RMT V6 Appeal

[Starzeee]

Hello! I don’t believe my ban for Starzee is correct. Could I have this reviewed please?

[Kestrel]

You were banned for paying real money to be boosted from level 46 to level 60 on 08-18 through 08-20.

[Starzeee]

I was boosted but I never paid any money??

[Kestrel]

Sounds like you should try to explain more then hu...

waiting.gif (1.77 MiB) Viewed 328 times

[Starzeee]

There's not much else to really say. I had a friend boost my account and boost me to 60. I know it's against to rules to pay money for boosting, so I found a buddy who was willing to boost for me as long as I helped him out on his toon.

[Terribletank]

Let me start by saying this:

1. I'm against RMT
2. I'm against boosting (paid or not)

Boosting creates shit players because they jump into a leveled toon without knowing their class. Sadly the group and the raid always pays the price; i have to kick them because they dont know how to polly, aoe every pull, charge mobs before the tank even tags them, cant comprehend target assignments and kill order, etc.

That being said, and not suggesting that the appellant counter argument is factual, the real question is how can it be determined if its telling the truth or not? Furthermore, what is the definition of the rule violation? is it a prohibition of boosting, or a prohibition of paid or purchased boosting?

Personally id argue the easiest way to nullify the argument would be to prohibit all boosting; however in that regard, i'm likely guilty of boosting players as well. There have been countless times ive been standing around and watch someone spam for an hour for a tank or a healer for a lower level dungeon. Many times ive jumped into that dungeon just to help the group out and allow them to complete the run. Did i ask to be paid, of course not; was payment ever offered, no; did i boost them, yea, in a way, i probably did. Again the intent wasn't to "run them" per say; however, did the group benefit from a higher level toon?

In this case, and even if the appellant's counter claim is factual, will there ever be any way to verify if the boosting was paid or not? Either way its clear that the account owner is garbage for attempting to obtain a boost, but if there is no way to determine an actual violation of the rules, should it be banned? This is one of those cases where a non ban sanction should be implemented. The boosted should be subjected to posting a video, verifying it is the account holder, and performing 100 pushups, 100 burpees, completing a 1k run, and submitting proof that it brushed its teeth and bathed properly prior to regaining access to the boosted account.

*No im not joking, punishments like this can save these folks. And, if it offends again, the punishment will be enhanced by it having to send in proof that it's actively seeking employment as well.