ShameOnTurtles

Hello, I will be taking this complaint with [mention]sebkillerDK[/mention]. This will also be directed to the whitelist team [mention]Alberyk[/mention], [mention]Coalf[/mention], and [mention]Datamatt[/mention]. If anyone has a situation they can share please do so. However, please limit any stories to first-hand knowledge only.

I thought I'd chip in here because I had a couple ideas about the PR and discussion surrounding it. Let me say I am in support of this PR. I believe it is an interesting concept that has been well thought out and has a capacity for creating interesting interaction. I think this is a false representation. This change is a proposed expansion of mechanics for their revival. Currently, those mechanics are very lacking; that cannot be argued. Kinda retreading old ground here, so I'll chuck the following in a spoiler: Lots of stuff in this thread so far but I'll try to keep this succinct: Yes yes yes! I like this idea. Especially considering the persistent economy update on the horizon. I would propose the Baseline chassis being available from Robotics, hence the name, while customized shells would need to be ordered via cargo and by extension the separate companies, for a hefty fee. In the interest of not making this post too much of a wall, I've cut out some of your suggestions. I believe they are worth consideration, though. However, I think it's important to note that this is an expansion of IPC reviving mechanics. I'm not sure in what faith this change was proposed but I don't think it should be nor do I think it is a useful/necessary change to stop powergaming. That's up to people adminhelping it to admins, and always will be. I agree with you; lack of customization and so to speak playing your 'not-character' isn't fun. I don't think it's exactly genuine to look at this change as being purely a nerf. The avenues you suggest are very similar to just making IPCs 'metal humans/organics', which I think is something that needs to be very clearly avoided. IPCs are special, and mechanically different. Keep them that way. As I said before I don't think this change should be meant to counter rulebreaking behavior. That's for admins to cover. This change fleshes out revival mechanics for IPCs and makes death more of an obstacle. I don't think this is the proper way to look at this proposed change. I don't think it is, and I don't think it should be, a fix such as you suggest. What I believe it is, and what I like about it, is the introduced mechanics for IPC revival that make it so the process is more than taking out the brain, putting it back in, and adminhelping for an admin to rejuve the dead IPC. Like I said before I don't think that making IPCs 'metal humans' is a viable alternative. With that second scenario that you list, that sounds like something completely IC (although possibly worthy of ahelping). When shit happens in a round, part of roleplay is dealing with it. With all that addressed and said, my thoughts on this: Make the default thing produced a baseline, and specialized or shell frames can be ordered from cargo for a large price. I think this can provide some amazing character development, while still retaining the special-ness even if you only go for the baseline. An IPC dying on extended and having to purchase a new chassis, getting ICly in crippling debt. That's really cool, especially with the persistent economy. I just find this type of on station major character development really cool. Having punishment for dying is not a bad thing! If your character is dying enough that this becomes a legitimate restriction stopping you from playing them on a lot of rounds, odds are you need to heavily reconsider how you approach situations, and take another look at the self-preservation rule. I feel like I had more to say but I can't remember what so, here we are. Let the PR go through!

Okay, here we are back at subduing. OTHER THAN the holy dislocation of legs-which did not occur to me- how do we deal with the Hard-suit? I'm really wanting to know at this point the previously mentioned plethora of responses we could have taken. So far Jackboot has chimed in to give me "Running away" as an option, you have yourself stated that it's a 50/50 on whether we know if a hard-suit handles dislocations or not. I had an idea that it might worked like that, but I usually just choke them out- I cannot do this anymore, because it's just as likely to kill them as it is to subdue them and we'd be right back here anyways. So please, give me more of these options we have. The scenario being he's now laying there not having gotten up for 20 seconds- you do not notice the gasping. Your adrenaline is pumped up a bit, this makes it feel like about 5 seconds. What options are on the table for you? I wasn't sure, but it was tested and confirmed during the round that dislocating worked through a hardsuit. Like I said earlier, I wouldn't hold it against anyone for not knowing that specific aspect of the mechanic. Some options include: Neckgrabbing Ioning them further, although I think their hardsuit was already out of charge or pretty much there. Since he's unconscious due to critical injuries, just grabbing him. I hesitate to go this far, but possibly even breaking their hands That's all I can think of at the moment. I completely understand what you're saying about adrenaline and timing. It's happened to me in the past. The thing is, just because it happens does not mean it's something that should happen, if that makes sense. We nudge people for getting carried away during combat, and this is one of those times. The warning is for that purpose. There is no set format for warnings, but what I do is provide a brief description of the incident in question, link it to any related rules, and put in the notes for staff-only viewing particulars about the conversation and my judgments. I don't think the warning does misrepresent the situation. For reference, the staff only notes were: Notes regarding the warning: They were under pressure and frustrated ICly, but the beating was super excessive and they didn't even stop to attempt any kind of arrest/subduing via any methods. Argued with me in PMs about the situation, going in circles so I cut it off so we didn't really reach a consensus, but yeah. Keep an eye out for this type of behavior in the future.. I want to apologize if in my earlier post I sounded aggressive or hostile in any way, that was not the intention. I don't know if I'm reading too much into it but I just want to be safe. Your most recent post seems a little, retaliatory, I guess the word would be. Anyways yeah.

