Ban Appeal: SaulZoodman

Your Minecraft name:

SaulZoodman

The date and time you were banned.

8/27/22 at 5:25 CEST

What type of activity you were doing at the time of the ban (e.g. chatting, building, using world edit, etc.) or state "offline" if banned while offline. For the purpose of the appeal, only use the term banned offline if you haven't been on the server in the past 24 hours AND do not have a ban reason specified. So for example, if you leave the server for 10 minutes and find you're banned when you try to return, that's NOT an offline ban for the purpose of the ban appeal - just state what you were doing just before you left the server and that found yourself banned on return.

Chatting on the server

Why do you think you were banned (select the best choice below)? Admins should only ban based on the following policy: https://forum.totalfreedom.me/d/2961

a. I don't know because I did not violate any rule as noted in the server conduct policy.

Which admin banned you, and what were you told (if anything) before the ban occurred?

videogamesm12

Have you reviewed and agree to the community guidelines (yes or no)? Please review the policy at https://forum.totalfreedom.me/d/2961

Yes

The admin who banned me mentioned something about me being another player before banning me from the server. I was banned with no actual evidence or reasoning to back it up.

Quote from videogamesm12

I banned you because your username is ridiculously similar to that of a player who was just indefinitely banned last night. The fact these two users joined so closely to each other, have usernames that have the same gimmick in them, and quite literally said pretty much the same things upon joining can't be a coincidence in my eyes.

You're seriously backing this up because two people happened to make the same pop culture reference? That's ridiculous. It's not like what I said is some obscure phrase that I and only I would say. In fact: I bet if you did a search for "Did you know that you have rights?" in the Discord you're showing in that screenshot, you'd find about a dozen more examples of other people saying it.

It shouldn't be my problem that someone else joined yesterday and made a pretty common joke. I get that it seems similar and we have similar usernames, but we are not the same person. Right now, it looks like you're trying to argue yourself out of having to correct a mistake.

Quote from videogamesm12

Within a ridiculous close timeframe with nearly identical usernames speaking in nearly the same fashion? Yes, I am, and there's more.

The "speaking in nearly the same fashion" argument is completely invalid because what this other user and I said were both the same common pop culture reference. The similar usernames are for the same reason as well: it's a joke that was made because of a reference to mass media. (Notice the term "mass.")

And no, there's not "more." The rest of your post is just server logs that show an indefinitely banned player's ban message before I even joined the server. You still have no actual evidence, and you're still making a pretty weak argument in a case where you're trying to argue that an innocent player should be banned without proof.

This entire process shouldn't be happening: I am being put in an unfair position where I have to argue against someone whose opinions are going to be inherently more believed and trusted by the rest of the community here due to time and status. This is why the innocent player should remain innocent unless there's actual proof or evidence that they did anything wrong.

Quote from videogamesm12

I wasn't referring to that at all? The way you spoke on the server (inconsistent capitalization between messages, most of your messages having proper capitalization) perfectly matched SaulDoodman's. I know it's not definitive proof in itself, but it's one of the many coincidences that seems to have somehow happened.

You're using capitalization as a means to over-exaggerate the unlikelihood of a coincidence that happened? And even when you're making that argument, you said yourself it's "inconsistent." This argument doesn't actually mean anything, and capitalization is a behavior that very, very easily could change from day to day.

Quote from videogamesm12

So you just so happened to join minutes after someone with a very similar username to yours received a message notifying them that they were indefinitely banned, and upon joining made the exact same joke they did? How am I expected to believe that these are just coincidences?

Yes. I did just happen to join minutes after "SaulDoodman," whose username was an extremely common pop culture reference. I joined to make the same pop culture reference. It's not like it's a coincidence that we made the same joke. It's extremely common, and you have probably seen it countless times before from someone other than me or this other player.

Quote from videogamesm12

Read the timestamps. It's pretty suspicious to me that after a player named SaulDoodman tried to join the server and got rejected with a message notifying them that they were indefinitely banned, 11 minutes later a new player named SaulZoodman show up on the server for the first time and make the same jokes.

Again, it's not at all unlikely that two people would make the same pop culture reference. If you factor that out, (like you should be doing because of the lack of significant connection,) you get that one player joined minutes after another player received a message that they were banned. That doesn't actually mean anything.

Quote from videogamesm12

Good one buddy. I'm actually arguing that you bypassed the ban which you received as SaulDoodman.

No, you're not. You're arguing that I, a player who currently has no evidence or proof of any wrongdoing tied to their account, should be banned because of your speculation. Unless you can provide any proof that I did anything wrong, the fact remains that that's the position you're taking here.

Quote from videogamesm12

New players are assumed innocent, but with all the shit I mentioned before, your own innocence is questionable.

You can't say "new players are assumed innocent" when I'm a new player and should have been assumed innocent but wasn't. That claim now no longer holds any water.