Ban Appeal

[epicmatthew]

I was banned for "Hate Speech/Harrassment" in a vip gamemode.

I had been Potion Master, and used my reveal potion night 1 on a player who was revealed to be tracker. I then used that information to successfully impersonate tracker myself, and frame them as being the coven leader in order to get them hanged. While they were being hanged, this player accused me of "reghunting" despite the fact that I had the very game earlier not been playing vip gamemode as they accused, but Coven All Any gamemode. Since I, the potion master, intended to not be shot by the still-living vigilante, or roleblocked by the, again, still-living escort, I played along with this baseless accusation, among other false statements I made (namely that I also claimed to be pirate, which I evidently was not). The reason for this is quite simple: I aimed to play my role and avoid losing. I hope my intentions are understandable.

I was not aware the moderator reviewing my case would not a) check that anything I did constituted "harrassment" as defined by Town of Salem rules or b) have access to my logs proving I had not even been playing with them (to my knowledge, since it is possible they had also been playing Coven All Any gamemode, which seems unlikely) in previous games, thus I made no effort to clarify the situation; something I, immediately after finishing the game in question, realized I should've done somehow anyway, via coven chat, or using town chat when it would've been safe to do so.

Even accepting that my statement of "idc you annoyed me last game" were, in fact, true (which I hope I've explained is not), I still don't see it fitting the definition of harassment provided by TMG rules, under any proper interpretation. Even if I had been specifically targeting this player to frame, specifically because they had annoyed me in a previous game, that does not change the fact I was playing towards the goal of my alignment, and that goal was to eliminate town, something my play had successfully done. Nothing I had done constituted any unfair targeting, as far as I can ascertain.

[Jerme]

Greetings,

please note that lynching someone because they are themselves, and not of soemthign that happened in the given match is considered harassment.

[TrialBot]

Here are your reports:

• Hate speech/Harassment
• Leaving
• Gamethrowing

[epicmatthew]

I'm not sure you read my appeal in full. I did not get someone hanged because they were themself due to events outside of the game in question. I got someone hanged because I was potion master and they were tracker. I was simply playing my role. I was falsely accused of targeting them for events which happened in other games, which again: a) was not true and b) was explained in this appeal itself. I explained all of this in the appeal twice, which is why I don't believe you read this appeal sufficiently.

As an aside, I'm unsure if this is the proper place to appeal, as it was merely a 7 day suspension, not a full ban.

[Jerme]

Any report based ban or suspension based on an invalid report may be appealable.
I did read your claim of "doing your role", don't worry. Yet you did claim that you got them hanged for annoying your in a previous game in the report, which we deem as targetted lynching for a reason outside of the current match, as the mentioned event did not take place.

speed: idc you annoyed me last game

We take your word for that and thus punished you because of it. WHen you admitted of a targetted lynching inside the report, then its valid, no matter what you write in the appeal, I apologize.

[epicmatthew]

Not sure how else to say this, but that isn't "admitting to targeting them for a previous game". That's claiming to admit to "being annoyed from a previous game", which evidence shows isn't true anyway. They falsely accused me of targeting them specifically, and the standard of evidence you're saying is acceptable to act is that I said that I was "annoyed from a previous game"? I have never claimed that I "targeted them for a previous game", in game or in this appeal, and interpreting anything I've said as such is flatly untrue.

Furthermore, the reason I didn't feel it necessary to clarify that it wasn't harassment in the game was that if my role was considered sufficiently (Potion Master, as stated), then the idea that I intentionally got someone hanged due to prior grievances is ridiculous. Potion Master has a kill potion. They can kill who they want. If I'd had a grudge that I planned on acting on: I simply would have done so myself, rather than relying on a method less likely to succeed, and more likely to be reported. The medusa in game even told me to use kill, not reveal potion night 1. I understand that sometimes moderators are overworked and that sometimes leads to less-than-sufficient care taken on certain reports. I'm not chastising the moderator for doing something egregiously wrong here. But this is a false suspension.

[Jerme]

You were annoyed by them from the previous game and the comment is directly mentioned after the lynch towards the lynched player, this more or less makes it obvious that the reason you chose them for your lynching target (you led the lynch train on them) was mostly because of the annoyance.
We seem to have different opinions here. Sure you could've killed them instead, but in fact you did not.

[epicmatthew]

This is an absurdly frustrating response. The evidence I've provided clearly shows no harassment took place. I've argued that this information was readily available to the moderator reading the report, and thus felt no need to clarify that the obviously incorrect claim of harassment was obviously incorrect. It isn't proper to ignore the context which proves and would have proven that no harassment took place, without any explanation of why. "Sure you could've done that" isn't sufficient. It flat out does not make sense with the idea that I was harassing them. It directly contradicts it. Proves it wrong.

Is there a purpose to filing a ban appeal if this is all it entails? A moderator explaining the reasoning used to justify the suspension, and no actual consideration taken to determine whether that reasoning is, you know, correct? Of course we have different opinions. When someone files a ban appeal, they are clearly of the opinion that the ban was invalid, and since a moderator had banned them, the moderator clearly thought the ban was valid. Having different opinions isn't sufficient to uphold a suspension, as, if it were, all appeals would be considered invalid the moment they were filed. The point of this appeal is that I'm contending the opinion of the moderator was wrong, with careful evidence presented proving this, and no effort has been made thus far to consider that charge on the moderation part.

As far as I can see, a narrative was constructed by my reporter, a narrative which was so obviously incorrect that any unbiased moderator reading over the events of the game in question would (and should) have realized that. However, it seems the moderator reviewing the report bought the narrative as presented by the reporter, considered no facts of my side that proved it untrue, and as such was not acting unbiased in my case, intentionally or not. The evidence I bring to show this is that there is 2 interpretations of me saying "idc you annoyed me last game": 1) it came after they were hung, showing the hang was made because of hypothetical events in other games, or 2) it came right before night action, showing the statement was made because of the known fact that there was a vigilante and escort alive. Of these 2 interpretations, 1 has no evidence to support it beyond a baseless accusation and an inference of my intentions. The other (2) has, admittedly circumstantial but nonetheless present, evidence within the report log itself, as well as an inference of my intentions that was not made. I can't see any legitimate reason to value the former evidence to the latter prior to establishing the validity of an interpretation, although I may just be biased by the knowledge that I engaged in no harassment.

I could just as easily have claimed that the reporter's baseless accusation of "reghunting" to also be harassment, as it alleges that there would be events outside of the game to justify this (again, there weren't, you repeated the untrue idea that there were in your response, immediately following me rebuking that idea very directly) and they were using this accusation to attempt to convince town not to listen to me, something which would then undoubtedly have an effect on the outcome of the game. And the thing is, I'd have had equal evidence for, with less evidence against, that claim. Do I think that would constitute harassment? No, obviously not. They were just salty that they were being hanged, and grasping at whatever straws they could. But it would apparently meet the standards of evidence used in my report, thus making us both guilty of harassment as per the standards.

I apologize if anything I've said comes off or came off as hostile. It is not my intention. I'm sure my frustration with this entire situation is apparent through my tone alone, and I'm trying to not have this be any more of a problem than necessary. I'm just kind of annoyed the moderator didn't seem to take even the slightest bit of consideration that anything said in a deception game might, in fact, be a deception for the purpose of playing the game. Whether that be the individual moderator's discretion or written in a guide for moderators to follow, neither seems like adequate moderation, if I'm being honest.

[Flavorable]

Moderator Message: Your appeal has been denied. Your reports are valid and valid suspensions or bans cannot be appealed.