• Only the thread starter and admins can reply to appeals/complaints.

Appeal Approved Ban Appeal: BBobrQ

M

MonkeighQ

In-game Name BBobrQ

Have you cheated before? no

What's your side of the story as to why you were banned? The original report against me greatly exaggerated what I did.
As can be seen in this report against me : https://banzore.com/forums/threads/complaint-from-rypta-about-player-bbobrq.8621/
he claims I repeatedly griefed him, but it was only once and the c4 death was unintentional.
as can be seen in the video he posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGiOZ_HCuEw

I was not waiting in spawn for him, I had just spawn in a second after he did, I ran up to his AA because at first I thought it was a friend of mine in the AA, so I asked him to share since he was spending most of the game getting the AA blown up after like 30 seconds of it spawning or just handing it to the enemy team.

I expected him to get out so I pre placed c4 on the AA since me and some other guys were trying to launch vehicles on the roof tops, as can be seen in the video at 1:01. But he drove off so I walked into spawn to grab another vehicle and he got blown up by a mav sitting outside our spawn.

Also idk if its against the rules but his chat was flickering rly fast and when he got in the AA it beeped and extra 2 times which seems like a pretty obvious clicker macro or something and its a dick move to use it to insta lock a vehicle for the entire game.

Why should we lift your ban? The report was greatly exaggerated and taken out of context. It was not my intention to grief.
 
As I sit here, waiting for a reply that may never come, I read through the forums and replies of the other lost souls, and I began to wonder,

what does it truly mean to "grief"?

According to Merriam-Webster "TROUBLE, ANNOYANCE", would be the most fitting descriptions of the actions taken by individuals within these walls, but that definition would also apply to basic gameplay mechanics. Is it not an annoyance when someone depletes your characters health with a single tank shell fired from across the map, without you able to retaliate in any way? Or when an attack jet is able to destroy a tank or boat in a single pass? There are hundreds more examples I could give, but a common theme within all of them is developer intention. Although it is an annoyance, to be killed in such ways was intended by the developers. But to determine what it truly means to "grief" can't be determined by something as loose as "developer intention" since a lot of non griefing actions that are perfectly acceptable are most likely not intended by the developers, but simply allowed due to the nature of these actions not being able to be removed or the actions not harming the normal ecosystem of player choice. Examples of such actions are "performing a "rendezook", or road killing with unordinary vehicles such as jets or suavs. These actions would most likely be classified as "trolling", so perhaps what it truly means to grief is to troll ones own team mates instead of the enemy team, but where would we draw the line? Would something as such as standing in front of a friendly snipers scope be considered griefing or trolling? Perhaps we may find our answer within this forums own set of rules, "Griefing: Purposefully shooting or otherwise sabotaging your teammates in an online game.". But such a vague definition only adds more questions, "sabotage" can be taken in many different ways, acts such as standing in front of a friendly sniper to block his view would be considered sabotage, but what of team mates who unknowingly commit acts of sabotage? As stated in my original message to this forum, the user who accused me of committing acts of griefing had been taking the mobile anti air craft vehicle and using it in very inefficient ways, well beyond the inefficiency of a new player unaware of the controls and proper positioning of such a vehicle. Could such acts be considered griefing? According the the vagueness of the term rules and their use of "sabotage" perhaps, but I hold no ill will to that individual and do not wish to see him suffer a similar fate as I. It seems that due to the vagueness of the definitions I may never get my answer as to what it means to truly "grief", and I fear that even with proper definitions to base our arguments on the discussion of griefing will continue on due to the vagueness of other conundrums such as the human condition, or how responsible we are for what goes on around us. Of course a man is responsible for his direct actions, such as his body's movement, but how responsible is a man for his words, after they leave his mouth and enter another's ear? When the direct actions of two individuals meet who is responsible for the unpredictable outcome? If a man places c4 on another mans vehicle due to a misunderstanding and then a disagreement in ideals, is it his fault for the resulting explosion when that vehicle is driven out of spawn? or is it the fault of the driver of the vehicle for leaving spawn when he knew of the possibilities? situations like that are a bit easy to argue around, but what about truly accidental consequences made by direct actions? If a driver of a vehicle is driving around a populated area then backs into another individuals C4 that was being placed to launch his own vehicle, and that C4 is then blown up by a third party, who's fault is the resulting explosion? Is it the duty of the C4 man to be aware of the possibility of accidents? Is it the duty of the driver to be aware of the possibility of accidents? Or is it the fault of the third party who simply took the direct action he thought was best for him at the time? Such vagueness will probably plague us for the entirety of human existence. I shall return to my pondering, and perhaps in another weeks time I will find answers to such complex intricacies.
 
Absolutely fantastic post, I will be saving this one.

Can you promise to follow the rules moving forward?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top