ChrisRid

Neutral I think Shank and Gunner summarise my position on this actually, and they've made some decent points in my opinion. Just a couple of things I saw others mention which I thought would be worth touching-base on: If you click 'Disconnect' then you disconnect immediately. But if you were to just unplug your PC, your player and entities hang-around for a few mins from my experiences. I would argue that LTAP (Leaving to avoid punishment) doesn't apply in this scenario. It's certainly FailRP without a doubt, but the FailRP was leaving in-itself. You would have to rejoin, be brought to a sit, then leave a second time knowing that you'd been reported, for it to be LTAP in my eyes. Even No Intent to Roleplay (NITRP) isn't a good fit for this given that it's for when multiple different rules are broken, as opposed to one just one instance - you could otherwise argue breaking the vast majority of single rules is NITRP, so it's best to keep it separate I think there's a couple of options that would work best: Make a new rule specifically for 'Intentionally disconnecting during an RP scenario' which would also apply to mugs, being arrested, and a whole host of other things too. I'd add that this should not be overly harsh (must be proportional) and should not be up to staff discretion, as over time ban lengths exponentially increase when left unchecked (I think the average first-time racism ban is now like 5 consecutive life sentences when it actually started at a discretionary 2 week ban with typically a verbal warning first). Perhaps a system of incremental increases, by number the of previous bans, as a better solution? Shank's idea of delaying the de-spawn of entities for 5-10 mins after you disconnect would be a good solution, by eliminating the root-issue without the need for another rule and associated moderation

ACCEPTED Thank you for your time and patience. After a careful review by our Operator Department, we have decided to accept your ban appeal. The decision to accept your appeal is due, but not limited to, the following: After reviewing the evidence from both PaereBrus and yourself, I have come to the conclusion that you were indeed trying your best to abide by the rules, and you avoided conflict unless either you or your party member was damaged first (or via other legitimate RP scenarios). With that said, there were at least two instances where you unintentionally RDM'd, by forgetting to join a party in order to defend your teammate. However, given that the evidence which you have provided disproves at least 2/4 of PaereBrus' screenshots, I believe this adds merit to your claim of innocence and so the other two will remain undetermined, given I cannot definitively say whether they were in defence of your team mate once again. I don't believe that PaereBrus has done anything wrong in the way they handled your reports; the evidence here has taken quite some time to prepare and analyse, and there are some areas which aren't totally clear without additional context / evidence. For that reason, no action will be taken against the staff member. You will be unbanned shortly. Thank you for your time.

@Jesteruu Thank you for providing additional evidence, however as it stands, the clips you have provided don't disprove the evidence that PaereBrus has provided. I'll explain below: In your first clip, you aren't in a party with your team mate. You can see this by comparing your other clips which show both your health-bar and your team mates health-bar at the top of the screen, but isn't shown here. Therefore both kills would be considered RDM as you hadn't yet made a party. On top of that, it also doesn't tie-up with any of the log screenshots which PaereBrus has provided and is therefore a separate incident. Your second clip is valid, you did indeed defend your team mate. However it doesn't tie-up with any of the log screenshots which PaereBrus has provided and is therefore from a separate incident. Your third clip is also valid, and you defended yourself. However it doesn't tie-up with any of the log screenshots which PaereBrus has provided and is therefore from a separate incident. As it stands, it appears as though all four screenshots of the logs which PaereBrus has provided are RDM kills, but I'd like to offer you the opportunity to present any arguments or further evidence you wish to add before I make a final decision.

@PaereBrus Thank you for uploading the evidence and providing an account of the situation. @Jesteruu While I appreciate that other players may have been breaking rules too, I need to establish the facts surrounding your own actions in order to form a judgement on whether or not your ban was valid. As such, and given the evidence provided, is there anything you would like to add which you feel should be taken into consideration? Note - rules other players have broken are not relevant to your ban appeal, you may wish to submit a player report separately using the linked format above if those incidents haven't been already handled in-game.

UNDER REVIEW Thank you for your appeal. Please allow up to 48 hours to gather the facts and evidence pertaining to your ban, whereby a member of the Operator Department will respond. Please note, bans will only be appealed if they are of a false nature, incorrect reasoning, and in some cases mishandling of sit/report/ban. @PaereBrus Please could you upload evidence and provide your explanation of the situation. @Jesteruu Thank you for providing clips of parts of the circumstances leading up to your ban, please could you elaborate on the facts surrounding to your ban appeal. I see a player was indeed targeting you, if you feel this wasn't dealt with already in-game then please could you make a separate player report using the format below, to ensure that we have all the information needed to impose punishments as required.

Neutral I'm a little torn, because I do like the idea, but it's not in-keeping with the server's vanilla aim. I also wonder whether players can be damaged by getting run-over (so to speak) and if that would become a problem with minges, or players prop-pushing using the skateboard? I do see the benefits, and I'd love to see peoples skatepark builds. There's already some decent bowls around the map that come to mind. Overall I'm not totally convinced that the non-vanilla addon and possible issues outweigh the benefits, but I'd be interested to read further discussion and see some potential addons before deciding on a +1 or -1.

