I want to make this perfectly clear i am 100% unbias to both these people, but the banning mod has this all wrong. Ban case crakrjack perma banned by dirty ninja for nick abuse [BAN APPEAL] Crakrjack [Dirty Ninja] | Skyblock Forums report here: Nick abuse! (Crakrjack) | Skyblock Forums So Im looking at this and thinking how does one get banned permanently for nick abuse. The following screens were used as evidence, but clearly you can see that 2 people took the name ilemonz. I will explain in more detail. it shows crakr did indeed use the name ilemonz when the post was made. however in the next screen we see imalegand also with the same name. Now conveniently silent became imalegand after crackr was threatened with a report. In that window of time imalegend had plenty opportunity to change his nick and leave crakr with the nick ilemonz. on each screen you can see that 3 people had the same nick and in my time. (playing a little prank, sorry, i would do a nick, write a sentance then copy and paste /nick (my nick) before anyone could tell i changed which is what imalegand probably did). But heres the real winner: Cracker was using ilemonz colour (yellow) when chatting, and the message that was posted about free diamonds is in white. The smiley after is in yellow, however cannot be proven to have come from crackr because ilemonz (prodigy) was chatting. The evidence supporting ilemonz claims may show something that looks like crackr nick abusing to cause spam, but on deeper inspection shows that there are 2 people who should be in question and stories that dont add up. I, now in response to dirty asking crackr whether he could provided evidence it was not him, will pose this question: How is one meant to screen themselves not messaging ilemonz and nick abusing? How are you meant to prove your innocent on a crime when clearly, it is impossible. How is one to know they would need to defend themselves because they did nothing wrong and were surprised by the situation. By time crackr had looked at chat and (if he could) try to get evidence, the person responsible would have changed his name back and lemon already had 'alleged' proof. It is not fair to punish crackr when there is clear proof there is another possible person involved, and ban him because crackr had no evidence to back himself up when it is clearly ridiculous to suggest he give proof of innocence in that situation. Unless there is more evidence than the 2 screens, crackr should be unbanned (at least temp banned if you consider changing the nick to ilemonz is nick abuse). No offense to ilemonz, or imalegend,
Thanks for your support Krissy. I only used the nick to highlight what i think is an error in the following image. Ever helpful as I am. According to this image which can be viewed by typing '/help essentials 2', I used the /nick feature exactly as it is intended to be used. As for posting free diamonds, I did not do that and as you say, I obviously cannot produce any evidence that I didn't do it. No more than any other donor that was logged in at the time could provide proof that THEY did not do it. And there is certainly no proof showing that I did. I realise that while unfortunate that this happened, there is no way that the determine who posted that. However tkjpie questioned IAmALegend123 after this happened and apparently his response was suspicious. What is obvious to you and me and several others that have been surprised by this, is not so obvious to some.
Actually if you look at the terminology it says "or that of another player" meaning if you have mod rights, you can change the nick of another player, not change your nick the same as another players nick. sorry
well spotted, i miss read that but at any rate I dont believe im guilty of nick abuse and the matter at the center of this is the posting of free diamonds.
Most were on different ones, some cases people with power, other cases Youtubers, but no mods from what I see.
Mine was a permaban, got unbanned like 2 days later, WAS a permaban (I think). The archives were destroyed, so no way to look at it.
The problem is 2 people used the same nick, and then one person got banned. ilemonz is actually prodigy (dont know full ign), the name which was used by crackr and imalegend. The proof is no all that accurate to the situation, and crackr was asked to supply proof he was innocent which is quite impossible since he cant prove it was imalegend since he changed his nick back, and crackr, unfortunetly was left looking like he did the crime. Which i have pointed out from the screens is impossible. crackrs appeal was denied. It should have been temp ban since it was only another player, and theres no hard evidence it was him who sent the message on chat.
DUDE BACK ME UP PLEAAASSSSEEEEEE! He got mad at me in messages for unarchiving the appeal ;-; The /nick isn't a player's name but a /nick used by them, you should be unbanned, I've said this like three times now.
I didn't exactly take over it, I said this "I don't at all intend on being disrespectful towards you, Dirty, however, can you please reconsider this appeal since the username is not an actual username but it's a /nick meaning in a way it isn't at all completely a major issue and what could be considered something perm bannable." I now have a bone to pick with you, don't delete my posts when it beneficial something.
Dirty, you've told me to re-appeal but then stated that I've obviously nick abused. That is you have already made up your mind on it so what is the point in re appealing because I would only ask the same and that is that you provide proof that it was me who did it and in order to do that you would need to prove that IAmALegend didn't. I have not seen this evidence but you claim that what you have is proof, I cannot see it, nor can anyone who has posted in this thread.
