Donator
Name: Joshua Bond
Steam ID: STEAM_0:0:26721075
Please state if it is for SCP-RP UK or USA: UK
Level of appeal (2 or 3): 2
Have you already carried out a level 1 appeal - please give details: I have and it was denied by Thomas
Who did you carry out the level 1 appeal to, and where: Thomas via discord
Rank demoted from: Ambassador
Who demoted you?: Thomas Glover and Liam Reed
Date of demotion?: 28/01/2024
What is the case against you?: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_U6fF8kE1ojUgCaFd5raICAx84MrSfTgpHFmT4Q7BLw/edit
Is this true?:
I acknowledge that my response to a situation, wherein I felt betrayed by both another ambassador and Director Liam Reed, may not have been the most constructive. I openly shared my frustration with other agents considering joining the ambassador team, advising them against it. In hindsight, I realise there were more tactful ways to address the issue. However, I maintain that expressing frustration should not be grounds for removal, and I recognise the need for improvement in how I handle such situations in the future.
Prior to this demotion, have you ever been demoted?: I have not
Please list any previous roleplay demotion appeals: N/A
What is your side of the story?:
I find myself confused when reviewing the screenshots presented as grounds for my demotion. These images depict instances where I expressed my opinions or disagreed on certain matters, particularly in the context of new ambassador applications. Additionally, I questioned the decision making process, pointing out that despite majority votes against certain candidates, they were still accepted. The final set of screenshots pertains to a roleplay situation with a senior admin, where I opted for an agreed upon punishment over conventional confinement, fostering more immersive roleplay. I fail to discern how these instances serve as evidence for my demotion.
In my view, it is unjustifiable to demote someone for openly expressing opinions and disagreements, especially when constructive criticism contributes to positive change. A recent example of this is the reversal of the Site Affairs ID change, influenced by the Ambassador team's collective objections. Expressing opinions, as long as they are not toxic, should not warrant punitive measures.
Moreover, I have never been directly addressed by the directors regarding accusations of being 'toxic' or 'unprofessional,' the purported reasons for my demotion. The most recent strike against me was only brought to my attention three days after its issuance, and I was still in the process of appealing it as Thomas Glover had not yet responded.
In summary, I perceive my demotion as hasty and lacking proper consideration. Throughout my tenure, I have demonstrated unwavering loyalty to the IA department, actively contributing to its development and assisting fellow agents and ambassadors.
Steam ID: STEAM_0:0:26721075
Please state if it is for SCP-RP UK or USA: UK
Level of appeal (2 or 3): 2
Have you already carried out a level 1 appeal - please give details: I have and it was denied by Thomas
Who did you carry out the level 1 appeal to, and where: Thomas via discord
Rank demoted from: Ambassador
Who demoted you?: Thomas Glover and Liam Reed
Date of demotion?: 28/01/2024
What is the case against you?: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_U6fF8kE1ojUgCaFd5raICAx84MrSfTgpHFmT4Q7BLw/edit
Is this true?:
I acknowledge that my response to a situation, wherein I felt betrayed by both another ambassador and Director Liam Reed, may not have been the most constructive. I openly shared my frustration with other agents considering joining the ambassador team, advising them against it. In hindsight, I realise there were more tactful ways to address the issue. However, I maintain that expressing frustration should not be grounds for removal, and I recognise the need for improvement in how I handle such situations in the future.
Prior to this demotion, have you ever been demoted?: I have not
Please list any previous roleplay demotion appeals: N/A
What is your side of the story?:
I find myself confused when reviewing the screenshots presented as grounds for my demotion. These images depict instances where I expressed my opinions or disagreed on certain matters, particularly in the context of new ambassador applications. Additionally, I questioned the decision making process, pointing out that despite majority votes against certain candidates, they were still accepted. The final set of screenshots pertains to a roleplay situation with a senior admin, where I opted for an agreed upon punishment over conventional confinement, fostering more immersive roleplay. I fail to discern how these instances serve as evidence for my demotion.
In my view, it is unjustifiable to demote someone for openly expressing opinions and disagreements, especially when constructive criticism contributes to positive change. A recent example of this is the reversal of the Site Affairs ID change, influenced by the Ambassador team's collective objections. Expressing opinions, as long as they are not toxic, should not warrant punitive measures.
Moreover, I have never been directly addressed by the directors regarding accusations of being 'toxic' or 'unprofessional,' the purported reasons for my demotion. The most recent strike against me was only brought to my attention three days after its issuance, and I was still in the process of appealing it as Thomas Glover had not yet responded.
In summary, I perceive my demotion as hasty and lacking proper consideration. Throughout my tenure, I have demonstrated unwavering loyalty to the IA department, actively contributing to its development and assisting fellow agents and ambassadors.
