Scheveningen

Considering your typical, purposefully baiting and intentionally inflammatory behavior, I can probably chance to take a risk to say you were being intentionally inflammatory and trying to rile up a response out of everyone involved. I, a third party, told you both to cut it out and you decided to attack me back for it and call me a "pussy" and a "snitch" and then go "haha just kidding" like it's so easy to take back such comments. Why do you consider this acceptable behavior? There's a really good reason as to why telling everyone that you keep a diary to write about how much you like/dislike other people is widely considered creepy and weird. It is information no one needs to know to start with, because the fact you apparently keep a manifest to catalogue all of the inconveniences and the good things people have done unto you is incredibly strange. And then you try to threaten Sam with your very existence of a manifest and 'having a statement on record' when Sam makes a clearly not-to-be-taken-seriously statement, like, what? Bullshit. You just contradicted yourself, as seen here: You don't just catalog 'worthy' or 'notable' things. You make note of very specific details. The rest of Judge's comments are riddled with "tu quoque" fallacies and other delusions founded on the belief that I somehow hold a metagrudge against you because I'm the one that has to step up to report your awful behavior. The very notion that you can dismiss me, Chada, Paradox, SunSam and anyone else that has had negative experiences with you because you think we're all metagrudging you (which there is no proof of, find me a time where my character did something against yours in-game because of OOC motivations and we'll talk) is disingenuous and incredibly toxic. This complaint is about you. It is not about anyone else. You need justification for your own actions. Accusing other people of metagrudging you is not an excuse for your toxic discord behavior and waving around threats as if you matter more than other community members in this community. You can't even come up with an original response without flinging the same accusations of being "creepy" and "metagrudging" straight back at me. Is it suddenly creepy to ask for action against someone who admits they document a ton of negative things about people without their explicit consent? What the fuck? Legit, how is keeping this on record to yourself to sit on at all reassuring or helpful to resolve your own issues? And how does threatening people either high-key or low-key about how you have them on audit logging help you resolve your issues with other members of the community? Why do you think it's okay in any context to threaten to have someone permabanned?

It is a never-ending debate to qualify what counts as an exploit. Using a regular game mechanic in a regular fashion in a totally justifiable way can be argued as 'exploiting' game mechanics if someone is salty enough. Argue your case to an administrator if you have a problem. Their opinion matters more than mine and they can judge a case much better than I can. That's all I can tell you. Good luck with that. Kinda bold to shut down interaction stemming from a mechanic to get cargo more involved and doing things in a round that benefit their department just because it isn't balanced according to your perception to how things should go. Did you speak to an admin about this before making this post? Because they can probably offer better perspective than what anyone who replies here can do for you. There is no 'we'. There is the staff who decide what is a rule-break or not.

It's fixed. Also fixed. Has yet to be fixed. Wouldn't have happened if it wasn't initially coded that way. The problem would not even exist if a hotdog was only worth 20 credits. This thread would not even be written by you right now. Consider that, and consider why it's still important for the community to report bugs however they can. Just because a hotdog is worth way more than it should be, though, does not mean it's equivalent to abusing a mechanic that you OOCly know exists but ICly shouldn't know exists. But since the information is displayed to you in an IC manner, it's not bug abuse in the metagaming way. Therefore it makes it way harder to enforce the rule against bug/unintended feature abuse. Administrators rarely go ahead and enforce rules for grey area cases where they don't have precedent to take immediate action for. It's very difficult to conjure up enough confidence to improvise and risk getting a judgement wrong. It's difficult to be moderation staff, and not every situation they deal with is as clear-cut as the rules are, which is why they are so cautious to enforce them. They don't want to mess up or get anything wrong, they're just here to ensure people get along, they aren't present to play Fun Police. It's the community's responsibility to argue a good case for why they think a ruling should be made over a grey-area case. But also keep in mind that reporting bugs along the lines of being needlessly hostile and obviously frustrated at a mechanic that doesn't make a lot of sense - doesn't get the feature fixed faster. It only kills the morale of the developers by acting like this. You really shouldn't be using the suggestions forum to report bugs. The github issues section exists for this reason. Politely DM a dev to check in on the issue through discord once you put it up for them to take a look at it and judge how important it is to fix. Keep in mind that developers will only have so much motivation to do things regardless of whether it's their supposed responsibility to fix bugs or not. Bug-fixing is very tedious work at times, and developing this codebase for no other gain than simply contributing to the community is a very generous use of someone's time for our own enjoyment. Developing for this server and contributing is on a basis of "When I'm able and wanting to do so." Want these problems to be fixed? Be part of the solution. Learn how to code and contribute to the server if you want these bugs to be fixed so badly. It is also the community's responsibilities to address issues in their proper place. You can't expect a developer to give a fuck if you report bugs in the myriad of suggestion threads that dot the respective subforum, which they likely don't have time in their day to read every single one of them.

