My respond to the accusations

Dear community,

I was silent through the days and analysed my clips and the replays that were given to me. It took me a while to write my appeal but now i am ready to publish it. I hope everyone understands my position and how i have been treated unfairly in this case.


Link to the my document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CB9qxa5Awmjdd27koQ22G8jwQ3sjLmczzJgbd3MiivQ/edit?usp=sharing




Seeking

Is every involved party OK with you publishing what appears to be private conversations between you and them?

I do not think that it is productive to partially release parts of conversations that you clearly edited. Nothing makes sense, dates and times don't even match up with what you say. There are only snippets that show you are effectively trying to cover up.

Also, you are being constantly rude towards A_E especially at the end of your document. He clearly put a lot of thought and effort into this, whereas you're saying that he's emotionally unstable and abusing power. That is totally unacceptable. No need to be rude.

Your response makes your position even worse in this whole shitfest.

edit:

Just accept that you've been caught red-handed and move on.

To quickly talk about the screenshots from the private Discord PM threads...

The comments from me are snippets from literally 1000s of messages, including the process of going through replays and seeing clips. Yes I got super emotive at first, the idea that I had given community donated funds to a possible cheater was very upsetting.

What isn't shown is me asking people to be unbiased, being calm, and professional and trying to do what's best. So many parts of that long ass two week conversation are of a group of dudes just trying to figure out what's true.

The referee involved in talking to Kimbo/Flap in private messaages is Sturmtigergadafi, he's an excellent community member of high repute that has his own way with words yes, but he's a well trusted and outspoken guy that has his own style. He also likes to 'get shit done' and is forthright and upfront, he will make no apologies about that.

Also I told you the way I was going to go with this FIRST, two days prior to announcing (proof: https://i.imgur.com/Dx8srws.png) . I was asked by others to only rely on facts and stop the conjecture of opinion vs. opinion. It was never a case of "oh a vocal minority of people don't believe my anti seeking propaganda time to change tact" it was a clear way forward presented to you first, yet you chose to ignore me.

Everyone that saw the three replays of 'Deadbolt' beating top 2v2 players with CPM above 100 in the weeks after the first warning thought it was you, and I think it was logical deduction to make. You were asked about it, you chose to ignore me, you also lied in the past when first asked about playing on the Deadbolt account. I stand by our actions here, and won't apologise for things I said in private.

Is every involved party OK with you publishing what appears to be private conversations between you and them?

I do not think that it is productive to partially release parts of conversations that you clearly edited.


Also, you are being constantly rude towards A_E especially at the end of your document. He clearly put a lot of thought and effort into this, whereas you're saying that he's emotionally unstable and abusing power. That is totally unacceptable.

No, since this screenshot were made without knowing from the group!

Also interesting. I had for few days ago a voice call with seeking and even told him, that if he wants to make something public from me, he should go and show it me before!

He said, sure he will.

He did not...

Do I have my timeline wrong?

>Seeking is privately accused (this is good).

>Evidence is privately taken to Relic (this is good).

>Relic concludes (according to Sturmpanther's screenshot, I don't want to speak on behalf of Relic) there is nothing definitive.

>You get mad and make the evidence public (this is bad) and make a video smearing Seeking's reputation.

>You ask him to make a document explaining himself and tell him that there will be a vote regarding any punishment.

>Before he's even finished with his document, you decide to ban him for a year on even less concrete evidence than the alleged map hacking evidence and say that you don't give a fuck about the document that you asked him to make.

Edit: Oh yeah, and somewhere in there you suggest contacting the police and lying to them.

Do I have my timeline wrong?


>Before he's even finished with his document, you decide to ban him for a year on even less concrete evidence than the alleged map hacking evidence and say that you don't give a fuck about the document that you asked him to make.

Edit: Oh yeah, and somewhere in there you suggest contacting the police and lying to them.

No wonder he gotta swap to the same cheap ambush tactics with confidential material, utilised by some of the accusers.

To make things worst, you are EDITING the document in real-time in response to what we are saying in this thread and on discord.

Total shit fest of a response.

Let me ask you people a simple question, are your lives really that boring and easy that you decide to try and start drama on the internet?

I don't know about any of you but I work for a living and it's funny and at the same time sad to see all of this from the sidelines.

Games are made for entertainment purposes but instead of having fun while playing them some people instead decide to make a soap opera from it instead.

Now granted my opinion is that of a casual person that just plays for fun after work to relax and chill out and not play competitively for money in tournaments and so forth, but purely out of looking at it from a different angle just hold up for a sec, lean back and think about it in reality of what you're doing.

