Jump to content
Server time: 2019-04-24, 20:59
Dan

Attempted Invalid Kill

Recommended Posts

How's it going guys? First thread in a minute. Anyway, it's about this verdict here:

My biggest question I guess is surrounding shipwreck's perma ban. He received 10 points for "Attempted Invalid Kill."

According to the standard punishment it should be:

image.png.4d33c5c9265db41865a90c13cd9ffb98.png

5-10 warning points. So I'm not saying he couldn't have gotten 10, but there's no mention in the verdict about this action from shipwreck. So it doesn't explain why he got the heavier punishment.

Also, I didn't read the report, just the verdict. And the verdict never talks about any of the rulebreaks besides Moody's initiation and lying. It says the kills are invalid since the initiation is, but these were attempted?

I guess this would be for @RandyRP @Phoenix @Pontiff

Share this post


Link to post

A slight oversight on our part, but regardless he was on final warning, so the result is the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

About the same topic, i'm slightly confused about the "lying in a report" part:

image.png.8e37c97bd2a3195fa931a134cd778f9d.png

IC means in character. IC and in game aren't necessarily the same thing. IC could also mean talking in character in Teamspeak could it not? Even the radio forums are "IC". The whole "lying in a report" verdict seems a bit contrived in my opinion.

Edited by Osku

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Osku said:

About the same topic, i'm slightly confused about the "lying in a report" part:

image.png.8e37c97bd2a3195fa931a134cd778f9d.png

IC means in character. IC and in game aren't necessarily the same thing. IC could also mean talking in character in Teamspeak could it not? Even the radio forums are "IC". The whole "lying in a report" verdict seems quite contrived in my opinion.

I full heartedly agree. I would like to think Scar posted the report in terms of them thinking it was a rulebreak and not just them pushing to get moody and shipwreck perm'd. 

The outcome was really BS and it's taken alot of faith away in the community.

Yet again another friend still helped with the verdict. That's pretty shitty...

I want to stay in this community. Don't get me wrong, but can we all just try push for better? 

Share this post


Link to post

Moody initiated on rights which he did not have and also lied in the report about having, kills done behalf of his initiation automatically become invalid, attempts to kill also became invalid. Also "talking on TeamSpeak" doesn't make you a dynamic.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, RyanOG said:

 

Yet again another friend still helped with the verdict. That's pretty shitty...

 

Yeah a "friend" helped with my verdict too. 
https://gyazo.com/2fd804505914251bda8830018fa823c1

15 minutes ago, Osku said:

About the same topic, i'm slightly confused about the "lying in a report" part:

image.png.8e37c97bd2a3195fa931a134cd778f9d.pngIC means in character. IC and in game aren't necessarily the same thing. IC could also mean talking in character in Teamspeak could it not? Even the radio forums are "IC". The whole "lying in a report" verdict seems a bit contrived in my opinion.

Doesn't work like that, I'm pretty sure Exotic or someone got in trouble because they talked over teamspeak and thought they had rights. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, YungBrandonRP said:

Yeah a "friend" helped with my verdict too. 
https://gyazo.com/2fd804505914251bda8830018fa823c1

Doesn't work like that, I'm pretty sure Exotic or someone got in trouble because they talked over teamspeak and thought they had rights. 

Okay no that rules that out then. @RandyRP I apologise. That does make sense. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, YungBrandonRP said:

Yeah a "friend" helped with my verdict too. 

I don't think Randy was biased, but he was in the group thread roster when the verdict happened. So yeah, there should be no surprise when people yell bias.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, AndreyQ said:

I don't think Randy was biased, but he was in the group thread roster when the verdict happened. So yeah, there should be no surprise when people yell bias.

I dont think Randy has left Kamenici. He's always been on their roster/cp.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, JimRP said:

Moody initiated on rights which he did not have and also lied in the report about having, kills done behalf of his initiation automatically become invalid, attempts to kill also became invalid. Also "talking on TeamSpeak" doesn't make you a dynamic.

But them coming together on a big rock on a mountain because they talked about it on the IC Radio comms would make them RP'ing together or am I wrong? So him saying on the Radio he got robbed and then meeting up with us so he can get his revenge and them then firing back on him while we stood next to him. Isn't that dynamic? I don't see any lie from Moody's side. I am also confused how we don't have defense rights when they shooting at us.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, TeutonicOG said:

But them coming together on a big rock on a mountain because they talked about it on the IC Radio comms would make them RP'ing together or am I wrong? So him saying on the Radio he got robbed and then meeting up with us so he can get his revenge and them then firing back on him while we stood next to him. Isn't that dynamic? I don't see any lie from Moody's side. I am also confused how we don't have defense rights when they shooting at us.