Would be a better idea for it to simply say if you're SSD on sensors when your character is indeed, SSD, due to a player either crashing or logging out without cryoing. It's a good idea at its most base, non-specific form. It should be implemented for that sake only.

This is a little different from a shipping manifest, Resi. Judge keeps more on file than just what one characters thinks of another. He archives other people's complaints about you, he logs everything you've ever said to him. He keeps all of your characters on file and has a lot of ire against what he defines as "throwaway characters." He accuses people of metagrudging and waves around the idea that his audit log exists and shows off his supposed detective skills to anyone he dislikes. If you don't watch out, he'll put you on his list. Does that not sound disturbing to you whatsoever? If you have proof that someone's metagrudging you, why hold onto it and tell none of the staff about the encounter? The staff work on a principle of, "If it wasn't reported, it didn't happen" when it comes down to the rules being enforced. This community works because we have players willing to point out issues to staff so they can solve them and permit the rest of us to still have a more enjoyable experience. Rubbing it in people's face that you have an audit log and special notes for specific community members while making veiled threats is a disgustingly toxic way to go about this. This is not simple record-keeping. This is a community member that writes down every single detail to interactions with other players and their characters and proudly admits having it catalogued. Do you go around cataloging every single interaction with other people to an excel document? It's one thing to make a mental note of someone who insulted you and pulling up the screenshot to provide to an admin 2 minutes later. It's another to hold onto everything you've compiled to connect with some gigantic conspiracy theory being entertained to prove to everyone that there's a grand design to why people treat you a certain way. Ever play Oblivion? Remember that Wood Elf in Skingrad, Glarthir, who believes that he is constantly being watched and conspired against? Here's a little snippet of that character's habits: Maybe it is a stretch to make this comparison. The behavior is practically identical. It's better to be reassured that I am wrong and early in quashing this mentality Judge seems to display than to be right but too late to call attention to it.

Still sounds ridiculous that they somehow keep personal logs like that? Here's more admission: Sorry for the double post but this is just ridiculous. Is there anyone else who keeps an in-depth audit log around for malicious reasons like these? This dude's not even staff and he keeps hardcore notes like these to fight supposed metagrudging with more metagrudging?? Is there any other doubt? Mine is completely dismissed at this point. This is creepy as shit.

I fixed the pastebin. Also I spoke to Paradox and apparently I entirely understand the context now. Here's an example of other interactions pertaining to JKJudgeX and the kind of player he is. JKJudge literally keeps every single player he's had interactions with in an excel document and counts the amount of negative interactions he's had, and also documents all of their characters. He's admitted to this in the past. (Big mobile images above) Literally nevermind -- I do not have a problem with how ParadoxSpace and others have treated Judge. The outrage is wholly justified, but my current question right now is to what to take from a community member that behaves in such a manner, keeps record on other players to drop information bombs and literally combs through the forums to find someone's characters if a player somehow inconveniences them. Is this someone that belongs in the community?

This is a two-in-one complaint because it's describing one particular situation that happened last night. BYOND Key: Scheveningen Game ID: N/A, happened on discord, #general_channel. Player Byond Key: JKJudgeX + ParadoxSpace Staff involved: 0 administrators were online throughout this time, and I was already playing a round. Since it was already too late to report something directly to an admin, I chose to head to bed and report it when I had time. Reason for complaint: Rule 2: Don't be a dick. https://pastebin.com/7FRmnZUF [Edit: Fixed, discord copy-paste + scrolling is a pain.] tl;dr; a Baystation moderator/lore developer for Aurora and a head whitelisted community member decide the discord rules don't matter and choose to flame each other back-and-forth with close to no administrator intervention because nobody was online to deal with it. Both their behavior was really gross. It really says a lot about the state of our community when a staff member and someone who's been whitelisted thinks it's alright to flame each other in the public discord just to embarass themselves and everyone else watching the chat flood in. I can't imagine how this is a good use of anyone's time. Did you attempt to adminhelp the issue at the time? If so, what was the known action taken by administration/moderation? No. An admin was not available to directly look into what transpired on discord last night, nor was one available for the duration that a round was happening on-server when they were needed. Approximate Date/Time: Approx. 6PM EST, 06-Sept-18.

