JackOG

Steam Name: JackOG Ingame Name: Jack OG SteamID: STEAM_0:1:511658441 Ban Length: Permanent Admin that Banned you: Console Reason for Ban: "ALT ACCOUNT" Dispute: Well, I don't even know what to say. First of all, I was banned without being spoken to. I started loading into the server and I went to go fold some laundry. I come back and im banned from the server for "ALT ACCOUNT". I was staff on PoliceRP for a month or two, I bought VIP+. I enjoyed the server. I'm not an alt account. I think its a good thing you have been banning alt accounts but I personally don't see how I'm an alt account. I'm a MSGT in PD and I train a lot of cadets. I really don't know what else to put into this appeal as I don't believe I'm an alt account and I believe this was a mistake. I don't know who exactly banned me but I would have liked if they spoke to me before banning me so I could at least put up my defense as I've dedicated time and money into the server. Thank you.

Ill pay the beans to join we can 1v1 for the spot you can use your negev and ill use a normal AR

-Support You are pulling false warns from over nearly 5 months. Im going to need to see some evidence of him being bias in a situation or him taking a sit with his friends involved before you use that as a argument against him. A few warn appeals dont hurt too much. While I do think he should just have a talk about the amount of warn appeals that have been accepted.

Your In-game: Jack Goat Your SteamID: STEAM_0:1:511658441 The admin's name in-game: Sull The admin's steam name (If you know it): n/a What warning did you receive: ltap | rdm Evidence of the warn (REQUIRED): https://gyazo.com/2d97bf3b3ff60cef90bd4105fdbe6f34 Why do you think this warn was false: I think it is false because I talked to Mikey after I got the warning from Springs and I got off the server after appealing my warn on the forums. I just checked the ban pannel now to fill out the appeal and get the warn removed (it was accepted) and I see I was warned after Springs warned me for "ltap | rdm" I personally dont know why I was warned whatsoever as I when I left the server it was after mikey returned me and I was never in a sit with a staff member named Sull. I did not even know there was a staff member named Sull. I would like Sull to explain to me why I was warned because I know for a fact I did not RDM and I did not LTAP from a sit. Remember, for it be LTAP I have to be brought for a sit first and my game has to be actually disconnected by myself, not a crash. I dont know if @[GL] Mikey can confirm this but after our talk about the warn from springs I posted my warn appeal and hopped off. Any extra information: @sull why did you warn me??

im trying to get on a custom class anyone got a open spot? I'll pay for me to be added and maybe a little extra fee if necessary to join a CC. All I need is negev

Your In-game: Jack Goat Your SteamID: STEAM_0:1:511658441 The admin's name in-game: Springs The admin's steam name (If you know it): n/a What warning did you receive: FailRP Evidence of the warn (REQUIRED): https://gyazo.com/dc1396aae4e222206212867f6dc21af2 Why do you think this warn was false: I was defending my home and a FBI agent tried arresting me. I got in a shootout with the FBI agent as a gun dealer and I was arrested for FailRP. I asked Mikey if this was ok to appeal on the forums or if I was going to waste my time. I told Mikey the exact same thing I said to Springs and Mikey told Springs and Springs said I should appeal it and he will +Support. Now since Springs somehow didnt see the two messages I put answering his question on why I got in a shootout im appealing it on the forums. Mistakes happen though so its alright. Any extra information:

-/+ Support Mature Knows the ins and outs of staffing Not active

I understand this can aid in the case for h is ban at this time, but what im saying is that it is not evidence from Eternity to show that he is a alt account at the time on PoliceRP. I was trying to explain id like to see the evidence he gathered to make a ban on JJ.

@EternityAgar would you like to provide examples of when ive sided with friends of smoke?? I don't know who smoke or his friends are. All im saying is just because someone says something their word shouldnt just be taken for it. You dont know when there is going to be someone who is not a alt and is banned falsely, that is why we have ban appeals and thats why even though it may seem like it is a blacklisted member all of appeals should be closely reviewed. Also, Eternity if this is true you know you are in fact supposed to bring and inform someone of their rulebreak before issuing a punishment. @Voxis you made a very good point, I guess we just look at this differently. This is why im not leaving a support, like I dont leave a definite support on many ban appeals I like to give my input so there is another point of view in the sitaution. Eternity it babbles my mind that you are trying to use this SCP-RP video as proof, you banned the person BEFORE they were on SCP-RP and were banned. So why is this your proof of you banning them for being a alt account if it happened after the fact?? What lead you to ban this person in the first place without bringing them to a sit. Remember, just because you suspect someone of being a alt account does not mean they are, there are a lot of compelling facts in this circumstance that can lead someone to believe this is a legit account. So, Eternity, I would like to hear your thought process and evidence that lead you to banning this person for being a alt account. I'm just going to ignore the staff handbook infraction.

