All Activity

+1

What.

Character's name & rank: Francis O'Rourke SteamID (STEAM_0:X:XXX): STEAM_0:0:571098892 Staff member who issued the PK (if you know): Kurti Explain why you were PK'd: GO Order, by Hamburglar Why should you be un-PK'd?: I am appealing this PK for 2 (potentially 3) violations of the PK guidelines, and how it was conducted. Firstly, I believe this PK violated rules 3 and 4 on the PK-Guidelines sheet. Hamburglar had not offered a single way to get out of the PK, where I offered 70k initially and upped it to 200k. I offered to stay silent, and not report the situation to anyone, but this deal still was not taken. It seems he simply jumped the gun directly to a PK without any negotiating even being possible. Secondly, I believe this PK also violated rule 6 on the PK guidelines. I hadn't done a single illegal act against the NYPD, and my only interactions with them were serving them at the front desk of the cafe for free. I hadn't been given a single charge, nor any reason asides what I did as Mayor for justification. If we are counting past jobs, as Mayor I had revoked the future budget for the NYPD. Not a dime was lifted out of their account, I hadn't committed any crimes to warrant suspicion, simply a political argument over whether or not the NYPD could get a budget they didn't currently have dispensed. For this reason, after I was removed from Mayor whilst in custody, Hamburglar wasn't able to get a PK and simply released me the day of. Lastly, I consider this PK to have been conducted horribly. I was simply snatched up, taken to ABI HQ where Hamburglar was seen dragging me by a member of ABI command, driven to a shack near the highway, and shot. There was absolutely no roleplay asides 2 mis-spelt /me's, which were then used to PK me. All that this led to was Hamburglar being photographed conducting it, and seen entering the ABI building. Additional Information: I simply don't understand the reasoning to jump to a PK here, considering there was absolutely no last-resort and I had done nothing to the man for the last 2 days straight. He had already passed up a PK whilst I was in his custody after being fired as Mayor, and decided to PK me 2 days after. PKing former NHC off of a GO Order, after already passing up the chance whilst in custody, and as a high-command member of a criminal enterprise, and conducted in such a manner seems improperly done to me. Additionally, the business I was under may be considered under the ALU, and so I'm not all too certain whether a Senior Moderator could conduct this.

+1 Very active, Seen around a lot during both, quiet hours and peak hours, Has a good understanding of staffing and has previous experience!

+1 known mossad asset

+1 Competent Individual

BIG +1

+1

Lovely young fella, has plenty of experience on the server and staffing as a whole. i beg you accept this man! +1

Introduction Information Section Steam Name: Toast SteamID32 (STEAM_0:X:XXX): STEAM_0:1:29580598 Discord Username/ID: .breadtoasted. / 1070338922862878802 Timezone: GMT Age: 28 Time Played (check with !time): 1w 3d 18h 29m Your current rank(User/Donator/Trusted): User Do you have a mic & will you use it?: Yes Are you consistently active on the forums and server?: Very active on the server, I play daily. The forums I check here and there but can be more active if needed. Did anyone from the Recruitment Team assist you in making your application?: No. Staff Recommendations (Sponsors will be asked to verify): Thomas, happy washing machine, Kurti & meem Basic Information Section IC Character names, ranks, and brief overview of their duties/everyday activities in a list format: Tim Brown, Major in the VSK. Basic overview would be leading the VSK when we go out and do stuff like general patrolling, setting up checkpoints & providing security for those who require it. Setting up training sessions within our faction and resolving any internal conflicts. How long have you been roleplaying?: 3+ years. Have you received any infractions i.e Notes/Bans? If so, what were they for and what could you have done to prevent getting them next time?: None that I'm aware of. Staff Knowledge Section What previous experience so you have as a staff member either within Garry’s Mod or the Nutscript Gamemode? I have been staff on Diverge many times so I have a lot of familiarity with Nutscript. I've also staffed on many DarkRP servers in the past. Why do you believe we should pick you for the Prometheus Networks Staff Team?[300 words or more]: I believe I would be a strong addition to the staff team because of my prior staffing experience and consistent activity. As I mentioned prior I was a Seasoned Admin on Diverge in the past, where I regularly handled ban appeals and player reports on the forums side of things, whilst also dealing with tickets made by players in game. Being a staff member requires a person to remain fair, consistent & level headed even when dealing with players who are frustrated or are confrontational players. I know how to investigate situations thoroughly via logs & use of in game commands. I've been playing the server regularly since it switched over to MITHC and have stayed highly active throughout. Because of that, I've gotten a decent understanding of the player base and some of the common issues that arise such as lack of staff members in early hours. I'm applying as someone who is heavily invested into the server and wants to contribute to the community in a more meaningful way. One area where I believe I can make an immediate difference is staffing during the EU hours. Sometimes there’s barely anyone on, or no one at all, and tickets just sit there. I’m usually online during the early and later EU hours, so I could actually help cut down on those wait times and let people get back to playing instead of sitting around waiting for a response. I also try to stay approachable both in-game and out of it. People are more likely to actually message staff when something’s wrong or they need something clarifying if they know the person they're messaging is easy to talk to and won’t just brush them off. Overall I’ve got the previous experience, I’m on enough to actually cover some of the quieter hours, and I care about the server running smoothly and helping out the community. I’d take it seriously if I got the chance. What are the duties and responsibilities of the position you are applying for in your own words? [150 Words or more]: From what I've gathered from past experiences, the main duties are pretty clear. A big part of it is handling player tickets that get made in-game. That means actually looking into the situation, talking to the people involved when needed, checking logs or using the commands and other tools in game that are available to figure out what happened, and then dealing with it in a way that’s fair. Things can range from simple questions to arguments between players, so you have to be ready and not just take one person’s word at face value. Another part of being staff is dealing with ban appeals and PK appeals, especially when you’re the staff member who issued the original punishment. In those cases you’re expected to go back over the situation, read the appeal properly, and give a proper response instead of just ignoring it or automatically sticking by your first decision. At the end of the day, you have to stay consistent and not take things personally, your main goal is to keep the server enjoyable and balanced for all who play. Notes:

