Steam Name: Majora
Your SteamID32: STEAM_0:0:84642146
Your Character Name: Wilford Mactavish
Ban Length: One Week
Banning Staff Member: @SCOTTISH
Ban Reason:
If I may continue, upon the administrator reviewing the evidence I was charged with 3 separate entities. These entities alone are listed above and will be referenced often and with precision. If at any any given time the information I am stating when elaborating my charges does not meet all official rule book standards, and the actions can be proven without a doubt as truly malicious then the admin may deem the charge in question as legitimate. From this point forward I will be referring to myself as "the player in question" or simply "the player".
Section I: Meta-Gaming: Taking OOC to IC or vice-versa.
My first argument here on being charged with meta-gaming is simple, if player in question is charged with meta-gaming for communicating in a call with other players during this situation there would have been a blatant use of external information used in character for the gain or roleplay use of the player charged with meta-gaming. In this instance yes the player accused was in contact with two other players via third party programs, though these players were not giving nor was the player in question receiving external information that would otherwise ruin players roleplay experience. The player in question was merely using third party VoIP application to communicate with friends at the time, therefore since the player did not use any incharacter information given to him from external sources nor did the player in question give any information to external listeners that would have changed the outcome of the situation in question, I believe the charge Meta-Gaming as according to Monolith official rules which is stated in section 2.3 [Metagaming/Powergaming] is illegitimate.
Section II: Fail Roleplay (Breaking Character).
Moving to the second charge the player has been given in the situation, there are many dotted lines and very grey areas when pertaining to such a rule therefore I will be giving my argument in accordance to Monolith rules. As stated in section [0] Terminology, FailRP is "any actions performed by your character that are not realistic and do not correlate with the setting of the server and your roleplay role." This instance the player in question was charged with specifically (Breaking Character), which is not stated as a rule in the server by any means whatsoever. While I feel this argument alone is very frail and can not be sustained I must say you probably agree, though this is only the basis of my argument. If I may point out section; [2.6] FailRP
Section III: Erotic Roleplay
In this section there will be a very hard case to argue the player was not eroticly trying to roleplay without admitting to breaking character in a non roleplay fashion, though an attempt will be made. In the official rules of Monolith RP, section [0] Terminology states that Erotic Roleplay is seen as "any role-playing activity performed mostly, or exclusively, for the purpose of sexual behavior." The player in question would like to first and foremost admit whole handedly the statement spoken & quote "You're gonna be sucking my dick later". With this information on the table and completely given confession for, the argument still stands that this was not said in a manner of sexual innuendo and thus by the admins description is deemed as such. The player did say this, though the player refuses to stand by the claim it was said with intentions of exclusively sexual mannerisms. The statement at hand was in fact in character and given a derogatory undertone such that it would be insulting to the opposing player to hear. The player in question wishes that the admin does not sexualise the word "dick" just because it is derogatory word. The act of sucking dick is considered to be sexual, though the player did not carry this statement out any further and left it in a derogatory manner, which the opposing player found humerus. The player wishes to apologize for a misunderstanding of this context and hopes that in the future, he will use better insults and think before slurring.
With the above stated, the player wishes again to apologize for the trouble caused for the situation and all staff members in question. The player also wishes to apologize for breaking the rules in the first place as even though their arguments are decently constructed, they are not perfect and therefore accepts all punishments given. Furthermore the player asks for an appeal hearing on this ban issued and a further explanation as to why the first offense was so harsh given that the player is very calm and compliant with staff members at all times, and that the player has staffing experience themselves. Overall the player wishes to at the least have a reduced ban time based on previous good behaviour and arguments claimed above. At the most a complete ban appeal would be welcomed, but understandably with narrow chance. If the appeal is denied, then another will be posted adhering to the guidelines listed in the rules.
Concluding this post, I Majora personally want to apologize for breaking any and all rules, and thank the staff for handling the situation the way they see fit. This post is not a piece targeting any person(s), nor is this post a statement of dissatisfaction with the staff. This post only serves as a linear view of my own and a platform to appeal and say I am sorry. with this being said;
please read the ENTIRE thing!
Thank you, happy staffing.
Time of Occurrence: Sunday, April 5th, 2020, 10:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Additional members involved/witnessing: No relevant members.
Read, understood and followed ban appeal rules?: Yes I have read and understand the appeal rules.
Your SteamID32: STEAM_0:0:84642146
Your Character Name: Wilford Mactavish
Ban Length: One Week
Banning Staff Member: @SCOTTISH
Ban Reason:
- Meta-gaming
- Fail Roleplay (Breaking Character)
- Erotic Roleplay
If I may continue, upon the administrator reviewing the evidence I was charged with 3 separate entities. These entities alone are listed above and will be referenced often and with precision. If at any any given time the information I am stating when elaborating my charges does not meet all official rule book standards, and the actions can be proven without a doubt as truly malicious then the admin may deem the charge in question as legitimate. From this point forward I will be referring to myself as "the player in question" or simply "the player".
Section I: Meta-Gaming: Taking OOC to IC or vice-versa.