For EMS to remain neutral I believe they should not have a radio and not prioritize reviving Government before criminals. I dont see how helping government and making callouts makes them neutral

none of them

Government has the numbers and tactics. Learn to counter it, its not hard to do.

As long as they arent offensive or reference any past terror attacks/school shootings I dont see a issue. Although this is to a extent, I would say leave that to the staff member to decide. If it is going too far, the staff member should intervene, but a casual bomb scenario wouldnt hurt, if anything it'll liven things up for gov.

I dont think I mentioned anything about race, gender, race, or nationally

Sorry I dont think your ready for admin.

While I trust Eternity's decision making. We cant just take his word for it, there has to be actual proof that this person is a alt account. I have seen this happen multiple times, and countless appeals. Its ridiculous to me that you can just take someones word that they are a alt. @EternityAgar can you please explain and provide the evidence that this person is a alt account? We still havent seen anything that can really proof this person of being a alt. The game is purchased and the story makes sense. Everyone lets not mindlessly -Support because Eternity gave the ban, its not fair actually consider the persons point of view before making a decision on it. I know its real easy to quote someones response to get your post count up but this person may be a innocent player trying to play on this server.

What you want to see? - I want to see a requirement of at least 12/13+ to be able to apply for staff on the server (this can be lowered or raised depending on the outcome of this suggestions) Why should we add it? - There are a multitude of reasons for adding this. Those being that accepting young people as staff, and them being promoted to higher ranks without them being matured or at least starting to mature can lead to multiple problems staffing on the server and for the player base. According to a credited article regarding brain development in children at age 12 does your brain start to use the prefrontal cortex, the decision making part of the brain, instead of the amygdala, the part of the brain responsible for the "fight or flight" emotional responses. This can affect staffing as a young person because when your mind has not fully developed or has not developed your mind using the prefrontal cortex for critical thinking/emotion responses it can lead to young staff members taking offense to certain things that will lead them to giving a harsher punishment, or letting their power ride to their head and issuing a severe punishment when it reality it should have been a lighter, more lenient punishment. I have had many experiences with younger kids that let their power override what the right thing to do is. Kids of this age act out of emotion more than actually critically thinking about the situation. I have had experiences with someone like Springs, while not trying to disrespect him, it is obvious that he is not fully matured. I have had to deal with him killing me while he was on staff, after telling him many times that I had weapons and was not trying to mess around with him. This happened a decent while ago and I still see younger staff members constantly messing around on staff, representing the staff team negatively. While younger minds are incapable of intensive critical thinking without letting emotion take control of their responses, thanks to the amygdala, they are unable to make fully credible and accurate staff decisions resulting in either a punishment taken too far, being bias towards a friend, targeting another member of the community because of something they might have said in the past or maybe the staff member just dislikes them. Most staff members that are mature and understand the responsibilities of staff and are capable of critical thinking without letting their amygdala influence the process make good staff members. Examples: Eternity, Mikey, Jimmy James, etc. These people make great staff members and while their personalities are great they also are fully capable of mature, critical thinking. While I see people like Masterson, constantly being called in OOC for things they said or did, while its not enough for a actual report, it still makes the staff team, and the community look incompetent. While a prime argument for this is the fact that none of our minds are really fully matured, unless you are 25+. While that is credible and can be said, our minds have matured for some years past the starting point (around 11-12 your mind starts to develop the critical thinking process using the prefrontal cortex rather than the amygdala), enough to allow us to use our prefrontal cortex more so for critical thinking and intensive staff situations without letting our amygdala hijack or brains response. Many of these younger people can say that they are matured, but they cant control what portion of the brain decides on important decision making. What I said here can be credited and sited from sources such as AACAP, TheLoop, Rochester.edu, and many more sites. What are the advantages of having this? - The advantages is being able to create and maintain a fully mature staff team, allowing the community to be better represented. Allows for better sits, and overall a better experience for players. Less bias in the staff team and more well-thought punishments based on facts and circumstance, rather than emotional feelings taking control of their critical thinking. (Matured/Semi-Matured minds use the prefrontal cortex more than the amygdala). Who is it mainly for? - Links to any content - https://www.theloop.ca/12-year-old-boys-are-the-worst-science-says-so/, https://www.aacap.org/AACAP/Families_and_Youth/Facts_for_Families/FFF-Guide/The-Teen-Brain-Behavior-Problem-Solving-and-Decision-Making-095.aspx

