Ban Appeal

[Matador1812]

Your Character or Steam Name: Matador

Your SteamID (Click to retrieve):  https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561199887634168/

Your Discord ID#: Matador11812

Reason for ban: RDM PO X1

Length of ban: 5 days

Reason for appeal (dispute/apology): Dispute

Why should you be unbanned? Tim Burr and I were at harbor and TL:DR Supreme team gave us a count down to leave even though we weren't on their property, long story short Tim Burr sent one of them flying, and the next guy had his gun up ready to kill my friend for this obvious crime! Until I gunned him down. I assume this is what I'm being banned for but defending allies isn't "RDM" and if Tim Burr isn't banned then why the fuck am I banned, LOL.

Additional Information (images, videos, etc): Here is a clip I stole off of one of the Supreme Goobers: https://medal.tv/games/garrys-mod/clips/mU8pSb4fKoI0CpY7l?invite=cr-MSxkM2ksNDY5MTEzOTQ0&v=30

[KingJewMonaclu]

Well I can give part 1.

User made ticket to report you two for RDM. Had the shortest clip ever, showed just like a gun on safety and a countdown, and someone got out and shot him.

I told user "Hey lets make sure we're following escalation rules. i.e. when you threaten an individual with a gun you have to point it. Obviously you didnt shoot him, so not serious."

Told other user "Let's make sure we're waiting till they point the gun to take a shot at them, and dont be dancing to prevent them from seeing you pull your gun" (It was tim burr)

I was not made aware of the larger firefight or given any further information

 

Later, Greenghost stated that he had a new clip and asked if it was "Handled". I said I wasn't aware of a longer, fuller clip, and that he should assess the situation himself with the new information and make a ruling. He did so, which led to your ban.

 

 

P.S. "Why didnt my friend also get banned"
Dry snitch ass nigga

[Matador1812]

5 minutes ago, KingJewMonaclu said:

Well I can give part 1.

User made ticket to report you two for RDM. Had the shortest clip ever, showed just like a gun on safety and a countdown, and someone got out and shot him.

I told user "Hey lets make sure we're following escalation rules. i.e. when you threaten an individual with a gun you have to point it. Obviously you didnt shoot him, so not serious."

Told other user "Let's make sure we're waiting till they point the gun to take a shot at them, and dont be dancing to prevent them from seeing you pull your gun" (It was tim burr)

I was not made aware of the larger firefight or given any further information

 

Later, Greenghost stated that he had a new clip and asked if it was "Handled". I said I wasn't aware of a longer, fuller clip, and that he should assess the situation himself with the new information and make a ruling. He did so, which led to your ban.

 

 

P.S. "Why didnt my friend also get banned"
Dry snitch ass nigga

Nigga did get banned and then unbanned, where the hell is my unban 

[KingJewMonaclu]

4 minutes ago, Matador1812 said:

Nigga did get banned and then unbanned, where the hell is my unban 

I've been told this is actually a *second* situation with you guys, so who knows. Apparently you all were on some fuck shit last night or something.

[Greenghost_906]

12 minutes ago, KingJewMonaclu said:

Later, Greenghost stated that he had a new clip and asked if it was "Handled". I said I wasn't aware of a longer, fuller clip, and that he should assess the situation himself with the new information and make a ruling. He did so, which led to your ban.

Shy is the banning staff member. Different incident than the one I reviewed.

Edited 5 hours ago by Greenghost_906

[Matador1812]

12 minutes ago, KingJewMonaclu said:

I've been told this is actually a *second* situation with you guys, so who knows. Apparently you all were on some fuck shit last night or something.

This has been the only situation from yesterday, LOL.

[shy]

Hello banning staff here,

After reviewing the footage, I believe the ban on Matador was justified.

The appeal claims the shooting was done in defense of an ally. However, the footage shows that the players who were shot had not escalated the situation to a level that justified lethal force. While there was a verbal confrontation and firearms were visible, neither player was actively threatening Matador or Tim Burr at the moment shots were fired. No punches were thrown, no weapons were aimed, and no shots had been fired.

Additionally, Matador is seen taking his weapon off safety while using a dance animation before opening fire. Whether intentional or not, this concealed the animation from nearby players and allowed him to get the jump on the individuals he ultimately shot.

As for Tim Burr, his ban was removed after I realized I had relied on a note that was tied to this same incident. Since Tim Burr did not have prior offenses, there was no basis to maintain his ban. Matador, however, had a prior Slight RDM note, which was considered when determining punishment severity.

Based on the footage, the lack of sufficient escalation from the players who were shot, and Matador's prior history, I stand by the original ruling.

[Matador1812]

47 minutes ago, shy said:

Hello banning staff here,

After reviewing the footage, I believe the ban on Matador was justified.

The appeal claims the shooting was done in defense of an ally. However, the footage shows that the players who were shot had not escalated the situation to a level that justified lethal force. While there was a verbal confrontation and firearms were visible, neither player was actively threatening Matador or Tim Burr at the moment shots were fired. No punches were thrown, no weapons were aimed, and no shots had been fired.

Additionally, Matador is seen taking his weapon off safety while using a dance animation before opening fire. Whether intentional or not, this concealed the animation from nearby players and allowed him to get the jump on the individuals he ultimately shot.

