Jon on the other hand has been one of my best friends for almost 7 years. Never, EVER have I known him to be an immoral person. He's a lot like myself-he speaks his mind, he's honest and he is definitely one to make things right however he can. He's returned every card I've let him borrow and some I'm pretty sure were never mine to begin with. Even after all this drama I would trust him with almost any item I own. The man has an unyielding moral compass and a strong sense of guilt-a sense I'm not sure if Gino has at all. Jon maintains that he tried to only take from the suitcase what was his. Everything else was given back. Gino, if he stole the laptop, took advantage of the situation and Jon's distraction. I don't think that Jon would just let Gino take someone elses laptop. He's one of the few people I've known to have the courage to stand up to Gino. In fact, you never even see the laptop. If Gino stole it he probably kept it in the bag, hidden from Jon as well.
You (to your credit) state your obvious bias for Jon, then sidetrack your whole argument about people not having all the information making assumptions by making up your hypothetical scenario.
Jon has had his deckbox stolen locally before and he had no reason to target Jason in the bathroom. Like I said, Jon believed that he was on good terms with Jason. I don't think there was any bad intent there, the incident was just poorly timed relative to the whole Laptop affair.
Wrong, you don't know that as you have only anecdotal accounts from Jon himself. It's okay to think he's innocent until proven guilty but you're making assumptions left and right to justify your belief that your friend is innocent. The fact is that you have both accounts of the same situation - one not so flattering (Jason mentioning that Jon needed to be stopped by him before turning around and returning the cards - a bit extreme for a "joke", no?) and a second hand account from you, having heard from Jon (supposedly) saying that it WAS indeed all a joke in poor taste. While one is no more valid than the other, the only constant is that Jon - regardless of intention - did take someone's cards at the same event and had to be verbally stopped before returning them.
Unfortunately the Pokegym community (and the Reddit one, thanks to yet another poster trying to create an internet wide witch hunt that would pressure TPCi to ban both Jon and Gino) really doesn't have level of firsthand information or posters informed about the situation. These people who are just trying to shout far and wide to put pressure on TPCi are completely out of line. Not only are they damaging TPCi's reputation... these rash actions are perfect examples of poorly thought out vigilante justice. To all the ban happy players out there who want a slice of power: why do you feel that your opinion carries more weight than the informed decision that TPCi made? Do you all seriously think you deserve to decide who gets banned and who doesn't?
People are entitled to their opinions. Just like your opinionated piece about your friend. TPCi should expect backlash given that the transparency behind decisions is non-existent. In this particular case, given the one-sided evidence and precedents set by TPCi with bans before, it's hard to rationalize why no action was taken. Unless evidence to the contrary is given (and it doesn't help that Jon did have the cards - but mailed them back, and that Gino hasn't said anything meaningful), there's no reason for everyone to believe otherwise.
...Jason Klaczynski. I admired him as a player for so many years. Jon did too. I know he had a particularly bad experience with Jon but the harassment has gone too far. As far as I know Jon contacted Mees about the cards he had mistakenly taken (and if you don't know Jon's side of the story you shouldn't even be making judgments here) well before Jason made his first post calling him out. What Jason said only damaged Jon's reputation forever. Gino, if he has the laptop, would be shooting himself in the foot if he ever gives it back. By admitting he has it he would be forever shunned by the community-he'd be better off keeping it. Had the situation been kept between Mees, Jon and Gino everything could have been resolved quietly.
You forget to account for the fact that Jason didn't necessarily know that contact had been made between Jon and Mees at the time of his account. Therefore you putting the smear on him is unjustified (and ironic considering your stance on this matter), given that he may only be calling it as he experienced it. Did he blame Jon directly for Mees' cards?
Your second suggestion that this whole thing should have been kept quiet... I don't know what to say. Theft is theft. Mees made it clear that Jon had returned the cards. Gino hasn't returned the laptop. His experience with the hotel security and Vancouver police is documented. He hasn't done anything wrong based on the info we have, and has every right to call out the people responsible (with sound evidence, even). Whether he would have gotten the stolen articles back had things been kept quiet is another assumption you make, and is irrelevant to the fact that both Gino and Jon did something wrong in rummaging through someone else's property (that they had no right to) and taking something without permission.
Hard to believe this can even be defended. There's video, picture, and written evidence of the whole thing... people have been banned for way less than this.
- - - Updated - - -
Did you read Jon's account of it?
A) He initially went to Mees's room to ask for his stuff. Mees had already checked out and the room was empty. Since he hadn't heard from Mees, he thought they were stealing his stuff.
B) When he was taking his stuff he also accidentally grabbed one of Mees's boxes that looked like his.
So he knew he was missing something.
He knew what he was missing - that's why he helped himself to someone else's luggage.
He knew what he was missing, but still took something extra by "accident".
Right....