MO_oNyMan

I think you're mixing IRs The first IR (Sandavol) that resulted in a reprimand wasn't related to antags and i don't think there are any security radio logs that would play against me in that situation. If you mean the second IR (Gonzales) then even aside from the fact that there was confusion about what was related to antags and what wasn't, the closure notice goes on about me threatening people with the taser and how CSIs shouldn't carry tasers. I haven't touched a taser the entire shift, i didn't threaten anyone with it. Moreover under false accusations i recieved not an equivalent of an admin note (which would've been pretty bad as is) but almost a week long character ban. Which considering the lack of solid proof is pretty appalling. I have a very specific issue that seems to be reoccuring. When i do everything correctly (reporting a crime, storing contraband etc.) but still get punished by CCIA for it, what do i do? The punishment can vary up to a character ban (which is what mods do) but mods can get to conclusive results by looking at logs which are pretty solid. CCIA can only read interviews and based on that more often than not their judgement does not follow the actual events in question. So why are character bans a viable option? Leave them with the reprimands if they don't have means of obtaining solid proof. Otherwise people will be losing characters on arbitrary basis regardless of whether their play in the moment was correct or not. And when you're playing, doing your job and then suddenly you're being told that you can't play your character anymore because someone said you did something bad, that does not help the atmosphere of the game one bit.

I've always wondered why are unwhitelisted players allowed authority over the captains. This fixes it and also allows to keep emergency response forces staffed with less equipped dudes with no authority. +1

How to explain accusations of crime that never happened then? The statistical probability of CCIA making charges up from thin air is way too high to write it off as a reasonable human factor of making a mistake. Two counts of spoofed charges through the course of two consecutive IRs in the span of less than a months. How can anyone resort to CCIA as a mean to adress IC problems knowing that there's about 50% chance of them going into completely wrong directions and either not punishing someone who actually did something wrong or punishing someone who didn't? How are people supposed to act and play knowing that even if they do everything correctly they can loose their characters to the blatant disregard towards the lack of evidence?

You stop trying after they've started hitting you because you get hit badly. Autohit with a manual hit would indeed hit you badly

uhh, from the IC perspective trying to control the opponents weapon in the scuffle of a fight (which disarm basically is) is not something surreal that never happens. In fact most fights do that. While disarm runing melee weapon advantage is a sort of a problem i think putting a cooldown on it is not the best way to fix this. I would instead suggest giving the weapon holder a percent chance of getting in a free hit on a person that tries to disarm them (much like firearms are right now). So that having a weapon gave you a distinct advantage in a fight while also not always guaranteeing victory

i was under impression that CPR was vastly underpowered not actually helping people who are dead. Unless it recieves a buff to help with resuscitation i don\t see it causing rib fractures as a viable options as it would basically kill the feature

That's presuming security wasn't initially invited to deal with the threat. The active situation was handled, the aftermath was not and bodies and contraband needed to be stored properly. No medics stored the bodies in the morgue, no medics brought the raiders' contraband to security which is why i was forced to handle it myself. I'm not sure what "direct cleanup" was made but it sure wasn't connected to the raiders since even after deescalation to green everything remained in its place and i was the only one cleaning up. I managed to sort out two out of four bodies dealing with the aftermath of the incident (and noone including passing medics seemed to have any objections) yet when i was handling the remaining two it was deemed necesssary to make trespassing charges appear. As far as i remember code green was reinstated only in between second haul and the HoP's request to return equipment, which delayed the third haul slightly. While according to regulations head of staff can deny access to their department, that wasn't done. The bodies and contraband were still lying in medbay, noone informed security that the medbay is now off-limits and contraband and bodies of the intruders should stay in the hallways for some reason. Instead the first thing that was done was blocking the all-access elevator to prevent people getting out of sublevel. That's not denying access to medbay, that's denying the opportunity to leave which is the opposite. The raiders were not crew, were not insured by the company and were known terrorists so the only thing that could give medbay any sort of authority over them is the fact that they just so happened to die in there.

