[US] "Genocide" Level 3 MTF O-1 LTCOM Demotion Appeal

[PolarBear]

Name: Grizzly or "Genocide"
Steam ID: STEAM_0:1:550399845
Please state if it is for SCP-RP UK or USA: USA
Level of appeal (2 or 3): Level 3
Have you already carried out a level 1 appeal - please give details: Yes, I tried to talking to "Hunk" in DMs
Who did you carry out the level 1 appeal to, and where: MTF COM "Hunk" and ECC "Recker" in DMs and TS
Rank demoted from: LTCOM -> CPT
Who demoted you?: COM "Hunk" & ECC "Recker"
Date of demotion?: 10/9/24
What is the case against you?: Please read under "Reasons for removal"
Is this true?: No
Prior to this demotion, have you ever been demoted?: No
Please list any previous roleplay demotion appeals: N/A

What is your side of the story?:

Reasons for removal

- Conduct/professionalism while using ECM disguises.
- Misusing ECM disguises.
- RP at CI base.
- Overriding of a strike from a Lieutenant. "For no good reason"- ECC Recker
- "Hunk and myself (Recker) were provided with evidence that Raixin told you he did not want Nu-7 to guard him or enter Ethics wing, which you blatantly disregarded and invited them in anyways - ignoring the orders of an ECM."
- "The Committee has had consistent complaints about lack of leadership within regimental command for over a month now" - Lack of leadership
- Acting bias towards O1

Alright lets begin, I have video and picture proof that counterdict some claims that Recker is saying in my demotion. I can't post the proof here because its confidential to staff members only. (Whoever DMs me about this appeal I will send everything.)

Conduct/professionalism while using ECM disguises. - On this day we had a big group of O1 and a couple ECMs, we were having the ECMs get O1 disguises and I would get an ECM disguise (with permission) so in an assassinations attempt they would get the wrong person. We were doing this for over an hour, so I was ready to get off for the night. The "Conduct/professionalism" part comes next, we went down to 939 to see a test, and as a JOKE I said in TS (TeamSpeak) "Hey Raixin (The ECMs disguise I had on at the time) Im going to get on this railing and jump off!" I proceeded to get on the railing and ALT F4 off the server, I did not jump in, nothing. No further interaction came from that.

Misusing ECM disguises. - Raixin told Recker that I "took Raixin's disguise without his permission and went into inner D-Block with little planning which resulted in harm to an ECM and O-1 operatives."- ECC Recker I not once took Raixin's disguise without asking, I have known not to do this since the dawn of time joining O1. This "Misusing ECM disguises" is the same day from the "Conduct/professionalism" Incident. How I took Raixin's disguise was I asked him to take off the O1 Disguise so I could have his, Raixin took off the O1 kit and I took his disguise, he proceeded to put the O1 kit back on when I put his on. Not once did he tell me to take it off or that he did not want me to have it on. We ran together for over an hour, its not like I took it and ran off. The "went into inner D-Block with little planning which resulted in harm to an ECM and O-1 operatives."- ECC Recker part is, I don't know who brought up Dblock or that we should go in there. But I suggested since we are going to Dblock, we should try to do an RP enhancement for Dclass. I suggested, what if we go in there and check the living conditions and have a conversation with them, sit them down talk about any ethics issues they may have ect.. ECM "Pawz" and "Raixin" agreed it would be a cool idea. We proceeded to walk into Dblock and we sat there for 15-20min before we walked in. In that time I asked all of GENSEC to please come to Dblock, multiple times in comms. When I seen there wasn't many combative I proceeded to ask for any combative to assist, combat medics and DEA came in to help. I then talked with a GENSEC CPT and told him I wanted people on catwalk and SCUs to come in with us on the ground. I do admit when we walked in it went horribly and the Dclass killed me instantly (I was disguised as the ECM). About a minute later O1 and the ECMs pulled out of Dblock because Dclass didn't attempt to have an interaction.

RP at CI base. - "I told Hunk that if he doesn't discipline you for what happened at CI base, I want you striked for misusing ECM disguises." - ECC Recker.

(Being vague because this is an ongoing event still I think.)

-A1 has a whole event with CI, there are parts to it. I wanted to further the RP between CI and O1, so I asked to have a meeting with the CI LTCOM, we got there, and I asked about a document, didn't say what was on it or who its by, just a document. A TB then walks in and tries detaining us, we all cyanide.

Basically this part the ECC wanted me disciplined because I was trying to set up RP for this event, and I don't think its right to punish me for trying to do RP?