Hi. Firstly, full attack and PM logs for the situation can be found here To get some misconceptions out of the way immediately: Echo, the merc in this instance, was not an IPC. They were ioned multiple times in their hardsuit, but since they were human minimal harm was actually done. I agree with you: this would be a lot more clear cut if it was a robot. That wasn't the case. I won't deny that the mercenary could have played this a lot better. No administrative action was taken on them in this situation, however. Hardsuits can splint limbs, but dislocations still have full effects (though, to be fair, I would not fault someone for not knowing this). Additionally, I want to make it quite clear that telling someone "Stop resisting!" while spam clicking them with a baton, without pausing whatsoever, is not a legitimate surrender call. A bind for that is actually a pretty good idea, but not when utilized in this instance. Other than that: I don't think this is exactly a proper representation of our conversation in PMs. It went back and forth quite a bit, and after we kept arriving at the same points of contention over and over (mainly whether or not you had enough time and manpower to handle an arrest), where we just weren't agreeing even after both explaining our sides, I decided to cut off the discussion and apply the warning as putting my foot down. Looking over logs I can definitely say I'm a lot more aware of the situation than I was on server, and I better understand your point now. I want to draw your attention to two specific sections in the combat: Multiple times it's been stated that he was a massive threat all throughout this fight, but really, he's one man with fists and a broken hardsuit against 3 security personnel. Those three were armed with a wooden bat, a stunbaton, and a wrench. Not exactly fully armed, but certainly better equipped than the merc was at that moment. Understandable. As I said in PMs, I do not expect you to be constantly examining and being 100% aware of everything going on in combat. You are expected to have some critical awareness, however, one of those being the status of the people you're fighting. When you examine someone, you can see their wounds, and see if they're unconscious or not. This is incredibly important as security, where in general, you have an IC and OOC responsibility not to kill antagonists where it's not necessary. I pointed it out earlier that there were a couple substantial periods of time where one of you could have subdued them. It was three on one. As shown in logs, I entered the situation part of the way through the last period in which Echo did not get up while he was beat and eventually died. I saw that part firsthand, and while that doesn't put me in the forefront, I am approaching this issue with firsthand knowledge of it, not just logs. The explosion was much later, after Echo had been dead for a little while and I had been scrapped by the other two mercenaries, in fact. The main point of all of this is that you had time to make efforts to subdue them, rather than continue to try to kill them. They were a threat, but not an exceedingly dangerous one once the situation progressed to a three on one with them dropping in and out of consciousness.

And it was code green, and like you just said you didn't personally witness it, you were responding to the Captain witnessing it. You hunted down someone just because the Captain told you to. The Captain is not above regulation. The Captain has access to the warrant program for a reason. The Captain could have taken two seconds to file an arrest warrant, which is required under code green. The Captain is my direct superior. He is loyalty implanted. He ordered the arrest of a surgeon because he witnessed an infraction worthy of arrest. As I quoted in my previous reply, this clearly fulfills the exceptions stated in the Corporate Regulations page in regards to warrants. I'm not sure where the technicality is here. A Captain ordering the arrest of someone they witnessed drunk on duty is not them acting above regulations. They're the Captain of the station, they have full authority. In this context, it would be like saying the HoS couldn't order me to arrest someone they witnessed breaking regulations just because it wasn't an emergency. This was never claimed, so I'm not sure where you're getting this. As you can see from logs, I asked him if he'd been drinking and he responded in the affirmative. While it may not be necessary or efficient to arrest every surgeon that gets drunk in the bar, it certainly is within the Captain's scope. I feel silly nitpicking your use of words, but you're implying this was a lot worse than it really was. As you can see from logs I actually didn't respond to the call at first - I wasn't paying attention. When I did see the call for an officer, I took the time to link up with a cadet, go by the captain, and then walk over to the medbay and talk to them before entering. Only when they proved belligerent and uncooperative did I stop being courteous to them. A dangerous weapon is "largely irrelevant"? What? It was a deadly laser stolen from the Captain's office which, as I've shown in logs, was said many times over security. I don't fault you for not noticing it - there was a lot of text flying by and I don't have access to as many channels as you - but still, that's an incredibly relevant piece of information to the situation. I feel like a broken record here. As I have shown in logs, I did not immediately jump to shooting him. Both the officer and I aimed first, and due to reflex shooting of him talking on the radio right after and us shooting, he ended up aiming a lethal weapon at an officer. I shot at him at that point, instead of the alternative, which would have meant dropping my weapon and hoping for his mercy - something which would have been ridiculously irresponsible as a security officer. Logs for my second encounter with Moyers: I assumed that you gave me a gun with two settings so I could adapt to any situation. In this case I used the lethal function because it was appropriate for the situation. As for your disapproval the first time, there's only so much your orders will do for my character when he's in the middle of a lethal situation - especially when you made no effort to get the other officers' or my own side of the first shooting. I believe I've adequately described why I wasn't being unreasonably violent, but I do want to note that none of this displeasure was actually communicated to me beyond you reacting to partial understanding of the first shooting which, again, you did nothing from my perspective to investigate.

