Appeal

[Alfie]

Steam Name: https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198149431514/

Name of the Admin you were banned by: Fedora

How long is the ban for?: Permanent, even though i barely have any major infractions previously

The reason you were banned?: Apperently metagame.

Why do you wish to be unbanned?: Yeah ,i don't understand what's going on right now. Fedora, mind giving me a rundown of the situation and why the ban was carried out? As i personally cannot put my finger on why i was banned. Unless it's about the recent situation, otherwise i do want to see some clear evidence of my supposingly metagame so i can display my point of view and defense.


Do you have any picture or video evidence to support your reason?: N/A until a casuse can be put forward or perspective.

Were there any witnesses who can help in this appeal?: (List the steam and/or character names of them or tag them): N/A

 

[Fedora]

Here is the situation:
@Travis asked me to oversee the situation where his group would assassinate Brooks. They have video proof of this.

They corner Brooks and get ready to pretty much kill him. During this time, I told an admin to overlook your behaviour and I also took down notes of what you did. Two minutes prior to the event, you were with an trial admin trying to get a base claimed for yourself. You go down towards the area near the homeless shelter and stop for 10 seconds or so, same time when the guy is being asked to be put against the wall. You immediatly head to the area and then do the /mecs to prepare yourself and pretty much allow for your friend to escape.



Here is the video proof from the player's side. I don't have proof of any steam logs.

 

[Alfie]

Ah okay, so it's about the recent situation then. Well, I really can't see where the metagame is coming into place here. All I see is assumptions based on actions taken IC rather than rock-solid metagame evidence which makes this kinda fall short on its own.

This entire situation was already taken back when one of my gang members approached me about a possible trade that was happening. So, I myself got strapped with an SVD along with kevlar armor and an incendiary grenade. We came to an agreement that I was going to watch his back in this trade and that was what I did.

(Logs)
'Hitman' whispers "Come with me."
Daniel Baynes whispers "What's up, pack?"
'Hitman' whispers "I'mma trade TOZ and one armor for an AK."
'Hitman' whispers "We've got good amount of ammo for possible AK."
Daniel Baynes whispers "Easy.i'll watch from above. Where at?"
'Hitman' whispers "Shelter."
Daniel Baynes whispers "I'll watch your back from afar."


Didn't take very long until the situation became rather suspicious as none from the opposite side of trade had shown up at the meeting location down at the shelter. Hitman whispers into my ear calling out the possibility of a "Set up" or "Ambush" which puts me on high alert. Especially based on recent discoveries as our faction is high on the hit-list amongst other players. Additionally this is not the first time a situation like this is happening as it's almost predictable at this point, as we've had encounters like these before.

(Logs)
'Hitman' whispers "Back to crib."
'Hitman' whispers "This shit is bananas, she probably called cops for a set up."

While this is happening, I would take the opportunity to check up real quick with an admin about an apartment that has been left inactive. Meanwhile, the conversation with the admin falls short for a brief moment, as I begin hearing people talking over a stolen radio which was used in gathering intel on possible operations on our faction. As it was taken from a guy who tried killing me. And the channel had not been changed since I last got ahold of it.


[3-14 DQT61] [A man in a mask with a blue kevlar ve...] whispers: "Hello hello."
[3-14 DQT61] [A tall scarred Italian male stands be...] whispers: "All clear outside."

Taking this between the lines to the possible assumptions of a "set up" or "ambush" makes me bolt to the shelter where they might have "cleared or secured" the outside of the building where Hitman was going to have the trade based on the radio. Hints of movement are seen on the 2nd floor while I make my way down to the homeless shelter from the balcony area. I'd swiftly peek inside and don't find either Hitman or anyone related to the trade. I'd glance an eye around the slum park before making my way up to the crib where previous scouting attempts by other people have been attempted to gain knowledge of our base. It was my duty to watch over hitman which I failed and with desperation, I'm swiftly met with a /me while making my way up the stairs.

