I'd like a 2nd moderator to review this.

[samcrow]

Your Warcraft III username: Samcrow
Realm/Gateway: Entconnect
Why are you banned: ''refusing to play with team'' -> With a user who both flamed and ignored me, and then uses our other teammate as a middleman?
viewtopic.php?f=24&p=531081#p531081
Why you should be unbanned:
Because this ban is wrongful in my opinion.

First of all, even if i did solo play it DID NOT impact the game in any way since the supposed solo play occured at lvl 7/8 and the freaking game ended at level 20. So like i stated in the banrequest it had 0 influence.
I think a 5 day ban for something like this is utterly stupid, 100% within proportion (sarcasm off). No wonder your community is dieing.

Secondly, seriously? A freaking 3v1 game because of Greymane's stupid mode, which i did not even see because he ignored me and vice versa in lobby?
Shouldnt you ban him for not announcing modes? Or atleast using !slap to do it.

Incase a 2nd moderator doesnt review this i'd like a step by step explanation by Matdas how he thinks a 5 day ban for non-impact ''gameruin'' is justifiable.
Should a 2nd moderator agree, i'd like the same explanation.

@matdas

[matdas]

solo send on 5,
(08:22 / Allied) Greymare: teals solo sending
(08:33 / Allied) Greymare: ask him not to or i will do a ban request
(08:56 / Allied) ROCNAv.NABRAZEN: red says stop solo sending or he report you
(09:41 / Allied) samcrow: thats weird
(09:44 / Allied) samcrow: i cant see what he writes
(09:46 / Allied) ROCNAv.NABRAZEN: ?
(09:57 / Allied) samcrow: oh wait its bcuz both of ur wood is so low
(09:58 / Allied) Greymare: rdy to send?
(09:59 / Allied) ROCNAv.NABRAZEN: he ignored you in lobby
(09:59 / Allied) samcrow: leeeeeeeeeeeeel
(10:15 / Allied) samcrow: lets go 7
(10:18 / Allied) Greymare: send

doesn't even send for the level he called out for

solo send 8

(12:46 / Allied) Greymare: report made
(13:10 / Allied) ROCNAv.NABRAZEN: ok reported fyi he said
(13:17 / Allied) samcrow: hmm
(13:20 / Allied) samcrow: i missed the 7 send
(13:22 / Allied) samcrow: and its 3v1
(13:24 / Allied) samcrow: like it matters
(13:32 / Allied) samcrow: but fine with me tho
(13:46 / Allied) ROCNAv.NABRAZEN: he says fine
(13:54 / Allied) Greymare: good

You are ok with being banned, though according to this appeal, you change your mind?

18:09 / All) samcrow: my team is full of cucks
(18:20 / All) fortunes: i hope u lose :>
(18:26 / All) samcrow: tbh i'd rather be alone then with these 2 bro

being toxic

(22:37 / Allied) samcrow: whats what
(22:43 / Allied) samcrow: the meaning of lfe?
(22:45 / Allied) samcrow: idk
(22:45 / Allied) ROCNAv.NABRAZEN: lol
(22:46 / Allied) samcrow: life*
(22:53 / Allied) samcrow: probably not playing with u 2 pimpleheads
(22:55 / Allied) samcrow: but here i am

being more toxic

(25:10 / All) samcrow: tbh i hope u win too
(25:11 / All) samcrow: xD
(25:16 / All) samcrow: #support the underdog

more toxic toward your team....

and to top it all off, for the way you handled the entire game
(39:47 / Allied) samcrow: !slap scrub red

this would be why you are banned for 5 days. Your level of toxicity is not welcome on ENT. It has to stop, or the bans will only get longer the more you are reported.

[samcrow]

Lmao did u even watch the replay?
1 hermit on level 5.
I missed a send on 7 cuz i wasnt paying attention. Playing NC makes lvl 6 go as fast as lvl 1.
I actually thought i was sending for 7 while 7 was already in progress because of the EXTREMELY fast waves.
I am fine with a brq for me because i figured no person in his right mind would deem it a legit brq, but see that greymare just posted it out of pathetic childness. (Guess i was wrong there).