I was the officer Gavin Matthews in this round. I want to start out by saying that I have no OOC issue with how the HoS handled anything, and the subject of this complaint is the IAA, not him. Anyways. In logs, for the sake of sanity, I will bold my comments. I spawned just after the round started, got geared, and was relaxing when the Captain saw the surgeon, Eric Mcloskey, drunk. The Captain then ordered security to arrest them for Neglect of Duty. Logs for this interaction: No warrant was asked for, or offered, as a loyalty implanted Captain was ordering the arrest. Since there was no Head of Security at that time in the round, there were in direct command. This is relevant to the above and I'll be referring to corporate regulations a couple times throughout this post. Next, I head over to the medical bay with the cadet in tow. The door from the lobby to the bay is open, so I step in it to stop it closing and talk to the medical staff waiting at the desk to let them know what's going on, so it's not just a random officer and cadet rushing into their bay. Logs: A virologist from the lobby follows me, and we talk for a bit before I walk past him with the cadet to find the surgeon. Logs: After we get to the brig I put them in the holding cell and go to handle someone at the front desk. The IAA comes to investigate the issue after an incident with a hostile in their office, but just seems to kind of... ignore what people are saying? I'm not sure what they were doing. Logs: The only time I was ever contacted by the IAA for them to get my side was in this interaction. Logs: That's about it in regards to that issue. In response to Munks: But... neither of you ever tried to get my side for this! Well, that's technically false, you did call me to your office before I had to leave for more critical issues, but you ignored my explanations when you asked for them, and created an entirely false report because of it. That's not being a proper IAA. The only thing left to cover is the laser fire issue, really, Logs leading up to and including the shooting: I want to reiterate that I am not making this complaint about the HoS, just the IAA. While I am annoyed that the HoS gave us lethals, and then sent us up against a hostile using lethals, and expected us to use stuns that's an IC issue. The laser issue was used by the IAA to push for a demotion for me with the HoS. Zero investigation. Much conduct unbecoming of an IAA. That's about it.

I'll be taking over this complaint.

Appeal accepted.

You've racked up quite the amount of serious notes in only 2 days and your general attitude regarding these issues on the server was, well, deplorable to say the least. I am willing to lift this ban, on the understanding that this is your last chance to read the rules and abide by them. Any more poor behaviour will result in the permanent ban being reapplied. Sounds good?

For reference, the station Command account holds 70k, I believe.