*** [An Italian accented man standing tall...] searches pockts and takes everything

It's not very hard to puzzle 2 and 2 together in what was happening as I'd begin peaking around the doorway before seeing Hitman being threatened at point-blank range. A rush of adrenaline and shakiness takes over my body in real life seen by my two /me's of throwing an incendiary grenade as my spelling is horrible. Which just proves the shock of seeing the situation unfolding in front of me.

* Daniel Baynes WOuld equip the indciary
* Daniel Baynes woudl throw it

And from there on end, I end up banned after trying to escape.

After seeing the video clip of the operation taking place, I noticed the same frequency on the radio I heard is not the same as the one they are using in the video. After doing some digging myself, it seems like this is a cause of pinpoint luck on my end. As the radio call, I got actually had nothing to do with the operation. The unknown context of the person sending the message of "securing/clearing the outside" was enough for me to go bolting down into the shelter. It seems to be more of something happening at the right time at the right moment, because if it wasn't for that radio that was stolen by a rebel that tried killing me then I'd probably wouldn't have had a reason to go look for hitman.

Anyone can go into the logs and see that the timestamps add up. I got un-contexted intel about some sort of "securing or clearing the outside" that could very well have been the shelter which hitman was supposed to have a trade-in, meanwhile hitman was being held at gunpoint. It's just a coincidence.

Additionally, if I were to equip all my guns or equipment and then run straight to the location where hitman would be held that itself would be enough of a reason for metagame. But the fact that wasn't the case and the entire thing unfolded in front of my eyes and prepared beforehand says a lot.

 

[Rabithunter]

I have been asked to give my opinion, based and what I can read and watch in this thread. At the time, I had zero involvement, as an admin or a player.


I have taken a look at the logs, rummaging through them and can say for certain that what your saying here, tallies up correctly, from your point of view. I cannot confirm or deny the other parties exact phrases or remarks in the logs, as I don't have a real name to retrieve them with at the time of writing. Saying that though, I agree with what you have said about yourself here.


Again, this is something I cannot confirm or deny, as the name in question is not the characters real name, thus will not show in the logs, other than being used by a third party.


I cannot find this in the logs either, meaning I cannot confirm or deny this one as well.


Yes. This is very concrete, as it can be seen clearly in the video evidence supplied by Fedora.


This is very much confirmed in the logs, but not the video evidence. The reason for this, is because of it being a /mec, not a /me. From a personal standpoint, when engaged in a fire fight, its really best to make sure the other party involved can see your actions, as to allow them the opportunity to react accordingly. In doing this, rather than it being a meta-game scenario, and only for this instance alone, I would have called this a power-game. My reason for this is simple. You actions being quiet, could not be seen by the other party involved, as can be seen in the video evidence. Not only that, but the shortness of the performance is something I personally frown upon as well. "would equip the incendiary", could have been changed to something better, like "Reaches into their bag, quietly pulling out an incendiary and holding it firmly in their hand, ready to throw". This would have been done as a normal /me. Yes, the other party would have seen it on their side, but cannot react to it, as you make no noise in doing so and cannot be seen doing it from their perspective. You then "would throw it". You could have done something like "Peers round the edge of the doorway, looking inside as they held the incendiary. He pulls the pin, throwing it through and igniting the area of impact, sending flames up and around the two individuals". Yes, this is a much more elaborate way of doing it, but would have avoided some scrutiny against you.

Personally, I'm not sure there is enough evidence to warrant a full on permanent ban. The video only shows your entry into the situation, when the player recording it turns to see you, after the incendiary has been thrown. I cannot find the radio messages from Gus, nor the accomplice cupcake. The logs are showing your entire side of the story, but without the real names of the others involved, I cannot make a comment on anything further. If the admin overseeing has anymore evidence to give, whether in support to this claim or not, then I would be able to give some more input. I hope this make some sense for you

 

[Alfie]

I have been asked to give my opinion, based and what I can read and watch in this thread. At the time, I had zero involvement, as an admin or a player.

I have taken a look at the logs, rummaging through them and can say for certain that what your saying here, tallies up correctly, from your point of view. I cannot confirm or deny the other parties exact phrases or remarks in the logs, as I don't have a real name to retrieve them with at the time of writing. Saying that though, I agree with what you have said about yourself here.

