Jump to content
Server time: 2019-02-19, 20:00 WE ARE RECRUITING


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Country

    United States

Quiet last won the day on February 5

Quiet had the most liked content!


390 h Bean Bandit

Community Reputation

1445 Veteran

Account information

  • Whitelisted YES
  • Last played 3 months ago

About Quiet

  • Birthday January 12

Personal Information

  • Sex

Recent Profile Visitors

  1. SLAVA NA UKRAINE I like this, best of luck with your whitelist x
  2. I don't understand why it would be removed, but +1.
  3. I'm feelin it pal I messaged him and told him too, so hopefully whenever he's around it'll work out
  4. This is nae good. Seems as though clearing the internet cache isn't the solution. Might be a Roland bug, perhaps only staff can see it for some reason? Just spit balling.
  5. Quiet


    best of luck friends but with that roster, we all know you won't need it!
  6. That must've changed in the three months I haven't played then. Thank you kindly
  7. There's a lil marijuana bud in game, but I don't think it spawns in yet. I might be wrong, though. Best of luck finding your couple, hopefully more people see this thread. if it ends up with no one else offering, @Smoke and I will.
  8. https://www.dayzrp.com/servermessage i gotchu fam
  9. Hiya @Roland! I reported a post from a staff member. At the time, the post in question was up for around 15 minutes or so I believe, which means that the edit was not a "last minute" fix but rather the member acting upon the reported post. The comment was a clear unnecessary post. With unnecessary posts, it's known that members receive one caution had they not used a caution in the past. If they had, punishment would be 3 points as usual. Whenever I looked at the thread again later, I noticed that the staff member had edited their post to make it not an UP. They were never cautioned or warned for the post but instead got the chance to edit it & alleviate their post. Why are staff members given the chance to edit their post as opposed to receiving normal punishment but community members are not? That seems pretty unfair. I would only like to receive an answer from Rolle himself. Thanks! Update; To say that you can't act on it since there is "no concrete evidence" is silly. You can see clearly that the post was edited most likely after the post was discussed in #staffgeneral. To back up this claim, you yourself can read the chat and see what the outcome was decided for the post. It was obviously marked, but the point is that the staff member was allowed to edit it and have no punishment. On top of this, you can see the staff member viewing my profile around the time that the post was reported. This, again, backs up my claim that a. the staff member was allowed to alleviate their post + b. it was not a "genuine" edit as they viewed my profile after it had been reported and had the time to edit their post to circumvent any repercussions.
  10. lmao u wild

    1. Quiet


      thanks dan much love x

    2. Dan


      its been too long since i left staff to want to leave feedback tbh

  11. Link to the situation: Link to the appeal & points in question Any supporting evidence or notes: Feedback: Hiya Randy, I hope you're keeping well. To start off, I'd like to mention that I'm only writing feedback for you as you were the person who issued the warning points. However, this feedback goes for anyone who was involved in agreeing with them as well. I think a few people were pretty shocked to say the least when Dan received these warning points. I myself thought it was incredibly silly to give someone warning points for criticizing the fact that the staff team had not so much as looked at an appeal for 3 weeks. At what point in the status update was there flame? Who did he flame? What response was he looking for from who? If it was the staff team, that's silly as the staff team is expected to react maturely and professionally. The appeal has been accepted by Rolle now so most might think there's no point in leaving feedback, but it's the principal of it really. The points just felt really forced, heavy handed & most of all unnecessary. Suggestions for improvement: I would suggest having warning points signed by whoever agreed with them similar to how reports & appeals work. On top of this, before issuing warning points it would be a good idea to actually discuss the points to determine whether or not they're flame. With these points, I doubt much was said other than "flame" a couple of times with no actual reasons as to why the staff team believed it was flame.
  12. Not necessary. On your character page, just choose the gender they were born as & then write in the backstory if they transitioned or whatever.
  • Create New...