Overriding of a strike from a Lieutenant. "For no good reason"- ECC Recker - I did not override a strike from a LT? LT "Anvil" came to me and asked what to do with CSG "Blade" for missing doing training's for the week. LT "Anvil" asked if he should strike them because he thought that's what Apollo told him to do if they missed requirements. I responded by saying "No I don't think a strike for missing your first time is fair? Lets PT him since its his first time missing it."

Later to come find out (Without my knowledge) CSG "Bomber" got striked for missing training requirements. So I got asked "why did this person get striked but you didn't want this person striked?" I overall said I did not know "Bomber" got striked for that, and I thought a strike for missing requirements your first time is a bit much and we should PT them first if anything?

After having that conversation ECC Recker said, or brought up the fact that COM "Hunk" himself said a strike will be the only punishment. HUNK never DMd me or told me anything beforehand of this? The most I could find was an announcement from CPT "Raj" about missing requirements. So to my knowledge I thought it was CPT "Raj" or "CPT "Apollo" who made striking the only punishment.

"you also went against Hunk's directives to strike people who fail to complete CO tasks when as a LTCOM you do not have the authority to go against the wishes of the Commander." - ECC Recker

I did not find out it was the commander's orders to only strike people who miss training requirements until they demoted me and told me in TS.

"Hunk and myself (Recker) were provided with evidence that Raixin told you he did not want Nu-7 to guard him or enter Ethics wing, which you blatantly disregarded and invited them in anyways - ignoring the orders of an ECM." - The "evidence" Recker claims he got, was only word of mouth what Raixin told Recker. The person that they claimed sent in video proof was CSG (Now LT) "Crush". Crush told me he never sent them a video of, and agreed with me that ECM Raixin never told me or ordered me to make the Nu-7 leave or that he was not wanted.

So what happened was, I seen an ECM flag on, and I seen a lot of Nu7, so I asked in comms if an Nu7 would like to be attached to us and be a medic to help us out, one agreed, I told them to meet in ethics wing. I went back to ethics wing and went into the office of ECM Raixin. The Nu7 said in comms that he was in ethics reception and was there waiting for us, I sent CSG "Crush" to bring the Nu7 back so I could explain to him what was going on. When ECM Raixin saw the Nu7 he was confused why he was there, I then explained the Nu7 was there to be a medic for us, and to heal us if needed, and to "Keep you alive if you go down or get hurt" (I said this to Raixin). We all went about our business, I was never told to escort him out or that the Nu7 was not needed.

"The Committee has had consistent complaints about lack of leadership within regimental command for over a month now" - Lack of leadership

My only comment to this is for the past month the COM has been gone, and both my MAJ are on LOA. I have been running this by myself for weeks, I have been hosting the weekly meetings by myself, running the regiment in game ect.. on my own for awhile now. I also commented that I felt stretched thin for awhile now, and that I said that for weeks.

One comment I was told as well during my demotion hearing. that people don't like to DM me simply because I am a Sr. Admin, and that they feel scared to come to me about O1 problems. I find this a ridiculous statement, how can I control people not DMing me? I always tell people that my DMs are open and if I do not respond ping again.

Acting bias towards O1 - I was told that I was being bias towards "Blade" "Rajesh" and "Hydra"

I would like to start out by saying, I have not once forced my hand on something to give someone else gain. I like being a staff member and would not risk getting demoted or even removed for giving someone else gain in RP.

"Blade" - Claiming I was bias for "override Blade's strike"- ECC Recker This can be found in "Overriding of a strike from a Lieutenant."

"Rajesh" - Claiming "the attempt to get Rajesh severe PT after accusing ECMs of harassment & bullying and later asking Hunk to create a new LT slot for him, and such."- ECC Recker The issue with "Rajesh" we were discussing what to do for punishment. I merely suggested punishments, one being severe PT. After the ECC and COM "Hunk" decided on demotion, he mentioned its going to be a two rank demotion because there were no LT slots. When I asked hunk, if its possible to make another LT slot for "Rajesh" because I felt like a double demotion is a bit too harsh of a punishment for what Raj has been doing the past weeks.

I'm confused how my opinions are bias?

