Completed Report against Spitefulvenom

Name of Staff/Player:

Spitefulvenom​

Steam ID of Staff/Player:

-​

Your Steam ID:

-​

Which Server:

Vanilla​

Which Map:

-​

Which Round:

-​

Time of Occurence:

-​

Reason For Report:

Incorrect report resolution along with a pretty petty warning point.

Read my post in the thread below, I think its pretty clear.

For the warning point, really? We've historically allowed people to post in reports if its on-topic and provides a valid viewpoint or information. I can trawl through the forums and pull precedent if I need to.


I honestly didn't think I'd still need to make these.

No real commenting should be needed outside of Lordy as I think our positions are pretty cut and dry.​

Evidence And/Or Witnesses:

https://www.seriousgmod.com/threads/report-against-the-big-man-rfcoil-himself.57298/#post-614204​

 

@Spitefulvenom
@Lordyhgm

 

As an addendum, I just saw this line.

You are not recieving a warning point as your comment is valid but it was the wrong place i am happy to explain my thought process here if you wish

So no warning point I guess, even though you used the standardized warning point template... I've seen it often enough I didn't even finish reading it, so my bad.

 

I'm good on the point, but I still have an issue with your report response.

Apologies for jumping you on the point. I literally stopped reading after the title and seeing the general layout of it. I still feel its the wrong decision to flag it, but without a point its pretty null to me.

My biggest issue is using information (the 2 points of damage) to justify the slay as RF didn't slay for that reason. It was basically extraneous to the slay decision making process. Only you brought it up as justification.

This almost feels like equating to getting slayed for invalid report response, but then coming back and saying "oh he did this valid reason, you shouldn't have slayed me so I'll report you" We don't allow that. The response is the response, and in this case RF slayed for not performing a traitorous act. Using information outside of the report itself to constructively generate a reason for the slay post-report doesn't sit well with me.

I figured I'd post to nudge you in that direction as I also agree your mod didn't do anything wrong given what was available in the death scene but just for differing technical, but critical, reasons.

 

I keep pivoting back to the fact that in RF's video they do not once see that 2 points of damage occurred. Since they don't see that it has no real bearing to the report. It happened, sure. It did not affect the decision making process to slay or not to slay. That makes it null as a reason to justify the slay. You are the one that is using it to justify the slay, using information attained after the slay/report had occurred.

Without these two points of damage, the slay reason was for not committing a traitorous act. The death scene support this. Night's movement of the pig is lackluster at best in the deathscene. Therefore RF made the right decision at the time, given the deathscene information, to slay Indy. However, post-report, Night's POV shows that they did indeed perform a traitorous act and therefore makes the slay invalid as Indy killed Night for a traitorous act.

I would argue, and I think that we agree, that RF did not do anything wrong given the information they had at the time. They did however issue an invalid slay given Night's video. Only Night's video, that RF did not have access to at the time of slay, proves that this is an invalid slay. That makes the report "technically" valid as an improper slay was issued.


My biggest issue here is you trying to use information that your moderator did not see at the time of the slay to justify your moderator's slay. You're using information outside of the decision making process to justify the slay.