-support not mature enough

A massive amount of people were blacklisted from the server. Some of those people were blacklisted for knowing some of the people that were causing harm to the community at the time. While I believe that they shouldn't regulate who you talk to or play with on other games, I dont believe that someone should have their appeal completely looked over just because its a "blacklist". There have been people that have appealed their blacklist that came from this time period and have been unblacklisted. I dont see why you should just -Support because its a blacklist, people make mistakes, smt makes mistakes and its not impossible that maybe this was a excessive punishment for knowing someone who was a risk to the community deeming Wezzy as a risk to the community even though he showed no signs of it. He didnt intentionally try to harm the community and he was blacklisted for knowing someone who did. Seems controlling to try to make sure that people dont know/play with people that have been blacklisted. I know of people that are still in contact with blacklisted members and im sure there are many more that wont be punished as well. Its hilarious how they are claiming they told Wezzy to "keep his friends in check" you dont control who he is friends with buddy. Its not Wezzy's role to "try to intervene". He can sit and watch it happen he doesnt have to try to intervene in any way because its not his place. Just like someone on the server is not obligated to report all crime seen/any rules broken.

-support not ready senior admin is has a lot of power and responsibilities that accompany it and I dont think you are ready for it yet

When someone makes a community leave post they cant make another one. Ive seen people post 4 community resignations like if you leave please leave stop fiending for attention

Anyone can go rouge, anyone can have personal prejudices against another person, there is no saying that this wont influence their judgement. In this case I believe that the person should not be unbanned, im just saying that they should at least be able to be reviewed especially because of how long ago this occurred and maybe at the end of the day the punishment was too severe, it all depends on the situation. What I dont like is that you, because you were SMT, believe that you have experienced more than me and have had to make more important decisions than I have because you were high staff on a video game, but that is just not true buddy. I have made multiple important life decisions that have influenced more than weather or not someone can play a server on Garry's Mod. Its very possible for a SMT member to go rouge if they feel like quitting, what if they have planned to go rouge and while they can they might take advantage of their position. While I understand that it is the owners decision on whether or not he can trust this power with them, if he does its his choice, im just here to question whether or not it can be completely fair. At the end of the day sometimes punishments were made in the heat of the moment, and can be appealed a lengthy period afterwards or, right after. Maybe the blacklist was unfair and there were personal biases that took over, then you can have another SMT member or the Owner review the situation to confirm the decision of the blacklist appeal. I do believe that once it is appealed once it should not be appealed again.

I dont think there should ever be a punishment issued that cant be appealed. Theres no reason why if someone thinks a punishment is not fair or was done for corrupt reasons that it wouldnt even be looked into by the community or other SMT memebrs because its a "blacklist".

So what im seeing here is that Calamity banned someone who A. Did not sound like Bambob but your reasoning is he continued to type (your allowed to type on the server) B. Broke "common" rules but I dont see how minging makes you a alt C. You mentioned having relations with someone who has been banned is "bad news" well @Hannah King just said she regularly talks to Bambob, does that make her a alt? fuck no. When you see such blatant contradiction to the case of the person being a alt account why do you continue to issue the punishment? Really, you did not have any substantial evidence that is worthy of a ban. You say that you have been banning people frequently for being alt accounts, this does not mean anyone you may have slight suspicion towards is a alt account, you reference the seriousness in which this offense is but I dont think you understand the seriousness of the punishment you are issuing. I have seen a pattern here, and its not a good one. You had no actual reason to ban this person. This person needs to be unbanned and Calamity needs to be talked to about the seriousness and the need to know completely if they are a alt before issuing such a punishment. +Support