Disputing my DNT

Okay, so the one rule that I admit I broke is trolling the staff for fun, which according to the rules listed here The Official Sythe.org Rules is only 1 infraction (mind you I've been banned for over 1 year, actually closer to 2 years)

Moving on the reason I reported myself for (which was a fake reason) even if it were to be true would only be a 2 week ban which has been way over served. For these reasons I am disputing my ban instead of requesting a pardon because I have not broken any rules that require a perm ban or a DNT.

Regards, Lean

@Sythe

 

I am unaware of the circumstances that resulted in your DNT, but if there was nothing that put the Sythe community at risk (i.e. scamming), then I support the removal (providing it wasn't something truly destructive).

 

Disputing my DNT

The reason I was banned was because nearly two years ago I reported myself for a fake reason claiming that I had a fake vouch from when I first joined sythe (the reason I did this was because during the time I had held a giveaway where I trolled a few people into thinking they won, but the whole time I made it clear that PlanBuK won) the people I trolled got mad and made repeated threads saying that I scammed them. I then Pmed JackGoff who was an admin at the time asking for the words "Lean is a scammer" to be removed from the reports and also reported the posts a few times which mods just told me to let it go. I eventually ended up responding via PM to JackGoff saying that if people are allowed to call me a scammer just because they didn't win my giveaway then I might as well give them a reason to call me a scammer, so that's when I reported myself for a fake reason.

Moving on, during my 2 week ban I talked a lot of shit to certain members of the staff who I felt abused their power and told them that if they didn't unban me then I would scam. So they gave me a perm ban, but according to the rules threatening to scam isn't a perm ban either, neither is trolling the staff, neither is talking shit.

 

You need to keep it for a long time to teach you a lesson.

 

@FireZ I have had it for close to two years, you told me last time I pardoned which was forced by you that I had to wait for 6 months. You are breaking the rules that you are meant to enforce. @Sythe

 

You sit there and support people who actually have scammed and have done negative things to this site. Yet you say that I need to keep my DNT every single time (after two years of not breaking any rules that require a perm ban). That's pathetic, you shouldn't be a staff member

@Sythe @Shin @Azie

 

So tell me, what rule have I broken that requires me to have a DNT?

 

I have talked to Sythe and he will look at your dispute on Monday.

 

Are you going to deal with this @Sythe

Disputing my DNT

 

@Sythe

 

@Sythe

 

Users will be banned permanently for the following:

• Scamming: Or any suspicious behavior similar to scamming

Threatening to scam is definitely "suspicious behavior similar to scamming" just to make that clear. You are also misstating events; you actually said you would scam if you WERE unbanned, which is one reason why you have a DNT. You yourself have said that you are a danger to the other members on this site so you have a DNT and I don't see any reason to think that this has changed

 

I'm not sure what scam report but investigate it and if it's a frame attempt i expect the reporter to be banned for framing. Im on mobile right now so sorry for my grammar. As for videos claim i already explained that situation and i never said I'd scam if i was unbanned, infact i said the exact opposite and explained countless times why

 

In addition to my previous post. Video linked a rule that pertains to attempted scamming, threatening to scam in an act of rage and actually carrying out the act of attempting to scam someone are two different things

 

Your moral compass is slightly off track

 

@FireZ i would like to see some facts instead of your personal opinion as to how my moral compass is wrong. You along with shin, video and excelont shouldn't even be able to weigh in on this case due to conflict of interest. All I've seen are opinions backed by no proof. In accordance with article 5 - 41 of the conflic of interest clause
@Sythe

You can find it here www.ncsl.org/research/ethics/50-state-table-conflict-of-interest-definitions.aspx

 

No response, closed.