Admin Abuse - Falcao
#81
(02-17-2016, 08:25 PM)Skummet Wrote:
(02-17-2016, 08:17 PM)Clementio Wrote: Skummet did you even see the video? or did you just feel like writting that, we were getting wall banged like crazy how were we supose to change weapons to a Ram and ram the door! Clementio died without exposing his body!

This.
how were we supose to change weapons to a Ram and ram the door!
Well aiming down the ground screaming shoot me shoot me was better than acctuly ram the keypad?
I will stay with my oppinion that this looks like you trying to get more evidence.
[/quote]

Everytime i want to get more evidence that hes breaking the rules i just have to hop in the server and check out whats hes doing, so i have a unlimited source of evidence.

Btw Skummet whats the problems of getting more evidence for Admin abuse thread is it not real, did that situation not occur. your opinion is has flawed has you understanding of the unwritten rule that keypads cant be in the line of fire.
#82
Hello. 

As my previous case was mentioned, I wanted to poke my head in for a moment to clarify something, then I'll show myself the door. I believe my two cents will prove vital to the verdict so it should be listened too, even if remotely. 

Clementio has a point with my case. The angles are the same and overall your back is exposed in roughly the same proportions in both cases. 

With this in mind, Theo, the base defender in my case, admitted in person, with logs to prove it that he was wrong in his construction to build such a base. The key part here is that enzyme, the previous sa and person in charge of my case, mentioned that theo stated this. 

This proves without a shadow of a doubt that theo was wrong, but fixed it, which is why he was let go without a hitch. With this in comparison to the current case, there's a clear correlation here. 

The reason why my case was posted is because enzyme said that part of the base is OK when theo said he would fix it. Given the base in question here wasn't fixed, according to the previous ruling, from an sa to boot, it's illegal, and Falcao should have stepped in.
#83
The administrative team, along with the SAs, have recognized the unclarity and concerns regarding doomforts and will be working towards clarifying them.

As history has shown, there were even cases where ex-staff were accused of doomforting. Sometimes there was admittance of mistakes made, such as the build in Izzie's on v33x, however, there were times where the administrators in question denied their build being a doomfort, such as Grub's build here in the corleone villas: http://imgur.com/a/OyPoq which, just like this case, could be considered doomfort-like because of the keypad right next to a firing hole. See the following thread for the discussion about the build mentioned above: http://www.fearlessrp.net/showthread.php?tid=62006.

It would be unfair to punish players, staff or otherwise, for using or approving of an aggressive RP base with elements that many others were not punished for, even ex-staff.

However, as I've mentioned, we recognize the unclarity and possible unfairness of the base and bases like it described in this case and certain rules may be created and/or adjusted in order to dispel any misunderstandings and/or unfairness. However, no players will be punished for these unclarities until that is done.

Admin abuse case concluded.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)