"Hydra" - Claiming I "passing Hydra's tryout when he failed certain aspects" - ECC Recker I will admit, I have know Hydra before this community, and at the time I was an Admin going for Sr. Admin, and the last thing I needed was the possibility of someone making a report of me being bias. So with saying that, I took all the proper precautions. I did not conduct Hydras tryout, at the time LT "Rajesh" did. Hydra passed his tryout with only ONE error ( According to records on O1 docs ). I would also like to point out, I was not on the server during Hydras tryout, so im very confused why Recker is accusing of me being bias, or questioning like I had anything to do with the tryout? I would also like to say, in every CO meeting, I have never put up Hydra for promos or have treated him differently like any other O1.

 

[Recker]

Hello Grizzly,

I will be replying to this seeing as I was involved and referred you to make a level 3 demotion appeal. I will be addressing each point of the appeal for reference to SSL, while also hoping that they speak to me verbally.

I want to state for the record that I originally had tried very hard to distance myself from this. I repeatedly told Hunk that this was his decision and that the Committee would back up whatever disciplinary actions he wanted to take, as we did believe something needed to come from it. However, I felt that I was forced into joining Hunk in making a verdict due to the gaslighting that you were doing to make me believe that Hunk said I forced him to demote you; which Hunk himself can confirm that is not true and that he never said that.

Addressing Specific Points​

Reasons for removal

- Conduct/professionalism while using ECM disguises.
- Misusing ECM disguises.
- RP at CI base.
- Overriding of a strike from a Lieutenant. "For no good reason"- ECC Recker
- "Hunk and myself (Recker) were provided with evidence that Raixin told you he did not want Nu-7 to guard him or enter Ethics wing, which you blatantly disregarded and invited them in anyways - ignoring the orders of an ECM."
- "The Committee has had consistent complaints about lack of leadership within regimental command for over a month now" - Lack of leadership
- Acting bias towards O1

As discussed in your level 1 appeal, the 5th bullet point referring to Nu-7 in Ethics Wing was being removed from our reasonings as it was a miscommunication.

Conduct/professionalism while using ECM disguises. - On this day we had a big group of O1 and a couple ECMs, we were having the ECMs get O1 disguises and I would get an ECM disguise (with permission) so in an assassinations attempt they would get the wrong person. We were doing this for over an hour, so I was ready to get off for the night. The "Conduct/professionalism" part comes next, we went down to 939 to see a test, and as a JOKE I said in TS (TeamSpeak) "Hey Raixin (The ECMs disguise I had on at the time) Im going to get on this railing and jump off!" I proceeded to get on the railing and ALT F4 off the server, I did not jump in, nothing. No further interaction came from that.

This is accurate to an extent, however, you did admit that you are not sure if you fell into the pit after you allegedly ALT+F4'd. You took this action of unprofessionalism not only in front of other people in another department, but also after Omega-1 had posted announcements relating to professionalism on the following dates (most recent to less recent)...
- September 15th
- August 24th
- August 17th
- August 10th
- August 3rd
and counting.

This action performed by you was while you held the rank of Lieutenant Commander. We should not have to explain professionalism to a Lieutenant Commander after 5 announcements about professionalism were posted in a 2 month period. Regardless if it was a joke, as I said with Hunk in your level 1 appeal, you said this (and did it) in Teamspeak/In-Game in front of people who you are supposed to be a role model for. This is unacceptable.

Misusing ECM disguises. - Raixin told Recker that I "took Raixin's disguise without his permission and went into inner D-Block with little planning which resulted in harm to an ECM and O-1 operatives."- ECC Recker I not once took Raixin's disguise without asking, I have known not to do this since the dawn of time joining O1. This "Misusing ECM disguises" is the same day from the "Conduct/professionalism" Incident. How I took Raixin's disguise was I asked him to take off the O1 Disguise so I could have his, Raixin took off the O1 kit and I took his disguise, he proceeded to put the O1 kit back on when I put his on. Not once did he tell me to take it off or that he did not want me to have it on. We ran together for over an hour, its not like I took it and ran off. The "went into inner D-Block with little planning which resulted in harm to an ECM and O-1 operatives."- ECC Recker part is, I don't know who brought up Dblock or that we should go in there. But I suggested since we are going to Dblock, we should try to do an RP enhancement for Dclass. I suggested, what if we go in there and check the living conditions and have a conversation with them, sit them down talk about any ethics issues they may have ect.. ECM "Pawz" and "Raixin" agreed it would be a cool idea. We proceeded to walk into Dblock and we sat there for 15-20min before we walked in. In that time I asked all of GENSEC to please come to Dblock, multiple times in comms. When I seen there wasn't many combative I proceeded to ask for any combative to assist, combat medics and DEA came in to help. I then talked with a GENSEC CPT and told him I wanted people on catwalk and SCUs to come in with us on the ground. I do admit when we walked in it went horribly and the Dclass killed me instantly (I was disguised as the ECM). About a minute later O1 and the ECMs pulled out of Dblock because Dclass didn't attempt to have an interaction.

