[ChriseygamingYT]

Your Name:ChriseygamingYT

Issued by: [font=Roboto, sans-serif][L²] Goigle[/font]

Blacklist ID: 80358

Server: LIVE

Why should you be unblacklisted?: I did not get a say in the blacklist before now and 10.9 is to search a property not a car/van

[Limelight Gaming]

The staff-members have received your unblacklist-request, ChriseygamingYT.

It will take a while for it to be reviewed.

[ChriseygamingYT]

The staff-members have received your unblacklist-request, ChriseygamingYT.

It will take a while for it to be reviewed.

ok

[Doctor Internet]

While I won't be concluding this, as it is @goigle's case, quite frankly I'm astounded that you only received a blacklist, as opposed to an exploiting ban and a lengthy blacklist for 10.3, with my opinion not just that the blacklist was valid, but the punishment wasn't enough and should be extended.

[goigle]

I didn't give you a say because you had to go pretty soon after I left and frankly what you did was unquestionably against the rules. This is not a grey situation where maybe you had a reason or anything like that.

First, to start out, when I joined the server all 4 people were asking for staff help and it was clear some malarkey was happening. You even apparently self-reported for metagaming:

ChriseygamingYT
(STEAM_0:0:460070883)
said "@ 9 did failRP"
ChriseygamingYT
(STEAM_0:0:460070883)
said "@ and i was matagaming"
ChriseygamingYT
(STEAM_0:0:460070883)
said ".// and i did @ messages and i put myself under the bus in the @'s"

Pretty soon after you join we were all talking and one mentioned you /me'd finds weed under the seat to arrest someone. I told you that was powergaming and you said you had to go and left. I was willing to leave it at a verbal warning initially,  but as I went through the logs I realized some things that people forgot to mention.

You were getting a search warrant on every car you stopped and illegally searching them:

[23:32:58]
ChriseygamingYT
(STEAM_0:0:460070883)
used command "warrant 9 search we always do this"

You even put the reason as "we always do this."

Let's circle back to a traffic stop from earlier. After you left, I forgot who it was (Dutch or Duckie?) told me you used a search warrant to instantly install emergency lighting on their vehicle and arrest them:

ChriseygamingYT
(STEAM_0:0:460070883)
said "/warrant 11 search may have something in the car "
ChriseygamingYT
(STEAM_0:0:460070883)
used command "me grabs the ford badge and it looks like it can be taken off"
ChriseygamingYT
(STEAM_0:0:460070883)
said "/me takes the badge and find 10g of coke"
ChriseygamingYT
(STEAM_0:0:460070883)
said "/me opens hood and plugs in his computer and finds it is registered to ... Chrisey Vice"
ChriseygamingYT
(STEAM_0:0:460070883)
used command "inventory veh_pwl use 1" <-- this is red/blue lighting on vehicles
ChriseygamingYT
(STEAM_0:0:460070883)
said "/me finds red and ble lights"

So, doing that is both 3.3 and 3.4. You can't just magically install an emergency lighting package on a car, and that's also technically an exploit. Please note the finding the car is registered to you and the 10g of coke under the badge were both powergaming as well.

With all things considered, I was actually rather lenient. You were upsetting the other players so I had to take an action.

As to 10.9 referring to property: the intent of the rule is clear. You need probable cause for a search warrant. Cars are property. Even if that rule did not exist you would have been blacklisted for 3.3 and 3.4.

[goigle]

With the above in mind, I am gonna conclude this as the blacklist is valid and lenient at best