"Hey, why don't we get greentext for just doing our jobs?" Because it's what you are supposed to do.

The solars are a support power source, not the primary one. The current power requirement without any modifications to pumps throughout the station (to think of two, i'd say atmos and toxins) is around 1.2 million watts minimum (more accurately it needs 1 million watts, but you need an amount over that to power the station at a reasonable rate without fluctuations). So unless the solar SMESes get upgraded individually, they won't be able to output much as they each have a cap.

/obj/item/clothing/head/collectable/kitty name = "collectable kitty ears" name = "collectable kitty ears" @@ -109,7 +104,7 @@ name = "collectable rabbit ears" name = "collectable rabbit ears" desc = "Not as lucky as the feet!" desc = "Not as lucky as the feet!" icon_state = "bunny" icon_state = "bunny" body_parts_covered = 0 siemens_coefficient = 1.5 ZZZZZT hahaha

The flash was nerfed merely to get rid of the last bit of zero-effort stun that left zero trace on the individual and otherwise was an infuriating inconvenience. It was not nerfed to directly cripple security in any fashion. The flash was just irritatingly powerful with zero tradeoff. The baton is fine as is, as it's rather weak in its current state against traditional combat-oriented antagonists, and rightfully so.

Acceptable. Resolved on my end.

While antagonists can find some value for this guide, this is mostly tailored from the perspective of a disgusting subhuman security player. SS13 is an incredibly difficult multiplayer game for those just getting into it and it still has a measure of its difficulty for any degree of experienced player that still plays this. At its core it is a survival game, and despite that this is an HRP server, you don't get a say whether you character lives or dies in a confrontation, the game mechanics do. Perhaps once of the most difficult skills to master in the game is being able to overwhelm a defensive position with only equipment, tactics and often teamwork as your sole advantages. There are many things that can go wrong during an all-out assault, especially when your own advantages and disadvantages are not being actively considered by you or your teammates. When you ignore the possibility of being disabled by something you don't expect, you're highly likely to be caught off guard from it and to be killed by it. If you play an antagonist or play security, this absolutely can't happen in the context of your own character's self-preservation. If you cannot take the heat, you should never risk your character jumping into the frying pan. But despite this, there are still methods and thought processes that I personally use to find success in unlikely scenarios where I really should not have survived under normal circumstances. Situational Awareness Before Going In First off, think of something that brings you peace or joy. Shouldn't you relax? Now think of something that irritates you. What really grinds your gears? Switch this up to something that makes you afraid. What are you terrified of? What makes you furious? What makes you depressed? What drives your heart-rate up or down, and what is stopping you from finding a proper balance? Notice how your mood dictates how you approach issues? Do you ever ask yourself why you let that control you? Rule 1 of situational awareness; If you are distracted by internal problems, you will never truly learn awareness. There is even such a thing as being too relaxed. Apathy is death. This phenomenon will curse you for the rest of your life when unchecked and you'll only catch a glimpse of what it means to be aware of something and trying to understand a threat from more than just your own point of view. To continue on from that, if you're capable of placing yourself in a state of mind that is not panicked nor relaxed, but cautious and alert, then good job! That is a skill that you should exercise often and integrate it as part of your daily habits. It will allow you to make very controlled decisions within the lens of objectivity and viewing risk as dangerous as it ought to be without freaking out about the possibility of the worst case scenario. Now for the real lesson on the subject: Perfected situational awareness is knowing all of the factors in play that could provide a risk to you, in addition to all of the weaknesses to solving a problem that you can exploit and potentially scratch out net positive gains in your favor. The big victories are often difficult to achieve, it is often better to follow a checklist and accomplish many small victories than it is to have sacrificed much for a large victory. The small victories without significant cost often add up better results. A word of caution, though: Expect certain people to get very mad when they die because of the small, subtle victories adding up in your favor. The reason for their anger is due to the lack of their understanding as to how they went wrong, and how you went right. It's very easy to recognize an obvious mistake, but some people are smart and are just as cognizant of the biggest risks as you are. Some players put the biggest focus on preventing the worst-case scenario to the very end, so do not expect "loud and obvious" to always work. Let's get onto some important factors to consider before we piece everything together again. You might actually notice some factors synergize or anti-synergize heavily with one another and there is significant conditional overlap. Environmental/Positional Assessment These are two factors in one. In SS13, the worst-case scenario for you, if you're a security officer, is that there is a hostage situation being held up by a bunch of mercenaries who are very good at playing antagonist, in the midst of a maintenance shaft where all of the angles of attack are covered. No amount of binoculars will help you as there are no windows, so you cannot see into an area to be able to siege it. You might notice there's only one way in or out conventionally, but you might find success making your own entrances. Now wait, that was confusing, wasn't it? What's an angle of attack? It's actually quite simple, an angle of attack is one of few-to-many routes that an adversary can take to attack you. They can choose to