DreeBott

[Jonas]

Hello Dreebott,

I'd firstly like to state that posting a thread for someone does not make you involved at all. You were not posting on Balls' nor Connbob's behalfs, only your own, stating your opinion, which is not allowed unless you're involved.

I tried to talk to jonas but he refused to talk to me.

This is a lie, we had a clear conversation in PM's, let me remind you that lying in the courthouse is not tolorated.

Rickets is indeed involved, as he reported your post to me, and that's when I realized you're not involved at all, even though you were the original poster.

Your attitude is not wanted here, we're in the courthouse, having a salty attitude won't help. Rickets is allowed to post his side to the story, and what not. Stating his an ex-admin is completely irrelivant.

I want to know how I get a 50% warning for replying in my own thread but rickets doesn't get a warning for posting on my UBR without any new content / content that is important.

And I want to know how I'm not involved when I posted the thread.

You got a 50% warning due to the system Avgar implemented a little while back. (Referring to this)

Rickets will not get warned because he is posting his side of the story, and as I said in my post above, you're not involved at all.

You were never involved, being on the server or anything. Therefore you're uninvolved.

I fail to see exactly why you should be unbanned, if you have anything else to add, feel free to.

[Floodify]

Dreebott, you state that Jonas refused to talk to you, yet you accused him of harrasing him and breaking TOS when he answered your PM's and his motivation for the warning. Be honest and do not lie, or your warning will increase far more than that of your current one.

Then I might aswell report you for harrasing me using FL services (TOS) You should know better Jonas.
I want you to stop messaging me now.

[Rylund]

Posting on behalf of DreeBott.

I want to ask you something Floodify.

Why are the "Staff report Policies" (https://www.fearlessrp.net/showthread.php?tid=63609) saying that I am actually allowed to post?

I'll show you a picture here:



Let's take a closer look shall we?

Staff Report Policies:

• First and foremost, remember to use the template. Disregard of this will result in closure of the report thread by appointed staff member.
  
• Ranks that are to be reported in this section are; Owner, Supervising Administrator, Administrator, Trial Admin and Developer. All other rank reports are to be reported in the Punishment Request section of the Courthouse. 
  
• You may only post in the thread if you are; the accusing user, a specifically involved user in said event or have other crucial information in regards to the report at hand.
  

Do you see that? Let me mark it for you in a nice red big font:

Staff Report Policies:

• First and foremost, remember to use the template. Disregard of this will result in closure of the report thread by appointed staff member.
  
• Ranks that are to be reported in this section are; Owner, Supervising Administrator, Administrator, Trial Admin and Developer. All other rank reports are to be reported in the Punishment Request section of the Courthouse. 
  
• You may only post in the thread if you are; the accusing user, a specifically involved user in said event or have other crucial information in regards to the report at hand.
  

I now want to ask you Floodify and Jonas, am I the accusing player?
Did I post the thread against Awestruck?

Lets see...


Oh yes I did.
Which means I am indeed the accusing user like stated in the Staff report Policies which also means I am allowed to post.

Thanks.

[General Rickets]

You provided your own opinion on the case you did not just post on someone else behalf.

[Jonas]

Hello Dreebott,

Your thread is posted on behalf of Balls, not you. Therefore you're not the accusing user, Balls is.

I still don't see a reason to revoke your warning.

[Rylund]

Posting on behalf of DreeBott

Who said my thread was on behalf on Balls?
Balls told me to make it since we were in Discord and he boradcasted the game to me and told me to take screenshots and then post the Admin abuse case using those Pictures. I thought I would say that I posted the Thread for balls, but It's my evidence used, and my thread, and me being the accusing player, meaning I was allowed to post.

[Floodify]

snip

This will be concluded by the staff team collectively, rather than Jonas or Myself only.

As you are keen to provide information about staff policy, could you tell me how you specifically fitted in these policies when you blatantly disregarded that and posted this, which had no relevance to the case at hand:

I will stop posting when you and General rickfets learn to spell my name right.

Thanks.

Being merely present during the events described by accused user does not give you the privilege to post. Only post if you have supporting facts to either discussing party of the report.

Stating your opinion does not make you involved nor have crucial information, use common sense.

You were not present during said situation, but merely forwarded information that Balls was hesitant to do and then he entered the discussion, which undoubtedly rendered your position irrelevant with the motivation that you posted irrelevant replies and Balls beheld more information about the case than you did. Just because you have posted the thread, does not mean you can shit-post freely and disregard of the policies at hand.

This goes without saying that the situation is not as simple as it looks as, because you were not present nor had further information to provide seeing as Balls entered the discussion. But you did post the thread and as you said, you were the accusing user. Thus the situation is not as black and white as some may have painted it out.

This will be discussed further and a conclusion will be made.

[Rylund]

Posting on behalf of DreeBott

snip

This will be concluded by the staff team collectively, rather than Jonas or Myself only. 

As you are keen to provide information about staff policy, could you tell me how you specifically fitted in these policies when you blatantly disregarded that and posted this, which had no relevance to the case at hand:

I will stop posting when you and General rickfets learn to spell my name right.

Thanks.

Being merely present during the events described by accused user does not give you the privilege to post. Only post if you have supporting facts to either discussing party of the report.

Stating your opinion does not make you involved nor have crucial information, use common sense.

You were not present during said situation, but merely forwarded information that Balls was hesitant to do and then he entered the discussion, which undoubtedly rendered your position irrelevant with the motivation that you posted irrelevant replies and Balls beheld more information about the case than you did. Just because you have posted the thread, does not mean you can shit-post freely and disregard of the policies at hand. 

This goes without saying that the situation is not as simple as it looks as, because you were not present nor had further information to provide seeing as Balls entered the discussion. But you did post the thread and as you said, you were the accusing user. Thus the situation is not as black and white as some may have painted it out. 

This will be discussed further and a conclusion will be made.

I agree, my last reply on that I'll stop when they get to spell my name right was not really needed.
BUT posting this would not have been worth a warning of 50% like I have now.

I wasn't directly present in said situation, yet it's MY evidence used and MY thread made on him, making me the accusing player.

[Floodify]

How can it be your evidence when you were not there at all?

[Rylund]

Posting on behalf of DreeBott

I have a feeling you're not reading my replys, / showing any interest in getting this situation solved.
Anyways: