Appealing rushed and inconcise ruling by Pikachu (SD Deliveries + KoServices DNT and BAN)

Link to/reason for TWC/DNT/Ban:
Spectacular Deliveries - Co-Owner report (Koss)
Spectacular Deliveries - Self report

Link to your vouches: /
Anything else you wish to say:/
Detailed description of the events that took place and why you disagree with the decision:


Introduction and Reasoning for Appeal

Dear Sythe team,

I appreciate your time and efforts in the recent case concerning Spectacular Deliveries and KoServices. However, I believe there are areas in my argumentation that were not addressed in the initial verdict, and I would like further clarification on these points. There seems to be some misunderstanding about my involvement in the scam and the ownership in general, specifically regarding my role in the business and the nature of my partnership with Ko. As evidence suggests, my role was limited to bot development and did not include decision-making or ownership aspects. Considering this, I am submitting this appeal for a thorough review by a higher-ranking moderator.

This appeal concerns the following two reports:
Spectacular Deliveries - Co-Owner report (Koss)

Spectacular Deliveries - Self report


I submitted evidence supporting my claims on many aspects in both of these reports, which I feel have not been addressed in the verdict by Pikachu. Pikachu’s verdict is based on a few aspects, that do not have any basis supported by evidence. In his decision, he does not cover my broad argumentation with a response but uses the fractional arguments to deem me a co-owner of the business. Additionaly, he requests additional information on the ownership agreement, but does not justify my response to this with a response. The verdict comes across rushed, and I would like clarification and a thorough review on all evidence and argumentation I submitted. In addition to this, the verdict itself is unclear as well:

1) It does not specify the extent of my liability - whether it is 33%, 50% or 100%

2) It does not mention whether I am responsible for only open reports or also future reports.

3) It also does not clarify if I should cover the tbow scam (and other scammed items), which happened totally separate from the business through DM’s between him and the scammed party), which I feel should never be my burden, no matter what the verdict is.


Overview of the Verdict and Counterarguments

To start off my appeal, I want to review the argumentation from Pikachu which forms the basis of my “co-ownership” of the server. The verdict of me being co-owner and being responsible for the debt relies on three aspects according to his verdict:

1) I was meant to receive partial revenue

2) I currently have Discord ownership

3) Ko refers to me as Co-Owner multiple times

I believe these points do not hold up under scrutiny, and I have provided extensive evidence and argumentation to counter these claims in both the threads. Additionaly, I believe these points are inconcise, and do not represent or consider all arguments and evidence I provided. I will touch upon the points again that Pikachu used for his verdict again:


1. I was meant to receive partial revenue: There is no proof of this arrangement or an ownership agreement in place where both Ko and me agree on a partial profit and partial ownership. There is no proof of payment ever being made as partial profits, other than a compensation I got for bot hosting costs (which I can support by chat logs and invoices from the hosting party). Additionally, if there was any form of partial payment made, then according to this reasoning, Davy would be considered just as much of an owner as I am, resulting in him also being responsible for the debt. In the task division screenshots I delivered as proof, we both clearly take a side-role, and Ko becomes owner, so since he is not considered a co-owner in this process, then neither should I based on this argumentation.


2. I currently have Discord ownership: I provided plenty of evidence clarifying as to why I have Discord Ownership, and Ko pushing me into getting the Discord Ownership, which were not justified with a response from Pikachu. Ko initiated the idea for me to get Discord ownership, because I needed this to clone the Discord server and create a testing environment clone to test the bot behaviour while it was under development. He claims he asked for the ownership back, but there is no proof of this, since this is just a plain lie. He forced me into this role, and my evidence supports that claim. I was still working on the bots when he exit-scammed, which is why I was still in the possession of ownership for the clone functionalities and testing purposes. There is no basis here for me to be deemed co-owner.



3. Ko refers to me as Co-Owner multiple times: I am unsure what the basis for this reasoning is and would like some clarification that includes my argumentation and evidence submitted. Ko mentions the title of co-owner ONCE in one of the last screenshots. This mention of co-owner occured while he was already in the process of trying to exit scam, and obtaining/scamming my tbow for extra stolen funds, so he knowingly refers to me as co-owner to put me in his debt. My response to his statement of co-owner is quite clear: I clearly let him know that I mentioned before that I would not have time to help him run his server or work on the operational side of things, just making a Discord bot for him, hence I am not assisting him in running the business or acting as a co-owner. This mention in a single chat log, with me instantly disputing it, forms no basis for me to be deemed co-owner.


Overview of my arguments

To further clarify the nature of my role and lack of involment in management, operations or ownership in any way, I would like to present the following arguments, which I already mentioned quite extensively in both responses to his report and in my own report:


1. Clarification of Side Role and Proof of Ko being sole owner: The logs I provided, that are around the task division screenshot, clearly show Davy and me selecting a “side-role”, and Ko determining himself as owner. As I mentioned before, there never was a formal agreement of shared ownership, or anything closely resembling that, in place. Merely an overview of tasks proposed by Ko, where I make clear my only involvement in the project will be making a bot, after we joined the project created by Ko and VIL (or Wash after his name change). The only determination of ownership, being the discussion below, is where Ko proposes and sets himself as owner, in agreement with his other founder VIL. There is no agreement in which Ko and myself agree to a 50/50 shared ownership of the discord, as he claims.


My role was limited to bot development. I did not have any operational or financial responsibilities, which are typically associated with ownership. I was not involved in the day-to-day operations of the business, which supports my claim that I was not a co-owner. Ko handled all aspects of his business from operations to personnel, from customer tickets and jobs to finances. Additionaly, he made the calls, and I did not partake in any managerial decisions. Any management or operations like decision, such as increasing taxes on jobs, accepting jobs from customers and handling/storing payments, allocating workers to jobs, hiring new workers and onboarding them, handling and storing worker deposits, paying workers salary and whatever action you can think of was done on his accord. I like to draw similarities to the Gettaxed case here, where Alastor was placed in a Co-Owner role, but his responsibilities, tasks, ownership responsibilities, management of finances and role in general did not reflect that, and he was spoken free. Ko even mentions the Alastor situation, where he was thrown under the bus, which is similar to what he is trying to do to me now, and why it would make sense for him to be owner.


Gettaxed exit scam



To round of this argument, in his self-report on Sythe, he mentions the following, further indicating that he considered himself the sole owner and manager of the Discord:

KoServices said:

To start off with the reasoning, running the service has become incredibly stressful as the sole manager. There a multitude of reasons but to simplify it. I'm solely to blame for what's happened




EVIDENCE:

https://imgur.com/RtFdqM5

https://imgur.com/nWuW30V

https://imgur.com/L00DjUv

https://imgur.com/OHrSYA5

https://imgur.com/JZg5pAQ

https://imgur.com/Jvg7bFT


Ko and VIL started the Discord. At the end of the screenshots, they get to decide on ownership, and the conclusion is Ko becoming sole owner.


In this message below, Ko clearly nominates himself for being owner:



Koss — 03/10/2023 8:55 PM

As for "owner owner", I'd nominate myself, only because I think most of the workers trust me here, as well as customers. Since i've been dealing with all of the jobs, giving davy or hacker the only-owner role may start to throw people off if I just title myself as a mod.


And at the end, the concensus is that Ko is the sole owner:


Hackerman — 03/10/2023 9:04 PM

And, I am okay with Ko being owner


CrazyDavy — 03/10/2023 9:04 PM

Yeah sounds good


Hackerman — 03/10/2023 9:04 PM

I think thats a discussion for you and VIL


Wash — 03/10/2023 9:04 PM

Tbh I see Koss more as a owner then me

So il@be support manager


Koss — 03/10/2023 9:08 PM

Since im currently in charge of payments, it was another reason why it made sense for me to be owner


CONCLUSIONS FROM THIS EVIDENCE

-There is no shared ownership agreement defined or in place, with discussed terms and agreement between both Ko and myself.

-There is no basis for Ko claiming that we are 50/50 shared owners

-Based on the tasks Ko suggests himself, he nominates himself as owner

-I make clear my only involvement will be making a bot

-Everyone, including his co-founder VIL agrees with Ko being owner.

-He further confirms the choice for him as sole owner by saying he is the one in charge of all finances, which is why it would make sense for him to be owner.

-If this division of tasks would be the basis of me being co-owner, then Davy would be considered as much of a co-owner as me in this situation. Since he is not considered a co-owner based on these roles, neither should I.


2. Lack of Ownership Agreement: A business partnership is a legal relationship that is formed by a verbal or written agreement between two or more individuals or companies. It involves a contractual agreement (the partnership agreement, or in this case the “ownership agreement”) between all of the partners that set the terms and conditions of their business relationship, including the distribution of ownership, responsibilities, and profits and losses. Partnerships outline and clearly define a business relationship and responsibility. The partnership (or ownership) agreement should include a clear agreement of this compensation and a set of terms that cover the responsibilities in the partnership. Based on the proof I have provided, there is no ownership or partnership agreement in place that forms a basis for my suggested co-ownership. Additionaly, there is no basis to determine that Ko and myself were 50/50 shared owners.

EVIDENCE:
Similar to evidence from Argument 1


CONCLUSIONS FROM THIS EVIDENCE
-No basis for shared ownership between Ko and Me


3. No receipt or evidence of agreement on partial profits: There is no proof of an arrangement of the 33% profit split, neither in chat logs nor in an ownership agreement, neither are there receipts of partial profit payments being paid out by Ko. I merely received a compensation for hosting costs, which I can provide evidence for with invoices, as it adheres to my role as bot developer. Additionaly, if the “proposed” compensation alone would suit as a basis for co-ownership, then Davy would be considered a co-owner too. He is not concerned a co-owner in this case, so neither should I. Ko is the only one that had access to the server funds and floating money, and left with all the money in his crypto wallets and Cashapp.

