[nopleez]

Hello,

I would like a short discussion on the length of DylPickle's ban.

https://www.dinklebergsgmod.com/site/Thr...uest--6270

Throughout the entire thread there were only three screenshots posted; each a single RDM happening on different rounds. If DylPickle was reported he would have served a slay for each RDM. There were multiple claims that he mass RDMd, yet nothing came of it.

The rest is anecdotal evidence.

Why does DylPickle have to serve a two week ban through the Christmas holiday if everything that happened could have been taken care of on the server with a few slays?

I find the ban lengths that admins dish out to be too long.

[VolfVoss]

A decision is being made by the TTT Admins. Please be patient, they have lives to manage on top of dealing with server situations.

[nopleez]

A decision is being made by the TTT Admins. Please be patient, they have lives to manage on top of dealing with server situations.

They already made a decision, I'm discussing that decision.

I'm confused by your post.

[[Yellow] Travis1421]

While it is a shame that the ban was based off of anecdotal evidence, it would seem that they have a decent reason for it because of how Dakota at least seemed to be strong about him harassing players before this ban. You're not mentioning the harassment in the ban that was also part of the reason. He maybe serving the 2 week ban based off that rather than the RDM.

[nopleez]

While it is a shame that the ban was based off of anecdotal evidence, it would seem that they have a decent reason for it because of how Dakota at least seemed to be strong about him harassing players before this ban. You're not mentioning the harassment in the ban that was also part of the reason. He maybe serving the 2 week ban based off that rather than the RDM.

I'm going off of the stated reason for the ban which was:
   

If that's not why they kept him banned maybe they should correct it.

[matt_st3 (Strongrule)]

It should be corrected^

[[Yellow] Travis1421]

While it is a shame that the ban was based off of anecdotal evidence, it would seem that they have a decent reason for it because of how Dakota at least seemed to be strong about him harassing players before this ban. You're not mentioning the harassment in the ban that was also part of the reason. He maybe serving the 2 week ban based off that rather than the RDM.

I'm going off of the stated reason for the ban which was:


If that's not why they kept him banned maybe they should correct it.

I can see that then. I'm not a TTT player but from the evidence that I saw, I can agree that it wasn't Constant RDM.

[nopleez]

The accusations of harassment are one sided as well. The arguing and name calling went both ways, yet only Dyl was punished.

[matt_st3 (Strongrule)]

The discussion was over his previous interactions as well, as presented to us by different staff and admins own knowledge (eg. When they had to gag him themselves).
Offering to” give her something to gag on” will not be tolerated as it was unwanted. Previous acocounts and him continuing the pester other members and staff in pms about the ban while 1) asked to stop and 2) they can’t affect it anyways is also unnecessary behavior.

[[Yellow] Travis1421]

I think we can all agree though that a staff member should not be engaging in the act of harassment either. No matter what has gone down. If she was harassing him first, she should be reprimanded as well.