Build and Shoot

I was banned from Lampoviy Servachok because I was 'Aimbotting'. Amazing. I don't speak russian, and apparently, the Admin (Antosha) there warned me. He even called me a 'clueless retard'! I was headshotting people left and right, and I suppose people don't understand 'One shot, One kill'. Besides, I'm an eleven year old from Australia! And come on, why would you hack on a 27GB game?

My lesson: Don't play on a server from a foreign place. Especially retarded russians with the idiot Antosha. Ever.
Also, please demote Antosha. He abuses his power.

Maybe Antosha was the server owner.

Illusion wrote:

Especially retarded russians

rude

take off all the insults, add how much BNS has to do with this one specific server and how much you tried to look for this server's forum or if there is one.

@Dominis That was just my lesson that I learnt.
@Zekamalikyd , I'm not going back onto that server. I now understand some people don't have enough brainpower to realize what 'headshots' are.

Hello
Message translated google translator

I am not a server administrator, but only by a moderator. I consider it necessary to comment on the application user Illusion.

1. This man allows himself to racist remarks.
2. This man is rude.
3. No actual evidence that he did not use cheats, he does not.
4. He slanders that I will show.

As for the words 'clueless retard', to me it was not possible to say, because I have not simply did not know the English word 'clueless'. According to Russian I say this phrase could not, so as my game client does not support Cyrillic. I think these accusations slander.

If he was banned, then after I watched him as The Spectator. This is a standard test procedure. In addition, the report only griefers, those I suspect to use cheats, I do not notify to secretly monitor their game.

So most of the assumptions and messages Illusion Player is either a deliberate slander or not justified. In addition, the manner of his posts - provocative.

Hope for understanding and fair hearing by the moderators of the portal.

Thank you for your attention.

Antosha wrote:

Hello
3. No actual evidence that he did not use cheats, he does not.

Insults aside, do you, on the other hand, have your evidence?

Antosha wrote:

Message translated google translator

Damn thats pretty readable for google translate.

underwear wrote:

Antosha wrote:

Hello
3. No actual evidence that he did not use cheats, he does not.

Insults aside, do you, on the other hand, have your evidence?

Message translated google translator

According to a well-known criterion: the burden of proof rests with the approving.

So, as the unfair ban said user Illusion, and then it requires advance proof.

He does not.

Or your moderator should lead on each occasion violations investigative case, collecting evidence and calling witnesses for questioning? That would be highly curious and absurd.

Antosha wrote:

underwear wrote:

Antosha wrote:

Hello
3. No actual evidence that he did not use cheats, he does not.

Insults aside, do you, on the other hand, have your evidence?

Message translated google translator

According to a well-known criterion: the burden of proof rests with the approving.

So, as the unfair ban said user Illusion, and then it requires advance proof.

He does not.

Or your moderator should lead on each occasion violations investigative case, collecting evidence and calling witnesses for questioning? That would be highly curious and absurd.

Actually no, if a hypothetical player was to record their every gameplay in case they could get banned someday, that would be absurd. In here, either of the sides has no evidence to support their claims. You could pass the buck like this endlessly, really.

underwear wrote:

Actually no, if a hypothetical player was to record their every gameplay in case they could get banned someday, that would be absurd. In here, either of the sides has no evidence to support their claims. You could pass the buck like this endlessly, really.

It is translated on a site www.translate.ru

Not I came running on a forum to complain and offend players. The situation isn't symmetric.

And, I will repeat, the duty of justification lies on shoulders of the approving. It not that principle from which it is possible to disown easily and so here only because it is difficult to observe it or because to it there is nothing to object.

Besides my claims are reduced not to that I accuse the player of fraud (though he and slanders, attributing me words which I couldn't say). Higher I only claim that banned it after supervision. Read and be convinced that my claims are reduced to its tone which could be more softly, considering absence of proofs.

It is visible from its first message. My claims more than are proved.

Concerning the ban. It always the personal decision of the moderator (if, of course, it not the autobahn by means of scripts) which can be challenged only proofs. Nevertheless I am not Pope and I don't broadcast "ex cathedra" therefore I am always ready to consider the actual signs of innocence of the person if they are.

Besides, it is possible to altercate as in essence, and isn't present. And it isn't surprising that the person whom accuse without proofs, will insist on a wrongfulness of the accusing. Especially when the dirty rhetoric is used.

Your opinion is clear to me, but I won't begin to agree with it, as a situation here the asymmetric.

Antosha wrote:

underwear wrote:

Actually no, if a hypothetical player was to record their every gameplay in case they could get banned someday, that would be absurd. In here, either of the sides has no evidence to support their claims. You could pass the buck like this endlessly, really.

It is translated on a site http://www.translate.ru

Not I came running on a forum to complain and offend players. The situation isn't symmetric.

And, I will repeat, the duty of justification lies on shoulders of the approving. It not that principle from which it is possible to disown easily and so here only because it is difficult to observe it or because to it there is nothing to object.

Besides my claims are reduced not to that I accuse the player of fraud (though he and slanders, attributing me words which I couldn't say). Higher I only claim that banned it after supervision. Read and be convinced that my claims are reduced to its tone which could be more softly, considering absence of proofs.

It is visible from its first message. My claims more than are proved.

Concerning the ban. It always the personal decision of the moderator (if, of course, it not the autobahn by means of scripts) which can be challenged only proofs. Nevertheless I am not Pope and I don't broadcast "ex cathedra" therefore I am always ready to consider the actual signs of innocence of the person if they are.

Besides, it is possible to altercate as in essence, and isn't present. And it isn't surprising that the person whom accuse without proofs, will insist on a wrongfulness of the accusing. Especially when the dirty rhetoric is used.

Your opinion is clear to me, but I won't begin to agree with it, as a situation here the asymmetric.

Sure, your server - your rules. Just from my perspective, since I already was in a situation similar to this, such system doesn't work just as good as you might think.

Hopefully not necroposting. Antosha, although you are free to do whatever you want, I hope you have accurate proof before you ban someone. Using topovl or pubovl is adequate. You are correct in that Illusion did say a few insulting remarks, but from his point of view, they are justified since he was banned without proof of hacking.

Atreyu wrote:

Hopefully not necroposting. Antosha, although you are free to do whatever you want, I hope you have accurate proof before you ban someone. Using topovl or pubovl is adequate. You are correct in that Illusion did say a few insulting remarks, but from his point of view, they are justified since he was banned without proof of hacking.

he's actually right, no one needs to collect anything, even though people can make a mistake from time to time. playing on servers is a privilege, not a right. besides he seems like a very sensible person. yes, even through that translator coating

then again, such defiant appealer's tone might indicate immaturity and dealing with such a case for the first time, or just a mere annoyance (it works that way sometimes), instead of "LOLomg did i really just got banned/kicked for that?" - rather than concealed fault, although it prolly works the other way around, mostly. and yeah, if you want to get unbanned faster or at all, and you can't control yourself over a simple appeal post, then you might want to wait it out a bit, then try again.