User Papalinator has appealed their recent punishment of a tampering violation, found here.
The Appeals Team finds that the remark does fit the definition of tampering in the Rulebook (Sec. V. A. 1.) and agrees with DSFL Head Office in that sentiment.
Considering that Papalinator is a new user who had not received any prior warnings before the punishment, the Appeals Team recommends to reduce their fine from $5 million to $2 million. While DSFL Head Office reviewed several tampering cases in order to determine proper precedent, there was one unreviewed case found here that is too similar not to rely on. Both cases involve a new user who was only a part of the community for a few months, and the conduct was not determined to be more than an ill-informed attempt at a joke.
In other previous instances of tampering violations, fines of $5 million were imposed. However, those users had either received warnings beforehand or had been longer-tenured in the league. Tampering, even in jest, must still be acknowledged as impermissible, and the Appeals Team holds that a punishment is still appropriate.
Tampering penalties are assessed on a case-by-case basis as specified in Section V. B. 1. of the Rulebook. The Appeals Team finds that the previous case mentioned aligns closely with the circumstances of the current case and recommends a reduction of the fine. All other aspects of the punishment are affirmed.
The vote was unanimous.
Appeals Team restates its comment in the LB3737 appeal that being a new user does not, by itself, automatically qualify you for a lighter punishment. It is the responsibility of every new user to educate themselves on the rules, and it is the responsibility of every DSFL GM to assist new users with their education.
The Appeals Team finds that the remark does fit the definition of tampering in the Rulebook (Sec. V. A. 1.) and agrees with DSFL Head Office in that sentiment.
Considering that Papalinator is a new user who had not received any prior warnings before the punishment, the Appeals Team recommends to reduce their fine from $5 million to $2 million. While DSFL Head Office reviewed several tampering cases in order to determine proper precedent, there was one unreviewed case found here that is too similar not to rely on. Both cases involve a new user who was only a part of the community for a few months, and the conduct was not determined to be more than an ill-informed attempt at a joke.
In other previous instances of tampering violations, fines of $5 million were imposed. However, those users had either received warnings beforehand or had been longer-tenured in the league. Tampering, even in jest, must still be acknowledged as impermissible, and the Appeals Team holds that a punishment is still appropriate.
Tampering penalties are assessed on a case-by-case basis as specified in Section V. B. 1. of the Rulebook. The Appeals Team finds that the previous case mentioned aligns closely with the circumstances of the current case and recommends a reduction of the fine. All other aspects of the punishment are affirmed.
The vote was unanimous.
Appeals Team restates its comment in the LB3737 appeal that being a new user does not, by itself, automatically qualify you for a lighter punishment. It is the responsibility of every new user to educate themselves on the rules, and it is the responsibility of every DSFL GM to assist new users with their education.