Luziyca wrote:Tano wrote:What? No, no no no. That's some fucked up logic right there.
The mods are not idiots. They are not going to make this case the benchmark for all other cases. They are not going to suddenly accept a large number of appeals because some guy who doesn't' even seem to understand what Predator is confessed to using it. He made TWO posts on the DEN (iirc it was DEN) forums. There's a large difference between that and one of the career raiders that got hit by the mods for this.
Eh. Considering how even the higher-ups of RTL are suspicious of Tex's story, I probably wouldn't want to run the chance until enough evidence emerges that can conclusively confirm that Tex has never used Predator.
Until then, I will support Tex's current punishment.Drasnia wrote:Um, no . . . I've talked extensively to a person or two who were punished for Predator as well as actually have read this thread. If you could tone down the snark that would be great. I live by the principle of innocent until proven guilty (not the inverse).
I've seen nothing that would suggest Texasa is guilty of using it - even the the admission of guilt. If the person can't actually identify what they are confessing to, the confession is not very plausible.
I support the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" for real-world laws. However, NS is not real life. Since we are on NS, we're subject to the rules of the site, and considering that Tex has already been punished for using Predator, it's safe to assume he is guilty.
I think Zacharie's screencaps of what an unverified user of Predator is greeted with is pretty damning. Texasa can't be punished just for having Predator on his computer - that can't be proven by the NS Mods. He can only be punished for accessing the NS API/site with Predator. The only way to ultimately verify that he wasn't able to use Predator would be to ask Halc, but he's DOS so that ain't happening. But with the information we know about how Predator was treated, I think the Mods, especially the GP Mods who would be handling this (Sedge, CG, Mal) would understand this. There is abundant information to show that he did not use Predator.
Secondly, appeals are granted all the time. Just because somebody was originally punished doesn't mean that punishment will hold up. I guess our ideas of guilt and innocence are different. I believe their must be incontrivertible evidence to convict, whether in RL or NS.