Jump to content
Server time: 2019-02-18, 03:14 WE ARE RECRUITING

Smoke

L E G E N D
Irrelevant Ex-Admin
  • Content Count

    3992
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16
  • Country

    United Kingdom

Smoke last won the day on October 27 2017

Smoke had the most liked content!

TIME PLAYED

395 h Bean Bandit

Community Reputation

2083 Veteran

Account information

  • Whitelisted YES
  • Last played 1 month ago

About Smoke

  • Birthday 11/06/1997

Personal Information

  • Sex
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

  1. Just chucking these here too for reference. Osku asked for a chat in a private TS and this is what was said. <16:36:08> "Jamie": Not really. What did you want to talk about exactly? <16:37:06> "Osku": Just wondering about your reasoning as to why it wouldnt be FB. You dont go into much detail in the appeal <16:37:58> "Jamie": Ask on the appeal and follow procedure then <16:43:26> "Osku": Dont think the personal issues and history behind it (between you and the other party) are something i feel comfortable with or necessary to bring up in the appeal <16:43:47> "Osku": Though you would like to give your side of it <16:44:06> "Jamie": May I ask a question? What happened to not looking into context? <16:44:23> "Jamie": It sounds like you guys are assuming that I hate the guy and you're going to deny it because I was "flamebaiting" him. <16:44:47> "Osku": When it is clearly aimed at someone like your comment is we have to take it into consideration especially when the other side clearly wasnt ok with it <16:45:22> "Jamie": I wasn't okay with a lot of things in the past. Is this an OOC hate investigation or looking into my post? <16:46:25> "Osku": This isnt any investigation, I just thought I would ask your reasoning behind the appeal since im thinking of solving it <16:47:32> "Jamie": All I said in my post is "Watch this guy @voodoo" and then several assumptions were made from the team and Watchman's side was favoured over mine because he's a staff member and I'm a "salty ex staff." You didn't even ask me for my view when you issued the points, why are you asking me now? <16:50:05> "Osku": I wasnt online when it was discussed but the way I see it atm is that the only reason for you to post it was to get a reaction from the other side since you arent on "friendly terms" and it wasnt banter or anything of the sort. If you hadnt directed it straight at them with the tag and posting it on their status update it would have been a case of not taking context into account <16:50:27> "Jamie": Who told you that? " but the way I see it atm is that the only reason for you to post it was to get a reaction from the other side since you arent on "friendly terms"" <16:50:49> "Jamie": I didn't know he wasn't on friendly terms with me? <16:50:57> "Jamie": I don't talk to the guy, and it was harmless banter. <16:51:33> "Osku": The other side didnt feel that way, thats why it was pointed <16:51:47> "Jamie": So you listened to their side and not mine? <16:51:53> "Jamie": I guess the perks of being in the staff team. <16:52:25> "Osku": They obviously werent a part of the discussion in staff general <16:52:37> "Jamie": And Watchman was? When he was involved? <16:53:08> "Jamie": I'm going to post these chat logs on the appeal if that's alright. <16:56:10> "Osku": I guess <16:56:53> "Osku": Although as I said I didnt want to ask in the appeal because I didnt think it necessarry to bring up the issues behind them in the appeal <16:57:05> "Osku": And i just wanted to hear your reasoning <16:57:25> "Osku": Since you just say in the report that you have no clue why you got pointed <17:01:10> "Jamie": Never fell out with the guy. <17:01:27> "Jamie": We used to be friends, we drifted away and didn't talk to much anymore. <17:01:37> "Jamie": So please stop making assumptions. I have no ill will against him. <17:02:38> "Osku": I havent made any assumptions thats why I wanted to talk to you in the first place <17:02:43> "Osku": to avoid making assumptions <17:03:11> "Jamie": You're saying I have ill will against him, you're favouring his side over mine. <17:03:15> "Jamie": I told you, no issues with the guy. <17:04:25> "Jamie": That shouldn't even be a factor. This is why we don't look into context and not investigate into things. You look at the post alone, unless its blatantly obvious. <17:04:43> "Jamie": You've seen people tag me in status updates where people are talking to Sleepy, it's a joke. <17:04:55> "Jamie": The points are a joke*^ <17:10:28> "Jamie": The last messages with him are fine too, no hate was shared. <17:13:50> "Jamie": It was actually lovehearts looking into it. I don't feel obligated to show you those though. Just a small TDLR. An assumption was made that I have ill will against @Watchman. He obviously reported it and said he was upset with it, and the assumption was made that the post was made with ill intent and I was issued points. The staff team do not look into context behind posts, and it seems that procedure was broken in this case and clearly was looked into, hence the chat logs above. I even looked at the last chats I had with him and no hate was exchanged, so I was purely given points based upon the fact that someone saw a harmless post and they got upset.
  2. Smoke, more like joke! Hah! 😎

    1. Smoke

      Smoke

      You put the cool emoji which is point repellent. 

      smh, smh.

