Name:
Steam ID:
Please state if it is for SCP-RP UK or USA:
Level of appeal (2 or 3):
Have you already carried out a level 1 appeal - please give details:
Who did you carry out the level 1 appeal to, and where:
Rank demoted from:
Who demoted you?:
Date of demotion?:
What is the case against you?:
Is this true?:The removal reason was "Powertripping" as put on the roster. Because this is not enough info, to roughly quote Giudon, this was because of a policy I instated following an RP situation involving A1/O5/Ethics on 25/11/2023 regarding not doing major treason/defection RP without OOC LTGEN+ approval first. It was also sparked by me removing some individuals from a Strike Team I lead.
Prior to this demotion, have you ever been demoted?:
Please list any previous roleplay demotion appeals:
What is your side of the story?:
The reason for my removal was "powertripping" by the creation of this policy.
However, I do not believe the instating of this policy was powertripping by any means. My reasoning for creating this policy is convoluted, and despite the surface-level appearance of it only being because my character was PKed by the RP situation that sparked this policy, it was not my motivation by any means. This was explained to the GEN before my removal, and the GEN did not revoke or complain to me about this policy. Here is the policy that was made:
My reasoning for instating such a policy was to avoid members of the CO team creating wide-reaching treasonous RP situations that may be of poor quality or unreasonable in the future. These RP situations affect many elements of our faction, including;
Alongside this, treason RP has been conducted by members of the CO team in the past, specifically an RP situation regarding defection/infoleaking to the Chaos Insurgency without approval, resulting in an immediate PK happening. I would rather one of the two regiment leads approve something like this just to ensure correctness and quality of RP, along with ensuring that it doesn't negatively affect faction health.
- Relations with external GOIs like Foundation, along with their in-character actions and opinions towards the GOC in the future;
- Information that may be leaked/given to external GOIs during these RP situations, effecting how they treat the GOC in the future and how they roleplay;
- Player kills and removal of knowledge from circulation that was gained by those characters;
- Possibly events by the GM team, which I believe were put into progress because of the RP situation and resulting "emails" to NEXUS that occurred after.
To tackle the point of me removing 2 individuals from a Strike Team, specifically ST-1142;
The two people removed had voted yes on a proposal for a "Liquidation Agreement" created and voted on by the CO team. The agreement in question would give personnel of the Foundation ADB effects.
To avoid the signature of this treaty, an assignment was made to Class-E COs who knew about this to make them forget about the treaty in question. The two people who voted yes would be included in this, so they were removed from the Strike Team considering they were about to be targeted by an in-character team assignment. This was not a disciplinary action, and was primarily for in-character reasoning.
I explained all of the above to GEN "Warden", and I was still not able to get a fully concrete explanation on how any of these points were invalid, beyond the situation "looking bad" because of timing.
To sum, I am not entirely sure how my removal from the regiment makes sense. This removal was also possibly pressured by Giudon believing he was going to be removed from GEN due to pressure from another player on the server; I am open to privately sending proof of this/DMs to a member of SL, but I won't be posting them here to avoid unnecessary drama.
At no point prior to immediately before my removal was I ever spoken to by the GEN about any complaints with this policy. He had spoken to me about my removal of individuals from ST-1142 for the IC reasoning I listed before, and was fine with it. This is why I believe as stated above that he was pressured to remove me, and I believe that this could've been much more reasonably handled than an instant removal.
Last edited:
Donator