
Krzyzstof_K
Junior Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:39 pm
Contact:

Re: [Timothytea] Von_Carstein - Dumb Ban Appeal

Post by Krzyzstof_K »

zI-H482 wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 7:50 am
There’s a few important points under rule 10 that I want to bring up. Namely, parts of parts 2, 4 and 10:
  • This is an adult server with adult content. Understand that you’ll be exposed to this sooner or later - however, it is not the whole point of the server, and it is not to be shoved down players’ throats.
@R0

Is it really shoving it down said persons throat? We were minding our own business, as everyone usually does. Requested sure if it got to that point, but awfully crude at best. Did we actually do anything sexual? No, so I'd say request fulfilled at the expense of offending the other party. Again, through this almost hour long shift, Amber could've left at any which point to leave and spare himself from stuff he did not want to overhear. He was researching at a console, not doing any robotics work. This is intentionally just him sitting around to snark back at the situation for unknown reasons, and motive. But guessing we're here you can connect the dots yourself considering the banning admin themself did this wordlessly. There's without a doubt motive to this case.
zI-H482 wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 7:50 am
  • Do not involve unwilling players with situations around adult content.
Involvement, yes. Did we at all incorperate Amber Reesh in our conversation? Did we force him to listen to our conversation?

Considering it all, he was willing to sit through the whole god damn thing when there's a second research console. I genuinely am baffled at why this is is even being brought up, it's literally an IC situation-Both entities are allowed to make their decisions, and Amber whole-heartedly sat through every bit of it for questionable reasons. Why put yourself through it if you don't want to hear something, genuinely?
zI-H482 wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 7:50 am
  • Players should not be forced to read your erotic scene while walking through the halls or their own department.
Finally, again, bad ruling; You can apply this to a various amount of things and obviously needs better clarification. Sitting around in the same spot and applying the rule as "forcing" them to read sounds like I'm breaching his consent by remaining in the SAME spot for almost an hour throughout the shift. Are the either of us following him around whisper our conversation next to him?
zI-H482 wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 7:50 am
Yet, I will probably need more context than what I’m seeing to take what Amber said as them being rude first when they overheard stuff like (as an example of one of things they brought up and wasn’t captured in your own screencaps):
(Suvar Anatoli Usuarzan) "Why are you rubbing your butt on Tennis Balls, huh?"
(Lolli Whirlbel) "Rubbing?"
(Lolli Whirlbel) "No, no."
(Lolli Whirlbel) "I put it inside the donut."
(Suvar Anatoli Usuarzan) freezes, contemplating those words before slowly bringing one of his paws up to promptly give one thumbs up, “Awesome.”
This again, which I still have not been told if Amber had late-joined for this round because I don't quite remember Amber being in the room as I made this comment. Was this screenshot given by Teak or Mindles himself-I know Teak mentioned it, but given the circumstances Amber had only begun to complain about "sexual" things when we were on the topic of food, so I bring a massive amount of speculation to this.

On top of things,

Amber Reesh (Mindles) if I STAND correct, has been banned previously for metagrudging the same literal person who's been banned here, with an appeal documenting this. So do not think them saying they do not know the either of us because this is just a blatant lie and I really cannot stand this anymore. It took me some time after hearing about this and confirming it. This is genuinely just a terrible rock throwing contest, and I'm shocked why this hasn't been spotted yet, if this doesn't prove motive, I don't know what will considering they claim they do not know them or me. They've certainly asked my discord ID on discord, which eventually I had said hi, this is me, so yes, they do know the both of us.

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=2958&p=10475&sid=5 ... d90#p10475

All I can say, and will say there is obviously bad blood, and certainly you cannot tell me, Mindles as Amber Reesh was glued to the one tile for an hour, forcing himself to listen to every bit of our conversation.
Trojan_Coyote wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 1:15 pm
This is my full opinion on this whole debacle tbh.
@Trojan

I'm sorry but I'm beginning to have my patience tested with you telling people to stop arguing by arguing and linking entire posts just to say, "This tbh". Please consider writing your own formal response on the matter instead of plagiarizing.

User avatar
Ragolution
Member
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:39 am
Contact:

Re: [Timothytea] Von_Carstein - Dumb Ban Appeal

Post by Ragolution »

Snowdragon01 wrote:
Wed Aug 11, 2021 9:14 am
They would have just told me to fuck off there as well.
Claiming 'could have' or 'would have' is disingenous at best. This is pretty lined out as rule lawyering but I think the greatest misstep is, infact, that it is a permaban. This should have been a warning, if anything, and not even a notable one.
If you don’t stand for something, you will fall for anything.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests