Jackrip Self Represents Without an AI Lawyer

[AwkwardStereo]

Bottom post of the previous page:

viewtopic.php?p=663890#p663890

[Turbonerd]

On one hand, I'd be willing to forgive him if he apologized. On the other, I really don't think setting the precedent that you can come back after doxxing someone is a good idea. Blacklists are permanent by nature, you aren't meant to be allowed back at all. You've done something so heinous or been such a blight on the community that we officially don't want you back. The only reason his actions didn't cause more damage is that I'm relatively careful about what I post online.

Agreed. I am disappointed that a game master, not even a forum admin, is able to see his appeal and make it public. Blacklists are supposed to represent people stuck inside a ban blackhole. They shouldn't be allowed to participate in the community ever again.

His posts should get automatically rejected, not just hidden. Appealing a blacklist also means they disagree with the blacklist, so obviously they know they're doing the wrong thing. The right thing would've been to never dox, and to never attempt to confirm a presence in the tg community ever again.

[Tearling]

This is the shitty outside forum, which is niche and small. You underestimate how much information can be gathered by digging around someone's digg posts if they're active enough.

The headmins already said that it wasn't doxing. I quoteth:

We do not consider this a dox due to the nature of the account being shared, being that it was publically accessible and used in r/ss13. However, sharing it and saying "I guess I'll have to dox X to prove it to you" definetly violates Rule 7.

Given that the definition of dox says it's not a dox, and the headmins have subjectively determined it was not a dox, I believe it's safe to say that he was not doxing them. That being said, what he did do was still clearly against the rules, and clearly meant to harass, not to just joke around.

-

Whether this is all real or fake:

The self-pitying text wall in 'your side of the story' does absolutely nothing to remedy or mitigate where things are at, its just going to serve as a trap that'll 'tug at your heart strings' and make them look like a victim of the system for having addictive tendencies.

They'd be better off putting that much effort into the 'why to unban them' and 'references of good conduct' sections.

Dude needs to get a grip and act appropriately. If they are attempting to show that they are mending bridges, they need to layout exactly what they have done to do so in the SS13 community if he honestly wants this to even be considered.

I would argue that had they gone down this route it would come off as pulling rank. "Hey guys, I'm an admin, I've dealt with shitters too, come on" kind of argument. Even if they wouldn't intend for it to come off like that, that's how it would. There's also less of a chance of it even being considered, as it took Timberpoes believing it to be genuine to be allowed. If Timberpoes decided he didn't seem apologetic enough, and just didn't respond, who would have been the one to step forth and put their reputation on the line to give him a second chance?

Especially because half the arguments in this peanut thread for why he should stay blacklisted still apply to the arguments you suggest he should make. Just take LolSwat's argument here for example:

Even if he completely changed as a person and can see why what he did was wrong, nobody is entitled to forgiveness (within reason) and nobody is entitled to play on the /tg/ chunk of space station 13, especially after doing what he did.

-

Blacklists are permanent by nature,

Are they? I agree they probably should be, but... haven't they been appealed in the past? Heck, "temporary blacklisting" is mentioned by MSO in his decision on doxing, though it's unrelated to the actual topic, and more related to the circumstances in that specific case.

MSO Blacklists Doxing post:

► Show Spoiler

All of this being said while I believe in second chances, and I believe his appeal is genuine, I'm not sure if I can agree that he should be unblacklisted. If someone told me that they would make it their mission to ruin my reputation in the ss13 community and then post something private from our DMs or something (Which something unrelated and similar has happened to me here actually) I wouldn't want to see them come back to the community, no matter how genuine they seem. I don't know, maybe the victim's thoughts should be taken into account in this case?

[Kendrickorium]

This is the shitty outside forum, which is niche and small. You underestimate how much information can be gathered by digging around someone's digg posts if they're active enough.

The headmins already said that it wasn't doxing. I quoteth:

We do not consider this a dox due to the nature of the account being shared, being that it was publically accessible and used in r/ss13. However, sharing it and saying "I guess I'll have to dox X to prove it to you" definetly violates Rule 7.

Given that the definition of dox says it's not a dox, and the headmins have subjectively determined it was not a dox, I believe it's safe to say that he was not doxing them. That being said, what he did do was still clearly against the rules, and clearly meant to harass, not to just joke around.

-

Whether this is all real or fake:

The self-pitying text wall in 'your side of the story' does absolutely nothing to remedy or mitigate where things are at, its just going to serve as a trap that'll 'tug at your heart strings' and make them look like a victim of the system for having addictive tendencies.

They'd be better off putting that much effort into the 'why to unban them' and 'references of good conduct' sections.

Dude needs to get a grip and act appropriately. If they are attempting to show that they are mending bridges, they need to layout exactly what they have done to do so in the SS13 community if he honestly wants this to even be considered.

I would argue that had they gone down this route it would come off as pulling rank. "Hey guys, I'm an admin, I've dealt with shitters too, come on" kind of argument. Even if they wouldn't intend for it to come off like that, that's how it would. There's also less of a chance of it even being considered, as it took Timberpoes believing it to be genuine to be allowed. If Timberpoes decided he didn't seem apologetic enough, and just didn't respond, who would have been the one to step forth and put their reputation on the line to give him a second chance?

Especially because half the arguments in this peanut thread for why he should stay blacklisted still apply to the arguments you suggest he should make. Just take LolSwat's argument here for example:

Even if he completely changed as a person and can see why what he did was wrong, nobody is entitled to forgiveness (within reason) and nobody is entitled to play on the /tg/ chunk of space station 13, especially after doing what he did.

-

Blacklists are permanent by nature,

Are they? I agree they probably should be, but... haven't they been appealed in the past? Heck, "temporary blacklisting" is mentioned by MSO in his decision on doxing, though it's unrelated to the actual topic, and more related to the circumstances in that specific case.

MSO Blacklists Doxing post:

► Show Spoiler

All of this being said while I believe in second chances, and I believe his appeal is genuine, I'm not sure if I can agree that he should be unblacklisted. If someone told me that they would make it their mission to ruin my reputation in the ss13 community and then post something private from our DMs or something (Which something unrelated and similar has happened to me here actually) I wouldn't want to see them come back to the community, no matter how genuine they seem. I don't know, maybe the victim's thoughts should be taken into account in this case?

lol i just realized goof being blacklisted explained his stint as host of hippiestation

it was exactly as much of a disaster as any of you would expect

[ekaterina]

On one hand, I'd be willing to forgive him if he apologized. On the other, I really don't think setting the precedent that you can come back after doxxing someone is a good idea. Blacklists are permanent by nature, you aren't meant to be allowed back at all. You've done something so heinous or been such a blight on the community that we officially don't want you back. The only reason his actions didn't cause more damage is that I'm relatively careful about what I post online.

It's not forgiving someone after doxxing someone, it's forgiving someone after threatening to doxx someone. One has consequences, the other doesn't.

On one hand, I'd be willing to forgive him if he apologized. On the other, I really don't think setting the precedent that you can come back after doxxing someone is a good idea. Blacklists are permanent by nature, you aren't meant to be allowed back at all. You've done something so heinous or been such a blight on the community that we officially don't want you back. The only reason his actions didn't cause more damage is that I'm relatively careful about what I post online.

Agreed. I am disappointed that a game master, not even a forum admin, is able to see his appeal and make it public. Blacklists are supposed to represent people stuck inside a ban blackhole. They shouldn't be allowed to participate in the community ever again.

"Nooooo the guy I don't like is having his appeal reviewed instead of being shit on!111!1!11"

[iwishforducks]

On one hand, I'd be willing to forgive him if he apologized. On the other, I really don't think setting the precedent that you can come back after doxxing someone is a good idea. Blacklists are permanent by nature, you aren't meant to be allowed back at all. You've done something so heinous or been such a blight on the community that we officially don't want you back. The only reason his actions didn't cause more damage is that I'm relatively careful about what I post online.

i was talking to a friend who had extremely poor experiences regarding jack. i told them they should reach out to him, as i think they could come to some sort of closure regarding it. i dont think they ended up messaging jack. and that’s fine. i don’t think you necessarily have to just forgive people and have to dance around in sunshine and rainbows. but i think it’s merely unhealthy to hold old judgements about people. they agreed that much, at the very least. just not good to go around being bitter about people when they seem like they’ve changed. bad for the soul

worst case scenario you talk to them and the only thing you get out of it is that you rationalize your bitterness.

