Unban Request: Paddington Bear; Rupert Bear; Fozzie Bear; [FL:RP] Frost ツ

[ITsM4x]

Your names: Paddington Bear, Rupert Bear, Fozzie Bear, [FL:RP] Frost ツ

Your SteamIDs: STEAM_0:1:71438206, STEAM_0:0:47619776, STEAM_0:1:86161774, STEAM_0:1:99466670

Your ban IDs: 70463, 70464, 70465, 70466

Banned by: [FL:M] Agorith

Reason: BRA (69414) - FailRP, interrupting passiveRP by forcing agressive RP onto it, destroying dupe with molotovs

Involved: Paddington Bear, Rupert Bear, Fozzie Bear, [FL:RP] Frost ツ, [FL:M] Agorith

Why we should unban you: Before I explain why we should be unbanned, I'll try to explain why I was banned...

BRA (69414) - FailRP, interrupting passiveRP by forcing agressive RP onto it, destroying dupe with molotovs

So according to [FL:M] Agorith: "interrupting passive RP by forcing aggressive RP onto it", is a rule. Please point out that rule. My friends and I cannot find a rule which is even related to stopping passive RP with aggressive RP anywhere. It is simply not a rule. Furthermore, the reason: "destroying a dupe with molotovs" is just ridiculous. Why on earth is that on there. If you believe that is a valid reason than please explain to me what molotovs are actually used for.

Fail RP is also inaccurate. We were Corleone at the time, and we see a shop which we could rob. And because they refuse we find vengeance; we show them that Corleone are not to be messed with, but never mind that, apparently we broke a rule there. Now I can understand that a molotov is a bit extreme. However, as I said, we are showing them that we are not to be messed with, I have no idea where the FailRP is there.

In addition, just to be safe, I'm going to remind you of what FailRP is:

2.5 Do not do unrealistic things out of context (FailRP). This includes things such as anti-gravity bathtubs, unrealistic car colors, watermelon fights, etc. when there is no specific roleplay in which they would make sense (i.e. game shows or science roleplays).

So, as I said before, we rob a shop, they do not give any cash, so we show them the Corleone are not to be messed with by setting their store on fire. Name one thing in that sentence which is out of context, unrealistic or doesn't make sense. It all makes sense to me, but I guess that's a matter of opinion as shown by [FL:M] Agorith's ban reason.

From my perspective, it seems that: [FL:RP]aDuckOnQuack, [FL:RP] Yogi Bear, [FL:RP] Reeceasaurus
Were at a disadvantage in the RP, which (understandably) they were not happy with. But that is not a reason to call an admin/create a BR. All we did was make them unhappy with the RP going on at the time.

1.7a Do not make an @ request just because you are unhappy with the RP or because the RP has you at a disadvantage; unless someone is clearly breaking the rules or you think they are, making an illegitimate @ request just to complain or to try and get someone else in trouble will likely result in you being warned or punished.

^ I think that rule can take care of that. They called an admin through a BR because the RP was bad for them. Isn't rule 1.7a set into place for reasons such as this. And I'm sure that this rule can be applied to ban requests.

Please have an open mind.

Thanks,
Rupert Bear