The taking Raixin's disguise without permission part was a miscommunication cleared up during the level 1 appeal, I am not sure why it is being referenced here. Another issue is that during the level 1 appeal, you accused ECM Pawz of coming up with the idea to go into inner D-Block which she did not; while on this appeal you put the factual truth. While this may seem bashing, it supplements the decision to deny your level 1 appeal in the first place.

Additionally, as I stated in the level 1 appeal, this scenario was handled with poor leadership. It wasn't that you were in the wrong for doing it, it's that it was done with very little strategy or planning, again, as I explained.

RP at CI base. - "I told Hunk that if he doesn't discipline you for what happened at CI base, I want you striked for misusing ECM disguises." - ECC Recker.

(Being vague because this is an ongoing event still I think.)

-A1 has a whole event with CI, there are parts to it. I wanted to further the RP between CI and O1, so I asked to have a meeting with the CI LTCOM, we got there, and I asked about a document, didn't say what was on it or who its by, just a document. A TB then walks in and tries detaining us, we all cyanide.

Basically this part the ECC wanted me disciplined because I was trying to set up RP for this event, and I don't think its right to punish me for trying to do RP?

This is an outright and gross mischaracterization of what I was telling Hunk. I was not saying that you deserved to be striked for what happened at CI base when I said this to Hunk, I said it because there is no point in giving you a strike if you are getting a strike anyways. It'd be a double whammy.

The issue the Committee had with this was you set up a meeting with the Chaos Insurgency, a hostile Group of Interest, to ask about a document which you should not have even known about (metagaming, essentially), which spooked them and resulted in getting your entire regiment killed. Again, a situation that you led with extremely poor judgement and leadership. Just like the D-Block situation.

As stated during your level 1 appeal as well, we never faulted you for wanting to create RP or anything. The fact that this is still being brought up shows that when we speak to you, you continue to mischaracterize what we say to support a narrative that suits you.

See this screenshot when discussing your creation of a level 3 appeal for more context on the mischaracterization to support a narrative:

Note: "I also said what I quoted"

You essentially were admitting to myself that you were going to choose something out of our conversation that best suited the parameters of this appeal, ignoring what your very first statement to me was which was "Hunk said you forced him to demote me.". This is something that Raixin can attest to as he was there for the entire conversation.

I am very curious as to why you left that entire thing out of this appeal as it was indeed a huge debacle we had which led me to become more involved in your demotion, resulting in me being more forced to have you make a level 3.

Overriding of a strike from a Lieutenant. "For no good reason"- ECC Recker - I did not override a strike from a LT? LT "Anvil" came to me and asked what to do with CSG "Blade" for missing doing training's for the week. LT "Anvil" asked if he should strike them because he thought that's what Apollo told him to do if they missed requirements. I responded by saying "No I don't think a strike for missing your first time is fair? Lets PT him since its his first time missing it."

Later to come find out (Without my knowledge) CSG "Bomber" got striked for missing training requirements. So I got asked "why did this person get striked but you didn't want this person striked?" I overall said I did not know "Bomber" got striked for that, and I thought a strike for missing requirements your first time is a bit much and we should PT them first if anything?

After having that conversation ECC Recker said, or brought up the fact that COM "Hunk" himself said a strike will be the only punishment. HUNK never DMd me or told me anything beforehand of this? The most I could find was an announcement from CPT "Raj" about missing requirements. So to my knowledge I thought it was CPT "Raj" or "CPT "Apollo" who made striking the only punishment.

A large portion of the CO Team were aware of Hunk's wishes to start striking. Here is the meeting notes from August 31st:


You claim you were unaware that Hunk wanted this outcome but here is a picture of Hunk from our former Omega-1 regcom group chat ordering the strikes of anyone who doesn't complete activity. So yes it was Hunks orders, you were made aware through the appropriate methods, and you still overrode Hunk's decision for Blade.

Note to SSL: This was kept by Hunk for archival purposes.


The Committee also received numerous concerns about you guaranteeing Blade a Lieutenant slot despite being none being available. You even told this to Senior NCOs, allegedly. After looking further into the issue, we found that you did tell Regimental Command this as well.
(Further clarification: You did ask Kilo's opinion but proceeded to move forward with the idea even past that, sort of "rubbing" it in the faces of SNCOs, or so we heard.)

