Unblacklist Iraqi Eagle

[Iraqi Eagle]

Your name: [FL:RP] Iraqi Eagle

Your blacklist ID: 26026

Steam ID: STEAM_0:0:60462361

Reason: ''general rule 5 it has nothing to do with you''

Admin who blacklisted you: [FL:M] Eisenhorn

Reason why you should be unblacklisted: First of all, I was arguing something with you Eisenhorn. You never gave me a clear warning, you just blacklisted me. Second of all, seriously six hours? You blacklist me for six hours from OOC because I was arguing with you? You could have told me to just stop. You never told me to stop arguing with you, you instead just let me continue so you could blacklist me. I cannot see that this is a fair blacklist, as I did not do anything wrong. General rule five says: ''Listen to the admin's decisions, they aren't negotiable. '' Alright, let's now discuss about that. Listen to an admin's decision, alright I get that. However, what dicision was made by an admin here? You never made a decision. Please, clearify that.

Here you can see Eisenhorn blacklisting me:
[Image: A8825DF4F87681A1DC49F4798ADF822E99B30AC4]

[Eisenhorn]

You decided to attempt to argue regarding weecows warning on the ooc, I asked you to explain how it involved you, given your hours you should be sufficiently aware of general rule 5, Verzyn and Shadow both witnessed this discussion and exchange, and you were warned multiple times.

Also please explain why you were attempting to influence other players into flaming in the ooc?
/pm jono Say in OOC: Why did you not blacklist Disorder form OOC for insulting
/pm Jono Please do tha

[Iraqi Eagle]

Yes, I was arguing with you about that topic. I explained my involvement to you, but I guess you do not find that good enough. You could have told me to just stop arguing with you, but no you just blacklist me for six hours from OOC. I am aware of general rule five, but I do not see what I broke? I do not understand what I broke about general rule five, you never made a decision. You are saying that you warned me multiple times, but you did not. Also, when Disorder joined the discussion you did not really bother. She insulted me, but you did not say anything until the very end. You only warned her, but doesn't she has many hours so she knows that she shouldn't do such a thing? Why did you not take action there?

Edit: I asked him to post that in OOC as I was unfairly blacklisted. I could not type, so I asked him and he wanted to do it.

[Verzyn]

v2d [14:20:24] [FL:M] Eisenhorn (STEAM_0:0:39947410) said: //so it has nothing to do with you? thanks for establishing that
A clear enough warning to end the conversation

v2d [14:22:52] [FL:M] Eisenhorn (STEAM_0:0:39947410) said: //sorry are you still discussing something which has nothing to do with you
A firm warning not to discuss it anymore

v2d [14:23:39] [FL:RP] Iraqi Eagle (STEAM_0:0:60462361) said: // You had also othing to do with Fultzy banning Ruxandra Eisenhorn, exact same situation.
You disregarding this warning

v2d [14:24:02] [FL:M] Eisenhorn (STEAM_0:0:39947410) said: /takeaccess iraqi u 6h general rule 5 it has nothing to do with you

I think this sums up that you did clearly disobey general rule 5, you continued a heated debate after you were told not to by a moderator.

[Iraqi Eagle]

v2d [14:20:24] [FL:M] Eisenhorn (STEAM_0:0:39947410) said: //so it has nothing to do with you? thanks for establishing that
A clear enough warning to end the conversation

Sorry, where does it say that this ended the conversation? He only said: ''So it has nothing to do with you? Thanks for establishing that.'' He first of all asked: ''So it has nothing to do with you?'' You can clearly see that that is a question towards me, so I had to continue. After that, he says: ''Thanks for establishing that.'' I did not establish anything yet, he did not give a warning there.

v2d [14:22:52] [FL:M] Eisenhorn (STEAM_0:0:39947410) said: //sorry are you still discussing something which has nothing to do with you
A firm warning not to discuss it anymore

He says here if I am still discussing something which has nothing to do with me, he never gave a clear warning. And if you see this as a warning, why didn't he just say: ''Stop the discussion now.'' instead of keep saying the same thing? Wouldn't that have been easier? Instead of doing that, he kept saying that until he could blacklist me.

[Eisenhorn]

It was a rhetorical question, a device used to establish a point. Also the subject matter had nothing to do with you at all. I fail to see why you discussed it in the first place.

[Iraqi Eagle]

Rhetorical question or not, you asked something. I answered to that. Also, I began the discussion with saying: ''30% Weecow'' and after that: ''40% Weecow''. You told me that I should elaborate and you said that I thought I looked badass because of saying: ''30% Weecow'' and ''40% Weecow''. Well, I clearly elaborated. I discussed it with you, but you blacklisted me instead. I fail to see your reason for blacklisting me.

Edit: Please answer my previous question; "Also, when Disorder joined the discussion you did not really bother. She insulted me, but you did not say anything until the very end. You only warned her, but doesn't she has many hours so she knows that she shouldn't do such a thing? Why did you not take action there?''

[Verzyn]

Approved, I will lift the blacklist before it expires because I believe you were not given a straight instruction to "end the discussion" which may have caused confusion. You should however know better than to bring up and continue controversial courthouse topics in OOC, therefore the blacklist will stay on your record.