Hunt689 Permaban

[taketheshot56]

A warning is all I wanted really from this post as I could talk about rule semantics issue in another post. Furthermore, as I previously stated, I wouldn't have any problem bringing up this rule issue on the public forum (Although that is only if I'm not permabanned as there wouldn't very well be a point). I'd hope to bring change to this deprecated rule and the egregious act of permabaning without warning.

I appreciate your understanding that a warning would suffice better than an instant permaban which has been one of the main points of my whole argument.

Thank you very much for your comment

That's the whole bit of the rule and it will not change, its very very clear cut and says in bold. If you break the erp/18+ rule there are ZERO warnings. Its a perma ban. You broke the rule willingly. You knew the rule and decided to do it anyway

[Mr_Richards_]

That's the whole bit of the rule and it will not change, its very very clear cut and says in bold. If you break the erp/18+ rule there are ZERO warnings. Its a perma ban. You broke the rule willingly. You knew the rule and decided to do it anyway

"Rule 1. No Erotic Role Play (ERP), erotic content, or 18+ sexual content - Roleplay intended to elicit a sexual response from the receiver(s), including but not limited to writing stories (WGW) or posting links to adult content. Doing so will almost always result in an instant permaban from our server. This is not to be confused with distasteful but acceptable marine bravado such as scratching your crotch or cup-checking. However, these actions could still be susceptible to Marine Law."

Clearly you are misunderstanding what I'm saying (Which is very much ironic). You are correct that the rule does infact state here "Doing so will almost always result in an instant permaban from our server." But this is a multi-dimensional statement. You look at it in plain speak and see ERP = Permaban (NO Questions). You must understand that not everyone views this rule in that same light and they shouldn't because it doesn't say anything of that sort verbatim. It states that 'almost always' when you talk about (WGW) or posting adult content in the game, you will be perma-banned. Of course it states 'not limited to' but that in turn creates a very large grey area. In this rule they're talking about posting adult pornopgrahic sites (Which is in now way anything I did) as being 'almost always' a permaban. If you do not understand that there could be cause for confusion in enforcing a rule as vague as this one then you are more blind than you know.

Now you mention this rule says there are 'ZERO' warnings. You are incorrect. This rule states absolutely nothing about there being zero warnings only that in 'most circumstances' when talking about adult pornographic sites will there be a perma-ban. It also states nothing about 'Zero Tolerance' which I've seen many admins touting around as this rule being in play. Where are admins deriving this line of thinking? Because It undoubtedly isn't clear cut in the rules.

Now perhaps you may know that it's zero tolerance because of how admins dealt with previous cases. Not only is that not, and should not, be a precedent to standby as you're following an idea not a rule but also by the fact that no average player would know about the supposed 'Zero tolerance' rule because as stated, isn't cut in stone.

Now we also take a look at the rule and it states "Not to be confused with marine bravado" as these are still "susceptible to Marine Law." Here you have a case where someone is talking IC about adjusting a crotch as being susceptible to 'Marine Law' and then you have a case of someone posting pornographic sites as being 'almost always' resulting in an instant permaban. Do you not see the massive grey area this creates? Does this mean that when someone talks about there 'cup' but immediately say one nasty word they get an instant permaban? How do you know when someone crosses that threshold? Is this a multilayered rule with variable punishments depending on the offense? Once again, you wouldn't know because it clearly doesn't state it. This rule could easily be interpreted as a rule that has a multi-layered punishment system. And then as a player, how do you know which layer you're on? Are you on the permaban layer? The 3 day ban layer? Perhaps the 7 day ban layer? A warning layer? You couldn't know because it *clearly* isn't stated.

Now one could argue that the rules are vague to allow admins to use their own discretion on a case by case basis. Now not only is that a very dangerous rule as you'd have extremely varied punishments and you could just run into a 'hot-headed' mod that didn't like you, but you also are attempting to make it an instant permaban out of a rule that is determined by the mod/admins discretion. Meaning if a Mod named Jim liked Person A, they'd give them a warning. Person B however did something Jim didn't like IC or OOC and now he's going to handout a permaban. And perhaps person A also didn't fully understand the extent of the rule. I'd hope you can see the extremely clear and troubling issue by using this system. You're essentially in an anarchistic system with admins having arbitrary rulings on whether they essiantly 'like you' or not and give out extremely varied punishments, potential detrimental ones, to honest and good-willed players. This is getting a bit further away from the topic but I feel like I needed to make this clear before someone tried to defend this nonsense.

God forbid any admin has some sort of vendetta against you and watches you like a hawk to say anything that could 'elicit' a sexual response (Which could be anything).

"You broke the rule willingly. You knew the rule and decided to do it anyway"

Friend, you speak of boldness as if you know it inside and out and then make a statement like that.

You're telling me that YOU knew, I knew; the zero tolerance policing on this community, what is considered ERP and what isn't ERP, what punishment is given in what grey area. Not ONLY do you think that, but you say that I purposely was trying to undermine this rule with ill intent. A *first time offender* who has been writing long-winded comments on his own appeal telling you over-and-over again about the confusion and misunderstanding of the rule and its vague nature. You knew ALL of this from the, let's say, 5 to 6 sentences I told you before you permabanned me? Unless you're some sort of omniscient being that people pray to, I sincerely hope you don't believe you have some sort of telepathic abilities that allowed you to listen to what I was thinking during the time of that incident.

You're correct. I knew about the ERP rule. I absolutely did know about it because I read the rules as required before you play on any roleplay server. What I didn't know is all the fine and hidden text that admins have been reading from this that is in no way stated. Nor should the way this rule is being arbitrarily enforced, be enforced the way it subsequently has been.