attack you from the north, or the east, the west, perhaps even vertically or horizontally, so on. Rarely are these angles actually considered as to what might give them the best possible advantage. In real life, an army might attack a position in broad early morning daylight from the east. They do this particularly because the sun will have risen in the east during the fall solstice, and the sun at worst may only rise from the far northeast and set to the southwest, with heavy south-bias. Having the sun in your eyes is a positional battlefield disadvantage that is incredibly difficult to deal with. When we apply this to SS13 again, such advantages aren't quite in play, but your position is considered for other reasons. When you hole up somewhere, do you ever have an escape route planned out in advance? A plan B escape route if you get cut off? Plan C, D, so on? Do you ever consider that being in a chokepoint might be to your detriment and to the opponent's benefit, and that you might be better off in a more open environment where you can move less predictably, than in a foxhole position being quickly overrun? There's flaws to being in an open position, too. Against a security force armed with laser guns, an antagonist is going to be quickly gunned down from multiple angles. Watch your positioning. If you think at any moment you could get your butt kicked because you overstayed your welcome, then you should move. Do not deliberate on whether you should take the chance. It is better to take a chance in being caught out than to guarantee being caught out if you get found hiding in the place they suspect you would be. Keep moving when your position no longer gives you an advantage. Equipment Assessment This is one of the most basic factors to consider, with a lot of complexity later down the line. Being able to gather information (or "intelligence" in the military operators' school of thought) is critically important before you go into a situation. Humans are defined as the apex predators of the earth due to our superior usage of tools and technology to accomplish certain tasks for us. Where a tiger might use fang and claw to hunt, humans use anything between spears and high-powered hunting rifles to give themselves a bigger advantage over hunting than a tiger might. A tiger might be in for a world of hurt if their instincts fail them and cause them to make a mistake. Being skilled with a tool and the proper usage of it puts you at substantially less risk in accomplishing a task. Well, great! Now you know why tools are good, if not completely necessary for you to do your job optimally. Now let's actually consider the scary risk part of your adversary being equipped with something similar but with different consequences involved if they happen to hit you. Let's assume your adversary has a shotgun. Shotguns are close-quarter weapons that are not easy to overwhelm. They are powerful defensive weapons that can defend chokepoints at close range and quickly put you down if you ignore their capability to kill you in a few connected shots. Slugs will murder you if you're unarmored, only slightly less so when you're armored. Buckshot will be mitigated by armor, but the shrapnel has a very high chance of sticking with you until the very end. Slugs happen to be the short-term kill-you-fast ammunition, whereas buckshot is designed to bleed you out for every second you remain on the field. What shotguns are not good at is sustained long-range combat. Even slugs are horribly inaccurate at longer ranges, and will be quickly outpaced by assault rifles or DMR-like weapons. Additionally, shotguns are difficult to wield and you can't manage your inventory while holding a shotgun, much less when you're in the heat of combat. Shotgun users are vulnerable when they're out of ammunition, because reloading is slow and easy to capitalize on. Shotguns also tend to be the most useful for the "corner-camp chokepoint-holder" playstyle. This can be exploited very easily, however, flashbangs and grenades are excellent at flushing people out of cover. Make sure you learn how to cook a non-chemistry grenade, as they were nerfed recently for their timers to not be exploitable. You can apply similar logic to sniper rifles. Unless you have a plan B method to create your own entrance, a person with a sniper rifle will hold down a hallway forever. There is no hope to unrooting someone with a sniper rifle unless you're confident you can countersnipe faster with a weapon type similar to theirs. Speaking of sniper rifles: anti-materiel rifles are fucking dangerous. They deal enough brute damage to remove your head through almost all types of armor, short of you getting lucky, they are also hitscan and require no prediction-based skill with ballistics whatsoever. Respect the fuck out of an anti-materiel rifle. It is the most powerful gun in the game, an argument can be made for it being overpowered, because there is no other similar weapon of its class that compares to the anti-materiel rifle, but it also has factors such as only being able to load a single shot into its chamber before needing another manual reload. So what about everything else? Pistols happen to be good hold-out weapons but they're vulnerable to almost every other weapon category, they're generally inferior to other weapon types (aside from the revolvers being the exception). They're great for wounding while you figure out an escape, but they're also good for finishing off an already wounded target. Pistols are not what I would call versatile, but they are better than having nothing when your main weapon runs on empty and gets flung out of your hands. SMGs and carbine-type weapons are versatile but not really good at anything. Unlike pistols, they're a good weapon to have, regardless, due to their average capacity. Anyone with a small gun such as this is still a threat. Long guns such as assault rifles and DMR-type guns (not to be mistaken with the actual sniper rifle class) are good at medium range in general. They're designed to enforce spacing between yourself and an opponent and they generally have a stronger kill threat than pistols and the small guns. They're not great at long range but they are still good guns to have. They're often two-handed, so keep in mind you can't manage