Bzths (2742922545). Roblox already reversed one of the two violations from this sweep. The other one still has my account terminated 8 days later.
I’m the user @40kq posted about in #9. I wanted to follow up with my own case because of what’s already on my account’s record.
Two violations were issued against me at the same timestamp, Jul 30, 2026 at 6:28 PM:
- My experience “Dollhouse Roleplay *VC*” (Place ID 86574504690356) for Harmful Content/Behavior
- My model “SecureAdminModule” (Asset ID 105697044615302) for Misusing Roblox Systems
Same sweep, same minute, same account.
On Jul 31 at 12:52 PM, Roblox reversed the second one. The decision says: “We reviewed your appeal and we found that your activity didn’t break the rules explained in our Community Standards, so there are no consequences to your account.”
So I’m not the one claiming the July 30 sweep produced false positives on my account. Roblox found that itself, in writing, within 24 hours. I’ve attached the screenshot.
How that reversal happened is worth mentioning. My first appeal on the module was vague. I basically said I didn’t think it broke TOS and asked them to tell me what was wrong with it. That got denied in 17 hours. My second appeal listed the actual engine APIs the module calls (Players:BanAsync, Players:UnbanAsync, Players:GetUserIdFromNameAsync) and stated that there was no obfuscation, no third-party HTTP fetching, and no unvalidated client execution in it. That one was accepted in 43 minutes. Nothing about the module changed between those two appeals. The only thing that changed was how specific I was.
About the place
I’m not going to act like the flag came out of nowhere. The place was titled “Dollhouse Roleplay *VC*” and this sweep clearly keyed on that phrase. This thread is full of the same story, including private places, archived places, and people who were just rebuilding the map to practice building. My title matched the pattern. I get why an automated system grabbed it.
To be direct about the name: the original game had been removed, and I put that phrase in my title to try to pick up search traffic from people looking for it. That was a bad call and I own it. It was a naming decision aimed at discovery. It wasn’t an endorsement of that community, and it didn’t describe anything that was actually in the place.
What I’m asking someone to check is the place file itself, since that’s the part no automated system ever looked at.
It was a baseplate with a server-sided stamper tool, the same sandbox mechanic those old build and sword fight games have used for years. The stamper could only spawn official Roblox models, which are already moderated by Roblox. No custom meshes, no custom decals, no custom audio in the place.
One thing I want to flag myself rather than have you find it. There was a BoomBox in the place, which is Roblox’s own model, reuploaded by me with an edited GUI. The edit was cosmetic. It played Roblox library audio IDs, all of which are already moderated on Roblox’s end, and I didn’t upload any audio of my own. If that asset is what the system matched on, I’d rather know that than keep guessing, and I’d ask you to check it directly.
The place also never had any real traffic. Two friends of mine joined it once or twice over a year ago and that’s the entire session history. Please pull the session data on Place 86574504690356 and confirm that, because it answers the reclassification on its own. If nobody was ever in there building anything, there’s no gameplay-generated content for “Sexual Content” to be pointing at. Everything that ever existed in that place was a Roblox model placed by a Roblox tool. Whatever the system matched on, it wasn’t what was in the file.
The appeal record on the place
- Jul 30, 6:43 PM: appeal submitted.
- Jul 30, 10:53 PM: denied four hours later. The denial didn’t uphold the original reason. It changed the violation category to “Sexual Content” without citing any new evidence or naming a single asset.
- Jul 31, 6:55 AM: second appeal submitted.
- Aug 7: still nothing. That’s past the five business day estimate the system gave me when I submitted it.
The category change is the part I’d really like staff to look at. “Sexual Content” is a much heavier accusation than the one it replaced, and it was applied without identifying anything. Reading through this thread, the exact same escalation got applied to an empty place, an anime outfit game, and somebody’s Shrek model. When one reclassification lands on that many unrelated things within hours of each other, it isn’t a review. It’s a default.
Where I’m at
Both of my appeals on the place are used up. There’s no route left for me inside the product. My main is terminated along with roughly 20 associated accounts that got banned by association rather than for anything they did. My appeal window closes Aug 29.
What I’m asking for
- A human review of account 2742922545 and Place 86574504690356, the same kind of review that correctly cleared my module on Jul 31.
- Either a specific statement of what content violated the standards, or removal of the “Sexual Content” reclassification.
- Reinstatement of the associated accounts that were banned by association.
- Confirmation of whether the Aug 29 deadline is paused for cases from this sweep that are still unresolved.
@Sourcemapper, I understand your Jul 31 post was about restoring experiences caught in the bulk action, not about account terminations. Could you say directly whether account-level terminations from that same sweep are included in the review? If they aren’t, please just say so, because a lot of us in this thread are eight days in and waiting on something that may never have covered us. My account is already a documented case of that sweep getting it wrong. Roblox established that on Jul 31, not me.
