Invalid TomCat™'s Report

Discussion in 'Shoutbox Ban Appeals' started by Juice Juice™, Oct 18, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Juice Juice™

    Juice Juice™ VIP Emerald Bronze

    Report or Appeal:
    Username of the reported player:
    Noo Noo
    Explain the case:
    Rozboon started flaming me, I responded, no words from staff the entire time and suddenly I get banned while Roz gets off scott free. Not saying I don't deserve it, but I think the bias is rather clear, and unless the rules really changed while I was away, there should have been a warning.​
    Related Evidence:

  2. john redcorn

    john redcorn strangers like me VIP Emerald

    Give me a few minutes to get my bearings.
  3. Juice Juice™

    Juice Juice™ VIP Emerald Bronze

    And to make something clear, this isn't an appeal in the slightest. I was continuing the argument as much as he was. But you have a member who continues to instigate and flame other people, something he did to both me and another member in that timeframe, and then we have a staff member who has an extensive history with me come in and ban me, without warning, or even warning the other side in the following minutes afterword, when both members where guilty of the drama, and I can only assume that Rozboon has been doing this with other people when he was so ready to do it with, as he puts it, someone he didn't even know.
  4. Rozboon

    Rozboon Forgive and Forget, or just forget. VIP

    As I'm mentioned several times in this post I'd like to say that the only reason I was typing after the initial warning was to clarify the points being made by you. I also don't appreciate the multiple instances in this thread where you are trying to flame my name and make me look like some type of big evil bad guy that's only here to cause pain and suffering to people and ask you politely to stop it.
  5. Juice Juice™

    Juice Juice™ VIP Emerald Bronze

    I must have missed the warning if there was one. If there was, apologies. You have only ever tried to instigate situations with me, Roz. I fall for them, and in this case, chose to follow along. You were clearly the one starting these events, and I was just willing to play along. Regardless: Every post I made was a response to what he said. I never made the first post. The only reason I can think of for me getting banned and not Rozboon is our history together. It is clearly not equal application of the rules.
  6. john redcorn

    john redcorn strangers like me VIP Emerald

    Hey Tomcat,

    Attached is a picture of my warning given and a picture of you not following it and receiving a ban.

    In the picture of me giving the warning, I kindly asked you and Roz to drop the debacle you guys were having. Both your posts immediately after the given warning happened within five seconds of it's posting, so I gave the benefit of the doubt and didn't ban.

    In the second picture, you are seen continuing said debacle I said to drop earlier and banned you for failure to comply.

    I'm missing a few things, so I'll post again tonight with context and the such when our shoutbox logs refresh of why Roz wasn't banned; his retort was simply refuting your post that got you banned, a post that shouldn't of been made in the first place. Like I said, I'll give context with full logs later tonight, then my lead @HelixSpiral can finish.

    noo noo,
    ~noo noo

    Attached Files:

  7. Juice Juice™

    Juice Juice™ VIP Emerald Bronze

    I think I'll need your definition of 'refute', and why 'refuting' something is a defense in the first place. It continued the drama. My reply was a 'refute' to his claim. I hadn't seen your warning, and I think it could easily be mistaken as something other than a warning even if I had, but you are giving him a pass, from my understanding, because he was 'proving my statement wrong'. Without evidence, that is exactly what I did. We did the same thing, but you only gave me the punishment.
  8. Juice Juice™

    Juice Juice™ VIP Emerald Bronze

    And I'm going to put a little more stress on this, but "Lets Drop it before it begins" could mean just about anything, and from a purely grammatical sense, isn't a warning for a situation that has already most definitely begun.
  9. john redcorn

    john redcorn strangers like me VIP Emerald

    Like I said, I'll be happy to provide more context with full SB logs later tonight; I believe the warning had its strength in context.
  10. john redcorn

    john redcorn strangers like me VIP Emerald

    context leading up to first warning. A mild altercation between you and roz had been going on quite some time in shoutbox at this point, and I was half paying attention getting ready to head to school. The altercation seemed to be heating up at this point when you started linking reports, and I decided to warn since it looked like a full on flame fest was about to begin.

    inbetween,aftermath. As I said above, I gave both you and roz the benefit of the doubt with these posts right after my warning, since shoutbox was moving rapidly and these messages were most likely fully typed before being able to acknowledge the warning. However, since I was getting ready for school, I missed Roz's second post in the first screenshot, and have addressed it.

