Player you are reporting:
Reason for the report:
Using his IC Voice Chat to communicate to another IC individual, about involving OOC characters as a threat:
"... Or I'll call staff!"
Date and time of the occurrence:
This happened during a hostage-attempt involving Brorsan, Eisenhower (and Ghost) and me (the hostage).
As you can see from the video, Brorsan was yelling at me, to get into the armoured van, using his Voice Chat - Eisenhower did this too, but only when he actually entered the van as well.
- I didn't directly act on these commands, as you aren't usually able to hear verbal commands through armoured vehicles, and reacted with a "what?" in chat, as a response to the fact I couldn't hear what they tried to yell at me through the thick armour.
During the voice-communicated commands, Brorsan says "..In, in, in, get in! Get in, or I'll call staff.!", here using OOC staff, as an IC threat for compliance - hereby breaking rule 1.2 - FailRP, § 2:
1.2 - FailRP
- Do not talk out-of-character over voice chat or in normal chat - use /ooc or /looc.
As I was involved in this situation, I would like to give my input.
"During the voice-communicated commands, Brorsan says "..In, in, in, get in! Get in, or I'll call staff.!", here using OOC staff, as an IC threat for compliance - hereby breaking rule 1.2 - FailRP, § 2:"
Indeed, Brorsan did tell you that he would call staff if you did not comply to our orders but you were delaying RP and he had no choice but to do what he did. I also said through VC for you to get in and said "Why are you delaying." Obviously, he should have called for a member of staff, but in the time that it would have taken for staff to respond, the situation would have likely ended and we would have lost an hostage. You advertently delayed RP thus forcing this situation on yourself - there is no one to blame except for you.
In real life, when you are binded to a hostage taker, you would have no choice but to get in the vehicle. That's common sense. Unfortunately, the way Garry's Mod works, this is not possible in-game. The situation at hand, forced Brorsan to "threaten" you with calling staff, because knowing your behaviour in other situations, there would be no possible compliance from you either way. This is because you seem to smart-ass yourself out of every RP situation. In effect, as I said before, you introduced this situation for yourself.
Furthermore, you should have gotten in the vehicle either way, because you were binded to me and I was already in the vehicle. You should've been warned for FailRP too because you delayed RP. If this report gets accepted, I will report you for that just to teach you how petty your reports are. Can you please just accept when you are in the wrong?
Holmander - I can say this, as I said on the Appeal as well; as far as I know, you aren't even playing on the server anymore, so even though you are "speaking of behalf of X", then dont - the moderators has clearly stated, multiple times, that only the ones involved should be able to place their own views on the matter
- And with your comment "..if we are going down to your level", is rather degrading and uncalled for - and the sentence "or im calling staff", is clearly ment as OOC staff, as Eisenhower confirmed on the answer above: "indeed, Brorsan did tell you that he would call staff…", so again, it simply looks like you are looking for another loophole
And the fact that I couldnt hear it IC (and the fact that you again try with your "loudspeaker" loophole, which isnt a mechanic on the server) but was able to still make a report on it here, OOC? is exactly what it is - I could clearly hear it OOC, everyone seeing the video can, but as IC, with the armour and how the audio/Armour rule goes, I couldn't - so again, stop with your small loophole attempts, as the situation is clearly transparent.
(This was an answer, to a deleted comment, which is why i have now darkened it)
Eisenhower - "but he had no choice": he had the choice not to bring OOC characters into the situation, and simply call the admins, when the situation was done. So yes, he had a choice. He might not have wanted to, but he did it anyway, so he actively chose the choice to do it. (I see this quote fitting here: "Can you please just accept when you are in the wrong?" - Eisenhower).
And wether or not FearRP was present, you agree that Brorsan spoke of of character, with his IC voicechat, in an IC situation, which is a direct link to the FailRP rule. I cant see if this is an attempt to appeal the fact he spoke OOC with IC vc, or its just a rant on the situation.
I believe that "stalling RP" is a topic in both FearRP, and FailRP, as FearRP is a subgenre of FailRP, as its a rule stating how you should act, in an IC moment, so reporting me for FailRP, for something that has already been reported for FearRP, seems repetetive. And if you do so, just shows how you wouldnt be "any better" than me, even though I dont find the behaviour of reporting bad, so you would just be as "petty". (Your words)
It is clearly stated in the rules, that talking OOC with anything else than /OOC or /LOOC, is considered FailRP (unless in an OOC space, such as Admin sit)
So being angry at me, for a report against a obvious rule break, seems odd; hostile even, with the tone you put into it, which I dont find ok, as it adds to the "reports are toxic!"-culture, that is building on the server, even though it was ment as a tool to report players that is breaking the rules, to continuously minimize the rule breakings - It especially adds to the toxicity-culture, whenever they are used as weapons, as your behaviour is a perfect example of, as you are threatening to use em as such, with your "I will report you for that just to teach you how petty your reports are." which is the true "petty" thing to do.
You might try to defend yourself with, "you are doing the same thing, with this report", as Holmander commented, in which I'll say no. I don't use reports as a way to get back on people, I was making this reports even before the FearRP was final, which means, before I would have a reason to "retaliate". (which I still aren't)
As Holmander clearly stated in his message, he has commented my view on the matter and I fullheartedly support what Holmander has said. I gave him permission to do so, and what he has stated is fully my opinion on the matter.
- Then you could have gotten the text from Holmander, and posted it yourself. There is no need to involve more people than necesary.
I could understand the fact, if you had lost all connections to internet, or access to the forums, but the fact that you are commenting now, shows you have neither of those issues.