[Vekter]

On one hand, I'd be willing to forgive him if he apologized. On the other, I really don't think setting the precedent that you can come back after doxxing someone is a good idea. Blacklists are permanent by nature, you aren't meant to be allowed back at all. You've done something so heinous or been such a blight on the community that we officially don't want you back. The only reason his actions didn't cause more damage is that I'm relatively careful about what I post online.

It's not forgiving someone after doxxing someone, it's forgiving someone after threatening to doxx someone. One has consequences, the other doesn't.

Considering that there was personally identifying information on my profile (that I've since deleted), he did actually doxx me.

[conrad]

Considering that there was personally identifying information on my profile (that I've since deleted), he did actually doxx me.

Waiting with bated breath for someone to now say it was your fault.

[ekaterina]

On one hand, I'd be willing to forgive him if he apologized. On the other, I really don't think setting the precedent that you can come back after doxxing someone is a good idea. Blacklists are permanent by nature, you aren't meant to be allowed back at all. You've done something so heinous or been such a blight on the community that we officially don't want you back. The only reason his actions didn't cause more damage is that I'm relatively careful about what I post online.

It's not forgiving someone after doxxing someone, it's forgiving someone after threatening to doxx someone. One has consequences, the other doesn't.

Considering that there was personally identifying information on my profile (that I've since deleted), he did actually doxx me.

He shared a profile owned by you, where you, of your own free will, published personal information. Unless I misunderstood something about the situation, you doxxed yourself.
If someone were to link someone else's YouTube channel, where the channel owner freely posts SS13 videos as well as personal information, would he have doxxed said person?

Considering that there was personally identifying information on my profile (that I've since deleted), he did actually doxx me.

Waiting with bated breath for someone to now say it was your fault.

If you know the truth, why do you wait for someone else to say it instead of saying it yourself?

[Qbmax32]

I think weather or not jackrip did actually dox according to the definition (publishing private PII about someone) is immaterial when jackrip clearly THOUGHT he was or was baiting/trolling/whatever enough to be indistinguishable from actual malicious intent which is basically the same thing in my eyes.

We all play a 15 year old shitty game about clowns in space, I have zero sympathy for losers who try and bring peoples personal lives or think they’re bringing in peoples personal lives because they’re so assmad and buttblasted they lost an internet argument. I’m generally a believer in second chances but I find it really hard to have any empathy for jackrip, especially considering I don’t even think he’s privately or publicly apologized to vekter for being a fucking moron.

[ekaterina]

I don’t even think he’s privately or publicly apologized to vekter for being a fucking moron.

He did, in the thread of which this is a nut.

[Qbmax32]

Doesn’t even address vekter by name, so I don’t really care, sorry.

[datorangebottle]

Doesn’t even address vekter by name, so I don’t really care, sorry.

In this specific instance, I don't think he needs to.
Shouting down the halls, "HEY, BY THE WAY, IF YOU SEARCH <DOXXED PERSON'S USERNAME> ON digg, THEY USE THE SAME ACCOUNT" gets close to the initial 'doxxing', which isn't very helpful if you're trying to get unbanned.
We all know who he targeted. If you don't, you can probably go to the peanut thread to find out. That doesn't mean he has to do it again to get a proper apology across.

[Epicgamer545]

He is at MSO’s mercy.

[Qbmax32]

Doesn’t even address vekter by name, so I don’t really care, sorry.

In this specific instance, I don't think he needs to.
Shouting down the halls, "HEY, BY THE WAY, IF YOU SEARCH <DOXXED PERSON'S USERNAME> ON digg, THEY USE THE SAME ACCOUNT" gets close to the initial 'doxxing', which isn't very helpful if you're trying to get unbanned.
We all know who he targeted. If you don't, you can probably go to the peanut thread to find out. That doesn't mean he has to do it again to get a proper apology across.

Yeah good point, fair enough. The whole thing just rubs me the wrong way. If jackrip apologized in his earlier ban appeals instead of basically memeing by getting an AI to write one of them, or apologized privately (though to be fair this may have happened and we wouldn’t know) I would probably feel differently

[TheLoLSwat]

This is the shitty outside forum, which is niche and small. You underestimate how much information can be gathered by digging around someone's digg posts if they're active enough.

The headmins already said that it wasn't doxing. I quoteth:

We do not consider this a dox due to the nature of the account being shared, being that it was publically accessible and used in r/ss13. However, sharing it and saying "I guess I'll have to dox X to prove it to you" definetly violates Rule 7.