EVIDENCE:

-There is none, since this was never agreed upon


CONCLUSIONS FROM THIS EVIDENCE

-No basis for co-ownership based, since there is no agreement of shared profits

-There is no proof of profit transactions being made (since these did not happen)

-If these proposed shared profits would form basis for co-ownership, Davy would also be considered a co-owner according to this 33% split proposed by Ko (which was never agreed upon in an agreement). He is not being considered a co-owner, so neither should I (merely based on this argumentation)


4. Explanation of Discord Server Ownership (which was merely for Bot Development tasks): Ko came up with the idea to give me ownership of the server, because this would make it easier for me to work with permissions and was neccesary me to clone the discord server to create a testing environment for the pricing bot. This is an assumption, but it might have been early part of a scheme to pin this all on me.


Based on this idea, I requested the transfer of the ownership to my name, hence is why I am currently server owner. In the end, when Ko exit-scammed, I was still in posession of Discord ownership because the bot was still in development. Ko claims he asked me for Discord Ownership, but this is untrue, and there is no proof supporting this.


EVIDENCE:

https://imgur.com/Jvg7bFT

https://imgur.com/EIiWiBn



Koss — 03/10/2023 11:22 AM

Im thinking, with you working on bots, we could nip it in the bud early.Maybe get Vil to transfer you the server owner under the premise you need it for the bots


CONCLUSION:
-Ko came up with the idea of me getting Discord ownership himself

-I needed Discord Ownership for my role as bot developer, since it allowed me to clone the server and test bot behaviour there
-Ko claims he asked for Discord ownership back, but there is no proof of this
-The reason I am currently Discord owner is unrelated to the assumption of co-ownership, as this was merely for development tasks on the bot




5. Victim of the Scam: As Ko already confessed to, when he was scheming his exit scam, he tried to scam me to gain access to additional stolen funds. I noticed that things felt off when he started pushing me to lend 1B, and then going on to try and lend my tbow. He was pushing hard, which is never a good sign. In his report, he admits that he willingly tried to steal my tbow to increase his amount of stolen funds, which makes me a target and victim of this scam. He then went on to scam Hand Wash's tbow, trying to pin that debt on me, and also stole some other high valued items.

During his scheming of his exit scam, he refers to me as co-owner. I believe this was part of his plan. Reviewing his report, there is quite a hostile tone towards me. I believe him referring to me as co-owner here is part of his plan to pin this entire debt on me. As mentioned before, this is the only time he refers to me as co-owner. I intstantly invalidate his comment here, by letting him know I would not partake in his business (definitely not as a co-owner), but I was just making a discord bot FOR HIM.

EVIDENCE:

https://imgur.com/7GXcsJ8

https://imgur.com/aemkNit

https://imgur.com/aufiqAp

https://imgur.com/GvJfRXc

https://imgur.com/knql5LP

https://imgur.com/qsR3JkC


Koss — 06/12/2023 3:55 PM

I know your busy but no ones that busy to just ignore messages, were supposed to be a team on the services, esp since were co owners

Its been like it for a few months now


Hackerman — 06/12/2023 4:23 PM

I believe I specifically mentioned I would not have the time to invest in running the server or partaking in the operational part of the services, just making a bot for you



Koss — 06/12/2023 4:28 PM

Not the operations, I've never expected you to start answering tickets ha But I've questioned the discord bots, passed on bugs and feedback from customers, I don't think youve responded once to



CONCLUSION:

-Ko targeted me with his scam too, trying to increase his stolen funds by stealing a high value ingame item (tbow)

-Ko mentions me as co-owner when he was already in the process of scamming my tbow and executing his exit scam plan, to be able to pinpoint the debt on me based on his supposed “anger” and “frustration” towards me.
-I clearly inform him that my role is merely making a Discord bot FOR HIM, and would not ever partake in any other operational or managerial aspects of his business.


Addressing Ko's Arguments

In conclusion, I would like to address the points made by Ko. He has not provided any concrete evidence to support his claims of my co-ownership. His accusations seem to be based on false assumptions and false presentation of our interactions. His claim that I was a co-owner from the start contradicts our later discussion (during his scam) where I mention I would have no involvement in the business, and that I was merely a discord bot developer. His assertion that I was meant to receive partial revenue is not supported by any proof of payment or an ownership agreement. His claim that I currently have Discord ownership does not consider the reason why I have this ownership (for server cloning), which were necessary for my role as a bot developer, and he forced me into this as the screenshots show. His last reference to me as a co-owner, while he was already attempting to scam my tbow and planning his exit scam, seems to be a deliberate attempt to put me in his debt. Ko has provided no concrete evidence of any of his claims, and since he is making accusations, the burden of proof lies with him. I shared concrete evidence on me selecting a side role as discord bot developer (just like Davy taking a side-role), and shared context on the task division that clearly shows Ko choosing to be owner by himself.



I hope this appeal provides a clear and comprehensive overview of my arguments and counterarguments against the initial verdict. I request a thorough review of this appeal by a higher-ranking moderator to ensure a fair and unbiased evaluation of the evidence and arguments presented.