Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2020 20:15:12 GMT
1. Minecraft name:
N/A
2. Discord username and discriminator (username#discriminator) (if any):
N/A
3. Approximate date of perm ban:
3 weeks ago? I don't remember the exact date.
4. Reason for perm ban. Please do not lie and try to be sincere and apologize as applicable:
I was banned from the forums because I sent somebody's (who has been banned & deleted from the community mind you, and I feel like my ban set precedent which had never been established before that people that have been permbanned from the community are still considered "players" or OPs, which is such a significant precedent that it should've been suggested to the rules rather than unilaterally applied) contact information to Video in a private direct message which was not part of any of this community's channels. I personally feel that the application of this rule (which from my reading of the conduct policy, would not have applied to me anyways as I am not an admin and did not do anything on a TF platform) was a double standard as it ignored many of the procedures that we have in place for banning members, ignored multiple provisions of the rules, and to my knowledge nobody (besides Video) has had this rule applied to them before in such a broad-based and unilateral manner.
Look, regardless of your personal convictions regarding what I did, I have been in this community since 2011 and the point in bringing that up is that since I have been around we have always enforced rules like this in an objective manner. This means that we don't act as the judge, jury, and executioner and preemptively determine a verdict so that I don't even have a chance to defend myself within the community's rules. Think about it, there was no forum sanction request procedure or objective reading of the rules, it just pretty much happened despite the rules. Since when do we ban somebody for something that does not violate the rules? I'm not trying to justify what I did at all, my point is that people shouldn't be banned if the rule does not apply. I have always defended people against unfair prosecution and that's what I have observed here in this case.
Courts may use three different means of interpreting rules: plain-face literal meaning, intent, and absurdity. In no way was my ban valid under a plain-face meaning because I am not an admin, I did not do this on a community platform, I have never seen this precedent of "a permanently banned and deleted user is still a player of the server" used before in my 9 years of being here, and a dox is strictly defined as a publication (that's how the word was even created, because people back in the 90s started publicizing other people's personal information as a means of harassment, this case is neither public nor meant as a means of harassment/stalking as it was a private relay of information, I'm sorry but this fact cannot be disputed because it's literally why the word exists and is a rule on many online communities).
For intent interpretation, you instead determine why the rule was put into place, what it was trying to avoid by being put into place, and how a case falls into that. As I just mentioned, online communities use these rules to prevent publication of personal information on their platforms, a totally common and normal rule that does not apply to what I did because I did not publicize information and did not involve this with any TF community platform. Absurdity interpretations are there to avoid a literal reading which would lead to an absurd ruling which would probably only be semantically justified by ambiguous rules, in this instance the rules are very clearly defined and not ambiguous, and so a narrower approach is irrelevant. A wider approach is basically a ruling based on principle of policy, but we strictly do not rule based on principle in this community, and even an intent interpretation shows that I could not have violated this rule.
It comes down to rule of law. I've already been banned for weeks over a rule that cannot apply to me in any charitable interpretation as I have discussed; are we going to ignore the rules for this particular case and continue setting an awful precedent for this community that rules and procedures do not matter and ultimately you can be banned based on whatever reason exists? Or do we follow the rules of this community consistently and accordingly? The choice comes down to you, and I have said all that I can say.
5. Do you agree to follow our server rules, the rules in place on the forum, and all the conditions stated above?
I agree to follow the forum guidelines, the ProBoards TOS, the conduct policy, and any other applicable community policy.
6. Please provide the one IP that you will be using to login to the server. If you don't know it, visit ip4.me and cut and paste the result. All other IPs that you used to get perm banned will remain perm banned. Don't provide a VPN IP.
N/A
N/A
2. Discord username and discriminator (username#discriminator) (if any):
N/A
3. Approximate date of perm ban:
3 weeks ago? I don't remember the exact date.
4. Reason for perm ban. Please do not lie and try to be sincere and apologize as applicable:
I was banned from the forums because I sent somebody's (who has been banned & deleted from the community mind you, and I feel like my ban set precedent which had never been established before that people that have been permbanned from the community are still considered "players" or OPs, which is such a significant precedent that it should've been suggested to the rules rather than unilaterally applied) contact information to Video in a private direct message which was not part of any of this community's channels. I personally feel that the application of this rule (which from my reading of the conduct policy, would not have applied to me anyways as I am not an admin and did not do anything on a TF platform) was a double standard as it ignored many of the procedures that we have in place for banning members, ignored multiple provisions of the rules, and to my knowledge nobody (besides Video) has had this rule applied to them before in such a broad-based and unilateral manner.
Look, regardless of your personal convictions regarding what I did, I have been in this community since 2011 and the point in bringing that up is that since I have been around we have always enforced rules like this in an objective manner. This means that we don't act as the judge, jury, and executioner and preemptively determine a verdict so that I don't even have a chance to defend myself within the community's rules. Think about it, there was no forum sanction request procedure or objective reading of the rules, it just pretty much happened despite the rules. Since when do we ban somebody for something that does not violate the rules? I'm not trying to justify what I did at all, my point is that people shouldn't be banned if the rule does not apply. I have always defended people against unfair prosecution and that's what I have observed here in this case.
Courts may use three different means of interpreting rules: plain-face literal meaning, intent, and absurdity. In no way was my ban valid under a plain-face meaning because I am not an admin, I did not do this on a community platform, I have never seen this precedent of "a permanently banned and deleted user is still a player of the server" used before in my 9 years of being here, and a dox is strictly defined as a publication (that's how the word was even created, because people back in the 90s started publicizing other people's personal information as a means of harassment, this case is neither public nor meant as a means of harassment/stalking as it was a private relay of information, I'm sorry but this fact cannot be disputed because it's literally why the word exists and is a rule on many online communities).
For intent interpretation, you instead determine why the rule was put into place, what it was trying to avoid by being put into place, and how a case falls into that. As I just mentioned, online communities use these rules to prevent publication of personal information on their platforms, a totally common and normal rule that does not apply to what I did because I did not publicize information and did not involve this with any TF community platform. Absurdity interpretations are there to avoid a literal reading which would lead to an absurd ruling which would probably only be semantically justified by ambiguous rules, in this instance the rules are very clearly defined and not ambiguous, and so a narrower approach is irrelevant. A wider approach is basically a ruling based on principle of policy, but we strictly do not rule based on principle in this community, and even an intent interpretation shows that I could not have violated this rule.
It comes down to rule of law. I've already been banned for weeks over a rule that cannot apply to me in any charitable interpretation as I have discussed; are we going to ignore the rules for this particular case and continue setting an awful precedent for this community that rules and procedures do not matter and ultimately you can be banned based on whatever reason exists? Or do we follow the rules of this community consistently and accordingly? The choice comes down to you, and I have said all that I can say.
5. Do you agree to follow our server rules, the rules in place on the forum, and all the conditions stated above?
I agree to follow the forum guidelines, the ProBoards TOS, the conduct policy, and any other applicable community policy.
6. Please provide the one IP that you will be using to login to the server. If you don't know it, visit ip4.me and cut and paste the result. All other IPs that you used to get perm banned will remain perm banned. Don't provide a VPN IP.
N/A
