Dion Donovan/Garfielf Unban request.

[kash]

Hey, I'm Kash. The first admin in the sit. I will go ahead and apologize for slightly rushing the sit, as there were many open at the time.

This clip by the way just shows you gunning down them all, which is why you were banned.

According to what 3 of them told me, you just ran up and gunned them all down with an AK. By looking at logs it seemed you had killed 5 within the span of 1-2 minutes, not even.

From what you had said in the sit, at first you said they were verbally threatening you, and then you said that they did it with a knife (which they have to be in stabbing range for anything to apply there), but I did not take your word as factual due to the fact that there was no clip, and you had changed your story.

When you asked for another staff member, you got Stretch (fellow Moderator) and then Somespy (Super Admin). I got cleared to ban you so I banned you after both had spoken to you. Please note that you may not kill for diss, and also the reason your ban was 2 weeks was due to the fact you already had 2 notes for RDM and it was 5 people that you just gunned down for a verbal confrontation.

Now if they would've threatened you with guns, then this would've been a different story. But I could not find anything on them damaging you prior, which is why I decided to punish you.

Like said, I do apologize if I came off as a little rude, I've had a long day overall today and there were MANY other tickets, so I was trying to get this one done and go on to the next.

Please remember in the future that you may not kill for disrespect.

it's totally okay with me. however I felt the situation was very tense from the moment we got in and it felt even more rushed. however the rules do not mention stabbing range at all it states that "-However if someone continues to disrespect you, you may physically intimidate or hit them. (Fists, melee weapon)" and follows that: "As continued disrespect could realistically start a fight. The user then has free choice on how to respond/retaliate. If they choose to flee you may not kill them" in this instance I believe the fact they threatened me and the rules saying they only have to have the implicit threat of violence being present for me to respond how I desire means I was in the right to kill them. the issue I have is that I had no evidence to support me (clips etc) but neither did they other then their Opinion and the clip clearing showing they never attempting to kill me once. hence why I feel this was invalid, I'd like to apologise for this making it seem like you where aggressive as you've shown a lot of maturity here and that might not have been the case, but even so the sit was rushed and the evidence was either way. and the rules explictely supports my understanding of the situation. The Key word here for the sake of our discussion is the word "You may choose to intimidate OR Hit them" not just hit them where you might have gotten confused.

Verbal confrontations doesn't mean you can just roll up on them and gun them down, you should've at least tried and RPed by verbally confronting them and seeing what they do.

The Problem I have with this framing is that it wasn't a Verbal Confrontation, it got Physical once the weapons where Present which shows they escalated. However I will definitely admit there was better ways to RP this circumstance then just clapping them after the threat I won't deny that. but I still believe when you examine the rules as they are written it's clear I was within the rules, and again have used this exact reasoning in the past during other admin sits with no issues.

It is not a physical confrontation until someone is hit, which logs showed none of them attacking you at the time.