[bunniey]

Not going to read any of this past first post, so if I'm regurgitating or anything, my bad.

Obviously things may be different now, and you sound like kind of a cunt so I'm not going to +1 for a reduction, but if it's you doing only three things over the course of a few maps (even if you said you were going to target him), and they were all that different, and one you were a T? Not really a good case for targeting, so it shouldn't have been an 8 point. At least in the past, I've tried to hit someone with targeting for first killing me 3 out of 4 rounds in a row (rdms) and they let it go (although it was nicky so take that what you will)

And before it was seemed always kind of agreed that it had to be super consistent. Multiple rounds in a row, or multiple T/D rounds in a row, not this sparse. But if it was more, I wouldn't know as I didn't read anything or watch anything, so who knows past that. And obviously this was common interpretation of rule from years ago so,,,,y'know, grain of asphalt or whatever. -0.5 because whiner +cope tho

[jcope]

for the record, it doesn't hurt my feelings when you call me a cunt, but it's funny how staff flip a coin on what is acceptable. If I called Nazu a cunt I'd be warned for harassment. I think one or two instances of something "bad" shouldn't warrant long term repercussions.

also, you seem to agree with my interpretation with 'targeting' so why "-0.5" if my point is valid. The whole point of an appeals process is to explain what happened to have people judge it OBJECTIVELY. Not about what kind of person you think I am

[Nazu(s)]

Even if the targetting warn is decided to be invalid, when you claim you are going to kill someone repeatedly every round over the result of one slay it can sway the opinions people can have when handling the situation.

There isn't a recording on my end so I'm not going to nitpick your account of the story too much since neither of us can back it up, if the later consensus is the warn is invalid then I will remove it if someone else doesn't beforehand.

My final notes are yes, Evan was on and should have handled the report, however given the circumstances I saw it appropriate to handle it, thank you.

[murl]

it's possible that you go a little too far with people under the guise that you're just bantering. There have been a few things you've done to me over the past week that some people could consider to be majorly antagonistic, but I figured you were just goofing so I didn't think much of it at the time.

[Foxka]

for the record, it doesn't hurt my feelings when you call me a cunt, but it's funny how staff flip a coin on what is acceptable. If I called Nazu a cunt I'd be warned for harassment. I think one or two instances of something "bad" shouldn't warrant long term repercussions.

you can call nazu a cunt, it's when you call nazu a cunt and target them that you get the warn for harassment. Which you did if i'm not mistaken.


@Nazu(s) cunt (ily)

[Jammin]

iight I don't care enough to read the full account but it sounds like OP is upset over his ban and Nazu handling his own report.

Nazu shouldn't have to put up with random bullshit when trying to play a video game during his spare time. Sure he signed up for it as staff, but you really seemed to make his night less enjoyable.

I think the best course of action is for Bryan to scream obscenities at Nazu for not letting Evan handle the report, Nazu apologize for the mistake, Jcope should grow up, Evan should be demoted for existing, Jammin should be given a new permavape, and everyone should move on.

Nazu didn't act professionally but jcope's actions went above and beyond normal trolling by his own admission, as Nazu was targeted for seemingly no useful reason. Only admins should be targeted and/or harassed, not moderators.

As for staff abuse I know Nazu has some history with conduct issues, but those instances are dated. This reads as less strikeworthy and more warning worthy.

[Evan]

In my opinion Nazu jumped the gun in giving out a warn at the point they did, but it wasn't abuse. Jcope said they were going to kill them a bunch so Nazu was on edge and then warned at the first instance of getting rdm'd by Jcope. Frankly, it could be argued Jcope was just being hyperbolic and wasn't going to act on the continuous rdm threat but it was in poor taste to make despite such an interpretation. At worst, this whole thing was essentially a messy accident rather than abuse or other misconduct.

[bryanbrr]

Thank you for submitting a report. The admin team will be removing this warning. We won't be classifying this as abuse but, we do notice that this was an instance of jumping the gun.