Okay. I am going to start this by simply saying that this is going to be VERY LONG. So if you are doing something/supposed to be doing something, read this later.
The reason i find this SPECIFIC rule to be fallacious, is because it is a contradiction in itself in most cases. I am first going to be focusing on this issue, and then I am going to focus the issue of my ban, I will be presenting an argument on why I think my ban was false. Before I continue, I would like it if the mods would not close this post, and if any mod truly sees this, please send this to the owner. This is the rule I think is a contradiction in itself, and I am going to be talking about why.
"Any attitude that the Admin Staff consider to be inappropiate will be punished with a permanent banand being blacklisted "
AND
"Evading a ban or mute will be punished with a permanent ban"
Lt's talk about the rule number one.
Rule number one:
The reason I think that this rule is a contradiction in itself is that everyone has a different view of inappropriate, it is an extremely subjective matter. That's the first thing.
For example, me saying "kys", implying that someone should literally go end their life, is a temporary mute, A TEMPORARY MUTE. But what an admin considers to be "inappropriate" could be something as simple as calling someone an n word. One is literally encouraging someone to end their life, which is a 30 minute mute, while the other one is simply someone calling someone a bad name, which is literally bannable. This was a hypothetical, the first one wasn't hypothetical since if you do tell someone to kill themselves it is a 30 day mute. Everyone has a different view of inappropriate, it is a subjective matter, which is why i think that that rule is fallacious and ridicilous.
Rule number two:
The problem I have with this rule is that you do not know if someone is evading a mute or not! Let's look at a hypothetical. A person gets permamently muted on their alternative account on which they do not have such high stats, which is the reason they said something that got them muted because they do not care as much for that account as much they would care for their main account on which they have higher stats. He gets muted on that account, he doesn't care and goes back on his main to try hard his stats. Following the logic of this rule, that person would be perma banned. This is one of the reason I find this rule to be extremely ridicilous and fallacious, because as in my situation, I got muted on my alt account, I went on my account where I try harder stats, and I got perma banned. This rule is extremely fallacious because we do not know if the person is intentionally evading a mute, or if they simply did not care about their alternative account, so they did what they did, then they changed onto their main account, and they would get banned according to this rule.
Thank you for your time. Later
The reason i find this SPECIFIC rule to be fallacious, is because it is a contradiction in itself in most cases. I am first going to be focusing on this issue, and then I am going to focus the issue of my ban, I will be presenting an argument on why I think my ban was false. Before I continue, I would like it if the mods would not close this post, and if any mod truly sees this, please send this to the owner. This is the rule I think is a contradiction in itself, and I am going to be talking about why.
"Any attitude that the Admin Staff consider to be inappropiate will be punished with a permanent banand being blacklisted "
AND
"Evading a ban or mute will be punished with a permanent ban"
Lt's talk about the rule number one.
Rule number one:
The reason I think that this rule is a contradiction in itself is that everyone has a different view of inappropriate, it is an extremely subjective matter. That's the first thing.
For example, me saying "kys", implying that someone should literally go end their life, is a temporary mute, A TEMPORARY MUTE. But what an admin considers to be "inappropriate" could be something as simple as calling someone an n word. One is literally encouraging someone to end their life, which is a 30 minute mute, while the other one is simply someone calling someone a bad name, which is literally bannable. This was a hypothetical, the first one wasn't hypothetical since if you do tell someone to kill themselves it is a 30 day mute. Everyone has a different view of inappropriate, it is a subjective matter, which is why i think that that rule is fallacious and ridicilous.
Rule number two:
The problem I have with this rule is that you do not know if someone is evading a mute or not! Let's look at a hypothetical. A person gets permamently muted on their alternative account on which they do not have such high stats, which is the reason they said something that got them muted because they do not care as much for that account as much they would care for their main account on which they have higher stats. He gets muted on that account, he doesn't care and goes back on his main to try hard his stats. Following the logic of this rule, that person would be perma banned. This is one of the reason I find this rule to be extremely ridicilous and fallacious, because as in my situation, I got muted on my alt account, I went on my account where I try harder stats, and I got perma banned. This rule is extremely fallacious because we do not know if the person is intentionally evading a mute, or if they simply did not care about their alternative account, so they did what they did, then they changed onto their main account, and they would get banned according to this rule.
Thank you for your time. Later
