Sparkle

I like your initiative Bagel but like others have said, this is better reported to their command or to Maintenance command to pass along. With evidence of course. We can get it talked about in their meetings or announced to their branch if it becomes a rampant issue.

I'm gonna go with a +Support despite Zeus' response. The main question here was how was Sammie supposed to know? Their side, in the sit even, shows their model is near normal. The only way they could know is here in the sit being told, being told at some point before, or being given a screenshot showing otherwise. Unless there's evidence they were told before active combat, I can't agree with it.

-Support Same as the other appeal. Your conduct record shows it all. The worst part is that it was over 1 single week.

SCP blacklists are only handled by SMT. The top of the top. There is no set warn limit to receive a blacklist so there cannot be a claim its false. There just has to be some notion you are abusing and/or will continue to abuse rules on the SCPs. To the appeal itself, -Support Misconduct on multiple SCPs including 076-2, 035, 682, 131, and 066. That's a very heavy history along with multiple chances to read the rules and shape up. Honestly, I would deem you as high risk. EDIT: This was all in a span of a week.

-Support Multiple misconduct with other SCPs. Multiple chances to have read the MOTD to avoid the warns.

+Support Obviously didn't break the elevator. Looking at the recordings regarding the sit itself, I am disappointed the appealer was not given a single chance to defend himself or present the video. This whole appeal could have been avoided with just that alone. Also... The sit videos show otherwise in many regards.

@Sprinklertek @Evil

Must have been a misunderstanding of the rules that went into effect at the start of the month. These are the rules changes that were pinged and announced to us when they went into effect on October 2nd: SCPs will now be able to breach regular doors (that have keypads on them) with the exception of Panic Rooms and Spawn areas. It takes 2 minutes to breach regular doors and 4 minutes to break through checkpoint/gate doors. SCP 682 has a reduced timer of 30 seconds and 90 seconds respectively. SCPs will now be able to breach to the surface on their own, meaning that MTF will now have some higher stakes in keeping the Site secure!

-Support regardless of format The warning you received was for RDMx5. RDM x4 or above is a 5 day ban by our staff handbook. Crystal listed the exact evidence given to Starstep who only handled the ban portion. Please fix your post to the format given by Dect or this won't be processed and immediately denied.

With the above explanation, -Support The evidence and punishment was talked over with high ranking staff, not really gonna get out of that one. I find the third screenshot to be really damning. Saying in OOC that such jokes are acceptable? Seriously? Making any jokes about pedophilia is in no way acceptable. Even if you were "provoked" as you say, you absolutely shouldn't be pulling that.

+Support Clear and obvious NLR violation.

+Support I'm not super concerned about the warnings. The application is pretty spot on. Also seen him around and have gotten good notes about him. Definitely should be given a chance.

The amount of times this has been an issue is uncountable.

This should probably be moved to Staff Reports since this is using its format. While I'm maintaining a -Support for this... I really feel that the initial sit about the demotion should've been handled better. If this part of the story is correct, ignoring and immediately denying sits should not have happened, regardless of your view of it. While I acknowledge that the reason was put in OOC, some people would like to hear it from someone who's on Administration. That's just how it is. Viewing it as he didn't care for going this route is just wrong. The demotion is allowed and within the rules since he's command. I feel this shouldn't have been the focus. He's writing to us about his experience with staff.

The warn was already given to 173. The issue here is that another warn was issued from that report for the Nu7 shooting 173. However that got issued to the wrong person.

+Support I was genuinely confused why that warn appeared as a result of that report. Warn should've been on Woods if anything. IMO shouldn't have been issued at all.

+Support Skela continues to be a great member of the community. Very unfortunate circumstances of the removal but I would very much love to have him back.

-Support As much as it would be nice, this would end up turning things into TDM than RP-focused. This would also exclude those that want to be in RP-focused branches like Research and Utility. I feel if any money or XP is to be awarded, it should be given towards actual RP scenarios then just killing people. One example is the recently accepted addition of giving SCPs XP for participating in research tests.

+Support The output is terribly low for the work and patience since these sewers aren't exactly the fastest in re-spawning trash.

Best dispute of a blacklist I've seen in a while. I believe you deserve this one for your efforts +Support