Ban Request - chocbar98

[5p carrier bag]

The fact that you got yourself killed is cannot be blamed on mine nor Charlie's shoulders;

You pulled the trigger.

So you don't think that stealing is an aggressive act?[b/] You don't think that stealing is going to trigger any problems? You're mighty wrong, and need to sort out your moral justification for stealing in the first place. The bottom line is, you stole from us, who at the time had ties with the [b]Bermuda Mafia. Whether or not you were aware of this was a different scenario -in that case, it was simply lack of understanding on your part.

Again, I will restate - I did not RANDOM death match. My actions were intentional; you TRIGGERED an aggressive roleplay. Triggered. Triggered death match, not random.

Stealing almost insignificant items(such as notes, fish, props, knifes etc) would not be deemed aggressive enough to provoke the response you gave(immediately opening fire without warning). Here, you need an appropriate reason to kill someone, even if you are "triggered", it still needs to be appropriate. For example, you cannot shoot a cop dead because he is arresting your friend, and you cannot kill someone because they punched you once.
Our feeling is that your killing(and attempted killing) did not have a valid reason, due to A:the fact we stole a note B:the fact we were unarmed C:there was no IC indication of your ties to the mafia(and a vague hint of your ties through OOC information such as the scoreboard), and you feel your characters background meant that this type of response was appropriate. Whether or not it is deemed RDM is down to the admins to decide.

I believe it is you who are whining, due to the fact you are complaining that you got killed, due to your own actions and are upset as the roleplay did not fall in your favor. [b]Tough. Additionally, you two filed the ban request - it is you who are whining, not us.

Charlie and I are merely fighting our case, due to the fact that your reasoning behind this ban request is unjust and lacks sufficient evidence to imply that this was a case of random deathmatch.

Regarding the harassment, I can say that you were certainly punchwhoring the door, and have been harassing Charlie for a duration of time on CityRP.

No we weren't. This was the first time we were there, and after the footage we did not return. Either you're mistaking us for someone else, or you're straight up lying.

I am certain that you had visited our store prior to the event, and were punching the door. I highly doubt that I am mistaken.

We feel what you did was in violation of the rules, and had the evidence to back up what happened. There is no lack of evidence to prove our version of events, the only lack of evidence is of your accusation of our harassment, especially any accusation of harassment that would have backed up your reason to kill us.
We have made our case, that you were willing to use lethal force without warning over a note, and you have argued your case that you had sufficient reason to do so based off your characters background. There's very little else to say.
The only disagreement over what happened is that you say that we provoked you and were harassing you, and this appears to have gotten more and more specific as the thread has gone on, without any evidence whatsoever.

Additionally, your ludicrous statement,

you're straight up lying.

is far from correct. With all due respect, if anyone is lying here, it is you and ilmon3y, due to the fact that you are covering up the point that you completely disregarded to presence of the Bermuda Mafia by using petty excuses such as:

Pay attention to detail, my time spent on the server had increased in this snippet compared to the video, meaning that this was well after the incident had occurred.

Despite the fact the Bermuda Mafia had formed long before the incident regarding the note occured. The only way to back up this point, is by reviewing the server log, and seeing if lewisb98 (FL:RP Sauce) changed his job to Bermuda Mafia member before I killed you.

I said you were either mistaken, or straight up lying. It is up to you to prove that we were there punch whoring your door(we weren't there at all prior, and our only return was happening to drive by quietly through the slums, assuming you were still there at that point).

We're using petty excuses to say we were not aware of their existance? We don't spend our entire time scrolling down through the scoreboard to see whatever generic unofficial faction someone has created today. You said he must have been aware since he had a screenshot of them, and he merely stated that this was taken afterwards(as evidence of your job title "'fish monger'"). Even if we were lying about having seen their name on the scoreboard, it's a rather vague name(when I saw the note, I thought it was a fact file on the Bermuda islands), and there was no reason for our characters to know about them(as seeing them in the scoreboard would be metagaming). Hence their mere existence should not have been a warning.

1) Dr Tosspot and Dave entered the store (being welcomed) , firstly being warned for stealing the note.
2) Dave returns after being warned (and is not welcomed by ANYONE) at gunpoint and by warning burst (Violation of FearRP) in order to obtain evidence (also metagaming)
3) Chocbar98 engages Dave, due to an important document (note) being stolen from behind the desk, affiliated with the Bermuda Mafia.
4) A ban request is filed for Random Death Match despite the engagement from Chocbar98 being triggered.

We were not warned, you immediately opened fire with a full magazine at us. Calling this a warning is like calling shooting someone in the face a warning.
Dave was welcomed back into the store, as shown in the video. Also collecting evidence of prior events is metagaming? You seem to think that us submitting a ban request with evidence is not allowed.

Here is my summary of events, feel free to state what you feel is wrong.
1)We arrive in our vehicle, and I enter the shop that is fully open and welcoming people in, I see the note on the desk(your only argument to this so far has been that you think it should have been away, but you are unsure).
2)I am shot at with full intent to kill as I leave in my vehicle(You have stated that you fired a full magazine into my vehicle, this is not a warning, this is an attempt to kill the driver).
3)Dave decides to start recording and return, repeating my exact actions, and is welcomed into the store(as clearly shown in the video). He picks up the note(this time, behind the desk, but still within a public store), and is shot down without warning.

We believe that the only "bias" and "insufficient evidence" is lack of proof the note was on the desk, and the fact it shows you immediately gunning Dave down, rather than taking the time till we were at the end of the street to open fire(which is most likely down to response time, and you being on edge the second time, rather than any roleplay reason)

Our feeling is that, in our combined time of playing on the servers, and the punishments we've seen handed out by administrators regarding what is defined as RDM on the server, taking a note is not an appropriate "trigger" to kill someone, especially an unarmed civilian, and there was no in character warning(and only a slight OOC warning) of any ties to the mob.

You and Scotch feel that your ties to the mob at the time made it appropriate to act so aggressively over the note. Whether or not this is an acceptable reason to kill someone is the point of this thread, and is down to the administrators to decide.