Given that the definition of dox says it's not a dox, and the headmins have subjectively determined it was not a dox, I believe it's safe to say that he was not doxing them. That being said, what he did do was still clearly against the rules, and clearly meant to harass, not to just joke around.

-

Whether this is all real or fake:

The self-pitying text wall in 'your side of the story' does absolutely nothing to remedy or mitigate where things are at, its just going to serve as a trap that'll 'tug at your heart strings' and make them look like a victim of the system for having addictive tendencies.

They'd be better off putting that much effort into the 'why to unban them' and 'references of good conduct' sections.

Dude needs to get a grip and act appropriately. If they are attempting to show that they are mending bridges, they need to layout exactly what they have done to do so in the SS13 community if he honestly wants this to even be considered.

I would argue that had they gone down this route it would come off as pulling rank. "Hey guys, I'm an admin, I've dealt with shitters too, come on" kind of argument. Even if they wouldn't intend for it to come off like that, that's how it would. There's also less of a chance of it even being considered, as it took Timberpoes believing it to be genuine to be allowed. If Timberpoes decided he didn't seem apologetic enough, and just didn't respond, who would have been the one to step forth and put their reputation on the line to give him a second chance?

Especially because half the arguments in this peanut thread for why he should stay blacklisted still apply to the arguments you suggest he should make. Just take LolSwat's argument here for example:

Even if he completely changed as a person and can see why what he did was wrong, nobody is entitled to forgiveness (within reason) and nobody is entitled to play on the /tg/ chunk of space station 13, especially after doing what he did.

-

Blacklists are permanent by nature,

Are they? I agree they probably should be, but... haven't they been appealed in the past? Heck, "temporary blacklisting" is mentioned by MSO in his decision on doxing, though it's unrelated to the actual topic, and more related to the circumstances in that specific case.

MSO Blacklists Doxing post:

► Show Spoiler

All of this being said while I believe in second chances, and I believe his appeal is genuine, I'm not sure if I can agree that he should be unblacklisted. If someone told me that they would make it their mission to ruin my reputation in the ss13 community and then post something private from our DMs or something (Which something unrelated and similar has happened to me here actually) I wouldn't want to see them come back to the community, no matter how genuine they seem. I don't know, maybe the victim's thoughts should be taken into account in this case?

lol i just realized goof being blacklisted explained his stint as host of hippiestation

it was exactly as much of a disaster as any of you would expect

a server that was already a forest fire and goofball was pouring gasoline everywhere.

[datorangebottle]

Yeah good point, fair enough. The whole thing just rubs me the wrong way. If jackrip apologized in his earlier ban appeals instead of basically memeing by getting an AI to write one of them, or apologized privately (though to be fair this may have happened and we wouldn’t know) I would probably feel differently

I absolutely agree that memeing the previous appeal is not a good look.
According to Vekter, he hasn't reached out privately to try and apologize. While that isn't in itself evidence, it's something.

On one hand, I'd be willing to forgive him if he apologized.

Emphasis mine.

[CPTANT]

Wait, Goof was a host of Hippie? hahahahahaha, why did I never know this.

[Vekter]

On one hand, I'd be willing to forgive him if he apologized. On the other, I really don't think setting the precedent that you can come back after doxxing someone is a good idea. Blacklists are permanent by nature, you aren't meant to be allowed back at all. You've done something so heinous or been such a blight on the community that we officially don't want you back. The only reason his actions didn't cause more damage is that I'm relatively careful about what I post online.

It's not forgiving someone after doxxing someone, it's forgiving someone after threatening to doxx someone. One has consequences, the other doesn't.

Considering that there was personally identifying information on my profile (that I've since deleted), he did actually doxx me.

He shared a profile owned by you, where you, of your own free will, published personal information. Unless I misunderstood something about the situation, you doxxed yourself.
If someone were to link someone else's YouTube channel, where the channel owner freely posts SS13 videos as well as personal information, would he have doxxed said person?

Yes. It's actively using or sharing the information that's doxxing, not just finding it.

Considering that there was personally identifying information on my profile (that I've since deleted), he did actually doxx me.

Waiting with bated breath for someone to now say it was your fault.

If you know the truth, why do you wait for someone else to say it instead of saying it yourself?

Local user doesn't understand sarcasm.

