Complaint against Rurik

[blueaves]

Admin Key: @Rurik

My CKey: blueaves

9/30/2023

Round ID: 37410

Nature of complaint: Feedback, requesting Head of Staff second opinion on admins ruling for my ban appeal.

 

Before I start, I understand that I'm not meant to post here for appeal denials, but seeing that my ban is indefinite until I get a vouch from another server I figured it's worth a shot. I had also spoken to another admin and they said I can try to appeal it here.

In short, I believe that Ruriks decision to deny my appeal was unjustified with the reasons he gave.

Rurik: "All in all, from the defending your last warnings actions, to your attitude when PM'd, to the wording of not causing "as much" trouble as a tider; I'm not convinced."

 

I believe the first part of me "defending my last warning" should not be grounds for a denial when all I am doing is providing context to Rurik seeing that he was not the one to issue that previous warning. I simply wanted to state that I felt that previous warning was unfair in my opinion seeing that he mentioned it and had nothing to do with Rurik's reason for initially banning me. Had I posted an admin complaint on that other admin who gave me the warning, I feel that my explanation of the events wouldn't be used against me like how Rurik is doing now.

 

Rurik: "-to your attitude when PM'd-"

In my appeal I had said "When Rurik messaged me, my bad reaction was due to how I've seen tiders doing far worse things the past few days in the same spot. Not an excuse for my actions, but I don't see them getting messaged from admins over it so its hard to know wither or not its acceptable after a few times of seeing it."

I had acknowledged that I was being rude in the PM and offered an explanation on why I was so frustrated in that moment and it was wrong of me to handle it the way I did.

blueaves: "If that level of tiding is unacceptable though, I will understand and if an Admin tells me to stop from now on as a tider I will understand and follow their instruction."

 

 

Lastly, "-to the wording of not causing "as much" trouble as a tider; I'm not convinced."

What did you want from me in this situation? I acknowledged that I went too far and will tone it down from now on??

blueaves: "But yes, it was wrong of me to do what I did with the firebomb, I won't cause as much trouble as a tider from now on."

Why are you digging for something else in what I am saying.. I think this is just silly.  

 

In summary, I believe that the initial ban by Rurik was fair and I had affirmed I had done wrong and will take action to fix it, but the reasons Rurik provided for denying my ban appeal were unfair, from me having a dialog about previous warnings and them interpreting my words as not being apologetic enough for them. 

 

 

 

 

 

[necaladun]

Hi there, apologies for the delay. I'm posting this as an ex-head of staff and after consulting with the current heads of staff.

 

On 10/1/2023 at 1:51 AM, blueaves said:

believe the first part of me "defending my last warning" should not be grounds for a denial when all I am doing is providing context to Rurik seeing that he was not the one to issue that previous warning. I simply wanted to state that I felt that previous warning was unfair in my opinion seeing that he mentioned it and had nothing to do with Rurik's reason for initially banning me. Had I posted an admin complaint on that other admin who gave me the warning, I feel that my explanation of the events wouldn't be used against me like how Rurik is doing now.

By itself, this wouldn't be very fair grounds for a denial, but this is why it was mentioned as one of many reasons for denial. Whether or not an appeal is accepted is a combination of all factors - from your behaviour on the server in general to the content of your appeal. 

On 10/1/2023 at 1:51 AM, blueaves said:

Rurik: "-to your attitude when PM'd-"

In my appeal I had said "When Rurik messaged me, my bad reaction was due to how I've seen tiders doing far worse things the past few days in the same spot. Not an excuse for my actions, but I don't see them getting messaged from admins over it so its hard to know wither or not its acceptable after a few times of seeing it."

I had acknowledged that I was being rude in the PM and offered an explanation on why I was so frustrated in that moment and it was wrong of me to handle it the way I did.

blueaves: "If that level of tiding is unacceptable though, I will understand and if an Admin tells me to stop from now on as a tider I will understand and follow their instruction."

This is another factor taken into consideration. From your notes, it appears this isn't the first time you've shown a poor attitude when an admin has spoken to you. This again, by itself, isn't good grounds to reject an appeal, but adds into the general 'vibe' of you as a player.

On 10/1/2023 at 1:51 AM, blueaves said:

Lastly, "-to the wording of not causing "as much" trouble as a tider; I'm not convinced."

Rurik says he's not convinced here - this is based on a combination of factors. Your previous history with multiple incidents and a poor attitude when being warned, on top of the content of your appeal and your discussion with him. No one factor alone is responsible for this, but instead the sum total of all of these has lead Rurik to not be convinced you'd be a positive addition to the server. This in the end is the deciding factor in any appeals, and why bans are handed out - because it is the belief of the admin that you are a negative influence on the server. 

Your appeal has not convinced Rurik otherwise, and I am personally inclined to agree. There is absolutely however the possibility that we are both wrong here, and you could be a positive addition to the server.

On 10/1/2023 at 1:51 AM, blueaves said:

What did you want from me in this situation? I acknowledged that I went too far and will tone it down from now on??

In this case, Rurik has offered a compromise - to get a vouch from another server. In this case, all that would be required is showing that you've been able to play there without causing issues in the time that has passed since you got banned from Paradise. This seems quite reasonable to me, and is generally standard policy for cases like this.

 

Edited November 11, 2023 by necaladun