07-19-2021, 05:05 PM
Very plainly, Sea Emperor had ungagged a player who had previously been gagged and warned for micspam.
Hoverce had been ranting in the spectator chat. While although it was hostile in nature, Sea Beast and other players at the time were having the time of their life. The mood was more "laugh at the minge teehee" and another player suggested that they ungag Hoverce just to see how angry he'd sound on mic.
Sea Emperor was the first to comply and ungagged Hoverce. As expected, the child behind the microphone began ranting and shouting. Hoverce was then swiftly re-gagged by .cee .
If there are DM's or Video that prove Hoverce had somehow told Sea Emperor to kill himself or that Sea Emperor had muted them as a response, then one could argue against a strike. I personally did not witness either.
With all this information in mind, I say +1 to strike on the grounds that Donors shouldn't contest a staff's decision. It's an abuse of power, and the guidelines clearly state not to perform these commands when staff are online. Much less reverse decisions.
Hoverce had been ranting in the spectator chat. While although it was hostile in nature, Sea Beast and other players at the time were having the time of their life. The mood was more "laugh at the minge teehee" and another player suggested that they ungag Hoverce just to see how angry he'd sound on mic.
Sea Emperor was the first to comply and ungagged Hoverce. As expected, the child behind the microphone began ranting and shouting. Hoverce was then swiftly re-gagged by .cee .
If there are DM's or Video that prove Hoverce had somehow told Sea Emperor to kill himself or that Sea Emperor had muted them as a response, then one could argue against a strike. I personally did not witness either.
With all this information in mind, I say +1 to strike on the grounds that Donors shouldn't contest a staff's decision. It's an abuse of power, and the guidelines clearly state not to perform these commands when staff are online. Much less reverse decisions.