Great honor ... +1

+1, w larps, good kid at the end of the day

This can be resolved in a discord ticket. You can summarize there on what your issue is. From reading part of this you are upset that @Kentuckyfriedhorsehad denied some half done ban appeal. However this is AI and I wont take it seriously when you get AI to do 90% of the work If you really care you can make a discord ticket!

You should kill yourself.

+1 I completely agree with this report. Staff members should be held accountable to the same standards they enforce on the player base. Punishments should be supported by concrete evidence, and appeals should be reviewed objectively rather than based primarily on someone's disciplinary history or personal opinion. The inconsistencies outlined here deserve to be investigated by Upper Administration.

I don’t even think there is a single bit of human in this

Shook is a good friend of mine, very committed to helping out where he can and has very good businesses inside of the server. +1

I aint reading allat

Holy ChatGPT ass copy and paste

Your Name: Donamyslu Your SteamID32: STEAM_0:0:593228317 Staff Members Being Reported: Maverick Kentuckyfriedhorse Staff SteamID32: Maverick: STEAM_0:1:65644683 Kentuckyfriedhorse: STEAM_0:1:93621811 1. Introduction I am submitting this Staff Report to request an investigation into the conduct of Maverick and Kentuckyfriedhorse concerning my original ban and the subsequent handling of my appeal. I want to make something very clear from the beginning: I did not commit the violations being alleged against me. I did not randomly shoot players, I was never shooting people from a rooftop, I did not resist detainment, and I did not LTAP. I also dispute the NITRP, FailRP and RDM allegations used to justify my original punishment. I am not submitting this report merely because I disagree with a punishment or because I am unhappy with an appeal decision. I am submitting it because I believe there are significant inconsistencies between the allegations made against me, the explanations provided by staff, and the published evidence requirements of the server. I understand that staff members have responsibilities and are sometimes required to make decisions based on their own observations. However, those decisions should still be supported by the standards established by Prometheus Networks. I expect those standards to apply consistently, regardless of whether the person being investigated is an ordinary player or a member of the staff team. I will address each staff member and each allegation separately. Timeframe: The relevant incident and subsequent appeal discussion took place throughout this week. The original discussion and the two staff responses were posted at different times. Their exact timestamps are visible in the original forum thread and can be checked directly by Upper Administration. I therefore consider it unnecessary to reproduce individual timestamps here. 2. Maverick – Original Punishment and Allegations The introductory evidence requirements in the official Man in the High Castle Rules state: "Staff cannot act upon an alleged rule break without concrete evidence or having witnessed it themselves." The same section explains that logs may be checked and that witnesses are non-admissible. My original punishment included the following reasons: NITRP FailRP RDM PO (Past Offenses) I categorically dispute the allegations of NITRP, FailRP and RDM in this incident. I did not commit these violations. I would also like the exact past offences relied upon under PO to be identified rather than allowing that label to serve as a general justification for the punishment. When I questioned the original punishment, Maverick provided the following explanation: "If i remember correctly, you were going around shooting people for quite literally no reason, You were resisting detainment and your microphone was absolute ass and caused a lot of spiking despite being asked several times to fix it. I saw you shooting people from a rooftop too i believe. Im not sure if it was you or someone else who LTAP'ed as well but i didnt add it to the reasons." There are several serious issues I would like Upper Administration to investigate. A. Alleged random shooting Maverick claims that I was going around shooting players for absolutely no reason. I categorically deny this allegation. I did not randomly shoot anyone, I did not commit RDM, and I did not go around attacking players without a valid reason. My account of the situation is that I remained at the military base. There was only one other individual present there besides me. I would like the relevant server records examined to establish whether this account is consistent with my recorded location and the actual events. Specifically: Which players was I allegedly shooting? When did these alleged incidents occur? Where did they take place? Is there any damage log showing that I shot or damaged anyone? Is there any kill log identifying me as responsible? What evidence establishes that the alleged shooting was RDM? I am asking for these details because I did not commit the alleged violation, and I want the accusation examined against the actual records rather than accepted simply because it was stated by the original banning staff member. B. Alleged rooftop shooting Maverick specifically stated: "I saw you shooting people from a rooftop too i believe." I want to make this absolutely clear: I WAS NEVER ON A ROOFTOP SHOOTING PEOPLE. I DID NOT COMMIT THIS ALLEGED INCIDENT. I immediately challenged this statement in my original appeal and explicitly requested footage. I have still not received a satisfactory explanation establishing where this alleged incident took place or how Maverick identified me. I find it particularly concerning that an allegation this specific is being presented using the wording "i believe" without any accompanying footage or detailed explanation. I would like Upper Administration to examine my recorded position throughout the relevant timeframe, if such records are available. I would also like the following clarified: Which rooftop was I allegedly on? At what time did this supposedly happen? Which players was I supposedly shooting? Did Maverick personally witness this incident? Was there any recording or other concrete evidence? How was my identity established? I am not asking for