[Belvue]

IÂ’m going to keep this factual and concise.

The ban dispute is separate from the issue raised in this thread. This thread is about terms/compliance of the public donation setup, not a moderation appeal.

For clarity:

1. I reported the platinum issue privately first and did not publish exploit mechanics publicly.
2. The response did not address the report with a technical rebuttal; it relied on personal accusations and public narrative framing instead.
3. The public summary presented as an "audit" does not include a verifiable timeline with supporting timestamps and includes assertions not supported by the available source/log evidence.
4. Claims about what was "spent", "hidden", or "intentional" should be supported by auditable logs and reproducible evidence, not character attacks.
5. I am willing to have the incident and report reviewed by a neutral third party using source and log evidence.

Separate from that, the compliance question remains independently verifiable from public pages:

- donations are solicited via Ko-fi,
- donation language ties funding to server operations/development,
- public funding runway/reserve information is displayed,
and donation flow allows character-name references.

If there is written approval/exception permitting this model, provide it and that resolves the question. If not, the question remains whether changes are required.

I will not post exploit details publicly. I will continue to stick to documented facts and responsible disclosure.