Hi there OniNoCap, Please could you edit your original post to follow the format linked below in order for your ban appeal to be processed:

+1 You've had a rocky past, and you've received multiple bans for MRDM last year after leaving the staff team, which doesn't sit well with me. However, I have noticed that you've been active, really positive and I've been impressed by how you've stood up for what's right in toxic Discord groups, showing what I believe is a true and genuine change - hence my +1. You have previously done some awesome work in the staff team, and I feel that you will do just as well this time around, but please just be self-aware of others who might mess around (as you have been doing) and stay true to what's right.

-1 You were game banned 2 days ago according to your Steam profile. Cheaters aren't fit for the staff team. https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198985731108

Congratulations to everyone in this months promos! Shout-out to our MVP's @Orion @DONTTOUCHMYFROG87 @CreativeStageName who've hit some crazy points this month, I love it! I'm really enjoying the direction that the server and staff team is going. We've seen some really positive changes made over the last month, with a solid staff team that continues to make me smile. I hope everyone has a fantastic Easter and here's to another month! Cheers

Neutral This summarises my position on the subject of clan bias, I think NotDeadPool is spot-on here. Bias is actually more of a subjective issue, rather than a blanket problem. From what I've seen you're either susceptible to bias, or you're not. Those who are susceptible will continue to act the same and demonstrate bias in all scenarios, and it's not limited to their clan friends. Luckily though, the administration team / management team have always had a nack for quickly identifying those who might sway, and any reports they handle (be it clans, friends, enemy's, or otherwise) will almost certainly be spectated. On the other hand, there are certain players who we know will maintain integrity despite being in a clan, and we know that even when nobody is looking they will always make the right decisions. So while I'm not a fan of clans for various reasons, I don't think adding rules specifically about clan-bias actually helps to target the root cause of the problem. Just as a side note, I think 10 minutes is way too long to claim a report in any case

It's really sad to hear you leaving the team mate, you're an awesome guy and you've done a superb job! Hope to see you in game for a catchup and a laugh, but either way I wish you the very best

Congratulations to all! I think Conway summarised this beautifully, we have a truly superb team and it's awesome to see these good people rewarded for their work and dedication. Cheers guys

PARTIALLY ACCEPTED Thank you for your appeal. After a careful review by our Operator Division, we have decided to reduce your ban to 1 week for Unintentional Mass Random Deathmatch (UMRDM). The decision to reduce your ban and partially accept your appeal is due, but not limited to, the following: You should not kill another player repeatedly just because they are breaking the rules, the appropriate action would be to place a report and allow staff to handle the situation. The evidence that JonnyFlame has provided clearly shows you repeatedly killing the other player. By your own admission, you knew and understood that you shouldn't repeatedly kill them otherwise you would get yourself in trouble and potentially banned as a result - quote from your appeal post: "I know for a fact this dude was intentionally trying to get killed so he can put in a report and get me banned". While I find that the ban for Mass Random Deathmatch (MRDM) is valid and JonnyFlame took all appropriate actions related to your own behaviour, I will on this occasion take into consideration the fact that the other player was very likely harassing you, which I believe was somewhat overlooked. Staff may use discretion in certain situations such as this, where the dispute was between you and only one other player who appears to have been targeting you for a reaction. More often than not, if the root-cause of an issue can be resolved, then countless other issues are averted. If this situation repeats itself in the future, place a report specifically for harassment as this will immediately become a staff priority. Thank you for your appeal and we hope to see you in game soon

UNDER REVIEW Thank you for your appeal. Please allow up to 24-48 hours for a response from a member of the Operator Division. As well as allowing a reasonable timeframe to gather the facts pertaining to your ban. Please note, bans will only be appealed if they are of a false nature, incorrect reasoning, and in some cases mishandling of sit/report/ban.

DENIED We regretfully inform you that your request for an appeal of your ban has been denied at this time. This is mostly but may not be limited to the following reasons: Your appeal does not follow the correct format, meaning that it does not include all of the required information in order for it to be processed. You may submit a new post using the format below, if you still wish to appeal your ban:

@ToasterReporter Please could you elaborate on what actions you believe amounted to staff abuse? Could you also confirm whether you agree with Chawheads version of events, and if not, could you give your version of events instead. And lastly, if you could upload and post any evidence that you may have for it to be taken into consideration.