Cucks, pimpleheads, showing compassion to a guy who is playing 3v1 and scrub is toxic? Lmao. 4 times of mild, if not non-existent flame is toxic? People are slinging cancer, raping families and idk whatnot over the place which is often ruled not excessive enough but pimplehead is banable? Laughing my ass off.

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=137194
Here u ban 2 hours for way more excessive "toxic" behaviour.

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=137349
Stuff like trash and garbage is less toxic than pimplehead?
No ban here.

I revert to my original statement since your explanation doesnt cut it. I'd like another mod to review this.

[matdas]

Lmao did u even watch the replay?
1 hermit on level 5.
I missed a send on 7 cuz i wasnt paying attention. Playing NC makes lvl 6 go as fast as lvl 1.
I actually thought i was sending for 7 while 7 was already in progress because of the EXTREMELY fast waves.
I am fine with a brq for me because i figured no person in his right mind would deem it a legit brq, but see that greymare just posted it out of pathetic childness. (Guess i was wrong there).

Cucks, pimpleheads, showing compassion to a guy who is playing 3v1 and scrub is toxic? Lmao. 4 times of mild, if not non-existent flame is toxic? People are slinging cancer, raping families and idk whatnot over the place which is often ruled not excessive enough but pimplehead is banable? Laughing my ass off.

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=137194
Here u ban 2 hours for way more excessive "toxic" behaviour.

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=137349
Stuff like trash and garbage is less toxic than pimplehead?
No ban here.

I revert to my original statement since your explanation doesnt cut it. I'd like another mod to review this.

wave 5 was hermit and wyvern all of your wood.

you called the send on 7, miss the send, and still send... your lack of attention to your own calls doesnt warrant a pass.

your language in the game was far worse than what the other's have had, and each request is handled on a case by case basis. Not to mention your toxicity consisted of 80% of the game.

I stand by my decision, you can await a second opinion from another mod. @merex @beerlord if you have time. (two mods, one from ltd, the other from dota). Would appreciate the review. we have a rocknrolled 2.0 coming around.

[roger5070mm]

5 days ban is a bit much

[Panopticon]

5 days ban is a bit much

Actually 5 days seems about right for the amount of gameruining and ghosting that occurred.

[samcrow]

At what instance did i give away information that our enemy could actually work with?
When i told him blue went 8 3 at lvl 11? Oh true there's no such thing as arena one level prior which actually reveals it.
Pathetic push? Susceptible to interpretation.
Not once did i feed him ANY useful information. Should you think otherwise i'd like an exact motivation of how it impacted the way the game played out, if u cant provide that you're just adding useless comments.
Motivate ur claims, or dont out them.

@apoth

[Atrux]

I was looking through processed requests and my own ban requests (the few that I have done) and find it odd that calling someone pimpleheads and missing a send calls for a five day ban (The other points made are, as far as I can see, less important, but mods may view it differently than I do hence why they're mods ^^). Let's take toxicity first, as I find that to be one of the most game ruining actions:

A pimplehead can be looked at as either a funny statement or an offensive one, depending on your viewpoint. In comparison, involving family into it far worse in my opinion, but mods think differently (Might be a cultural thing): viewtopic.php?f=24&t=137194&p=530204#p530204
This guy got a soft 2h ban, and went way over the line in comparison. In regards of the "Go underdog" thing: How is that a toxic statement towards your own team? It's simply rooting for an underdog. I don't see how this is trashtalking your team mates, compared to telling someone to suck their genitals. If possible, I'd love to see an explanation.
Now, for the second of the "worse" actions - solosending or "refusing to cooperate with the team". 3 extra chariots might have made the solo player to leak a couple of units. But in no way would it be game changing, unless a triple rage would have come into effect which is honestly too much for me to speculate on. In comparison, this guy got a one day ban for refusing to cooperate with the team: viewtopic.php?f=24&t=137248&p=530384#p530384

Now, let's move on to the "less game ruining" statements:
1. Ok with being banned - That is putting meaning into a statement, in some way. He was fine with being reported, as we all should be since we do believe the mods will find the proper action towards any problem. Hence the appeal, as he disagreed with the ban.
2. !slap command - Sure, it tops it off. But is it a toxic action? If so, could someone explain? I don't understand how that command is truly game ruining, but then again - I'm not the mod ^^

Summa summarum, the two truly "wrong" incidents are the solo send (not game changing) and the "flame" (which I put forward an example of way worse incidents, yet a soft ban). How does this add up to a 120 hour ban, compared to a 26 hour ban on the two cases I put forward?
Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to make this case any worse or harder to handle in any way. I simply would like to know the thought process behind the three situations as I believe this one is either handled quite roughly or the other two examples too softly.