As for Tim Burr, his ban was removed after I realized I had relied on a note that was tied to this same incident. Since Tim Burr did not have prior offenses, there was no basis to maintain his ban. Matador, however, had a prior Slight RDM note, which was considered when determining punishment severity.

Based on the footage, the lack of sufficient escalation from the players who were shot, and Matador's prior history, I stand by the original ruling.

I was seen using a dance animation before opening fire? You don't even have the right guy, that was Tim doing that, not me.

[Akira]

14 minutes ago, Matador1812 said:

I was seen using a dance animation before opening fire? You don't even have the right guy, that was Tim doing that, not me.

Bro, he was just explaining the same thing I already said. Tim Burr got unbanned because the staff member who banned him didn't realize he had already been noted by Monaclu for the exact same incident. You didn't get unbanned because it was RDM and you had prior offenses for RDM. You keep messing with people, take this as a lesson!! and stop annoying everyone. bro!!!!! 

Good luck with your appeal though. I need you back, its boring as hell without your stupid ass around

+1

 

[Mickey Lunestra]

1 hour ago, shy said:

Hello banning staff here,

After reviewing the footage, I believe the ban on Matador was justified.

The appeal claims the shooting was done in defense of an ally. However, the footage shows that the players who were shot had not escalated the situation to a level that justified lethal force. While there was a verbal confrontation and firearms were visible, neither player was actively threatening Matador or Tim Burr at the moment shots were fired. No punches were thrown, no weapons were aimed, and no shots had been fired.

Additionally, Matador is seen taking his weapon off safety while using a dance animation before opening fire. Whether intentional or not, this concealed the animation from nearby players and allowed him to get the jump on the individuals he ultimately shot.

As for Tim Burr, his ban was removed after I realized I had relied on a note that was tied to this same incident. Since Tim Burr did not have prior offenses, there was no basis to maintain his ban. Matador, however, had a prior Slight RDM note, which was considered when determining punishment severity.

Based on the footage, the lack of sufficient escalation from the players who were shot, and Matador's prior history, I stand by the original ruling.

Weapon aimed from the POV of the only guy matador shot 

https://medal.tv/games/garrys-mod/clips/mU8pSb4fKoI0CpY7l

[Matador1812]

9 minutes ago, Akira said:

Bro, he was just explaining the same thing I already said. Tim Burr got unbanned because the staff member who banned him didn't realize he had already been noted by Monaclu for the exact same incident. You didn't get unbanned because it was RDM and you had prior offenses for RDM. You keep messing with people, take this as a lesson!! and stop annoying everyone. bro!!!!! 

Good luck with your appeal though. I need you back, its boring as hell without your stupid ass around

+1

 

Shooting somebody who had their gun aimed at an ally is NOT RDM, regardless of what Tim did or did not do. Your associates got floored!, I apologize! But he shouldn't be aiming firearms at people if they don't want to be shot.

[Akira]

3 minutes ago, Matador1812 said:

Shooting somebody who had their gun aimed at an ally is NOT RDM, regardless of what Tim did or did not do. Your associates got floored!, I apologize! But he shouldn't be aiming firearms at people if they don't want to be shot.

I understand all that. The point is that, in a situation like that, the guy you killed had the right to make the first move. Just because he was holding a gun with the safety on doesn't automatically mean he was going to try to kill both of you. You never gave him a chance to escalate the situation or do anything at all.

You killed him because your friend had just killed his friend, and you assumed he was about to shoot both of you. The problem is that you can't know that for sure. At the moment you killed him, he was an Idle threat, not an Active threat. That's exactly why multiple staff members ruled it as RDM.

[Santana]

32 minutes ago, Akira said:

I understand all that. The point is that, in a situation like that, the guy you killed had the right to make the first move. Just because he was holding a gun with the safety on doesn't automatically mean he was going to try to kill both of you. You never gave him a chance to escalate the situation or do anything at all.

You killed him because your friend had just killed his friend, and you assumed he was about to shoot both of you. The problem is that you can't know that for sure. At the moment you killed him, he was an Idle threat, not an Active threat. That's exactly why multiple staff members ruled it as RDM.

Having your gun off safety and pointed at somebody with clear intent to use it is not an idle threat (especially after your friend dying) Do you think he took it off safety and pointed it because it looked cool? Or he was going to give us a strongly worded message on why that was wrong? Yeah come on don't be retarded, he was going to try and kill us lol.

[Akira]

38 minutes ago, Santana said:

Having your gun off safety and pointed at somebody with clear intent to use it is not an idle threat (especially after your friend dying) Do you think he took it off safety and pointed it because it looked cool? Or he was going to give us a strongly worded message on why that was wrong? Yeah come on don't be retarded, he was going to try and kill us lol.

I never denied any of the points you made. The issue is that, according to the RP rules, the fact that the guy's intentions may have been obvious doesn't change anything. He had the right to make the first move, and you can't kill someone based on what you think they're about to do.

For you to legally kill someone, they need to give you a reason by becoming an Active threat. The fact that he would most likely have tried to kill you doesn't give you the right to kill him before he actually attempts anything.