Character Name: Riuga Forum Name: Riuga Last thing you did: Criticizing GM John in a civilized and formal way, in addition to justifying my criticism by making an analogy to KS reports, though that is not the only justification I used in my criticism. I also stated that it is simply common courtesy to write a full sentence response regardless of whether or not the reporter followed the correct format. Why do you think you got banned?: I believe I was wrongfully banned due to exaggerated reasons. Ban message when attempting to log in: What GM banned you (optional): I am not sure, and I don't mean to be pointing fingers at this point in time. Let me break it down: 1. Personal Attacks In no way did the two posts I made constitute to a personal attack. It is rather far from it, and I believe the other posts in the thread come closer to the definition of "personal attack". What I criticized GM John for was not slander as he in fact, does post a sentence fragment regularly for KS reports that do not follow the new format. Since it is evidently true that he posts the said sentence fragments, I have the right to criticize him for that. Whether or not the staff likes that, it is still a fact, and we all have to accept the fact that people will criticize us for what we have done. It is seemingly tyrannical to call a simple, polite, and formal criticism a "personal attack". 2. Rude Comments That is your opinion, and I won't argue with opinions. In my opinion however, some of the other posts in the thread were equally as "rude" by your definition. I don't believe these other men were also banned, but if they were, do let me know. There's a difference between calling someone rude and ignorant, and I believe the latter is more factually correct in my case. Though, one count of ignorance still goes rather far as a justification for banning someone. 3. Bickering This shouldn't be ban-worthy by itself, so I'll let this one slide as that is your opinion also. Though I do find it rude that you should call a legitimate criticism 'bickering', as though criticism isn't appreciated. 4. Attitude These are some rather strict standards for attitude if you're calling me out for that. I may have taken the KS analogy a step too far, however there's no reason to single me out for "attitude" just for that.
You were banned for deliberately going against explicit requests by staff to stop bringing up a topic and continuing to do so in a place where it should not have been brought up. By continuing to talk about it despite our multiple requests for you to stop, you were showing us that you could not conduct yourself in a way that was appropriate for the forums, hence you were given the one day ban. This was the main reason why you were banned although the other points did have a small factor as well.
I made one post after the initial warning, and I had no intention to continue once you used the "staff discretion" card, so I don't see how this constitutes to "multiple requests for me to stop". Although there were two warning posts made after my first 'warning violation', there was no evidence that I was going to continue, hence I believe only the first warning and violation can be counted towards the ban. Still, why was this not listed in the reasons for the ban? Why was I given exaggerated reasons instead, and one completely false one (personal attacks)?
That was only one part of your ban reason. You're looking at it with a twisted POV. "Take a temporary break to step back and think about what we've said. Rude comments about staff isnt appreciated nor is the bickering and attitude". Take away the 'about staff' part and you still have the rest of your ban reason applicable. I saw it as being rude, and so did a couple other staff members. It was a 1 day forum ban, doesnt even affect you in game. It was purely to get you to step back and think about what we were saying, because any other way of doing so wasnt working - multiple attempts had been made by that point and everyone was going in circles. Edit: The point of the Ban Appeal forum is not to air out your complaints about a ban you received that already expired, FYI. It's to appeal a wrongful ban in hopes of getting it removed so you can play again. This does not affect your in game at all.
As minor as the ban is, I believe some of the reasons I was banned for were inaccurate or untrue, and I would like to justify and explain my side of it. I wouldn't say I'm exactly fond that you simply covered up the accusation of 'personal attacks', which I think is quite untrue, in favor of the other three reasons. Am I still being accused of personal attacks at this point? That's all I wish to know. Once again, I believe you are skewing the reality of the situation. Although there were three warnings, two of them were posted after my first violation of the warning. It is true that you made multiple warnings, however you're treating the latter 2 as though I violated them, even though the reality is that I had no intention to and did not violate the latter 2 warnings. Hence, I think it should be "one warning", not "multiple warnings", since I only violated the first one.
Though I understand you have some disagreements with how this server is being run, you have taken your replies to the extreme multiple times and this was not appreciated which eventually resulted in a temporary forum ban. With that said, my advise would be for you to let go of the situation and to just move on, rather than to keep arguing with us like your life depends on it as it doesn't make anyone happy.
I don't see this going anywhere, nor do any GMs seem to wish to clarify why some of my posts are classified as personal attacks, which I think is a far-fetched thing to accuse me of. You may lock the thread as this is no longer worth my time.