    The screenshot after the ban shows Roz simply refuting what you said, something that would of been okay if he didn't instigate the argument further with a post earlier.
  11. Juice Juice™

    Juice Juice™ VIP Emerald Bronze

    That completely does not explain why you banned me and not Roz, which is the entire reason for this report. It, in fact, explains nothing about my report, since my being banned is secondary: Your unequal application of the rules and what I see as very clear bias is. Unless you are claiming you missed his post both directly before and directly after mine, which also implies you only were paying attention to see what I said to begin with.
  12. john redcorn

    john redcorn strangers like me VIP Emerald

  13. Juice Juice™

    Juice Juice™ VIP Emerald Bronze

    Like I said, you were looking for my posts, and therefore missed his posts directly before and after.
  14. Juice Juice™

    Juice Juice™ VIP Emerald Bronze

    Let's give a little reminder: You consider targeted harassment to be something as benign as repeating a commonly made joke about you (I.E., that you have a lot of reports on you), yet somehow the fact you were 'moderating' a SB conversation in which you provided a single, extremely poorly worded warning, and completely neglected to pay attention to the other side of the argument, instead only focusing on me, is not? Even if it is true that you didn't see Rozboon's posts, and I don't believe for a second that is the case, if nothing else because you mentioned one of those posts in your opening statement here, but in the best case scenario, that means you neglected your duties as an Admin and made a subjective judgement call without even trying to get the context.

    But, because we all know you did in fact see Rozboon's post, simply because you mentioned it in the posts above, we were both refuting each other. It is not your place to determine who is more right in a flame war. He did the exact same thing that got me banned, you said you saw it, and then you didn't do anything about it.

    I said this already in PM, but if you want me gone, say it. Don't play games with the rules or the community. All I care about is that the rules are fairly and universally applied.
  15. neutral

    neutral VIP

    Heya Tomcat,

    We talked about this a bit on steam and I think we've come to an understanding on this.

    You are already fully aware and understand that the ban placed on you is valid and warranted. He had enough evidence at the time to place the ban on you, however, as he stated- he was missing some of the evidence that required us to check shoutbox logs later in the day once they are released. Unfortunately, we don't have immediate access to these logs so these punishments sometimes get delayed.

    What information that we had at the time, is that @noo noo was dealing with this incident while on his way to school, and the only evidence he had was you were the one attempting to continue the argument even after being warned not too. As @noo noo said, his small rebuttal and reminder of the second warning is absolutely fine- it was just addressing your final message and was an attempt to end the conversation after you guys have been warned. For instance, if were not banned and had said "Well, you did know who I am but we're done." The purpose of the warning would have been completed, and no one would have been banned.

    However, after further reviewing the logs and the full context, wink found further messages and issued the 12 hr ban to Rozboon as well. Due to the nature of shoutbox and how our logging system works, it is normal for us to do this in the events of bans like this. Staff members arn't expected to stick around for arguments or mind them over their real life commitments and sometimes these commitments get in the way requiring us to depend on the logs later on. What I don't see here however is any bias behavior at all. Both members were eventually banned for the same behavior for roughly the same period of time- even if it took a little bit more investigating for the other one to be banned as well.

    You mentioned some concerns and suggestions to prevent these in the future. I know you have been away for a couple months so you may not be aware of our proposed integration with Discord. With these improvements, that will be integrated with shoutbox we will hopefully have a better warning system and logging system in place. I do think wink's warning could have been a bit more explicit and we have talked about that. But regardless, a warning isn't even required in this situation and you shouldn't be starting/continuing conflicts with others in shoutbox. I did talk a bit with wink about the warning that was placed, and even how using the color red (for now) may be a good alternative to making the warning stand out. Yet, I do not feel this is enough to mark this report valid. The messages should also be instantly available so there'd be no need to wait for the logs as well.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.