+- Limelight Forums (https://limelightgaming.net/forums)
+-- Forum: The Courthouse (https://limelightgaming.net/forums/forum-198.html)
+--- Forum: Suspension Appeals (https://limelightgaming.net/forums/forum-210.html)
+---- Forum: Denied (https://limelightgaming.net/forums/forum-216.html)
+---- Thread: Incorrect ban description (/thread-22686.html)
Incorrect ban description - Apex - Aug 24, 2018
Your Name: Apex
Ban ID:2901
Banned by: Safira @Safira
Server: Main
Ban Reason: [b]PRA (9977)[/b] - RDM, Stepping on ragdolls, insulting
Why should you be unbanned?: I don't want to be unbanned, I just want the ban reason to be adjusted as it includes an unfounded claim that I "Insulted" despite there being literally no evidence provided to confirmed that - RDM and Stepping on Ragdolls is accurate however.
Evidence: https://limelightgaming.net/forums/showt...p?tid=9977 Evidence provided in this thread.
3rd time lucky lads
- Limelight Gaming - Aug 24, 2018
The staff-members have received your unban-request, Apex.
It will take a while for it to be reviewed.
RE: Incorrect ban description - Night - Aug 25, 2018
Escalated to HR to handle, seeing how Safira is no longer a staff member.
Please bear with us.
RE: Incorrect ban description - Apex - Aug 25, 2018
(Aug 25, 2018, 12:53 AM)Nightmare Wrote: Escalated to HR to handle, seeing how Safira is no longer a staff member.
Please bear with us.
RE: Incorrect ban description - Enzyme - Aug 25, 2018
Hello there, Apex.
You've appealed this ban once before in the following thread:
https://limelightgaming.net/forums/thread-20280.html
The verdict that was made there was:
Quote:Limelight cannot be hold accountable for players who wish to appeal their bans which are two years old where logs could exclude the fact that Safira might have found insulting in the logs and proven that you had in fact not insulted ingame.
You would have had more luck if you had paid attention to your previous UBR as we might have been able to do it then:
https://limelightgaming.net/forums/thread-15616.html
Since we can't exclude that this is not the case, and because you've failed to prove otherwise then the ban will remain on record as it is.
Denied.
Ban will remain on record as is.
Why would I draw a different conclusion to this case when nothing has changed?
RE: Incorrect ban description - Apex - Aug 25, 2018
(Aug 25, 2018, 04:02 AM)Enzyme Wrote: Hello there, Apex.
You've appealed this ban once before in the following thread:
https://limelightgaming.net/forums/thread-20280.html
The verdict that was made there was:
Quote:Limelight cannot be hold accountable for players who wish to appeal their bans which are two years old where logs could exclude the fact that Safira might have found insulting in the logs and proven that you had in fact not insulted ingame.
You would have had more luck if you had paid attention to your previous UBR as we might have been able to do it then:
https://limelightgaming.net/forums/thread-15616.html
Since we can't exclude that this is not the case, and because you've failed to prove otherwise then the ban will remain on record as it is.
Denied.
Ban will remain on record as is.
Why would I draw a different conclusion to this case when nothing has changed?
I have faith in the system.
RE: Incorrect ban description - Enzyme - Sep 2, 2018
Denied.
User has failed to provide a good enough argument as to why the desicion should be different this time compared to the previous time the case was appealed.
Reason for denial remains the same:
Limelight cannot be hold accountable for players who wish to appeal their bans which are two years old where logs could exclude the fact that Safira might have found insulting in the logs and proven that you had in fact not insulted ingame.
You would have had more luck if you had paid attention to your previous UBR as we might have been able to do it then:
https://limelightgaming.net/forums/thread-15616.html
Since we can't exclude that this is not the case, and because you've failed to prove otherwise then the ban will remain on record as it is.
Denied.
Ban will remain on record as is.