- Joined
- Dec 24, 2022
- Messages
- 7
First of all, I would like to state that a 60-day punishment is extremely severe for the situation described in this report. Even in cases where a player makes a mistake, GR-1.3 violations are usually handled with significantly lighter punishments, especially when there is no clear evidence of malicious intent, repeated behavior, or disruption of active roleplay.
Regarding the accusation itself, I did not list the pets with any malicious or deceptive intent. Both pets were listed with the understanding that their lifetime was already expired. For this reason, I set the same price for both items. The amount of 100,000 is not a significant sum, and there was absolutely no intention to scam, mislead, or take advantage of other players. All item details, including remaining lifetime, were fully visible in the market interface at all times.
I would also like to clarify the video evidence provided in the report. The recording only shows the reporting player opening the market interface and checking item prices. I am not visible in the video at any point, and there is no interaction between the reporting player and myself. There is no IC communication, no /me or /do actions, and no RP initiation whatsoever. Simply opening the market and viewing prices does not constitute an active RP situation.
Because no RP situation was initiated or active, it is not possible to apply GR-1.3. This rule specifically applies to cases where a player intentionally escapes an ongoing roleplay situation by entering a green zone. In this case, there was no roleplay to escape from. Therefore, the application of GR-1.3 appears to be based on an assumption rather than concrete evidence.
In conclusion, there was no malicious intent, no scam, no active RP situation, and no rule violation that would justify such a heavy punishment. I respectfully request a reconsideration of this decision and a reassessment of the punishment based on the actual evidence provided.
Regarding the accusation itself, I did not list the pets with any malicious or deceptive intent. Both pets were listed with the understanding that their lifetime was already expired. For this reason, I set the same price for both items. The amount of 100,000 is not a significant sum, and there was absolutely no intention to scam, mislead, or take advantage of other players. All item details, including remaining lifetime, were fully visible in the market interface at all times.
I would also like to clarify the video evidence provided in the report. The recording only shows the reporting player opening the market interface and checking item prices. I am not visible in the video at any point, and there is no interaction between the reporting player and myself. There is no IC communication, no /me or /do actions, and no RP initiation whatsoever. Simply opening the market and viewing prices does not constitute an active RP situation.
Because no RP situation was initiated or active, it is not possible to apply GR-1.3. This rule specifically applies to cases where a player intentionally escapes an ongoing roleplay situation by entering a green zone. In this case, there was no roleplay to escape from. Therefore, the application of GR-1.3 appears to be based on an assumption rather than concrete evidence.
In conclusion, there was no malicious intent, no scam, no active RP situation, and no rule violation that would justify such a heavy punishment. I respectfully request a reconsideration of this decision and a reassessment of the punishment based on the actual evidence provided.