"Hunk and myself (Recker) were provided with evidence that Raixin told you he did not want Nu-7 to guard him or enter Ethics wing, which you blatantly disregarded and invited them in anyways - ignoring the orders of an ECM." - The "evidence" Recker claims he got, was only word of mouth what Raixin told Recker. The person that they claimed sent in video proof was CSG (Now LT) "Crush". Crush told me he never sent them a video of, and agreed with me that ECM Raixin never told me or ordered me to make the Nu-7 leave or that he was not wanted.

So what happened was, I seen an ECM flag on, and I seen a lot of Nu7, so I asked in comms if an Nu7 would like to be attached to us and be a medic to help us out, one agreed, I told them to meet in ethics wing. I went back to ethics wing and went into the office of ECM Raixin. The Nu7 said in comms that he was in ethics reception and was there waiting for us, I sent CSG "Crush" to bring the Nu7 back so I could explain to him what was going on. When ECM Raixin saw the Nu7 he was confused why he was there, I then explained the Nu7 was there to be a medic for us, and to heal us if needed, and to "Keep you alive if you go down or get hurt" (I said this to Raixin). We all went about our business, I was never told to escort him out or that the Nu7 was not needed.

Again, this was something that was discussed and cleared up in the level 1 appeal.

One comment I was told as well during my demotion hearing. that people don't like to DM me simply because I am a Sr. Admin, and that they feel scared to come to me about O1 problems. I find this a ridiculous statement, how can I control people not DMing me? I always tell people that my DMs are open and if I do not respond ping again.

You were told that people do not like DMing you because they'll DM you, including COs, and you will not respond to them.

"Rajesh" - Claiming "the attempt to get Rajesh severe PT after accusing ECMs of harassment & bullying and later asking Hunk to create a new LT slot for him, and such."- ECC Recker The issue with "Rajesh" we were discussing what to do for punishment. I merely suggested punishments, one being severe PT. After the ECC and COM "Hunk" decided on demotion, he mentioned its going to be a two rank demotion because there were no LT slots. When I asked hunk, if its possible to make another LT slot for "Rajesh" because I felt like a double demotion is a bit too harsh of a punishment for what Raj has been doing the past weeks.

Aside from Blade,

Rajesh accused two ECMs of bullying him so bad that he wanted to leave the regiment. He had no evidence and referred to a Command Sergeant as his only witness. When speaking to the CSG, they denied what Rajesh was saying and provided us with evidence that showed the contrary. I will provide this evidence to SSL upon request. I am not sure in what world a tap on the wrist for accusing someone else of something that could result in their removal would be acceptable.

I also recorded our brief conversation in Teamspeak where you casted judgement on Pawz and Raixin despite Rajesh having no evidence. In the clip provided below, you can hear me say "Well no evidence has been provided" and you respond with "I know, but". Why is there a "but"? No evidence was given but yet you are casting judgement onto individuals based on the account of one person.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KljYeJR3wySSFlBQu9IeFFtNddLpuX7E/view

"Hydra" - Claiming I "passing Hydra's tryout when he failed certain aspects" - ECC Recker I will admit, I have know Hydra before this community, and at the time I was an Admin going for Sr. Admin, and the last thing I needed was the possibility of someone making a report of me being bias. So with saying that, I took all the proper precautions. I did not conduct Hydras tryout, at the time LT "Rajesh" did. Hydra passed his tryout with only ONE error ( According to records on O1 docs ). I would also like to point out, I was not on the server during Hydras tryout, so im very confused why Recker is accusing of me being bias, or questioning like I had anything to do with the tryout? I would also like to say, in every CO meeting, I have never put up Hydra for promos or have treated him differently like any other O1.

We received numerous complaints from members in Omega-1 relating to bias and you were a common denominator. In Hydra's case, someone came forward to us regarding concerns about his pull into Omega-1. It does seem that you pushed him through to take a tryout despite opinions from others, so no, you have not remained hands off as you claim.

(Dragon is Hydra)

You completely ignore what Raven said. You also were the one to approve him for a tryout. Yes, he passed a CO Team vote, but there were concerns laid out and they were ignored. Including by an unnamed Commissioned Officer who DM'd you evidence of him failing 1v1s to which you ignored.

Overall, a lot went into the demotion. It wasn't just words or statements. The Committee has been looking into Omega-1's regimental issues for some weeks and it is unfortunate that the end result was this.

- Recker