Again, this is something I cannot confirm or deny, as the name in question is not the characters real name, thus will not show in the logs, other than being used by a third party.

I cannot find this in the logs either, meaning I cannot confirm or deny this one as well.

Yes. This is very concrete, as it can be seen clearly in the video evidence supplied by Fedora.

This is very much confirmed in the logs, but not the video evidence. The reason for this, is because of it being a /mec, not a /me. From a personal standpoint, when engaged in a fire fight, its really best to make sure the other party involved can see your actions, as to allow them the opportunity to react accordingly. In doing this, rather than it being a meta-game scenario, and only for this instance alone, I would have called this a power-game. My reason for this is simple. You actions being quiet, could not be seen by the other party involved, as can be seen in the video evidence. Not only that, but the shortness of the performance is something I personally frown upon as well. "would equip the incendiary", could have been changed to something better, like "Reaches into their bag, quietly pulling out an incendiary and holding it firmly in their hand, ready to throw". This would have been done as a normal /me. Yes, the other party would have seen it on their side, but cannot react to it, as you make no noise in doing so and cannot be seen doing it from their perspective. You then "would throw it". You could have done something like "Peers round the edge of the doorway, looking inside as they held the incendiary. He pulls the pin, throwing it through and igniting the area of impact, sending flames up and around the two individuals". Yes, this is a much more elaborate way of doing it, but would have avoided some scrutiny against you.

Personally, I'm not sure there is enough evidence to warrant a full on permanent ban. The video only shows your entry into the situation, when the player recording it turns to see you, after the incendiary has been thrown. I cannot find the radio messages from Gus, nor the accomplice cupcake. The logs are showing your entire side of the story, but without the real names of the others involved, I cannot make a comment on anything further. If the admin overseeing has anymore evidence to give, whether in support to this claim or not, then I would be able to give some more input. I hope this make some sense for you

Thank you, I highly appreciate a neutral stance from both sides and I would gladly hand you the real name of "Hitman", but I myself have forgotten his real name and can't exactly hope online at this moment and check due to me being banned. I can say without a doubt that these logs do exist. I wouldn't be making this up as it would be an instant denial if that were the cause. I do know the log finder software Willard is currently using can be hard at times. I've had previous interactions with admins trying to find logs that I've displayed earlier that weren't found. Only for it to be hidden in a wall of text amongst all other logs.

I don't want to be rude or anything but it's easy from an outside view to be pointing out nick-picks of what people did wrong in an encounter. I would by all means do a respectable /Me with a few more words and perhaps a more detailed version of what I was doing. But the heat of the moment and a few seconds to spare in situations like these can be a moment of life and death. Additionally with getting slapped with almost a shock of adrenaline and shakiness of seeing one of my members being mugged. Which can almost be related to my spelling in those two /me's. I wasn't doing this in bad faith, I was doing it for a good principal and I wasn't going to do a 5 min /me of throwing a grenade as that could of very well changed the entirety of this situation which is the negative thing about HL2RP and being text-based.


As stated by the rules, the warm-up period is the reaction time. As long as you do a /me, /mec or /mel depending on the situation then no rules should have been broken. In this situation a /mec would be the preferred choice as they had no sight of me, it was obviously an ambush from my perspective and they wouldn't have had knowledge about what was about to happen. Meaning the /mec was a preferred choice in this matter when throwing a grenade. If I were to do a /me or /mel then it's quite easy to meta the action that it's about to unfold. Sure, the person reading the /me of getting a grenade thrown at them might not display any actions or signs of movements at the time. But they now obviously become aware of what is about to happen even though it's an ambush which would ruin the entire roleplaying scenario if you can see my perspective on it.

 

[Maroon]

Hi Alfie,

Due to a recent ban request made on your person AND the implications of this appeal, in particular, the staff team has elicited to permanently remove you from the server due to your constant transgression. If you'd like, you are free to appeal again in two months.