The goal of this policy is to protect both the community and individual players by making sure admin decisions are fair, evidence-based, and handled professionally.
Fair Treatment
All players have the right to be treated fairly and respectfully by staff and other members of the community. Admin action should not be based on rumors, personal dislike, frustration, repeated accusations without evidence, or because a player is simply better than average.
- Players should not be targeted because of personality conflicts, skill level, squad affiliation, or past disagreements.
- Staff should separate personal opinion from rule enforcement.
- Players should receive a clear explanation when serious action is taken against them.
Admin Review Before Serious Action
If a player is accused of cheating, exploiting, harassment, or breaking server rules, the matter should be reviewed properly by the admin team before serious action is taken.
Any serious action, including a ban or supervision requirement, should be based on evidence reviewed by the admin team. If a player is banned or placed under supervision and no evidence exists, then that decision should be reviewed.
- Serious action should be recorded with the reason, date, and reviewing admin where possible.
- Admin teams should look for patterns, reliable evidence, and context before deciding.
- Where possible, staff who are directly involved in a dispute should not be the only people reviewing it.
Evidence and Privacy
Evidence may include reports, recordings, screenshots, logs, demos, admin observations, or other relevant information. However, not all evidence can always be provided directly or publicly to the accused player.
In some cases, Delta Warzone may need to protect the identity of the reporting player, keep admin tools or methods private, or avoid exposing information that could be misused.
The accused player should still be given a clear reason for the action taken against them. Where possible, staff should provide a summary of the evidence or explain what behavior raised concern without exposing private reports, protected tools, or sensitive information.
- Evidence should be handled privately by staff and only shared when appropriate.
- Reports made in good faith should be protected from retaliation.
- Players should not demand private admin tools, hidden logs, reporter names, or sensitive investigation details.
Public Accusations and Reputation Damage
Repeated public accusations of cheating without proof are not acceptable. If players believe someone is cheating, exploiting, or breaking server rules, they should report it properly through the correct channels and provide evidence where possible.
- Do not repeatedly accuse someone in public chat, voice, forums, or squad spaces without proof.
- Do not harass a player, encourage others to target them, or try to damage their reputation.
- Public accusations, harassment, or reputation attacks may result in warnings or further action.
Appeals and Independent Review
Players should have the opportunity to appeal serious decisions. Appeals should be reviewed fairly by staff who were not directly involved in the original decision where possible.
- Appeals should be submitted through the official appeal form or approved contact channel.
- Players should explain why they believe the decision was incorrect and include any evidence they have.
- Appeal reviewers may uphold, reduce, modify, or overturn an action after reviewing the available information.
- Repeated abusive or duplicate appeals may be closed without a full review.
Player Responsibilities During Reviews
Players are expected to follow the server rules, respect staff decisions during reviews, and use the correct reporting or appeal channels instead of causing public arguments or harassment.
- Stay respectful when communicating with staff or other players.
- Use the correct reporting or appeal channel instead of escalating drama publicly.
- Provide honest information. False reports, edited evidence, or misleading claims may result in action.
- Do not evade a ban, mute, supervision requirement, or other restriction while a review is active.