Hi there Stickedy, please could you edit your post to follow the format linked below in order for your appeal to be processed:

Description: Add the !unbox crate keys to the /credits store. As it currently stands, crate keys are obtained by buying and unboxing Key Crates through the !unbox menu, which essentially just increases the price of the crate you'd actually like to unbox. By adding the crate keys to the /credits store, keys can be obtained through playtime as players earn credits for time spent playing on the server. I'd like to add that I don't see it necessary to add a cooldown for spending credits on keys in the /credit store, as the limiting factor will be both playtime (to earn the credits) and RP cash (to buy the crate which you want to unlock with the key). Reasoning: Allowing players to use /credits to obtain crate keys is a unique way to encourage players to be active on the server, and reward those who've spent a lot of time. Of course, players will still need to purchase their crate of choice through the !unbox store, and any items they get are unboxed at random, so it shouldn't affect the current balance, meaning this should only be a positive change. Additional Information: Below is a screenshot of the key crate, and the /credits store for reference:

UNDER REVIEW Thank you for your appeal. Please allow up to 24-48 hours for a response from a member of the Operator Division. As well as allowing a reasonable timeframe to gather the facts pertaining to your ban. Please note, bans will only be appealed if they are of a false nature, incorrect reasoning, and in some cases mishandling of sit/report/ban. Below is your proof of ban, which contains the staff members in-game name and staff members SteamID as it was missing from above: https://garnetgaming.net/darkrp/bans/?steamid=STEAM_0%3A1%3A92944524

UNDER REVIEW Thank you for your appeal. Please allow up to 24-48 hours for a response from a member of the Operator Division. As well as allowing a reasonable timeframe to gather the facts pertaining to your ban. Please note, bans will only be appealed if they are of a false nature, incorrect reasoning, and in some cases mishandling of sit/report/ban.

+1 I think this makes a lot of sense. Some of the best DJ's are those who setup a dance-floor / DJ hut and take donations for song requests, and actively engage with the players. For a job with a limit of 3 players, they shouldn't realistically be completely AFK with songs on loop. I think to add to this, there's three things that could be changed: As per this suggestion - prevent looping of songs on the radio Allow the radio to be fully muted by players, to be functionally the same as when you mute players voice-chat through the TAB menu Add a new rule to the DJ class to say "DJ's must be active / responsive while playing music and should not go AFK for long periods of time" Caveats to the proposed new rule: - The rule shouldn't require any punishment, but rather to help guide players who wish to play as the DJ; while also allowing staff to change their jobs / reconnect where necessary - "long periods of time" to be at the total discretion of staff - this will vary depending on how busy the server is / how many DJ slots are taken, but isn't aimed at kicking those who've popped out to use the toilet

+1 I think Computer would be a good addition to the staff team, you've always been a good laugh in my own experiences and you show a true care for wanting to help the team. You do currently have one active warn, I'd generally say it's best to allow active warns to expire (it's only 2 weeks of good behaviour) but otherwise all of your prior-bans are from a long time ago, so there's no issues there. You have some great referrals and prior experience on the team which is awesome, and so I wish you the best of luck! Just reading through some of the other responses here which I thought were a bit surprising: The training is essentially the same as it was previously, albeit with some updated / reworded questions during the interview stage to reflect the current server rules and changes, and without the need for TeamSpeak. Everything else remains the same from the trainees perspective, just as it was when both of us were previously managers. I think if you had any ideas / criticism then it's worth putting them forwards to the managers / HR Director for them to actually be considered. I don't think it's helpful to tell prospective staff members that the training system is "totally out of line". It's actually always been the case that if someone fails both training attempts, they are then removed from the team and have to re-apply (albeit normally after X number of days so the applicant can study). It's been this way since I first joined the staff team years ago and remains the same to this day. However, under previous management things were a lot more relaxed - instead of ensuring potential new staff members where knowledgable by having them pass a test, they were essentially assisted through that stage under the directions of those who were previously running the server. It goes without saying that this wasn't indicative of high-quality staff. Under current management though, this is back to being properly enforced again to ensure the quality of staff remains high. Remember that failing isn't a bad thing, it shows application and even I didn't pass with flying colours myself, it highlighted areas that I need to focus on. The illusion that everyone passes easily and first time is the damage which has been left behind by those who chose not to properly enforce the system before.

Congratulations to everyone who's done a fantastic job helping keep the server run smoothly! It's awesome to see how cohesive and effective the staff team has been recently, we truly have some superb staff and I feel positive that the recent changes which have been made to the structure of the team will only benefit all of us, by playing to each-others strengths and encouraging those who will undoubtedly do just as well. I'm excited to help in this new role, having previously found that this area of the team is one of my personal favourites. Cheers

Neutral I do see the benefits of this for sure, it would be a much simpler and easier way for the mayor to initiate a lockdown without the need of manually keeping an eye on a timer, which distracts from the RP. On top of that, it would also assist new players in the role as there's less to think about. My reason for staying neutral is because I differ in my objective / subjective take on this, and as this post is simply expressing my own opinion, the subjective side becomes relevant. I'm actually a fan of the vanilla play-style where you have to keep track of things yourself. Theoretically, we could add a lot to the server to essentially remove the need for most commands, but I prefer playing on Garnet because it keeps the tradition of using chat-commands, as it has been throughout its glory days. If everything was UI driven with automated timers, you could objectively argue that it would be more intuitive, but I think it would just loose its appeal and become a tad uninteresting. Learning the new commands almost seemed like learning a new job, it didn't come straight away but when you finally grasped it, you felt good, and really engaged within the role and made the most of your new commands. Call it nostalgia I guess, but back in my day we had to type "/ibuytheseprinterseverytimeyeahonfuckinggarnet" in chat every time we wanted to buy a high-tier printer The youth of today will never understand....