your inventory well with one of these weapons in hand. Be alert how you use ammunition. There are specialist weapons too. These are defined within the clause of, "Basically anything that doesn't fit in a neat little box." Specialist weapons all do unique and interesting things, and can probably kill or maim you in a variety of different ways, ranging from very subtle to extremely eye-popping. Keep an eye out for these and be sure to examine every armed person you meet. Grenades and gas-based weapons are all fantastic, but should never be used out in the open. It's a waste of a good grenade, 99% of the time it's going to do nothing in an open field. Throw grenades into chokes or small rooms for maximum effect. The person in that room has to choose whether to take the stun or to get flushed directly out of cover. Consider throwing grenades primarily into rooms with only one entrance or exit point for GREATEST value. You don't know humor like watching a Tajaran mercenary full sprint out of a room to avoid being stunned by a flashbang because they aren't wearing sunglasses, only to be caught in the flash range as they leave the room anyway. Let's talk about Tactical Structure. Tactics are very important. Having a good or bad plan may just as well make or break a confrontation. Here are a couple strategies I employ: Divide and Conquer Regicide There are plenty more tactics you can make up and test out throughout the course of your gameplay, but these two I've found are relatively more successful than anything I've tried. I have other tactics I use but I'd rather not spoil them, I'll write them in an IC book another time. The general rule of combat when clearing rooms is to be quick and efficient as possible. Always focus on building up your own tempo while denying the other force their own means of building tempo. The longer you dilly-dally in combat, the better chance the adversary has to screw on their head and to figure out how to outplay you. If you want to be successful, you'll want to avoid things that cause you not to be successful, savvy? WHAT'S GONNA WORK? I can't stress how important it is to have rapport built within your team. If you can't trust any of them and vice versa, not only is that a personal problem on both ends, but you have the lowest chance to execute anything right with a team. A team structure must be able to execute a plan and be on the same page regarding who has what role and what the stakes are for failure. If you plan on ICly being a douchebag to your teammates and plan on being successful with your team, then guess what, you can't have your cake and also eat it. That's just how it goes. You will not be able to be the master tactician that everyone respects when no one likes your character. Learn to be tactful, not just tactical. Leaders must also be charismatic and inspiring, not just the one with the plan. Round-about with Situational Awareness + Closing Now, this is a lot to cover. So let's do a rough TL;DR. Learn focus. If you can't learn to focus on the real issues and have a problem-solvers' mindset, you won't succeed. Whining doesn't solve problems, it just lets everyone know you have problems that you aren't willing to solve on your own while providing zero possible solutions. With a proper mindset and experience comes conventional wisdom that will stick with you every time you encounter an issue, everything will be as simple as running down a checklist with enough skill and experience. If you do not have experience with teaching, do not be a teacher. There are some things that are better off not explaining to people if you don't have the words for it. You can't explain something to someone that doesn't have the years to understand, either. Your positioning and your environment matters. Being able to make the best of both will make you incredibly oppressive to deal with, and you will have fun being rewarded for playing like a smartie. It is better to risk being caught out trying to move out of a compromised position than it is to guarantee to be overwhelmed in a compromised position. Mobility, mobility, mobility. Stay dynamic, not stagnant. Being well-equipped is important. Knowing what to be prepared for is better than knowing what to expect. Respect the power of whatever equipment you possess and whatever equipment your opponent possesses. Play to your equipment's strengths and against the adversary's weaknesses. Everything has strengths and weaknesses. Know how to make good use of your strengths and cover your weaknesses if possible. The versatile individual is more survivable than a strong individual with an Achilles heel. Know how to make a plan. Sometimes the most immediately obvious solution isn't always the best one, and often the brute force solution actually is, if your opponent does not expect it. On the other end, know to respect that the other side can do this too. Expect nothing but be prepared for anything. The longer you and an opponent stay in combat, the more likely one (or both) of you is going to die. Tactics are strong, but plans should stay as simple as possible. Complexity to plans makes it more likely something will go wrong in one of the many crucial steps. Remember what I said about chewing out small victories? Small defeats add up too. Only add a step of complexity if there's a factor to the equation that must be considered in order to survive. Teamwork is critically important, as is building rapport with your team. Against the worst odds you can succeed against anything if your team's willpower is strong enough. Can just as easily fail without it. Before a certain someone asks why this is a thing instead of it being a roleplay guide or something, I'll put it this way. You do not roleplay when your characters are dead, only the living get to roleplay. This is a survival game at its core and the mechanics are balanced around consequence being brutal. It's important to know how to survive SS13 before you learn the intricacies of roleplay. Anyway, this essay was fun to write up. I hope it's just as fun and interesting to read. I'll be writing up a Leadership 101 guide at some point to help current command staff players and prospective to-be-whitelisted individuals figure out the basics of how to lead and how to make their department function.

