Scheveningen

...OK, denying, then. Due to the nature of this, exactly one month from now on November 30th is when you're permitted to make another application again. Attempting to override this before the slated time period will not only result in its immediate denial but also push the date further up another week.

There's never been one. We get it, alex, you smoke weed. Materials such as steel and glass are missing. Even though it is mining's job to produce it, it should probably be there in case all of the miners decide to drop dead down a ditch.

That's what I was looking for. Unban appeal and apology accepted. Thank you for taking the moment to self reflect, it does show a lot of strength for a person to do that.

No. The staff run trials for people who they want on the team for certain or those who have a substantial chance of showing how good of a job they can do. My impression is that if such a chance were given to Ferguson, it would be very quickly used up. Their projected hostility and quick-to-anger mindset is not something that would benefit the team nor would it benefit the community at large. We don't run trials for more-than-substantial flight risks. There would be no point in doing so.

To add to the above, some of us (as in, Mods/admins particularly, not really CCIAA that I know of) did feel it was quite unfortunate that the applicant opted to apply for moderator instead, considering how our numbers are consistently topped off (we don't really need more than two at the moment before we're capped for awhile, really) or kept at a reasonable number just about every season, but CCIAA has been without needed manpower for months. The applicant apparently voiced some concern that the incident report procedures seemed tedious as they were described and that it might've been a dealbreaker for them to join into as they didn't feel as if they had the 'patience' for it, or something like that. I should probably add, there is a fair deal of potentially far more extensive amounts of attention-to-detail examples that would stretch beyond the scope of CCIAA to be dealing with such as the notes and view variables system, being able to interpret logs and at what time they happened in which context, being able to understand certain social nuances and log-in report mechanics to better understand the methods of ban evaders and whoever else to watch based on what reports come in. And et cetera. As it stands, it's within my personal opinion that anyone who is willing to learn the methods of CCIAA and hopefully pick up a little bit of the backlog in IC report work, would end up more greatly benefiting the staff roster compared to just adding another +1 to our already fairly substantial numbers of moderators. There's also nothing stopping you from switching either from CCIAA to moderator but unfortunately given the sensitive nature of access to logs no one person can be both. This is not to say that I am opposing this application, but it's also not to say I'm supporting this application. I admit I've lost touch with some of the fresher blood community members as of recent due to me working 5 days in a row during any given week and then being off for the other 2, so generally speaking I only have occasional nights and some precious hours of my days off to make notice of these sorts of things when I'm on-server, stark contrast to when I used to be on more frequently with an at-home job. Yada yada, who cares if I have a life. That being said, if this is what you want, we'll see how it goes.

What Xander said. That conduct is inappropriate and good OOC attitudes are what we look for in potential and existing whitelistees. There is a serious lack of disrespect you seem to hold against people who hold an opinion in terms of upholding what the actual rules are and how we enforce them. Especially one of the most important ones. It's degrading and belittling. Furthermore, you copypasted your previous denied application from a day ago. This shows little actual effort in being more convincing or caring to put actual needed substance instead of chunks of paragraphs into your application. Little effort displayed = little displayed amount of caring brought to the table, if you're wondering how the two were connected. Kind of disappointing, especially since you put so much effort into trying to convince me you deserved the antagonist unban, and I am feeling that was not probably wise considering how quickly you flopped back into the same kind of behavior we discouraged you to be doing. Will most likely deny this as soon as the week marker hits. Not seeing good feedback from this.

Well good to know, you've just proven you particularly have a serious self-control and attitude problem, probably one that compares pretty well with the guy you were mocking. Did you have to stoop to their level to make a point?

https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?p=86685#p86685 No, definitely not.

I don't recall if that was the context. but I don't really remember what the context was anyway, so I couldn't tell you if you were right or wrong about what the subject matter was. I don't usually give out bans for political discussions because everyone has a right to an opinion as long as they don't violate the principle of the very first rule you see when you log onto the server. I'm not sure if I'm really convinced to lift this ban if you're going to throw out sarcastic ripostes as your justification for how you acted. It wouldn't really be worth it to lift a ban placed for negative player attitude if you display much the same in your unban appeal, it doesn't really tell me that you've improved or matured if you're going to word your justification in this manner. You only seem to succeed at coming off as more rude and standoffish and still offput you received a ban for this sort of behavior. And I think I should point out the issue in consistency if you don't think how your displayed attitude is as serious as the other issues outlined in your notes. These things tend to add up to paint a better picture as to how you conducted yourself on this server. If you're going to apologize for the mess-ups, why not also apologize for the negative attitude you've displayed?

but why

The event was literally Midnight Animal. Good shit.

Unless it's a pretty big gun you know how to use properly, and there is no defense against a knowledgeable and robust player besides being more robust than them. Pretty much the only answer you're gonna get here to the query you posed.