With the combination of Hive's post of the video plus timestamps (thank you) and Delta's post, my thoughts are mostly summed up here. For reference, I was the one that handled this on server. Firstly, the medical bay incident was the only incident that was actually adminhelped. In the future, do not just assume something is being handled. Report it. I looked into the medical bay incident and deemed it valid. Why? Despite Hive's video I'll show some logs here: Start of the medical bay deaths: Now, on server I was told by Croike that he was just standing still and by Hive that he was chasing him. With no way to prove either side I discounted it, but still deemed the kill valid. It was at the point in the round where he had gone full hostile. Having security called on him when he's in medical would have turned it into a death trap. Calling security on an antagonist, in general, is a valid reason for them to kill you. Especially when you call them within reach (or in this case, chasing them.) Moving on: Daemian pulls out a knife on someone with a gun, and attempts to stab them. Very valid. The next two are similar, so I'll post them at once: The only thing I really regret from deeming these medical bay kills valid is not having more time to talk to each one of the people rushing the heavily armed and armored man. I really don't have much more to say, considering what's written here. As a whole, yes, one antagonist murdering quite a few people - especially civilians - is usually bad. Once you look closer at it, though, they're very justified. To add something extra from the other complaint posted about this issue; no one was threatened to not post a complaint. They were warned that posting a complaint during the round would be IC in OOC. Online staff at the time tried to make it very clear that this was not a random thing we were forcing on people, but an established forum rule. Lastly, I just want to remind everyone who was killed or participated in the debate in deadchat: Admin actions are not seen by players. Do not assume that just because you don't see anything being done, admins are ignoring you. When I came to the conclusion that the killings were valid I disclosed that to the original reporter and left it at that. Later, when accusations started flying, I posted it in deadchat.

Application denied. PM either TishinaStalker or myself for details.

Application denied. PM either TishinaStalker or myself for details.

the man, the myth, the legend here i am ladies

Application denied. PM myself, TishinaStalker, or Muncorn for details.

Application denied.

Application denied.

Application accepted.

You wound me. We're looking into it now. Expect a resolution within the next few days (hopefully).

There are actually a couple regulations this falls under. For one, as Aboshehab said, you could put it under violating an injunction. It could also be put under neglect of duty. If a doctor is smoking in the medical bay and refuses to stop upon request, he definitely deserves that charge. Alternatively, if a head of staff ordered that doctor to stop smoking, then a charge of failure to execute an order would also apply. You could also argue that security ordering someone to stop smoking in a no smoking area counts as a valid order, but the regulation does say "a superior's valid orders."

I will note he was an antag at the time of this incident. A changeling, to be specific.

I've come to a verdict on this. After discussing it with administration and seeing all your replies here, I am going to be labelling this complaint as an IC issue. With that said, these comments, in their sexual nature, are borderline. Please take care to make sure that any IC harassment is done tastefully. Additionally, in regards to this being posted on reddit, action will not be taken against people who post content relating to the server, that falls within the server rules, on reddit. I'll leave this complaint open for 24 hours for any closing comments.

Full PM history from the time I first contacted Yacob: You explained to me here that your character had no hope, and that both non-lethals and lethal weaponry had no effect on them. As I said in PMs; I stand by this. Them not being fazed by this is not an issue with the methods you are using, but the resilience of the SS13 human, along with the pain and damage system. The wizard was a challenging enemy. They were incredibly mobile. Yes, an ERT would have trouble fighting them. It was not impossible for you, nor would it be impossible for them. However as I tried to stress in PMs, even by giving you suggestions on how you could have fought the wizard, you had options. Your disregard of these, along with a lot of your PMs - including the first few - indicated to me this suicide was primarily OOCly motivated. I didn't actually see what you said in Dsay or the warning to stop you got from Alberyk, but knowing that now just makes me think even more along these lines. Throughout PMs, you continually referred to how staff abused their powers, and pandered to antagonists. I told you to direct those concerns into the proper channels, and not take out your frustration ICly. As for the warning, exact wording: In regards to the adminhelp about acknowledging warnings; Due to your consistent disrespect towards me and the staff team, I was writing up a PM saying that you would be banned for a day when you adminhelped asking what happened if you left a warning unacknowledged. I added the answer to your question onto the end of the PM I was writing, rather than sending two. To be clear, you were not banned because you asked about acknowledging warnings, but because of your previous disrespect. The adminhelp and my response can be found in the pastebin linked above. Lastly, the ban. Exact wording: You consistently insulted staff in our conversation over PMs. This is unacceptable. The warning was not placed on your account because you insulted staff, but because you committed suicide without a valid IC reason and then argued with staff about it. I gave you many chances to settle down and stop the insults, but you didn't. I told you that concerns about admins should not be put into barbed replies to those very same admins. They should be put here, in this forum. I gave you many chances to correct your behavior. It never happened. If I may comment on Alberyk's part, he has already explained that staff may give antagonists a second chance, especially if it is early or the action against them breaks rules. In this situation, both of those things were the case.

Alright. I'll be taking over this complaint. I'll get the two subjects to post their side.

Yes, but I would say it depends on the situation. Especially in arrivals, all reasonable steps should be taken to avoid using bombs or similarly destructive methods, but if it becomes necessary and reasonable steps are taken to avoid immediate collateral damage I don't see an issue with it. It'd be best to adminhelp those individual situations for clearance on server.