Jump to content

Locked Frodo abuse


checkster
 Share

Recommended Posts

1: Your own ingame name checkster
2: Your own steam- ID STEAM_0:1:19531561

3: Name of the admin(s) involved Frodo
4: What server did it happen on Ze
5: What map  ze_rooftop_runaway2_v5    06/05/2019 @ 05:40

6: Time and date ^^^^
7: Explain the situation He knifed zombie killing entire ct team, started laughing. I asked why it was funny to to knie a zm and kill entire ct team, "just is" I kicked him, he banned me, I unbanned myself, and banned him for 1 day, just so lead admins can consider what to do. 
Its not correct to ban a fellow admin, witch he did, but since he did that I choose to ban him uintill a lead admin klix or ingame can review the abuse. 

8: Proof 

ze_rooftop_runaway2_v5    06/05/2019 @ 05:40 Thats the demo and time. was close to last round, I dont have the tic atm ,cause its almost 7 am 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little sidenote.  I was considering to ban for that knife just 10-30 mins. Mostly cause of his attitude. But I decided to kick. I did not expect him to ban when he broke the rules. 

I know it is repetitive, but banning a fellow admin is not ok, and to be fair I did not abuse by kicking him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your Honour, almighty Klixus, this is a criminal case under Section 18 of the Online Crimes Act 2001 concerning the banning of Frodo (paying nide admin) by Checkster, an insignificant glob of snot trying to act c00l. The defence DENIES that Checkster's banning was a result of a deliberate act to knife zombies on the sever by Frodo himself. 

The defence notes that this is a criminal case and henceforth, the prosecution has a duty to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the defendant committed the alleged offence. This means the prosecution must prove (a) that Checkster was banned by Frodo, (b) that the ban was caused by a deliberate act of the accused, and, (c) that at the time the act was done, it was done with either an intention to kill or to hamper the duties of an on-duty admin.

Your Honour, the defence does not deny that Checkster was banned by Frodo.

The key facts of the matter are thus:

• The defendant, Mr Frodo is a 44-year-old legend of the C:SS server Nide

• Frodo plays on the server almost every day and gets at least 7 mako solos every night (hellz extreme 3).

• This year a new coordinator, Klixus, made amendments in regards to the management of the server. Appointing Checkster, an inexperienced admin out of the blue, probably due to sexual favours.

• The defendant tried to contact the Klixus via both phone and email multiple times about his decisions however never received a response.

• Frodo expressed anger over the confusing admin changes however no threats to harm were present

• On this morning on rooftop runaway, the defendant snapped at the constant nagging and bad decisions from his "senior" and got kicked by him for no reason!

• The defendant returned to the server, where he proceeded to ban Checkster for inappropriate use of admin powers, not wanting another pivo.

• Checkster then stated in private dms to "sausage clicker" 

[14:35]
checkster:
    I can unbann and I have console
    so hes banned now

• Checkstar unbaned himself and proceed to ban Frodo for a day claiming that he was in the right.

[14:36]
checkster:
    how stupid are you when u ban a senior admin lel

• On the morning where details about mako v7 were due to be released, the defendant received an email from "the Checkster" stating a day ban off Nide due to harassments and threating behaviour by the Defendant, and futher damage claims to follow.

• Due to the Checksters refusal to reply to his questions, Frodo found  me, his lawyer.


Your honour, the defence will show through witness testimony that Frodo did not intend to cause any bodily harm, (only online). Indeed, the defence will show that Mr. Frodo had good reason not to cause pointless harm to Checkster because he was a dedicated css playerand a paying admin, a kind hearted worker and friend with no reason to ban Checkster but that he was incompetent. We will also show that Checkster was not doing his job properly and many other people had something against him. In doing so, and by following the outline of what a ban entails, we will prove that Frodo did not, in fact, deserve the ban for himself banning 'the imbecile' Checkster.
  
Although the defendant was angry about the recent changes and permanent banning affecting Mr. Frodo's good friend Pivo, killing or banning Checkster would have taken away any hope the defendant had of reasoning with Klixus and changing his decision. In banning Checkster, the defendant would have risked his job and imprisonment. The defendant was a dedicated teacher and Mako Solo-er, leader and effective item user that enjoyed his job and wouldn’t have risked all of that to ban someone when he had no motive. Through cross examination, the Defence has been seeking to clarify the exact detail of the banning, including the timing, whereabouts and knowledge of the witness from the time, proving checksters incompetence and hate boner. 

Your Honour, the defence will show that this, combined with evidence that shows that Mr. Frodo was a dedicated worker and kind hearted person, will find the defendant not guilty and unban him instantly.

 

Sincerely, 

Frodo's lawyer

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That defence is sh*t Sausage, please. A zm knife is zm knife. And coming from an admin, that is bad. Checkster should not have kicked/banned mr. frodo however. 

The appropriate action here would be free mr.frodo's admin and have a chat with him 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel I had no other choice but to ban, since he banned me. If a lead admin would have been online, klix or ingame I would have delt with this in a different way.  I would not hjave made a thread either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...