This is the problem. This is what I've said in the past dozen or so posts I wrote which, once again, I hope you read very, very thoroughly.

Now look. I'm not trying to attack you. I'm not trying to say you're a bad mod. In fact I do believe you were trying your hardest to protect the community. I don't think you have any ill-will sentiment towards community either. None of this is what I'm saying. I just want you to understand the mindframe and situation I'm coming from. That's all. And it can be hard especially considering the bias you'd have because you're the mod that banned me. All you have to do read through my previous posts and attempt to stand in my shoes. The admins that able to put themselves in the shoes of offender are undoubtedly the best admins out there. The ones that show compassion, humility, honesty, and remove themselves of all biases.

Thanks for the comment.

[Grimcad]

I very rarely support the lifting of 18+/ERP bans. And this one is no different. Your arguments have not swayed me.

- 1

[Mr_Richards_]

I very rarely support the lifting of 18+/ERP bans. And this one is no different. Your arguments have not swayed me.

- 1

"I very rarely support the lifting of 18+/ERP bans. And this one is no different."

Essentially this answer is yet another 'irregardless' answer that admin after admin has been posting here. Let me roleplay a scenario for you to show you what I mean.
---------------------------------
*A man is convicted of murder by running over a pedestrian in the middle of the street and thus is sent to trial. The prosecutor begins reading his statement, telling the court the man killed the pedestrian intentionally, therefore he should be sentenced to life in prison*

The defendant's lawyer, who meticulously gathered evidence proving the guilties man innocence begins to read their statement to the judge presiding over the case.

Defendants Lawyer: "This man can't be guilty as he was home during time of the crime."
Judge: "Irregardless, the defendant is guilty of murder(ERP)."
Defendants Lawyer: "Not only was he home at the time of the murder, the defendant doesn't even own the same model of car used in the accident."
Judge: "Irregardless, the defendant is guilty of murder(ERP)."
Defendants Lawyer: "The footage from across the street proves that the defendant was neither the same race or gender of the supposed criminal."
Judge: "Irregardless, the defendant is guilty of murder(ERP)."
Defendants Lawyer: "The defendant also has no criminal record and is a charitable donor to many local shelters."
Judge: "Irregardless, the defendant is guilty of murder(ERP)."
Defendants Lawyer: "The defendant only learned of the tragic fate of the victim when he was watching the news the day after the incident."
Judge: "Irregardless, the defendant is guilty of murder(ERP)."
-------------------------------

This of course is a very oversimplified roleplay concept but the logical thinking and practice among many of the staff here have been following this exact scenario. Not listening to nor wanting to listen to the defendant who the judge already, in his mind, decided was guilty from the point at which the prosecutor spoke their initial words. Furthermore, some of these statements are so generic and lacking in any substance that it wouldn't be hard to believe these are written on a .txt file so you can paste this message on appeals you dislike. I mean really looking into your statement, what clue addresses a single argument I made. This message could apply to anyone, and to be frank, adds absolutely nothing to the discussion.

I'm not gonna repeat my defense because, holy moly, have I said it and re-stated it about a dozen or so times now.

"Your arguments have not swayed me."

I'd really like to know what argument would sway you? I truly would. What mystifying words would be able to help you understand my predicament. I sincerely have no idea what could move an immovable person such as yourself.

What's more is you're telling me not one argument swayed you. Not one bit. Not even one argument I made. Not one or any even peaked your interest. I am that abysmal at defending myself that there is absolutely nothing that could possibly relate to you or even make any logical sense. Because I gotta tell you, that's pretty damn depressing (on my part). That's absolutely horrendous. I've written how many words now? And I'm just that appalling of making one relatable, understandable, logical argument that could make one iota of sense. Not even a specific argument either. No quotes or anything. Just everything I've been say these past few days, all bad.

I'll just add this copied sentence below because if an admin can do it, then hey, guess a simpleton like myself can do it too.

Thanks for the comment.

[Dorkkeli]

I very rarely support the lifting of 18+/ERP bans. And this one is no different. Your arguments have not swayed me.

- 1

Agreed. This is pretty much just arguing about loopholes etc. in the rules.
-1

[freemysoul]

1-

Right, let me break this down to you. When you join the server you see a very large bright red piece of text Read the rules! Ignorance is NOT an excuse. This is a written and legal form of contract/term and conditions that you have signed by joining the server and playing on it.

Moving on, Even if COPA isn't in effect, The ruling for ZERO 18+ content is there and is in effect on our server as we would like to keep the server a safe environment for people underaged (Including some of our staff).

So in general, by not knowing of the rules to their fullest you have not only breached the rules, but you have also breached the legal binding of our contract.

Contract: A contract is a legally binding promise made between at least 2 parties in order to fulfill an obligation (Reading and playing by the rules) in exchange for something of value (The ability to access and play on the server).

[Sir Lordington]

If you want to discuss the rule and propose it be changed, you've got a General Discussion forum for it. The status of COPA is compeltely irrelevant to this case. There's a rule against ERP and other 18+ content. What you wrote was inequivocally explicit sexual content, and we do not tolerate that here. The permaban was completely justified, and being tired, bored or having had a bad day is no excuse.

You did the crime, now do the time. This is denied.

[Emeraldblood]

With an attitude like that, I can promise you this will never be lifted. You're not here to try to find loopholes on how you're not guilty, you're here to tell us why you deserve another chance to play on the server and you're only digging that hole deeper with appeals like these. If your next appeal is going to be like this, don't bother making it because it's gonna be denied.