How about skipping the ability to attempt a simple conversation to reign in behavior the properly escalated way instead of just having an excuse to flex your command e-peen?

Since wiki page changes are based on an approval basis from contributors, isn't it effectively impossible to do any actual damage/grief on the wiki aside from causing momentary annoyance to the individuals having to approve it?

I was gonna say, in what world does a stun baton still 1HKO? I believe if you aim at the head there is a good chance it does, given it's not protected through the siemens_coefficient variable. But otherwise, clothing tends to protect from batonning. There is counterplay to this.

this is a good idea

OT, but, I remember this. I also recall being irritated at seeing such a 'concept' that was thought up by someone who thought it was really original to design such a character. You're not really alone there.

As above. The very notion that the character is not perfect, but rather 'flawed', is the very reason I find Prestoff as a bit of a roguish scoundrel yet still interesting.

So to take away from this situation, should everyone expect you to rush to the highest escalated punishment in order to deal with issues? Because that's what you did here and you don't seem particularly trying to empathize whatsoever.

Easily the simplest question to answer out of all of this and you dodged it.

You did not once bring this up as an issue ICly, so for all I knew you didn't care. You did not instruct me to stop. This is what the wiki tells AI players on what to do regarding giving information away: . It is also good roleplay. The wiki recommends this kind of playstyle. Whether it irritates people is of not a consequence to be really concerned of because there is no end of variation of what might irritate someone in-game. I will grant you this one, but nobody brought it up as a problem. Indeed, this is the Party horns are not indicative of an AI malfunctioning. I did not refuse a direct order. I stalled you in order to get context as to why you were entering the AI upload without an announcement of intention on what you intended to do. "I need no reason, I'm just going to walk all over you" is not something I'm going to simply take. You chose to threaten me and ICly accuse me of being malfunctioning, while also threatening to bring the security team down with lethals to "deal with me", if I did not disable the turrets. You assumed my OOC intent and skipped crucial steps in communicating as a head of staff while you were dead-intent on attempting to deliberately shut down roleplay that somehow personally disgusted you. Yes, I believe I have fair cause to accuse you of metagaming. When you give the AI zero context or reason for an attempt to change the AI's laws, yes, an AI is going to ask the context for it. It's absolutely unprecedented for a head of staff to march to the AI core because of the AI saying things that the captain took personal offense to but never attempted to address. You chose not to communicate your initial intention and when my AI asked you as to what your captain thought they were doing, they threatened the AI and gave little else context as to what was even wrong. Non-antagonists should not be changing laws to an AI so frivolously without attempting to escalate through minor measures first. You went from 0 to 100 because you were irritated? You should not be using your whitelist and the authority stemming from being a command character to instantly slam the hammer down on other characters without prior escalation and reason to use such a heavy-handed method of punishment. It's excessive misuse of authority and should never come from a loyalty-implanted role either. I resent being accused of 'sulking', I was literally indisposed talking to a moderator. Towards the end of the round I was communicating with the moderator handling this issue as I was arguing my case. If you can't see my point of view as anything other than "sulking" because you're intent on believing that I deserved whatever you issued, it's one more reason as to why I think you should be punished OOCly. I have a strong belief you use the command role to exert your frustrations and irritable nature on other players. You're abusing your whitelist to dole out unfair judgement on other characters ICly without making an attempt to escalate appropriately. You