[DISCORD] Andrej99

Appeals which have been closed.
Locked
Andrej99
Joined: Mon May 02, 2022 4:23 pm

[DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by Andrej99 » #639439

Discord username: Andrej#1225
Banning admin: No idea, can't remember his name.
Ban reason: I disagreed with an admin politically, so he decided to ban me.
Time ban was placed: 2.5.2022. 18:20~
Your side of the story: The Yugoslav wars were brought up in order to attack my point. (I did not bring them up). My only claim in regards to genocide was that the Srebrenica massacre, although a horrible humanitarian catastrophe, was not a genocide, because it does not constitute genocide as defined by international law. The admin that banned me then proceeded to strawman my points, call me a Nazi and attack me personally, while continuing to make arguements in bad faith and non sequiturs. The other thing I denied was rape camps, when he posted an article talking about literal "tactical rape" (that's the words used to describe it in the article), based on investigations done by countries that committed an agression against Serbia, with no physical evidence to back up any of those claims. Only eyewitness accounts, which were faked. There is no politically neutral investigation of any of these events and no physical evidence to back up these claims.

You can read all of the conversation if you want, there is 3 hours of it yesterday and 3 hours today, and in all of that time I have been nothing but respectful, while everyone else was attacking me personally. I don't think I've said anything that could be constituted as a personal attack. If the admin that banned me, assuming that was him, implies that I denied his family died in genocide, that is also a lie. He said I did this, even though I literally expressed grief for his loss. I did though say before that, that he might be lying. Because he was being very subversive about our conversation beforehand.

Why you think you should be unbanned: The ban is entirely unjustified, there is absolutely no justification for it, unless you consider someone disagreeing politically with an admin something worthy of a ban. If you read the conversation, you will see that the admin in question was entirely taking the whole conversation in bad faith, putting words in my mouth and strawmaning everything I say.
Andrej99
Joined: Mon May 02, 2022 4:23 pm

Re: [DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by Andrej99 » #639442

Anyway, if you want to consider justifying this ban as me denying genocide, their accusations of genocide in Srebrenica are based on investigations by sources from countries who militarily and politically benefited from justifying the NATO aggression against Serbia that followed this. My beliefs are based on the reports of this neutral, international organization, lead by a Jewish individual, here: https://incomfis-srebrenica.org/report/
Last edited by Andrej99 on Mon May 02, 2022 4:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Gwyn
In-Game Admin
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:36 pm
Byond Username: Starlord_Gwyn

Re: [DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by Gwyn » #639451

The banning moderator would be me, for the record, not the person you were primarily talking to.
Andrej99
Joined: Mon May 02, 2022 4:23 pm

Re: [DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by Andrej99 » #639453

Gwyn wrote: Mon May 02, 2022 5:11 pm The banning moderator would be me, for the record, not the person you were primarily talking to.
Sorry about that then, wasn't really a way for me to know who applied it as I didn't get a ban reason nor any input on the ban.
Andrej99
Joined: Mon May 02, 2022 4:23 pm

Re: [DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by Andrej99 » #639454

Oh yes and as I was fairly criticized for not posting any sources for any of my claims, here are some English language sources I have lying around as copies on which the narrative I represented in the conversation is based.

Bildt, Carl, Peace Journey: The Struggle for Peace in Bosnia.(London, UK: Weidenfeld and
Nicolson, 1998).
Delawarde, Dominique, and Bezruchenko, Viktor, Military analysis of Srebrenica region
events 1992-1995. (Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Archives of the RCIRZ
[Republic of Srpska Center for the Research of War and War Crimes and the Tracing
of Missing Persons], 2020).
Honig, Jan Willem, and Both, Norbert, Srebrenica: Record of a War Crime . (New York:
Penguin Books, 1996).
Mackenzie, Lewis, “The Real Story Behind Srebrenica.”Toronto Globe and Mail, 14. July 2005.
“No Evidence of Civilian Casualties in Operations by Bosnian Commander.” BBC Monitoring:
International Reports, April 11, 2003.
Prosecutor v. Milosevic. Case no.IT-02-54, ICTY (Tr. at 31975:19-31975:25, February
12, 2004). Retrieved from: https://www.icty.org/x/cases/slobodan_milosevic/trans/
en/040212ED.htm
Prosecutor v. Naser Orić, Case no. IT-03-68-T, ICTY. Retrieved from: https://www.icty.org/x/
cases/oric/tjug/en/ori-jud060630e.pdf
Prosecutor v. Naser Orić, Case no.IT-03-68-T, ICTY. Retrieved from: https://www.icty.org/x/
cases/oric/acjug/en/080703.pdf
Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstic, Case no.IT-98-33, “Srebrenica-Drina Corps” Trial Chamber
Judgment, (August 2, 2001). Retrieved from: www.un.org/icty/krstic/TrialC!/
judgement/index.htm
Sauer, Werner, “Srebrenica: Bemerkungen gegen den Strich [Srebrenica: Comments Against
the Grain].” In Europa und die Dynamik der globalen Krise: Friedensbericht 2006:
Ergebnisse der State-of-Peace-Konferenz 2006[Europe and the Dynamic of the Global Crisis:
Peace Report 2006: Results of the State-of-Peace Conference 2006], edited by Österreichisches
Studienzentrum für Frieden und Konfliktforschung. Münster, 2006.
Savitch, Carl, Srebrenica: The Untold Story (critical analysis), cited in Edward S. Herman,
The Politics of the Srebrenica Massacre (n.p.: n.p., n.d.). Retrieved from: www.
srebrenica-report.com
User avatar
Tearling
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 4:40 pm
Byond Username: Tearling

