Admin: Saegrimr
Time incident occured: 18th of April, 2016
Detailed summary:
To start off, yes. This is in relation to my most recent ban. Call me "Salty" if you will.
But in my opinion, the whole appeal is riddled with his apparent lack of commitment or care for handling the ban. As an admin, he refused to state what we did was "wrong", in favor of leaving a bunch of cryptic posts and then stated that he would not lift the ban anyways simply because i was "almost rule 0 perma'd by basil's pseudo-headmin." Regardless of the fact that the ban in question had been lifted and found to be unjustified. In-fact, the best i got on my end was a swift "Denied" without explanation by Hornygranny directly after he hands the appeal off to the Headadmins.
Saegrimr has likely changed his story, and attempted to magnify the "Offense" on our end. Though anything like this can not be proven without significant investigation, such as checking logs, having actually been there when the offense was commited, and cross-referencing posts/what he likely said behind my back to you. I feel as though this is the case. Why had he refused to change his decision on the ban? Bearing in mind that he claimed that the person that did ahelp was banned for banbaiting? Why did he not provide details about this? All he told me was that he was refusing because i had been "Nearly rule 0'd by the pseudo-admin of bagil". What does that have to do with his reasoning to not lift the ban? That ban was found to be unjustified and lifted in a day.
This bit of detail was posted just today. If you look here, it is obvious that he is referencing the detective. This being one of the people who had assaulted us randomly. stating that he was beating me to "Teach the ligger a lesson about wagging tails." Later he is found to have even been a permaban evader. This still does not seem to matter to Saegrimr as he continues to make claims that we were in the wrong and that the ban reasoning should stick. In the image he is also, accusing us of having "Murdered" them, but more specifically. That i did. With a stunprod. I'm certain it'd be very clear from attack logs that this is not the case in the least. Why isn't he checking his facts and ensuring he knows every detail about a ban before imposing them? Isn't that a necessity of forming good judgement? Instead he comes forward with new information as time goes by instead of ensuring he has it all before banning.
But i'm certain, that if you check logs on both incidents. In neither one did i use a stunprod, or even use harm-intent on either "Victim". I never even had a stunprod in my possession. And that i even specifically stated that it was "Enough" once they were critted ICly by another person. They were then dragged to medical. A point Saegrimr refuses to acknowledge. In the case of the detective, he was critted just outside of the medical lobby and dragged in with us, and the mime in the bar backroom, but his friend had dragged him to medical after the fight concluded. Why is he not referencing this? He's making it seem like we killed them and attempted to prevent them from being treated, but no. We only put them in critical condition in response to their unwarranted attack on us, and then allowed them to be dragged to medical or, in the case of the detective, dragged him to medical with us. Was this taken into consideration? It kind of indicates a lack of malicious intent on our part.
Now the one who originally ahelped. The detective, made his own post on digg here about the incident here, https://www.digg.com/r/SS13/comments/ ... th_for_it/
Here i am accused of "Theft" and the like by the victim, mostly irrelevent really. But the thing to note is the ban note from Saegrimr.
Why did he feel the need to ban them for ban-baiting us, yet ban us regardless, and make the bans stick on both ends? He claims this is because i was nearly "Rule 0 Permabanned by the Pseudo-Headmin of bagil." Even though that ban was found to be unjustified.
Another thing to note, You can vaguely see the text "You can almost hear something..." above it. Now, i'm pretty sure that you wouldn't be receiving that kind of message if you're dead. So then why is Saegrimr trying to claim that we had murdered them, then? Or stating that we had been dragging eachother around looking for "Escalation Valids" when they visibly had intent to harm me simply for being a lizardperson? We did not want to cause trouble with them. They wanted to cause trouble for us.
Tell me if i have a point here in saying i think his conduct is being unfairly biased towards me, or that he may be lying, or that he may simply not care about details after the incident and pass it off as an offense anyways when significant things come up by saying something along the lines of "The point got across. I'll lift it but don't do it again.". It's no secret that me and Saegrimr don't have the best history, but really, I don't want to point fingers. But i'm certain if you checked the logs the person the more "Guilty" in this incident would be Alarmclock, and even then i think you would find he had reasoning to do what he did. Yet it seems as though Saegrimr had been using the incident to specifically target me. I hope you can understand my frustration with this.
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