Yeah good point, fair enough. The whole thing just rubs me the wrong way. If jackrip apologized in his earlier ban appeals instead of basically memeing by getting an AI to write one of them, or apologized privately (though to be fair this may have happened and we wouldn’t know) I would probably feel differently

I absolutely agree that memeing the previous appeal is not a good look.
According to Vekter, he hasn't reached out privately to try and apologize. While that isn't in itself evidence, it's something.

On one hand, I'd be willing to forgive him if he apologized.

Emphasis mine.

I don't even care if he does it privately. I just noticed in the post that he apologized to the community at large and the person he attacked for reporting what he did, but not the person who could've actually been impacted by his actions.

[Kendrickorium]

This is the shitty outside forum, which is niche and small. You underestimate how much information can be gathered by digging around someone's digg posts if they're active enough.

The headmins already said that it wasn't doxing. I quoteth:

We do not consider this a dox due to the nature of the account being shared, being that it was publically accessible and used in r/ss13. However, sharing it and saying "I guess I'll have to dox X to prove it to you" definetly violates Rule 7.

Given that the definition of dox says it's not a dox, and the headmins have subjectively determined it was not a dox, I believe it's safe to say that he was not doxing them. That being said, what he did do was still clearly against the rules, and clearly meant to harass, not to just joke around.

-

Whether this is all real or fake:

The self-pitying text wall in 'your side of the story' does absolutely nothing to remedy or mitigate where things are at, its just going to serve as a trap that'll 'tug at your heart strings' and make them look like a victim of the system for having addictive tendencies.

They'd be better off putting that much effort into the 'why to unban them' and 'references of good conduct' sections.

Dude needs to get a grip and act appropriately. If they are attempting to show that they are mending bridges, they need to layout exactly what they have done to do so in the SS13 community if he honestly wants this to even be considered.

I would argue that had they gone down this route it would come off as pulling rank. "Hey guys, I'm an admin, I've dealt with shitters too, come on" kind of argument. Even if they wouldn't intend for it to come off like that, that's how it would. There's also less of a chance of it even being considered, as it took Timberpoes believing it to be genuine to be allowed. If Timberpoes decided he didn't seem apologetic enough, and just didn't respond, who would have been the one to step forth and put their reputation on the line to give him a second chance?

Especially because half the arguments in this peanut thread for why he should stay blacklisted still apply to the arguments you suggest he should make. Just take LolSwat's argument here for example:

Even if he completely changed as a person and can see why what he did was wrong, nobody is entitled to forgiveness (within reason) and nobody is entitled to play on the /tg/ chunk of space station 13, especially after doing what he did.

-

Blacklists are permanent by nature,

Are they? I agree they probably should be, but... haven't they been appealed in the past? Heck, "temporary blacklisting" is mentioned by MSO in his decision on doxing, though it's unrelated to the actual topic, and more related to the circumstances in that specific case.

MSO Blacklists Doxing post:

► Show Spoiler

All of this being said while I believe in second chances, and I believe his appeal is genuine, I'm not sure if I can agree that he should be unblacklisted. If someone told me that they would make it their mission to ruin my reputation in the ss13 community and then post something private from our DMs or something (Which something unrelated and similar has happened to me here actually) I wouldn't want to see them come back to the community, no matter how genuine they seem. I don't know, maybe the victim's thoughts should be taken into account in this case?

lol i just realized goof being blacklisted explained his stint as host of hippiestation

it was exactly as much of a disaster as any of you would expect

a server that was already a forest fire and goofball was pouring gasoline everywhere.

i still remember when that fucking idiot gave me a day ban because as an AI i failed to stop a fucking mob of players from murdering someone

[Kendrickorium]

Wait, Goof was a host of Hippie? hahahahahaha, why did I never know this.

yeah i think it lasted like 2 months

[BONERMASTER]

I think it could have worked, the players just didn't try hard enough.


With sincere regards
-BONERMASTER

[Tearling]

a server that was already a forest fire and goofball was pouring gasoline everywhere.

All this is telling me is to vote for goofball and make him a headmin.

[Bawhoppennn]

I think weather or not jackrip did actually dox according to the definition (publishing private PII about someone) is immaterial when jackrip clearly THOUGHT he was or was baiting/trolling/whatever enough to be indistinguishable from actual malicious intent which is basically the same thing in my eyes.