special treatment. I am asking for evidence supporting an incident that I maintain never happened. C. Alleged resistance to detainment Maverick also alleges that I was resisting detainment. I dispute this allegation. I WAS NOT BEING DETAINED, AND NOBODY ATTEMPTED TO ARREST ME DURING THE SITUATION I DESCRIBED. I DID NOT RESIST DETAINMENT OR COMMIT THE ALLEGED FAILRP VIOLATION. I have not received a sufficiently detailed explanation of what actions supposedly constituted resistance. I would therefore like clarification regarding: What exact actions am I accused of taking? Which instructions was I allegedly given? How did I supposedly disobey those instructions? When did this occur? What specific evidence supports the allegation? I would like the relevant roleplay records and any available recordings or administrative sit documentation examined. It is not reasonable to expect me to respond meaningfully to an allegation when the actual incident has not been clearly identified. D. Alleged LTAP Maverick explicitly stated: "Im not sure if it was you or someone else who LTAP'ed as well but i didnt add it to the reasons." To be completely clear: I DID NOT LTAP. I DID NOT DISCONNECT TO AVOID CONSEQUENCES, AND I WAS NOT THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ALLEGED INCIDENT. I acknowledge that Maverick stated this was not added as one of the reasons for my original punishment. However, I find it concerning that an allegation involving uncertainty about the identity of the individual responsible was introduced into the discussion surrounding my disciplinary history. If Maverick cannot establish that I was responsible, I do not see why this allegation should have any bearing on the assessment of my appeal. I would like Upper Administration to examine the relevant connection and disconnection records, if retained, and establish whether I was actually responsible. Someone else's potential misconduct should not be attributed to me simply because staff are uncertain about who was involved. E. Alleged NITRP I categorically deny having no intent to roleplay. I did not deliberately avoid roleplay or intentionally disrupt the roleplay situation. I would like Maverick to identify precisely which actions supposedly demonstrated that I had no intent to roleplay and what evidence was used to reach that conclusion. 3. Maverick – Accuracy and Verification of the Original Allegations I believe it is important to distinguish between an allegation being made, an incident being personally witnessed, and an incident being established through reliable evidence. I am not disputing that staff members can act on incidents they personally witness. The published rules explicitly recognise this. However, I am asking whether the allegations in my particular case were accurately identified and whether the original punishment was based on what actually happened. I would like Upper Administration to establish: Which incidents Maverick personally witnessed. Which incidents were established through logs or recordings. Whether the alleged RDM incidents actually involved my character. Whether the alleged rooftop incident was correctly attributed to me. Whether I actually resisted detainment. Whether I was responsible for any LTAP incident, which I categorically deny. Whether the original punishment was based on verified incidents rather than assumptions or mistaken identification. I believe these are entirely reasonable questions when investigating a punishment involving multiple serious allegations. 4. Kentuckyfriedhorse – Handling of My Ban Appeal Kentuckyfriedhorse subsequently reviewed my appeal and provided the following response: "After viewing the discussion and reviewing the logs and your long list of notes. I am wondering if there is any sort of evidence on your end that you could provide to help your case, as I am not seeing anything that would make me personally believe to elevate or shorten this ban. Based on your track record, it does not scream to me that you should be unbanned." My concern is not simply that Kentuckyfriedhorse reached a decision I disagreed with. My concern is that despite claiming to have reviewed the logs, he did not identify which logs supported which allegations or explain how those records established my involvement. Instead, considerable emphasis was placed on my previous track record and his personal assessment of whether I deserved to be unbanned. I understand that previous offences can be relevant when considering disciplinary history. I am not asking for legitimate previous disciplinary records to be ignored. However, having a previous disciplinary history does not prove that I committed the specific violations being alleged in this incident. I disputed the RDM allegations. I denied ever shooting from a rooftop. I denied resisting detainment. I denied LTAP. I also explained that I fixed my microphone when asked. These were specific objections that directly concerned the original punishment. Yet Kentuckyfriedhorse's response did not meaningfully address them. I would like Upper Administration to clarify: Which specific logs did Kentuckyfriedhorse review? What did those logs actually demonstrate? Did he verify my location during the alleged incidents? Did he examine the damage and kill records? Did he independently examine the allegations against me? Why were my specific denials and requests for footage not directly addressed? Was the decision substantially influenced by my previous disciplinary history rather than the evidence concerning this incident? I am not suggesting that Kentuckyfriedhorse was obligated to grant my appeal. I am asking whether the appeal was properly and independently reviewed before the decision was reached. 5. Kentuckyfriedhorse – Request for Witness Statements Another issue I would like investigated is Kentuckyfriedhorse's request for additional evidence. He stated: "Take the time to find clips, or others who witnessed this situation, and have them respond to this thread." The introductory evidence requirements in the Man in the High Castle Rules explicitly state that witnesses are non-admissible. I understand that video recordings and witness statements are two different things. However, I would like clarification regarding why witness statements were specifically requested as supporting material when the published evidence requirements state that witnesses are non-admissible. Were these statements actually intended to be considered evidence in the appeal? If not, what purpose were they intended to serve? I believe staff members should apply the published evidence standards consistently, particularly when handling disciplinary decisions and appeals. I also question why I was being asked to locate people who could support my account when the relevant server-side records should be available for authorised staff to examine, provided those records were retained. 