    2. Kordruga

      Kordruga

      No flame here! 😮

  3. Congrats on the 1k posts. I'm almost at 4k myself.

    1. Show previous comments  4 more
    2. Smoke

      Smoke

      What are you comparing too? 1000 posts is quite a lot ?

    3. Eagle
    4. Dan

      Dan

      Beanz over post count anyway lmao

  4. aw i remember when i left staff too ❤️ 

    1. Smoke

      Smoke

      You didn't even get GM ❤️

       

       

       

      (putting a heart for reassurance on not getting points)

    2. Dan

      Dan

      i still wrote more verdicts than any of the staff will ever know (except for the ones that posted it for me) and more verdicts than multiple admin promotions ❤️ 

  5. ʕ ͡° ʖ̯ ͡°ʔ @Quiet @Dan

    1. Show previous comments  5 more
    2. Quiet

      Quiet

      honestly screw smoke he's a flamebaiting jerk ?

      disclaimer: i'm just kidding btw! we're dating and i'm not flaming!

    3. Smoke
    4. Dan

      Dan

      i thought i was dating smoke

  6. Link to the source of punishment (report/post): Why the verdict is not fair: I received 5 points for telling someone to watch someone. I'm really trying to get my head around why this is flaming. The verdict isn't fair because it's not flaming? It states in the warning message of my supposed intentions behind the post, but that's a clear assumption from the team and bad practice in my opinion. Additional statements/comments explaining your point of view: Uh, I saw a post and made a lighthearted comment towards them. Several people have done it in the past to myself and @Quiet, why is this case different? I messaged @Onyx about the points this morning, but he didn't get back to me. Maybe a busy day or something, I dunno. What would you like to achieve with this appeal: The points revoked and post reinstated. If denied, I'd like further details as to why it was considered flaming. What could you have done better?: Not sure in all honesty.
  7. If you’re trying now, the server is currently offline.
  8. This isn’t a thread to discuss whether there are 2 genders or not, it’s a suggestion thread. For me, it’s -1. If people want to expand on their gender, then add it in the backstory.
  9. Never did a leaving message, but thanks @Roland for giving me another shot in staff. Enjoyed my time, apologises for having to leave during a shitty time, but you know why.

    Shout out to a few people who did/do a stellar job;

    @Ark

    @Spartan

    @Harvey

    @Semiazas

    @Misho

    @Zilly

    @Quiet

    You're all good lads, thanks for putting effort into the team and showing some passion for it. 

    tenor.gif?itemid=5428943

    1. Show previous comments  8 more
    2. Harvey

      Harvey

      You too Jamie. stay safe mate. 

    3. JimRP

      JimRP

      You did a great job Jamie. Take care.

    4. Spartan

      Spartan

      Ngl, I had to read the comments to see who this is ? 

      Glad you got your legend rank bud

  10. whoa wait what? Where do you two think you are going @Sleepyhead @Jamie ?

    1. Smoke

      Smoke

      We're just focusing on IRL stuff. Congratulations on the promo. 

  11. tumblr_m7u316r0Ai1r5g67po1_500.gif

    burn

    1. Quiet
    2. Ark

      Ark

      Way to bright for me gotta go back to sleep.

    3. Quiet

      Quiet

      Nice, I can agree with more sleep.

  12. We'd like to make an addition to the verdict, along with the appeal located below: @Shroud Just because you are dosing up on pain medication does not exempt you from roleplaying out torture. You made some effort via text, then just say "ouch" and things of the sort. We'd like to see you making more of an effort when it comes to torture roleplay, and not using the excuse that you couldn't feel anything or being used to it. If I shoved a screwdriver in your finger now, you wouldn't just be saying ouch, you'd probably be rolling on the floor in tears like anyone else. Please bare this in mind, and take this as a verbal warning.
  13. Hi Brandon, I hope you're doing fantastic. A team of staff have reviewed the report at hand, along with your appeal, and have decided the verdict is wrong and will be adjusted. First of all, you were given a 5 day ban for invalid kill. This is incorrect and we apologise. The original ban should have been met with a 3 day ban for that outcome. But alas, we have decided that the verdict is still incorrect with the proper punishment for that rule break, and we will explain why. Shroud was a hostage for a while along with his ally against District. The role play seemed fine and things were going well. Your party initiate and tell everyone to put their hands up, which is what they were doing. After the conflict with District, you storm the building shouting "You greasy monkey" and kill him where he stood. We have decided that an OOC slur isn't enough to constitute as role play. Your ban will be lifted from a 3 day ban to a 7 day ban, along with 15 points. The combat log excuses are down to faults of your own and not our issue. You left the server, joined the wrong one and realised your mistake but it was too late. Even though it's a mistake, it doesn't exempt you from the rules. Some people make the mistake of logging out 2 minutes early, but it's down to them to prevent that from happening. With that said: Outcome: Appeal Denied, Punishment amended to 7 Day Ban, 15 Points. Signed by @Jamie & @Sleepyhead
  14. Please list all your allies involved in the situation. Thanks.
×
×
  • Create New...