We all play a 15 year old shitty game about clowns in space, I have zero sympathy for losers who try and bring peoples personal lives or think they’re bringing in peoples personal lives because they’re so assmad and buttblasted they lost an internet argument. I’m generally a believer in second chances but I find it really hard to have any empathy for jackrip, especially considering I don’t even think he’s privately or publicly apologized to vekter for being a fucking moron.

The discussion about what actually counts as doxxing is interesting, but yeah I agree- Jackrip should be banned by rule 1 irregardless of that

[TheLoLSwat]

everything before

i still remember when that fucking idiot gave me a day ban because as an AI i failed to stop a fucking mob of players from murdering someone

All hippie players were in prison during the goofball presidency (many deserved, many not)

[Capsandi]

goof was doing the duty of a /TG/ patriot by sabotaging other servers from within foreign administrations. In this way the paranoia of the paranoia riddled metal deathtrap masquerading as a spacestation ascends into the reality of TG administration. Soon we will all have bountiful employment on SS13 IRL. Well except for me I'm going to live a full life and retire then die of golf overdose.

[ekaterina]

Considering that there was personally identifying information on my profile (that I've since deleted), he did actually doxx me.

Waiting with bated breath for someone to now say it was your fault.

If you know the truth, why do you wait for someone else to say it instead of saying it yourself?

Local user doesn't understand sarcasm.

I knew he was being sarcastic. To make the sarcastic remark, however, he had to come up with the correct understanding, which he then proceeded to mock. If he knows the truth, why does he mock it instead of stating it?

He shared a profile owned by you, where you, of your own free will, published personal information. Unless I misunderstood something about the situation, you doxxed yourself.
If someone were to link someone else's YouTube channel, where the channel owner freely posts SS13 videos as well as personal information, would he have doxxed said person?

Yes. It's actively using or sharing the information that's doxxing, not just finding it.

I'll tell you the same thing I told conrad:

By that definition, just saying someone's Discord handle on BYOND, and vice-versa, is doxxing. You're reducing the term to mean things so petty and insignificant that it destroys the credibility of actual mentions of doxxing.

And I'll quote toemas while we're at it:

Please stop fucking overusing words until they are nearly meaningless you are destroying the english language i am going to weep

The investigation at the time itself even concluded there was no actual doxxing.
"We do not consider this a dox due to the nature of the account being shared, being that it was publically accessible and used in r/ss13"

[cocothegogo]

does a leopard really change its spots or do the spots just change color or something prophetic like that. as a former toxic player (still toxic) sometimes the tendency to shit on others is too much to bear and i have to fuck with someone for fun for my own amusement. I suppose sometimes you have to have self-reflection on your actions to not continue on them but your nature is your nature. I don't think the appeal is genuine but thats just my opinion.

[cedarbridge]

Please nobody find my other social media accounts. I've gone through a lot of efforts to conceal them.

[Vekter]

(Words)

So are you upset over people calling it doxxing because you don't think it is, or are you upset that Jackrip got banned for doing something stupid?

[ekaterina]

(Words)
(no shit he wrote words, what else would he have written, sounds?)

I'm upset over people making wrong statements.

[Qbmax32]

its ogre

[cedarbridge]

Should have paid an AI lawyer.

[iwishforducks]

sad

[Turbonerd]

The good ending, though he should've never been able to create the thread in the first place.

[iwishforducks]

The good ending, though he should've never been able to create the thread in the first place.

why so full of spite and spice and everything nice

[Kendrickorium]

remember you can order starsector here

https://fractalsoftworks.com/preorder/

[Capsandi]

The good ending, though he should've never been able to create the thread in the first place.

why so full of spite and spice and everything nice

Turbonerd moment

[Bawhoppennn]

Do you think Jackrip is gonna:
1. Evade
2. Quit playing
or
3. Wait another year, get a good-boy voucher from another server, right a very apologetic essay to MSO and everyone involved, and appeal for sympathy, hoping that time heals all wounds

I suspect 1 but 2 may also be in the cards

[Tearling]

Do you think Jackrip is gonna:
1. Evade
2. Quit playing
or
3. Wait another year, get a good-boy voucher from another server, right a very apologetic essay to MSO and everyone involved, and appeal for sympathy, hoping that time heals all wounds

I suspect 1 but 2 may also be in the cards

1. He's addicted so 2 is off the table, and the events here have shown that 3 has no chance of happening.

[Kendrickorium]

hes not gonna ban evade

paris on the other hand..