Character
Rules
Events
Map
RP Points
Proplimits
Statistics
Steam Group
Members
Hall of Fame
Team
Bans
Blacklists
Warnings
Changelog
Content
12-16-2014, 09:26 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:03 AM by Fearless Community.
Edit Reason: Fixed Encoding
)
Possible political agenda? Talking to Freezak again? I don't appreciate the assumptions you guys are making for my reason. I gave a reason, to start of fresh with my return to the server. The one that said "the only thing he is guilty of is a light prop spam which was deleted right after" was Atrades who if you did have any discussion about the issue you would have known was not only not there at the time this happened but had nothing to do with the ban at all, he just wanted to defend me but what he should should have been deleted for not being involved and should not have been taken into account.
About the "Freezak" thing, I find it weird that he messages me after putting this up harassing me, and telling me he was going to talk to you about it as soon as he could. He shouldn't be getting involved.
I have no new proof, the point I am making is that there was never any old proof, and the only discussion was one stated that one of the admins, I think Termin, came into the teamspeak channel I was in, and without context asked me why I had spawned multiple fountains, to which I gave no serious answer because he gave no explanation for the reason he was asking.
Again about the spawning of 10 fountains which I said is the amount I spawned all though people accused me of many different amounts, I spawned them not on after another in a spamming fashion, but instead made a conscious effort to make sure I did not spawn them on eachother or onto another player. This so called "attempted propkill" was because Weecow was busy talking in steam chat and came back to see one fall and hit (but not kill) Verzyn which was because it was spawned a little to close to another but every other person understood that it was not meant to harm.
The biggest point I am trying to make is how is it fair that Weecow saying I did something has more credibility that around 4 other people saying the opposite as well Weecow stated it was a misunderstanding on his part and reneged on his own statement of possible ban worthy action he first "assumed" I was doing. This entire ban was based on an assumption and unlike practically every other ban was not discussed and a conclusion was jumped to based off of little to no evidence.
About the "Freezak" thing, I find it weird that he messages me after putting this up harassing me, and telling me he was going to talk to you about it as soon as he could. He shouldn't be getting involved.
I have no new proof, the point I am making is that there was never any old proof, and the only discussion was one stated that one of the admins, I think Termin, came into the teamspeak channel I was in, and without context asked me why I had spawned multiple fountains, to which I gave no serious answer because he gave no explanation for the reason he was asking.
Again about the spawning of 10 fountains which I said is the amount I spawned all though people accused me of many different amounts, I spawned them not on after another in a spamming fashion, but instead made a conscious effort to make sure I did not spawn them on eachother or onto another player. This so called "attempted propkill" was because Weecow was busy talking in steam chat and came back to see one fall and hit (but not kill) Verzyn which was because it was spawned a little to close to another but every other person understood that it was not meant to harm.
The biggest point I am trying to make is how is it fair that Weecow saying I did something has more credibility that around 4 other people saying the opposite as well Weecow stated it was a misunderstanding on his part and reneged on his own statement of possible ban worthy action he first "assumed" I was doing. This entire ban was based on an assumption and unlike practically every other ban was not discussed and a conclusion was jumped to based off of little to no evidence.