I must add that I have not watched this replay, but the examples but forward and compared those to my own. It is also worth mentioning that a NC-mode makes the levels go way faster and some players may leave their game for a quick toilet break (normally time for that with champions).

Good luck with the case to all parties

[samcrow]

I'd like to thank @atrux for posting a comment and actually motivating his statements.

He points out 2 ban requests, which add up to a total of 26 hours. The supposed wrong doings of me are way less then both of the ban requests he points out, yet the ban enforced on me is 5 times as much as these two combined. Makes me wonder if there isn't a guideline around? And i understand there's admins descretion and all that, but a 5-days ban, for all heavily exegerated offenses just so the banrequest looks like there is actually some basis for the brq itself?

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=137215
Solo sending 2 times -> denied.

Edit: viewtopic.php?f=24&t=135764&p=526627&hilit=Flame#p526627
Another example of hard flame -> denied.

I genuinly want to get insight in the thought process.

[w1tch]

First of all, i want to remind you all that rules are not universal, meaning that there may be some scenarios that rules may do more harm than good. That is why there are moderators that has to inter prate them to see if they are applicable on some particular scenarios. Additionally there are rules that favors a single person rather than majority eg.(If red announces mod on lobby even if no one agrees with that, red can choose that mod in the game for his selfishness.)
I watched the replay, and its obvious that no one except those two(red and blue) agreed with the mod. Those two used rules in their favor for selfish reasons. Two guys left on early game proves that. Red and blue tried to use ent gaming rules in their favor in a bad way like a swindler. Even well behaved players lose their temper when encountered with those types of guys.
Samcrow obviously tried to have fun by doing so called "Ghosting" even if those two selfish guys tried to ruin others. He tried to communicate with the enemy team to have some fun rather than losing his temper and offending anyone. I think samcrow should be rewarded rather than punished for his behavior. Banning such a well behaved guy discourages other players from having fun and respecting other players. And lastly samcrow did not try to ruin the game and its obvious that he is the reason his team won the game.

[samcrow]

I'd like to thank @w1tch for actually watching the replay, and he too finds that whatever i did was not impactful at all.

Do note that @matdas stated 80% of my behaviour was toxic in this game.

(14:21 / All) samcrow: all red's fault
(14:37 / All) samcrow: gj
(14:39 / All) samcrow: good hold
-> Encouraging the player who is in a 3v1 situation to keep on going, because he's doing good is toxic too?

(25:10 / All) samcrow: tbh i hope u win too
(25:11 / All) samcrow: xD
(25:16 / All) samcrow: #support the underdog
-> Once again, im making conversation with a dude who's playing 3v1, whose far in a disadvantageous position and thus most likely will lose. A situation i've had many times myself, and i always appreciated a talkative enemy, since you're alone. Even if ur on oposing teams, shouldnt mean u cant have fun with that oposing team. -> Toxic? Not in my opinion.

(29:06 / All) fortunes: 230
(29:08 / All) fortunes: so low atm
(29:14 / All) samcrow: yea its cuz 3v1 and mutants
(29:16 / All) samcrow: im 377
"LEAKED THE INFORMATION THAT IS THE REASON TO THE GHOST ARGUMENT". I ask again, what did he gain from this? Or better said, what did we gain? We learned more because he only got my income in return. (still not sure how he couldve used that data to make a play) Toxic? I dont think so.

(40:18 / Allied) Greymare: i will get his ip traced and find out whos account that is.
I too wonder how Greymane could get this information? I think this one statement proves that he was worked up and angry, and posted the brq while still suffering from this. Toxic? Yes. Posted by me? No.

[Merex]

You made your own call and didnt send, and just sent the next wave instead on top of the other solo send. Your behavior is toxic and needs to change before an appeal can even be considered.