6. Request for Server-Side Evidence Examination I am deliberately not attaching screenshots of individual server logs because I believe the relevant information should be available to authorised staff members through the server's own administrative systems. I am therefore requesting that Upper Administration independently examine the available records associated with the original incident. In particular, I would like the following checked: A. Player location records Examine my recorded position throughout the relevant timeframe, particularly whether I remained at the military base and whether I was ever at the alleged rooftop. I maintain that I was never on a rooftop shooting players. B. Damage records Examine whether I dealt damage to any players during the alleged incidents. I maintain that I did not randomly shoot or attack players. C. Kill records Examine whether I killed anyone during the relevant timeframe, who was allegedly involved, and when these events occurred. I dispute the allegation that I committed RDM. D. Roleplay and detainment records Examine any available records or administrative sit documentation relating to the alleged detainment. I maintain that I did not resist detainment or commit the alleged FailRP violation. E. Connection and disconnection records Examine the relevant connection and disconnection records, if retained. I maintain that I did not LTAP or leave to avoid consequences. F. Original administrative records Examine the original ban documentation, administrative sit records, and any recordings or evidence available to Maverick when issuing the punishment. G. Appeal review records Examine what records Kentuckyfriedhorse actually reviewed and whether the allegations were independently verified before the appeal decision was reached. I specifically request that any relevant records still available be preserved and examined before a final determination is made. I believe this would provide a considerably more objective understanding of what happened than relying exclusively on recollections or assumptions. 7. Request for an Independent Investigation Under General Rule 35 of the Man in the High Castle Rules, disputes regarding staff decisions may be brought to a higher-ranking staff member or through a forum Staff Report. I am therefore formally requesting that this matter be reviewed by someone who was not directly involved in the original punishment or appeal decision. Specifically, I would like Upper Administration to investigate: Whether Maverick had sufficient evidence or firsthand observations to justify the original RDM allegation, which I deny committing. Whether the rooftop shooting allegation was accurately attributed to me, which I categorically deny ever doing. Whether I actually resisted detainment, which I deny. Whether I was responsible for an LTAP incident, which I deny. Whether the NITRP and FailRP allegations were supported by concrete evidence, which I deny. What specific logs Maverick relied upon when issuing the punishment. Which specific logs Kentuckyfriedhorse reviewed when assessing my appeal. Whether Kentuckyfriedhorse independently examined the allegations rather than relying primarily on Maverick's recollection. Why witness statements were requested despite the published non-admissibility requirement. Whether my previous disciplinary history influenced the appeal decision more than the evidence relating to this particular incident. Whether the published evidence requirements were followed throughout the original punishment and subsequent appeal. I believe these questions deserve clear and direct answers. 8. Evidence and Relevant Links 1. Original Ban Appeal https://prn.gg/topic/2620-ban-appeal/ This is the central source of information for this report. It contains: My original ban appeal and the stated reasons for punishment. Maverick's allegations. My denial of the alleged random shooting. My explicit denial of ever shooting people from a rooftop. My request for footage. My denial of resisting detainment. Maverick's admission of uncertainty regarding LTAP. Kentuckyfriedhorse's response claiming to have reviewed the logs. Kentuckyfriedhorse's request for clips or witnesses. My subsequent objections and requests for clarification. 9. Additional Information I want to emphasise that I am not demanding that either staff member be dismissed simply because I disagree with their decisions. I am requesting an impartial investigation into their conduct and the procedures followed during my punishment and appeal. I categorically deny the allegations discussed throughout this report. I did not randomly shoot players. I was never shooting people from a rooftop. I did not resist detainment. I did not LTAP. I dispute the NITRP, FailRP and RDM accusations made against me. I acknowledge that my microphone experienced technical issues, but I addressed them when requested. I am asking that these denials be examined against the actual server records rather than dismissed because of my previous disciplinary history. I also want to make clear that I understand staff members have discretion. However, that discretion should be exercised consistently with the published rules and evidence requirements. I expect ordinary players to be held accountable for their actions, and I believe staff members should be held to the same standards of accountability when issuing punishments and reviewing appeals. I would appreciate a direct response to the concerns outlined above, an independent examination of the available records, and a determination of whether any procedural shortcomings or staff misconduct occurred. I am submitting this report in good faith and expect it to be reviewed impartially, without being dismissed simply because I am the individual who originally received the punishment. Thank you for taking the time to review my report.