My first argument here on being charged with meta-gaming is simple, if player in question is charged with meta-gaming for communicating in a call with other players during this situation there would have been a blatant use of external information used in character for the gain or roleplay use of the player charged with meta-gaming. In this instance yes the player accused was in contact with two other players via third party programs, though these players were not giving nor was the player in question receiving external information that would otherwise ruin players roleplay experience. The player in question was merely using third party VoIP application to communicate with friends at the time, therefore since the player did not use any incharacter information given to him from external sources nor did the player in question give any information to external listeners that would have changed the outcome of the situation in question, I believe the charge Meta-Gaming as according to Monolith official rules which is stated in section 2.3 [Metagaming/Powergaming] is illegitimate.
Given the circumstances it is easily confused and there is no concrete evidence that the player in question was planning to use VoIP to break the rule stated above, nor was the player proven to have been breaking these rules. On top of previous statements, the player in question was also live streaming at the time and recording as well, giving more reasons for the player to be speaking in what the administrator may feel is "the players self". The player in question also must inform administrator staff that alongside using external VoIP software, the player uses a push to talk key and does not openly speak during roleplay situations, to further concrete the very careful method of not leaking in character information. With all this being stated I wish for the charge of Meta-gaming to be either reduced, or dropped by staff members.
Section II: Fail Roleplay (Breaking Character).
Moving to the second charge the player has been given in the situation, there are many dotted lines and very grey areas when pertaining to such a rule therefore I will be giving my argument in accordance to Monolith rules. As stated in section [0] Terminology, FailRP is "any actions performed by your character that are not realistic and do not correlate with the setting of the server and your roleplay role." This instance the player in question was charged with specifically (Breaking Character), which is not stated as a rule in the server by any means whatsoever. While I feel this argument alone is very frail and can not be sustained I must say you probably agree, though this is only the basis of my argument. If I may point out section; [2.6] FailRP
specifically 2.6 - 1 states you must abide by realistic roleplay measures, which as far as the player is concerned was not broken. The player was very logical with the police force that was handling him, despite knowing they were breaking rules up until they decided to book him. Though I digress so I may point out another interesting piece of information. The argument could be made that the player in question "broke character" by mentioning a recording to the officers that were on the scene, though according to a quote from a staff member:
That being said, when the player in question was speaking of recording they were merely referring to the recording that their life alert body camera was doing at the time. Since this recording was done almost entirely in first person, and was presented as evidence as such, I believe there is no reason the player could be given a FailRP charge for this as well. However, later in the situation the player does admit to breaking character and saying & quote "See you on the forums." This information considered the player in question may be given a charge of breaking character, if there was a charge for such a thing in the first place. In conclusion of section II, the player believes they did not fail to roleplay appropriately for a mass majority of the situation as per the video evidence; though the player does agree they broke character, they do not feel it was Failure to roleplay appropriately as stated by the official rules of Monoluth RP.
Section III: Erotic Roleplay
In this section there will be a very hard case to argue the player was not eroticly trying to roleplay without admitting to breaking character in a non roleplay fashion, though an attempt will be made. In the official rules of Monolith RP, section [0] Terminology states that Erotic Roleplay is seen as "any role-playing activity performed mostly, or exclusively, for the purpose of sexual behavior." The player in question would like to first and foremost admit whole handedly the statement spoken & quote "You're gonna be sucking my dick later". With this information on the table and completely given confession for, the argument still stands that this was not said in a manner of sexual innuendo and thus by the admins description is deemed as such. The player did say this, though the player refuses to stand by the claim it was said with intentions of exclusively sexual mannerisms. The statement at hand was in fact in character and given a derogatory undertone such that it would be insulting to the opposing player to hear. The player in question wishes that the admin does not sexualise the word "dick" just because it is derogatory word. The act of sucking dick is considered to be sexual, though the player did not carry this statement out any further and left it in a derogatory manner, which the opposing player found humerus. The player wishes to apologize for a misunderstanding of this context and hopes that in the future, he will use better insults and think before slurring.
With the above stated, the player wishes again to apologize for the trouble caused for the situation and all staff members in question. The player also wishes to apologize for breaking the rules in the first place as even though their arguments are decently constructed, they are not perfect and therefore accepts all punishments given. Furthermore the player asks for an appeal hearing on this ban issued and a further explanation as to why the first offense was so harsh given that the player is very calm and compliant with staff members at all times, and that the player has staffing experience themselves. Overall the player wishes to at the least have a reduced ban time based on previous good behaviour and arguments claimed above. At the most a complete ban appeal would be welcomed, but understandably with narrow chance. If the appeal is denied, then another will be posted adhering to the guidelines listed in the rules.
Concluding this post, I Majora personally want to apologize for breaking any and all rules, and thank the staff for handling the situation the way they see fit. This post is not a piece targeting any person(s), nor is this post a statement of dissatisfaction with the staff. This post only serves as a linear view of my own and a platform to appeal and say I am sorry. with this being said;
please read the ENTIRE thing!
Thank you, happy staffing.
Time of Occurrence: Sunday, April 5th, 2020, 10:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Additional members involved/witnessing: No relevant members.
Read, understood and followed ban appeal rules?: Yes I have read and understand the appeal rules.
Last edited:
