Hugheackman - Code of Conduct Appeal

[jdc4654]

User hugheackman has appealed their recent punishment of conduct detrimental to the league, found here. (https://forums.sim-football.com/showthre...?tid=52376)

After reviewing the details surrounding the remarks, the Appeals team has reached a decision to uphold the decision by DSFL Head Office, although it was not unanimous.

The majority opinion found that the comments made by the defendant falls under the Contract Detrimental to the League (IX.C.1.a) as outlined by Head Office in their punishment post.

The Appeals Team found that 5 league members, including two DSFL GMs, publicly told the user to tone down their rhetoric. However, the user continued to push the boundaries and make remarks that fall under the rulebook subsection outlined above.

The majority opinion found that a reasonable user would have stopped and/or reached out to leadership for further clarification of what is and isn’t acceptable in our league spaces. Additionally, after the user was advised to change his rhetoric, he issued an apology which appeared to be a word for word recreation of an Antonio Brown apology. While some comments and jokes may not be as harsh or as offensive as others, we all have to be conscious and sensitive of our fellow league members and their personal/cultural experiences.

Although Appeals recommends upholding the decision, we are not affirming Head Office’s view that CDL cases should not be subject to reduction due to a user being new and reserve the right to recommend such in a future case as the facts warrant.

We all need to work together to report and educate newer users when it comes to our expectations in our great league. If you see anything that may cross the line, please notify Head Office or Rookie Mentors so they are able to coach and guide the user before it goes too far.

- The Appeals Team voted 5-3 in favor of upholding the original punishment. bwestfield recused himself from the case.

[HoodKirby]

Additionally, after the user was advised to change his rhetoric, he issued an apology which appeared to be a word for word recreation of an Antonio Brown apology.

Holy my lungs

[jreed12]

Additionally, after the user was advised to change his rhetoric, he issued an apology which appeared to be a word for word recreation of an Antonio Brown apology. 

Chat clip that

[OrangeJulius]

Appeals partial L. 5-3 is crazy though and considering it took this long means it was deadlocked for a quick min. The recommendation of potentially lower CDL punishments along with RM’s very clearly defining the line is extremely needed.

[Thor]

Appeals partial L. 5-3 is crazy though and considering it took this long means it was deadlocked for a quick min. The recommendation of potentially lower CDL punishments along with RM’s very clearly defining the line is extremely needed.

There's a rulebook quiz as a part of the RPT, mandatory agreement to the rules before participation in rookie discord and in this case several warnings from people in chat to try and redirect the energy away from topics/themes that may lead to CDL punishments.

However with all of that said, it's not as simple as our team clearly defining the line because it's not our line to define - we aren't involved with punishments and don't have a say in what is/isn't acceptable from a league standpoint. If you want a definition for that, it would be a HO responsibility. We can, and regularly do provide feedback to rookies as to what HO considers acceptable - how that is received and acted upon is up to the individual from there.

[McGriddy10]

ISFL APPEALS W