Jump to content
Server time: 2018-06-22, 20:29


Newcomer of the Year


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Castiel last won the day on March 30 2017

Castiel had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1107 Veteran

Account information

  • Whitelisted NO

About Castiel

  • Birthday 02/04/1996

Personal Information

  • Sex

Recent Profile Visitors

  • Whitename

  • lukaszxe

  • BorisRP

  • Dom Is Dead

  • Elk

Single Status Update

See all updates by Castiel

  1. Castiel



    I would never even dream of being this rude and unprofessional whilst in the Staff team. Making digs at community members for no reason, good way to lead by example.

    1. Reav


      When I got posting rights removed for leaving thread, i couldn't see my whitelist app cos i was blacklisted, so i joined TS to see if someone could help me get it and he just asked me why i wanted it,

      'because I wrote it and it's mine??'

      yeah but why do you want it?

      'Because i spent half an hour writing it and I want MY story why does it concern you what i want to do with my story?' came across as rude dno m8 just wanted me story not an investigation :ph34r:

    2. Castiel



    3. Caesar


      Some context. My first PM. Considering this is after Castiel had reported an identical post from Mexi (which indicates he thought it was a rule break). I do think he was trying to make a point, although I will leave my suspicions.



      Hello Castiel,

      I have a quick question for you. The following post leaves me with a question. How do you know the character in question?



      Presses the PTT

      Good fucking riddance. Best news I've had in weeks.

      Releases the PTT


      It seems apparent that you posted that because we "marked" mexi's post and you wished to make a point. Considering the content is in fact so close, in fact almost identical to what Mexi posted.

      Please enlighten me if I have this mistaken.

      Kind Regards,


      His reply, it is claimed to be purely coincidental and IC. The argument doesn't seem to really hold merit to me since he as an actual person did this right after he accused Mexi's post of being a rule break. You can see why I would assume you were making a point when you reported the post for breaking the radio chatter rules, then proceeded to do the same thing after. Since you denied this I will take your word on it, especially since I would still like such a meeting to go ahead. It simply did not make sense to me that your OOC self would make the same "rule-break" that you had recently beforehand reported. I also took your last line as pure sarcasm as you have used that kind of line before.



      Hello Caesar,

      I can and will answer your question to the best of my ability.

      Regarding my post being of similar nature to Mexi's post, this is purely coincidental. My character Antonio Romani had heard the initial broadcast by Frank (who he has had several encounters with, all hostile) but then switched to a different frequency to discuss the matter with other members of the business he works for. Because he had switched frequency he did not hear the message from Mexi, only today did my character switch back to the frequency to taunt Frank and any allies of his who may be listening after he was given the go ahead from Shadows' character who is the head of the organisation my character works for.

      It seems you have made a mistake in assuming my post was copied from Mexi's because of something which had happened out-of-character on the forums, my character Antonio could and would not know this information as that would be metagaming. This post was purely in-character and any similarities between myself and Mexi's posts are purely coincidence.

      I understand the mistake was made and will gladly accept your apology for it. Thank you for taking the time to send me a PM regarding this and I hope this information clears everything up.

      Have a great day!



      The above screenshot was what I sent and this is Castiel's reply. I think people can see why I would assume that the intention was antagonistic from the beginning, but if not see my closing statement. I also found it quite interesting that Castiel chose to mention his 6 months of good work and slam me for only being in staff for 2. Especially since I was previously an admin here for 2 years. Also considering I returned to help people like Castiel out who I viewed as struggling by being one of the few active GM's. On this front it would appear Dax and I came to the party too late to stop the exodus. For what it is worth, I have in fact heard good things about you in staff. I will commend you for your good work therein. If it hasn't already been said, thank you for your efforts.

      I also do not honestly know where the meme lord comment came from. It is true that I have been critical of Castiel "behind closed doors". but I am surprised if the same cannot be said for you. Unfortunately I do not want to benefit of people giving your everything I say to be misquoted later. For what it is worth, anything you have said about me behind closed doors cannot be held against you. Your private thoughts and communications are your own, I respect your privacy.



      Hello Caesar,

      Oh my mistake, I wrongly assumed that a Staff member might consider apologising for wrongfully assuming something, but it's okay - I forgive you regardless.

      You're absolutely right, I, Castiel, "Meme lord" as you so eloquently put it behind closed doors, would never do something like that. However it's wonderful to know an Administrator of this community would be so petty as to question a community member's integrity after only having returned to said community 2 months ago, missing the 6+ months of Staff work done by said "Meme lord".

      Have a great day Caesar, if it isn't too much trouble I'd prefer if you didn't message me again - have another member of Staff handle it if need be.



      I will hold my assumptions about the situation in check and assume that everything you have told me is in fact correct. In a genuine effort to keep the talk's planned on the cards I have explained why I did what I did. I admit that I should have refrained from my comment and will do so going forward. Please accept my apology.

      I think it would be more productive to both of us to wait for the meeting. I would prefer not to preempt any possible beneficial meeting we might have. I look forward this this meeting going forward.

      I hope you and everyone else has a good day and many more.

      Kind Regards,