You don't gain defensive rights from someone else because they told you someone attacked them, you get it from having already been RP'ing with them and then coming to their aide. Otherwise its too easily abused.

 

Quote

If you are a defender - the one being initiated on or subjected to other hostile actions that threaten your life which you did not start or provoke - you are allowed to defend yourself by gaining  DEFENDER RIGHTS on the attackers. Defender rights allow you to kill attackers for 2 hours or until your character dies. Defender rights can be shared with anyone who you recently role played with as well as all your group members, if you are a part of an approved group.

This snipped above is the important part. My understand has always been you only share them with people you are RP'ing with/recently RP'ing with when you gain them. Otherwise there is no point to making this distinction as you can just run up to anyone and ask them to help you, defeating the purpose of the rule.

Edited by Rover

Share this post


Link to post

JimRP hit the nail on the head on this one. Regardless of "Lying in a report" (Which I'm inclined to agree with Osku that IC is different that In Game, which some meeting would have to take place in game for defensive rights to be gained if I'm not mistaken), the initiation was clearly invalid as seen in Moody's own clip therefore making every other kill/attempted kill from that invalid. The verdict seems fair minus the iffy "Lying in a report"

Share this post


Link to post

Jesus

 

@TeutonicOG For them to have defense rights they gotta roleplay before @Puncture got hold up not after 

 

He knew he broke a rule and tried to save himself and got fucked idk why people complain

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Rover said:

You don't gain defensive rights from someone else because they told you someone attacked them, you get it from having already been RP'ing with them and then coming to their aide. Otherwise its too easily abused.

 

This snipped above is the important part. My understand has always been you only share them with people you are RP'ing with/recently RP'ing with when you gain them. Otherwise there is no point to making this distinction as you can just run up to anyone and ask them to help you, defeating the purpose of the rule.

Yea i see.. And therefore we reinitiated in case the rules would not work like this. But I guess it is whatever.. pleading on fair play instead of perm banning 2 players is without any chances.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, JimRP said:

Moody initiated on rights which he did not have and also lied in the report about having, kills done behalf of his initiation automatically become invalid, attempts to kill also became invalid. Also "talking on TeamSpeak" doesn't make you a dynamic.

I feel this rule has a lot of leverage, it should either be specified or be open for flexibility.  This among a ton other rules are left open ended thus setting people up for failure.

 

Moving on, Lets not all sit and lie to ourselves, that report was pushed so hard to get people banned, it changed direction 3 time and honestly was bullshit. If your gonna ban people for breaking rules, Your rules should be 100% without a doubt made clear and unambiguous. In my opinion this would make sure there is no bias nor favoritism in reports as i feel far too many reports have reached a verdict due to...

Also as far as the lying, Moody said pont blank that the RP was dont OVER TS and in game, so where did he lie?

Thats all

Edited by ZombyOG

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, YungBrandonRP said:

Doesn't work like that, I'm pretty sure Exotic or someone got in trouble because they talked over teamspeak and thought they had rights. 

Just to make clear, I'm not saying that Moody's argument was valid at all, but in my books not knowing the rules properly does not mean you are lying in a report. I was only going of what was said in the verdict and I now know there might be more to it but all the verdict said was: Moody said he hired puncture through IC and they weren't close to eachother ingame -> he was lying in the report. Saying that you hired someone IC could mean a discord message, speaking in TS while in character or even the radio forums. I just wanted this clarified because I was confused by it.

Edited by Osku

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, TeutonicOG said:

Yea i see.. And therefore we reinitiated in case the rules would not work like this. But I guess it is whatever.. pleading on fair play instead of perm banning 2 players is without any chances.

Don't think I'm happy about it. I am very much a vocal proponent of fair play.

But I also strive to have a firm grasp in the rules and not only how they are worded but how they are justified in reports, as that is the real meat of the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, BorisRP said:

Jesus

 

@TeutonicOG For them to have defense rights they gotta roleplay before @Puncture got hold up not after 

 

He knew he broke a rule and tried to save himself and got fucked idk why people complain

Nobody knew About any rulebreaks. two of us aiming their gun at the 3 on the street and moody telling them our demands was not expected to be invalid. Therefore your guys Initiation on @Laroche in the other report would also have been invalid. but I guess pointing on others is easier to get someone banned.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Osku said:

Just to make clear, I'm not saying that Moody's argument was valid at all, but in my books not knowing the rules properly does not mean you are lying in a report. I was only going of what was said in the verdict and I now know there might be more to it but all the verdict said was: Moody said he hired puncture through IC and they weren't close to eachother ingame -> he was lying in the report. Saying that you hired someone IC could mean a discord message, speaking in TS while in character or even the radio forums. I just wanted this clarified because I was confused by it.

i also have to agree here, Whats the point of having IC Radio, Comms, or otherwise if they cant be used as if they are in game IC????