I just really miss the good old days of even the competitive scene of the old CoH being a friendly sportsmanship show between 2 or more people, even if there were bugs or broken and unbalanced shit involved people laughed it off, shook hands at the end of it and continued on with their lives.

Im not completely through the document but some parts are horrific.
Did you seriously want to threaten Seeking in real life?! Dont know what to say but thats some fucked up shit if thats true

Threaten to ban kimbo (who i thought was proven to be clean?) unless he admits to play with a cheater?

I won't hop in to defend my clanmate and friend, I'll hop in to defend someone who got shit on, including by me.

I don't think it was the good call to publish screenshots from these moments, which were probably (like the clips though) out of context. I wish some names were hidden as well but too late.

But that threat on Kimbo is too much for multiple reasons :

1) He already got punished for what he did before. Double punishment is forbidden by most constitutional systems in the western countries, and that's only to quote the ones I'm aware of. I'd not recommend to proceed to do it.

2) In the hypothesis where Seeking is cheating, Kimbo would be punished for having unwavering faith, which most of us don't have, in his friend, without malicious intent.

3) Giving the option to come clean? How about letting the defendent answer to the accusations first? Adversarial system is still a thing if I'm not mistaken.

>You ask him to make a document explaining himself and tell him that there will be a vote regarding any punishment.

>Before he's even finished with his document, you decide to ban him for a year on even less concrete evidence than the alleged map hacking evidence and say that you don't give a fuck about the document that you asked him to make.

He suggested doing this, I say it's a good idea asked him to release it last Friday so I can include it asap.

Edit: Oh yeah, and somewhere in there you suggest contacting the police and lying to them.

No, wtf, I was going to suggest if it's proven 100% hacking and taking of community donated funds, that a complaint was made to the police. This was a silly emotional statement in a private message thread based on an initially upsetting situation, it was not a genuine intention.

I was the one speaking with Kimbo and unfortunately the conversation does not show prior context nor does it mention I also talked to Flap (Kimbo's irl brother, Deadbolt account's AT partner).

Due to his relationship with Flap, I openly asked Kimbo to confirm several replays involving Deadbolt which I received from community members with heavy indication of Seeking's playstyle. KIMBO REFUSED TO EITHER CONFIRM OR DENY Seeking's involvement into said replays at which point I got pissed off and threatened him with ML participation. For those of you who don't know all of the people mentioned above are hanging out in the same Discord on nightly basis and it is really impossible for them to not know who is playing when. A simple yes or no would have sufficed.

@Seeking and @Kimbo feel free to release the unredacted version. I got nothing to hide. I stand by everything I said in there.

This community is a Joke.

Just a quick reminder to keep it civil lads!

He suggested doing this, I say it's a good idea asked him to release it last Friday so I can include it asap.

I stand corrected, the document was Seeking's idea, but you agreed to allow him to create it but still banned him for a year before he was ready to release it? Essentially you wanted to give him the chance to defend himself, which was noble of you and the right thing to do... but then you pulled the rug out from under his feet at the last minute and went back on the deal.

I stand corrected, the document was Seeking's idea, but you agreed to allow him to create it but still banned him for a year before he was ready to release it? Essentially you wanted to give him the chance to defend himself, which was noble of you and the right thing to do... but then you pulled the rug out from under his feet at the last minute and went back on the deal.

There was no deal related to repeating the previous offence. This was determined based on further investigation.

Seeking is still free to attempt to clear his name for hacking accusations.

I stand corrected, the document was Seeking's idea, but you agreed to allow him to create it but still banned him for a year before he was ready to release it? Essentially you wanted to give him the chance to defend himself, which was noble of you and the right thing to do... but then you pulled the rug out from under his feet at the last minute and went back on the deal.

Doing a subjective opinion vs. opinion community vote without a procedure to go off was only ever an idea and a possibility discussed verbally with Seeking, what was a certainty was the proposal I put to Seeking two days before the announcement at 3pm GMT on the 15th of March. https://i.imgur.com/Dx8srws.png

This was ignored.

Lol, reporting to the Berlin police, are you serious?

Lol, reporting to the Berlin police, are you serious?

|

No I wasn't serious. In my initial thinking upon finally being 100% convinced I'd seen someone use hacks to win publicly donated funds, I said something stupid in a 2000 message private pm thread.. I dont' think people took me seriously, and I certainly didn't say anything similar after I had calmed down.

Now who's taking things out of context? Snipping private dms is a weird move

If you boosted an account for a tourney that's a lifetime ban from tourneys in most other games. Saying you've been treated unfairly here doesn't seem accurate