⚖ This matter is of grave public concern — Spread the word ⚖
Wrongful Ban — Active Dispute
Free KOTH
"Justice delayed is justice denied — and this ban was denied justice from the start."
Docket
KOTH-001
Filed
April 2026
Counsel
Law Offices of Whatever It Takes
Status
Pending Relief
FREE KOTH NOW // RELEASE THE BAN LOGS // DUE PROCESS WAS VIOLATED // THE BAN REASON WAS FABRICATED // FREE KOTH NOW // RELEASE THE BAN LOGS // DUE PROCESS WAS VIOLATED // THE BAN REASON WAS FABRICATED // FREE KOTH NOW // RELEASE THE BAN LOGS // DUE PROCESS WAS VIOLATED // THE BAN REASON WAS FABRICATED //
The Situation
On or about a recent date, the group known as KOTH was subjected to a ban so arbitrary, so procedurally flawed, so transparently unjust — that this office had no choice but to intervene.
KOTH, a group of upstanding server citizens with an unblemished record of contributing to this community, was summarily removed from the server without warning, without evidence, and without due process. The ban reason provided was vague at best, fabricated at worst.
We have reviewed the record. We have consulted the statutes. We have examined the ban logs — what little of them we were permitted to see. Our conclusion is unambiguous: this ban cannot stand.
"They didn't ban KOTH because they broke the rules. They banned KOTH because KOTH was winning."
Violations & Relief Sought
Procedural Violations
No prior warning issued
Accuser identity withheld
Appeal offered after one full year
Ban logs not produced
No impartial review conducted
Evidence not presented to accused
Ban reason vague & unsubstantiated
Relief Sought
Full reinstatement of KOTH
Unredacted ban logs released
Public apology in Discord
All charges expunged from record
Acknowledgment of wrongdoing
Established Truths
Two facts form the entire foundation of this matter.
I —
The ban was issued without a formal warning — in direct contravention of any reasonable moderation standard, community guideline, or basic principle of fair conduct recognized by this or any other server.
II —
The stated reason for the ban was vague, conclusory, and devoid of any factual basis sufficient to sustain a punitive action of this magnitude. It does not meet the threshold. It does not come close to the threshold. It is an embarrassment to the concept of a threshold.
These two facts alone are sufficient to vacate the ban in its entirety. Everything that follows is simply us being thorough.
"The absence of evidence is, in this case, the evidence of absence — of any legitimate basis whatsoever."
Controlling Legal Precedent — U.S. Supreme Court
This office draws the attention of server administration to the following decisions of the highest court in the United States, each of which speaks directly to the conduct at issue here.
470 U.S. 532 · 1985
Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill
The Supreme Court held unanimously that individuals cannot be deprived of a protected interest without first receiving notice and an opportunity to respond. The "Loudermill Right" — the right to be heard before adverse action is taken — is now considered a bedrock of American procedural law.
→ Applied here: KOTH received no hearing before the ban. The appeal that was eventually offered came one full year after the ban was executed — at which point the harm was complete, the damage was done, and the offer was an insult dressed as a remedy.
424 U.S. 319 · 1976
Mathews v. Eldridge
The Court established the definitive three-part balancing test for due process: (1) the private interest at stake; (2) the risk of erroneous deprivation through the procedures used; and (3) the burden on the authority of providing greater safeguards.
→ Applied here: KOTH's interest was substantial. The risk of erroneous deprivation was 100%. The burden of issuing a single warning before banning was, by any reasonable measure, zero. The math does not favor administration.
408 U.S. 564 · 1972
Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth
The Court affirmed that where a legitimate expectation of continued participation exists, that expectation constitutes a protected interest that cannot be stripped without cause and process.
→ Applied here: KOTH had every reasonable expectation of continued server membership. That expectation was obliterated without cause, without warning, and without a scrap of documented evidence.
Damages Claimed
Our clients have suffered materially and reputationally.
Material Damages
Lost server time (unrecoverable)
Progress forfeited upon ban
Missed server events during ban
Emotional distress (severe)
Strategic disadvantage to rivals
Reputational Damages
Public ban visible to all members
Implied guilt with no finding of fact
Standing in community undermined
Future server applications prejudiced
Group morale: critically impacted
This office reserves the right to amend the damages claimed as further evidence comes to light. We anticipate that the ban logs, once produced, will significantly expand this section.
A Note on Resolution
Our clients are reasonable people. They have not sought this conflict. They sought only to play. To compete. To thrive within a community they respected and supported. That opportunity was stripped from them through a process that was rushed, biased, and unworthy of this server's stated values.
Furthermore, the belated offer of an appeal — arriving not within any reasonable window, but a full year after the ban was executed — is not due process. It is a formality extended at a point when the harm was already complete and the insult fully compounded. An appeal offered one year later is not remediation. It is theater.
We are prepared to resolve this matter quickly and without further incident. Our clients bear no ill will toward server administration and remain hopeful that a reasonable outcome can be reached by all parties in a spirit of mutual respect and good faith.
At the end of the day, we just want to play. That's all KOTH ever wanted. We trust that senior administration, upon reflection, will find it in their hearts to do the right thing. We believe in this community. We believe in Koko's Crib. We believe, perhaps naively, in justice.
Thank you for your time and consideration. We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
Law Offices of Whatever It Takes
Counsel for KOTH et al. — Est. the moment this ban dropped