cast blame and take zero responsibility. Furthermore, I could say much of the same about your captain's ability to make judgement calls. You insisted to the engineering department to prioritize setting up the tesla while station power was failing. My AI made mention of this (as it's a computer, whose priorities are based on efficiency alone) as a suboptimal method that won't output what the station needed. Only after the supermatter being set-up after the tesla did the station's power finally stabilize (this is because the Tesla SMESes by default don't output enough what the station needs, not that the engine is suboptimal.) But viewpoints of one another don't really matter. tl;dr: You rushed to punish my character the hardest way you could without prior communication as to what was wrong with my character's behavior until I spoke with an administrator. This is bad head of staff play. Do you disagree?

BYOND Key: Scheveningen Game ID: bV9-cIFn Player Byond Key: Kaedwuff Staff involved: Tailson Reason for complaint: Unbecoming behavior as a head of staff, deliberately poor communication leading up to the captain giving me these laws: . Simply because I was using common communications as an AI to attempt to spice up an otherwise uneventful low-pop extended round with some dialogue. It was a low-pop extended round and it was obvious how much anticipation there was for an antagonist to prop up in the round, but it was secret rolled into extended. Since it was clear that everybody was just standing around and doing very little, (I never knew both the HOS and the captain could be so statuesque as I observed them throughout the round) I attempted to interact through common communications to spice up an otherwise uneventful and boring round. Kaedwuff, as their pink-haired captain, chose to beeline straight into my AI core, implores me to turn off my turrets as I question them as to why they're attempting to enter my upload with seemingly no escalation or prior attempts at communication and uploads the two above laws. Rather than telling me to stop what I was doing (which is a simple thing I would've obliged), they chose to march down to my core silently until they ordered me to disable my turrets. I stalled them momentarily in order to actually get a word in edge-wise. They refused to give the benefit of the doubt and I stalled for longer until I got the answer I needed. They accused me of being malfunctioning (a very metagamey accusation, for one. An AI with wit doesn't remotely come close to having adequate proof of a computer going rampant, either) and threatened to bring the security team down until I would open the door. This is an extremely gross form of using power as a head of staff to attempt in shut down other characters in the round attempting to roleplay and otherwise have fun in the round. Whitelists are supposed to filter out certain people with mindsets that they can control how much fun other people are having in the round by exercising what authority the job they join as gives them to influence the round in any way they see fit. When I asked [mention]Tailson[/mention] as to the reason the captain did all this, evidently this was due to the captain trying to 'reign in' and 'punish' behavior. The issue I see with this excuse was that I was never issued a scolding or a direct order to cease whatever I was doing. [mention]Kaed[/mention] immediately escalated to punishment. If Kaed were playing security and brigged someone on a vague proof-basis without telling them their charges or questioning them for their fair say on the matter, any other admin would surely job-ban them for being shitcurity. Shitcurity/being bad command isn't a state of necessarily breaking the rules, what makes most people shitcurity or bad command is a lack of understanding that certain actions can end/ruin a person's entire round - or that they know but don't care about anything other than their own personal goals in a round. Did you attempt to adminhelp the issue at the time? If so, what was the known action taken by administration/moderation? It was not handled in the way I would have liked, because I have witnessed whitelist strips for less. The moderator had certain limitations such as not having full round logs to make more of a succinct decision that would've been appropriate for the situation. Approximate Date/Time: 01-Sept-2018