[Appeal] Harassment (?)

[Hakons]

Hello! I'm not too familiar with the moderation forum, so I hope this is the correct way to go about asking for a repeal.

I was recently given a one day ban, as enacted here:

Hakons, *** One day ban for the same ***.

The topic stops here and now.

Thread to remain locked until the hour to get this point across.

Edit: Thread re-opened.

Reminder, harassment of other players, i.e. 'calling out' other players by name and accusing them of actions which could have real world repercussions, is against the rules. If you wish to talk about the story of this boy feel free to do so as long as it does not dip into trolling, but we will not allow this to generate into a thread where other players are called out for being either pedophiles or pedophile apologists.

I was initially very confused, since I couldn't figure out what I was banned for as the reason was unspecified. The edit wasn't until 30 minutes later, clarifying it was believed I was involved with harassment. Before the edit, other users were confused and asked why I was banned as well. The thread in moderation is now locked, so I cannot link to the quotes, but one kind user asked,

Why were Hakons and Benuty banned? They were not the only people discussing the Desmond story in RWDT, what exactly made them stand-out?

To which a moderation figure replied,

They were banned for harassment as stated in the rules.

I don't care about the story, it's when accusations are made against players in this game that have real life repercussions that it runs afoul of the rules.

From this, it became clear that I was given a forumban for harassment. As is obvious by the presence of this post, I'm appealing this ruling, as I do not believe I committed harassment by the standards of this website, nor by the standards of common reason.

Under the moderation code posted by our admins, harassment is defined as,

Harassing/griefing a nation or region because of their words or actions is forbidden regardless - in telegrams, Regional Messageboard (RMB) posts, and on the forums.
*Accusations of misconduct that may bring real world repercussions outside of NationStates do not belong in public spaces on NationStates and will be punished as harassment. Players may post, in general terms, about factual repercussions taken in response (I.e. removal from a region or regional position), but may not go into details or link to material that does.

My main point of contention is that the post that was deemed actionable intrinsically could not meet the definition of harassment. The accusation of harassment is dependent on two objects, one being the existence of a targeted nation, and the other the existence of harassing language directed towards that target.

In the words of the moderation figure, my post involved,

'calling out' other players by name and accusing them of actions which could have real world repercussions

What is strikingly different from this explanation and the apparently actionable post was that I did not call out "other players by name." The actionable post was deleted by the moderation figure, so I cannot point out directly that I did not call out other players by name, but the moderation figure that ends up reviewing this in the evidence locker will note that I failed to name a supposed target for harassment. This glaring difference between the events recorded and the events charged was also noted by several users.

From the locked moderation thread,

Can you link me to the accusations they made against players? I didn’t see where they attacked anyone directly.

From the RWDT,

SNIP Hakons didn't call out anyone by name. SNIP

Though offsite interactions should hold little sway, it should nonetheless be added that several prominent and respectable former users that I have the fortune of being acquainted with joined the chorus of voices in asking the simple question that I ask now,

Who did I harass? I name no users or regions for harassment. I simply use the pronoun "they", and I do not specify further in my post because I did have a target to specify to.

Further, even if it is construed that I targeted an unspecified, nameless being, my post does not amount to harassment. I unfortunately do not have the post available to reference, as we know it is in the evidence locker, but I made no such accusations "of actions which could have real world repercussions." The phrase in the edit from the initial ban post "pedophile apologists" was likely in reference to the use of my phrase "engaged in pedo apologetics" (which mind you is a legitimate observation from a different thread). I fail to see, as I'm sure others would fail to see, how that could be construed to have real world consequences. I'm not accusing anyone of pedophilia, nor of enabling pedophilia, nor even of the perceived target as directly being "pedophile apologists." Words have meaning, and simply saying an entity is engaged in something does not mean that entity is that something. It has been many years since grammar schooling, but an action verb for the subject noun does not mean the subject noun is that action verb. When writing that post, I did not have that intent, the text plainly shows that I did not have that intent, and it cannot be construed that I had that intent.

Therefor, possessing neither the target nor the action for harassment, I humbly ask for a fair-minded review of this action, so that questions may be answered, justice may be obtained, and that tempers of an increasing number of dissatisfied users may be tempered.

[USS Monitor]

You were posting in support of Napkiraly. His sig, for which he was deleted, named three specific players. Therefore it stands to reason that when you talk about "they" and "those posters," it refers to the same three players. I'm sorry, but the contention that you were just talking about some nebulous hypothetical people and not a group of NS players is not convincing.

I might have called it flaming rather than harassment as it was only one post and not something that was being trumpeted all across the forums, but it's still actionable.

Warning history is why you got a ban rather than just a warning.

Appeal denied.

I think Nerv's reminder is intended to address the whole collection of posts that were removed, and the whole incident that led to it, not only your post. So there may be a few references to things that you didn't specifically do, but he felt it was still worth reminding people because of the larger context. You didn't call anyone a pedophile, but some of the other posts that were removed were heading that direction.

[Hakons]

You were posting in support of Napkiraly. His sig, for which he was deleted, named three specific players. Therefore it stands to reason that when you talk about "they" and "those posters," it refers to the same three players. I'm sorry, but the contention that you were just talking about some nebulous hypothetical people and not a group of NS players is not convincing.

I might have called it flaming rather than harassment as it was only one post and not something that was being trumpeted all across the forums, but it's still actionable.

Warning history is why you got a ban rather than just a warning.

Appeal denied.

I think Nerv's reminder is intended to address the whole collection of posts that were removed, and the whole incident that led to it, not only your post. So there may be a few references to things that you didn't specifically do, but he felt it was still worth reminding people because of the larger context. You didn't call anyone a pedophile, but some of the other posts that were removed were heading that direction.

I was not posting in support of Napkiraly's signature or actions. That is simply another assumption being made. I have no idea what the signature looked like. How could I have seen Napkiraly's signature when the nation was deleted before I posted my complaint? I was, as I usually do at the frequent occurrence of a nation getting banned/DEAT'd in the RWDT, complaining about what I perceive as heavy-handedness. I don't agree with what a lot of users do, but I quite detest heavy-handedness.

I said "they" because I genuinely don't know the users that were, in my words "engaged in pedo apoligetics." I had heard several users were banned, so I looked for the ban post. Seeing that, I made my usual post of complaining about moderation action against RWDT users. This was of course written to the situation about what I had heard from others (once again, pedo apoligetics), but it can't be construed that I somehow implied I was targeting and harassing/flaming a list of nations I never even saw.

I simply must object to the notion that a different user, in this case a moderation figure, knows my own writing better then myself. I did not target an individual or group and I did not suggest to target an individual or group. It wasn't flaming either, I'm pretty sure I ended with melodramatic huffing about not wanting to associate with the people "engaged in... ect..." Moreover, I once again didn't have a target and could not have flamed without a target for the flaming.

After a repeal being denied, is there any other recourse? Like a second opinion or a higher appeal?

[Lamoni]

Your only option would be to file a Final Appeal via GHR. If you do this, please be sure to indicate that it is a final appeal. Whatever results from the final appeal cannot be appealed any further, and is (as the name "final appeal" suggests) final.