Re: [DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by Tearling » #639455

Andrej99 wrote: Mon May 02, 2022 4:42 pm I don't think I've said anything that could be constituted as a personal attack.
I'm snipping out a VERY long argument here, but posting this for the sake of reference.
Image
Main FNR Rules - 10: wrote:Lying, forging supporting evidence, or making baseless claims against the administration will not end well for you.
Andrej99
Joined: Mon May 02, 2022 4:23 pm

Re: [DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by Andrej99 » #639458

Andrej99 wrote: Mon May 02, 2022 4:42 pm I don't think I've said anything that could be constituted as a personal attack.
I suppose in the 6 hours I wasted arguing I did do a personal attack once, but I am sure that you will find at least a couple of dozen personal attacks thrown against me, so my real point is the ratio of these attacks, especially since they mostly came from admins, this one guy and also FloranOtten who straight up called me retarded a couple of times, which you can look up very easily.
Main FNR Rules - 10: wrote:Lying, forging supporting evidence, or making baseless claims against the administration will not end well for you.
To be quite frank the snippet you made is an attack on his behavior, not a personal attack.
Last edited by Andrej99 on Mon May 02, 2022 5:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Gwyn
In-Game Admin
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:36 pm
Byond Username: Starlord_Gwyn

Re: [DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by Gwyn » #639470

I have done my research into the conversation leading up to the ban, and the sources you have tried using as a defense for denying the nature of the massacre as a genocide and the use of rape in it.

The primary investigation you cite for your position was initiated at the behest of a genocide-denying bosnian serb leader, and seems to be biased towards one single earlier report from the ICTY while ignoring the writings of historians and legal scholars with diametrically opposed positions on the matter. The other studies you cited seem to counter your own argument and support the claims to genocide.

On top of that, during the conversation you asserted someone lied and was acting in bad faith over their family members having died in the massacre, which is flagrantly against the rules.

This appeal is denied. You can appeal again in a year from now.
Andrej99
Joined: Mon May 02, 2022 4:23 pm

Re: [DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by Andrej99 » #639473

If you are genuinely going to take this ban seriously, then please cite the exact ban reason and cite the rules I have broken.
Andrej99
Joined: Mon May 02, 2022 4:23 pm

Re: [DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by Andrej99 » #639475

The primary source I cite is this 1000 page independent report by a neutral party.
The members of the comission are from countries who don't have a stake in the conflict, or would be biased against Serbia if they did.
https://incomfis-srebrenica.org/wp-cont ... %20lan.pdf
The historians and legal scholars you mention are subsrcibing to a narrative perpetrated by countries who have used these claims of genocide to justify the illegal NATO agression against Serbia in 1999. These are simply two differing narratives and as much as you would like for US propaganda to be considered the only truth in this world, it is simply not, there are simply different narratives on the war.

And I repeat again, I am not denying that the events at Srebrenica happened. Never have I said that. I am just arguing that legally speaking, they do not constitute a genocide. They were a horrible massacre, and I heavily oppose everyone involved in that, but it does not constitute a genocide, as explained in the report I cited.

Also in your current response, you completely misunderstand both the argument and my stance. Either way I plead that you don't ban people for political reasons, because it is genuinely a pathetic thing to do.
User avatar
oranges
Code Maintainer
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:16 pm
Byond Username: Optimumtact
Github Username: optimumtact
Location: #CHATSHITGETBANGED

Re: [DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by oranges » #639508

I ran into this guy malding in the verification channel about the server icon, honestly you are not losing much by keeping them banned.
User avatar
Gwyn
In-Game Admin
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2019 1:36 pm
Byond Username: Starlord_Gwyn

Re: [DISCORD] Andrej99

Post by Gwyn » #639812

The ban reason is the denial of a genocide and denying the systematic rape of women during the genocide. This is in violation of both rule 1 and discord rule 7, because it violates the discord ToS.

Additionally, you violated rule 1b by insinuating someone was a liar and bad faith actor multiple times when they shared that they had family members that died in the genocide.
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users