Hey hey hey, I'm sure a lot of people who are new to the server wonder why the kits/weapons used by their faction aren't something they just 'spawn' with, and instead have to go to a vendor each time and spend their own money to purchase and use them. There are a multitude of reasons for this: 1. If you just spawned with the kit each time, it wouldn't be an item within the NutScript framework and therefore wouldn't be in your inventory when you spawn. This would prevent weapons from being stripped off you, as the restraints system requires you to access another player's inventory and take the weapon from there. 2. During active conflicts, money is a real factor. This prevents civil wars from lasting forever, as eventually one side will run out of money. It also forces generals to pick their fights a little more carefully. No general is going to waste their limited budget on a raid that will gain nothing for their faction. (Ideally) At the end of the day, it is the responsibility of your command to ensure money is distributed throughout the ranks. Of course, this system isn't perfect, which is why there are other ways to earn money, such as fishing, mining, or just taking a bribe . However, good command should ensure their personnel are properly funded to carry out their day-to-day duties. In regards to weapon prices within the vendor, that is something handled in character, with specific characters being responsible for the supply of firearms within vendors. While some item prices are controlled by Upper Administration, and yes, they can be changed at will, doing so would mean a price decrease for every faction, not just the NYPD. This would then defeat the points I made earlier regarding active conflicts and civil wars. Hopefully, this helps answer your questions. I only decided to respond because I noticed this had been left open for a while. Enjoy!

+1 Plays by the rules, generally a clean dude with a solid reputation.

+1 always putting in work, great RP, I always see him around the city on staff and in RP. I think he would be a great staff member

+1

+1 Prometheus staff doesn't have enough asian staff some diversity is needed