So what? This happens to literally every person in the game in terms of the amount of stun threat a cultist has. The merchant doesn't need special exceptions just because. Most merchants I've seen are fully capable of taking care of themselves.

i entirely agree, what's with the petty shitflinging. This is supposed to be about my conduct, stop using this thread to soapbox, please.

Just note that you're allowed to post security officers outside of the merchant ship in the event someone's buying guns such as derringers for themselves. They're allowed to confiscate stuff like that if said crewmember does not initially sign a weapons permit off from the HoS in doing so, for obvious reasons.

Don't you have some of my evil laundry to do? Such as the sweaters with spikes all over them? I expect them to be handwashed with scrub sponges.

Similar, but I'm not sure if it's too relevant. Not every case will be handled the same especially since there's a score of us in numbers which means any of us may have different methods and different opinions based on independent contextual situations. Even if it wasn't dealt with so that it was consistent in line with our other decisions, the primary issue is we do not enforce what an okay niche situation would be. Ultimately, it doesn't make what Hive did any less wrong though. I should probably also note that Hive was forumbanned for pitching lies in a complaint in addition to the swathe of notes on-server and conduct relating to the forums that he had. So he won't be able to reply further in this complaint. Not really anyone's business but this is why this complaint may end up not going anywhere in the near future.

Considering you brought that up and are still holding that over me I think you're the one holding the grudge, not me. I'm not the mod who's been constantly condescending, admitting to following me during rounds to find things to punish me for, or taking over punishments from other staff in mid-game so you get to be the one to do it. Ever since Discord you've been harassing and bullying me out of spite. Pot calling the kettle black, I guess? If you think me explaining how you broke the rules is talking down to you then honestly that's not really my problem if you get offended over that. Sorry, dude. I don't believe I've ever admitted the second one to recent memory. It seems a bit like nonsense. I think it's nothing more than coincidence that you've run into me many times relating to player issues. I look out more especially for this kind of behavior because of how harmful and toxic it is to the community. I don't think that's personal bias, that's morein executing a proper MO on the most common rulebreak that happens, and that is powergaming. As for the third, I had to take over because superiorform's computer bluescreened and he could not be online to deal with the issue. That being said, I'm denying this appeal. Feel free to appeal it in a month, though frankly if you wish to have any chance of appealing the ban in the future you should first drop the hostile attitude and perhaps take a little responsibility and culpability for your own conduct.

Disagree. Phoron may be the superior set-up but the 100% reason why the SM delaminates if it isn't emitter related is because the filters get set incorrectly. Nitrogen is... not good nor optimal, but it serves as a decent coolant. Despite being pretty terrible at containing heat by itself.

Lifting the original ban. I doubt the original fellow will come along so it isn't a big deal. Let me know if there are problems, I won't lock this up just yet

Considering you brought that up and are still holding that over me I think you're the one holding the grudge, not me.

..Because you broke those rules. Characterized by the statement of, "This isn't really what I believe you've done wrong, it is what I know you've done wrong because our ruleset both in written nature and nature in spirit greatly discourage this kind of conduct on our server." Which is a nice way to say you broke rules, you're trying to say you didn't break any despite having run across this issue over and over again. This isn't an issue with the thermal drill in particular but your conduct as we've seen it. I'm denying this appeal and will have it locked in 24 hours. If you have anything else to say you may as well say it, I'm not really surprised this went the way it did considering how you handled your last appeal for the science job ban. This isn't personal, this is me doing my job enforcing server rules you still don't seem to have a grasp of. Sorry, I wish you better luck if you manage to fit into another server climate.

I think either the prices need toned down or the budget accounts need inflated in credits for the purposes of departmental purchases. It should definitely come out of someone's wallet personally for trying to buy a personal guard dog, not so much if security wants doggos.

..validhunting is a form of powergaming, powergaming being a broad definition of your playstyle which generally does not provide particular benefit to the server atmosphere we attempt to nurture and uphold. The HoP gave you permission to defend yourself in the event your life was threatened. According to multiple testimonies here, you did more than just that and willfully sought out opportunities to engage antagonists. It takes combat skill to use a mining tool when it's repurposed as a weapon, as it was used. When it's displayed that your character has the discipline and confidence to repurpose a focused mining laser as a weapon to use against humanoid beings rather than as a rockcrusher, and there's no character skills to suggest this is justified, there's a problem. Being able to play on the server stops being a right when you repeatedly toe the line of acceptability when it comes to conflict escalation and break character rules that posit proper risk assessment and a sense of self-preservation are required when roleplaying in-character. This isn't really what I believe you've done wrong, it is what I know you've done wrong because our ruleset both in written nature and nature in spirit greatly discourage this kind of conduct on our server. If you think otherwise, that is unfortunate but not unexpected. If you can't deal, there are other servers you can play on that may be more tuned to your methods of play.

The situation was that I was caught up in a dramatic complaint. Since this is a situation relating to mirror bans I'll try to contact Skull about this. Sorry for the delay, sometimes stuff goes on and they put off other stuff that should be important.