Share this post


Link to post

Well sharing Defense Rights because of Radio communication is leaving too much space for abuses tbh. So I can see why gaining Defence Rights from the robbery in bashnye is not valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, ZombyOG said:

i also have to agree here, Whats the point of having IC Radio, Comms, or otherwise if they cant be used as if they are in game IC????

Because a meeting in game in character with roleplay would have to occur for Defensive rights to be gained through dynamic groups, such as two approved groups. At least that's how I understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, AndreyQ said:

I don't think Randy was biased, but he was in the group thread roster when the verdict happened. So yeah, there should be no surprise when people yell bias.

Brandon would be correct, Randy hasn’t left our group or roster. Not sure why he’s on theirs.

Randy has given out verdicts against his friends and has even banned them, but of course that seems to have been overlooked because it doesn’t benefit one sides argument. Not that you were the one that started it Andrey, simply saw you mention it first and the thread that was put up in the ask the staff forums.

The person was on final, the verdict was fine because as shown it’s 5-10 depending on the GMs decision. They’d have been banned either way.

9 minutes ago, TeutonicOG said:

Yea i see.. And therefore we reinitiated in case the rules would not work like this. But I guess it is whatever.. pleading on fair play instead of perm banning 2 players is without any chances.

Without any chances? You get 30 points total before you get booted mate, it’s not difficult to avoid getting them. 3-4 years here, not one IG ban and I’ve been in a lot of high profile hostile groups. They had a chance to show their side of the story and it didn’t work out for them in this case. They can always appeal for another team to take a look at the case but otherwise there’s no point in arguing your point in every damn thread that calls for a conversation about a rule or verdict because it really doesn’t increase their chance of returning.

Edited by Mexi

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Mexi said:

Brandon would be correct, Randy hasn’t left our group or roster. Not sure why he’s on theirs.

Randy has given out verdicts against his friends and has even banned them, but of course that seems to have been overlooked because it doesn’t benefit one sides argument. Not that you were the one that started it Andrey, simply saw you mention it first and the thread that was put up in the ask the staff forums.

The person was on final, the verdict was fine because as shown it’s 5-10 depending on the GMs decision. They’d have been banned either way.

Without any chances? You get 30 points total before you get booted mate, it’s not difficult to avoid getting them, 3-4 years here, not one IG ban and I’ve been in a lot of high profile hostile groups. They had a chance to show their side of the story and it didn’t work out for them in this case. They can always appeal for another team to take a look at the case but otherwise there’s no point in arguing your point in every damn thread that calls for a conversation about a rule or verdict because it really doesn’t increase their chance of returning.

Do you want to tell me to not leave my oppinion about something?
I am not trying to get a returning for anyone here. I am trying to point out things that should be handled different in my oppinion.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Mexi said:

Brandon would be correct, Randy hasn’t left our group or roster. Not sure why he’s on theirs.

Randy has given out verdicts against his friends and has even banned them, but of course that seems to have been overlooked because it doesn’t benefit one sides argument. Not that you were the one that started it Andrey, simply saw you mention it first and the thread that was put up in the ask the staff forums.

The person was on final, the verdict was fine because as shown it’s 5-10 depending on the GMs decision. They’d have been banned either way.

Without any chances? You get 30 points total before you get booted mate, it’s not difficult to avoid getting them. 3-4 years here, not one IG ban and I’ve been in a lot of high profile hostile groups. They had a chance to show their side of the story and it didn’t work out for them in this case. They can always appeal for another team to take a look at the case but otherwise there’s no point in arguing your point in every damn thread that calls for a conversation about a rule or verdict because it really doesn’t increase their chance of returning.

i see where you coming from, BUT, just because your not in a group with someone doesnt mean you dont have OOC Bonds or friendships that could cause a Bias judgement.

2 minutes ago, TeutonicOG said:

Do you want to tell me to not leave my oppinion about something?
I am not trying to get a returning for anyone here. I am trying to point out things that should be handled different in my oppinion.

agreed upon, theres too many loop holes and undefined rules, this is one of the main problems i continuously see in rulebreaks and reports.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, ZombyOG said:

i see where you coming from, BUT, just because your not in a group with someone doesnt mean you dont have OOC Bonds or friendships that could cause a Bias judgement.

As Roland and Jim both explained in the thread questioning this, there is zero way to quantify and measure how much bias comes from how much friendship.

 

They rely on staff not to weigh in on things where they feel biased. And there are enough other staff members this should be okay.

 

At some point it comes down to trusting the communities staff.

 

See the below

 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...