Character
Rules
Events
Map
RP Points
Proplimits
Statistics
Steam Group
Members
Hall of Fame
Team
Bans
Blacklists
Warnings
Changelog
Content
01-11-2016, 11:52 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:04 AM by Fearless Community.
Edit Reason: Fixed Encoding
)
Hello Mike,
After reviewing and analyzing the unban request opening post as well as the later post the following is the reply:
While similar ballistics testing is indeed conducted in real life, the second any injury should incur the testing would cease immediately. In the video, the person to your right can be heard calling out their HP, proving that they are taking damage, as well as you taking damage down to 9 HP. It was at that moment, the second either of you stated you were losing health, the testing should have stopped. By continuing after injury incurs, it becomes a 12.7 violation (friendly fire).
As their sergeant, you are responsible for your mens’ lives in the field. By allowing them to continue injuring each other, you are promoting 12.7 (friendly fire) to be violated.
Rule 12.7, just like any other rule, is enforced whether or not it was broken accidentally or intentionally
While you may not have expected friendly fire to occur, it did. Once that happened the SRU team kept on firing at you. Near the end of the video you can be seen applying a medkit to heal your wounds, as well, which proves you were fully aware of your health. Instead of asking, you chose to conduct the experiment yourself without consulting staff.
We do not recall the staff team ever stating that a normal punishment would apply for minor rule breaks as last chance means last chance. Please provide chat logs of this occurring. If you wish for them to remain private, you may forum PM it to either of us directly.
The ban was lifted due to the joking amongst each other within the staff team, however the last chance was removed by SoulRipper due to a miscommunication within the staff team. He was not aware that you agreed to the terms of being put on last chance during the Teamspeak discussion about the incident regarding DDoSing the staff member as opposed to receiving a permanent ban.
The last chance being re-applied was the result of the staff team present during the meeting discussing bans 67894 and 66911 and wondering how the last chance disappeared initially. It then became clear that as mentioned above, it was removed due to a miscommunication within the staff team, and all present for the meeting agreed it should be reinstated, SoulRipper included; hence why the admin reason on ban 67894 states “Decided on by the Staff Team”.
Avgar
Fearless Administrator & Developer
Hitman
Fearless Administrator
After reviewing and analyzing the unban request opening post as well as the later post the following is the reply:
Quote:As part of my teams SRU training, we were testing the officers ability to handle the equipment as well as realistic training for a situation that requires it. At no point did we intend to cause lethal harm to any officer involved in the breach equipment training. We had an officer standing safely to the side to oversee the session and determine if it needed to stop at any point and apply ballistic first-aid if required.
- SRU were heavily armoured with bullet-proof clothing and also a bulletproof shield before commencing
- Safety advisor was standing to the side
While similar ballistics testing is indeed conducted in real life, the second any injury should incur the testing would cease immediately. In the video, the person to your right can be heard calling out their HP, proving that they are taking damage, as well as you taking damage down to 9 HP. It was at that moment, the second either of you stated you were losing health, the testing should have stopped. By continuing after injury incurs, it becomes a 12.7 violation (friendly fire).
As their sergeant, you are responsible for your mens’ lives in the field. By allowing them to continue injuring each other, you are promoting 12.7 (friendly fire) to be violated.
Quote:I would like to point out that rule 12.7 should be enforced on those who intentionally break it, for example having an argument with another cop and one fires upon the other,
Rule 12.7, just like any other rule, is enforced whether or not it was broken accidentally or intentionally
Quote:However we did not expect friendly fire to occur for the above reason and therefore had no intention of supposedly breaking 12.7 and I think the staff should have realised this, understood our purpose and RP reason and maybe warned us that shields do allow bullet penetration, I also believe a blacklist would have been sufficient as the staff dealing with this knew our intentions were not bad.
While you may not have expected friendly fire to occur, it did. Once that happened the SRU team kept on firing at you. Near the end of the video you can be seen applying a medkit to heal your wounds, as well, which proves you were fully aware of your health. Instead of asking, you chose to conduct the experiment yourself without consulting staff.
Quote:I had a discussion with staff after my 'last warning' was issued and they told me that in order for the perm banned to be implemented it would require another major rule-break such as a DDoS threat or threatening a staff member, etc, and normal punishment would apply for rulebreakers such as CDM, RDM etc..
We do not recall the staff team ever stating that a normal punishment would apply for minor rule breaks as last chance means last chance. Please provide chat logs of this occurring. If you wish for them to remain private, you may forum PM it to either of us directly.
Quote:As you can see, my ban for 'joking to DDoS' I received a final warning for from staff when I was unbanned, the 'final warning' was then REMOVED by SoulRipper following on from a moderator also joking to DDoS.
The ban was lifted due to the joking amongst each other within the staff team, however the last chance was removed by SoulRipper due to a miscommunication within the staff team. He was not aware that you agreed to the terms of being put on last chance during the Teamspeak discussion about the incident regarding DDoSing the staff member as opposed to receiving a permanent ban.
Quote:My next ban for 'backseat admin' then put me on a final warning and I had only had 3 bans prior to that which does not warrant a final warning.
Therefore the perm ban should not be valid because the final warning was completely unjustified and invalid.
The last chance being re-applied was the result of the staff team present during the meeting discussing bans 67894 and 66911 and wondering how the last chance disappeared initially. It then became clear that as mentioned above, it was removed due to a miscommunication within the staff team, and all present for the meeting agreed it should be reinstated, SoulRipper included; hence why the admin reason on ban 67894 states “Decided on by the Staff Team”.
Avgar
Fearless Administrator & Developer
Hitman
Fearless Administrator