"but he had no choice": he had the choice not to bring OOC characters into the situation, and simply call the admins, when the situation was done. So yes, he had a choice.
That's not what I am getting at here. Brorsan did not want to stall the roleplay by waiting for a staff member. If one was called, by then we would have lost you when you were (as I said previously) supposed to be in the vehicle in the first place. I would go as far as to say that it would have ruined our "immersion" in the RP as we had spent minutes now to get an hostage. Here, he had no choice but to again, "threaten" you so you can comply with his orders, which wouldn't have been the case if this was in real life. As I said, you would have been bounded to me and forced into the car. Hence, my argument is that you brought this OOC into IC situation by yourself, it is not Brorsan's fault that he had to go through his way just to tell you how to roleplay properly.
You champion realism for the server right? Yet, you complain when realism is not to your advantage. You brought this situation into play purely by your own stalling of the RP. You should've been punished equally for FailRP even though FearRP is a "subset" of FailRP. You could argue, most of the rules are subsets of FailRP, but the end of the day, FailRP is listed under a separate rule and none of the other RP-related rules are listed as a subset of FailRP.
It is clearly stated in the rules that avoiding or stalling role play is not allowed. This includes; disconnecting from the server, switching jobs, etc. And you would clearly qualify as seen in the proof presented by you in this post.
And on the subject of reports. My behaviour is not a perfect example of this "reports are toxic culture." If it was, I wouldn't have been a member of staff due to my "attitude." Never have I ever chased after someone for a rule break on the server except when it directly affects another member of the community. If you would look, my only reports on this forum have been on OOC matters (people's behaviours). When I threaten you to teach you how petty your reports are, I mean it. I will not back down from what I've said. It is not petty, it is just playing Westwood.
Eisenhower.Last Edit 2020-06-29 16:37:28 by Eisenhower
First of let me state that I was doing you a favor by warning you that I would call staff if you didn't stop breaking rules, which you didn't. And if we are going down to your level, how do you know that I was referring to OOC staff? Maybe I meant RNU staff or TA staff? Nothing states that I was referring to Server moderators/administrators when I spoke in-game. Also I will use the FearRP appeal you made as a reference to this: https://realityroleplay.co.uk/forums/viewthread.php?id=1241 I do have to say that I find it fun how you can't hear me use my intercom system where I'm telling you numerous times to get inside the vehicle which you persistently refuse but you can somehow hear me say "I will call staff" I think this whole thing is just you being salty over getting warned for something you found unfair so you go after everyone involved which you have a tendency to do as you can't take an L and realize that you made a mistake.
Re-sent since it was deleted.
"first of let me state that I was doing you a favor by warning you that I would call staff if you didnt stop breaking rules" - you just confessed to the accusation.
"how did you know I didnt ment TA staff?" - read the statement above, you just admitted to it yourself, which is how I know with a 100% guarantee.
"Funny how you couldn't hear my intercom system" - RRP server doesnt use such mechanics, if anything, we use /ad or /c
"How were you able to hear "im calling admin" but werent able to hear the rest?" - Because everyone can clearly hear you OOC, but IC I couldn't, due to the Armoured car rule.
"I think this whole thing, is just you being salty, and want everyone warned for it, which you have a tencendy to do" - Lies: I dont have a tendency to "get people warned, because im "salty", or otherwise use reports as a weapon, as Eisenhower is threatening to use em as (trial staff - good example).
(And funny you should say that, in the video its clear to hear your comment "I hate Westwood so much, I will take every chance to get him warned" - it sure seems like your statement, is more fitted on yourself.)
(What Brorsan commented, is a close 1:1 copy, of what Holmander wrote prior, which where deleted, which I've responded to in the darkened text in my first comment.)
It is a copy of what Holmander said, Holmander said it using my words, and with my permission. But since his message was removed I re-sent it.
"otherwise use reports as a weapon, as Eisenhower is threatening to use em as (trial staff - good example)."
Westwood, look at all of the reports you've generated, most if not all were denied. I could argue that you are simply saving face by trying to attack me for using these reports as 'weapons.' I've only made 2 reports in my entire time here on RRP and those were for very good reasons. Again, this is just as a way to get back at you for your incessant behaviour to report every single person who you don't like. If you don't think this behaviour is fitting of staff, you are much free to continue your behaviour and report me for being a 'bad example' for staff. You would also prove yourself hypocritical to your own accusation.
Last Edit 2020-06-30 16:47:00 by Eisenhower
You are litterally saying: "Again, this is just as a way to get back at you", which is litterally what I say the issue is... using reports as "weapons".
People say "yeah? but most of your reports are denied! they are clearly toxic!"
- No, just because a report is denied, doesnt mean it still isnt a legit report, as I have already commented, on other people, who come up with the exact same accusation, a large portion of the reports were either denied for being too old, or denied for an actual warn; but was converted to a verbal instead. - And even though my reports might be denied, I still stand by them, as I believe they were rightful reports, because they weren't used as a bad excuse to attack people.
And no, I wouldnt "prove myself hypocritical", because I dont use reports as weapons; as I dont use them "just to get back at you", etc.
But you, in contrary, your 1/2 reports, is on staff for "Inability to act like a Moderator".
- Yet, you, as a Trial Staff, is advertising the use of reports as a tool to get back on people, which first off is incredibly unprofessional, and secondly, it's litterally what you are trying to frame me for doing…
This isnt a report on your disgusting use of reports, but is a case on Brorsan - so unless you have actual info that would further the Brorsan case, I will see that this developed topic is moved to another thread, or likewise; as long as it isnt continued in this one.
Thread is locked