vision cones would be pretty neat. 180 degrees plus a tiny tad bit more for peripheral vision would be sufficient enough. As for combat it's really easy to use shift click to keep tabs on the opponent or even use alt+dir. Bision cone generally increases immersion and realism and introduces more options for gameplay without taking a huge toll on combat (since it's pretty easy to work around it and everyone stays in the same conditions). The only problem is the difficulty of implementation but i don't think we're in a rush generally +1

You didn't clean up. I was cleaning up for you. Picking up corpses and weapons immideately followed the fight, nobody had any problem with that. CSIs can do a lot of things but one thing they lack is psychic abilities. To convey your thoughts the corporation has given you the headset. If you let someone in and don't want them in anymore - use it. Breaking regulations is punishable and is not how you go about things. Even in a hypothetical scenario if security actually was trespassing. It's standard procedure

That’s somewhat not how it should work. You should still have reported the offender for this infraction and listed down your witnesses on this incident report regardless of letting sleeping dogs lie unknowingly whether they’re vicious or not. By doing so, you are able to give more than enough information for us to piece together to why did this happen. You’ve chose to take this path and sleeping dogs woke up and have bitten you. On the round directly following the round of the incident i was contacted by the SRVODeath in PMs about an IR filed against me. I told him that i was looking to file an IR myself and whether counter IRs were allowed. He replied the counter IRs are not a thing and that i'll have to just mention witnesses in the interview and he'll go through them. I had an extra witness, i sent him the name of the witness in PM, i mentioned the witness in and interview. So i did everything i could do, asked if i could do more, was assured that it's not needed and rolled with it. If i was actually supposed to file a counter IR then it was a case of miscommunication. I can say this without violating witness’s integrity. There were indeed testimonies against you on this. People have seen this occurred. As I review your testimony once more regarding this situation, you are the only person to have ever mentioned a small fight involving casualties and so you alone decided to call the shots and moved the bodies into Medical Bay’s morgue. By doing so, you have given the bodies over to Medical Department in which they’re responsible for this. So let me clarify, the investigation voided the antag incident that was the entire reason for me being let into medbay and allocating bodies? And that's why trespassing is considered legit? Because medics calling security to medbay never happened? That’s not the issue. The issue is, you are a Crime Scene Investigator which means you are part of Security Department. According to testimonies, as a member of Security Department, you threatened an Emergency Technician Sherer. This is a reminder that you should not threatening crew members. Security Department is there to ensure the safety of crew members, not to attack your own crew members. Security positions are also expected to have high tolerance with rude crew members and hold it in. None of the threats (both from paramedic and myself) went over the line of regulation breach on "threat of death or serious injury". Considering recent circumstances (both armed raid which was apparently voided without droping an IR for some reason and me being locked down for a while and then paramedic appearing to see if being a dick can maybe solve the trespassing problem) the threats or any frustration really are ICly justified. I would consider keeping unphased if i was playing an IPC for example, but i'm playing a human that can become upset. And there were well over sufficient amount of severe reasons to be upset with medics going petty yet again. Some of them were left out so what exactly i'm expected to do in antag rounds? Acting like there wasn't ever an antag the moment it leaves my sight? There are testimonies against you saying this happened. Even in the court, testimonies ARE evidences. We do not investigate throughout OOC logs to discover whether you really did have that taser weapon as Eve said, the court do not have the capabilities to hold attack log whether person X hit person Y. Testimonies are used as supportive evidence. If person x says that person y threatened them with a taser then it's ground for reasonable suspicion. Then let's ask questions regarding the taser: does person x own a taser? Is there any pictures of them holding a taser? Where are prints of that person on the taser? In criminalistics every action leaves a reflection (that is the subject of study). If you shoot someone the reflections would be the bullet hole, the casing, the powder on your hands and on the gun, the damages done by the bullet etc. If something is true (which accusation of carrying a taser wasn't) there must be a reflection of it presented as tangible evidence to give the accusation any sort of weight. If you can't present it (which CCIA frequently can't) then it's just a suspicion and can't be used to dispense punishment. The haphazard rush for punishment with insufficient evidence is the problem here. Saying it's not because everything works fine is ridiculous because the very reason for this complaint being filed is me being accused of something i've never done twice in a span of a month. The solution i'm suggesting is either don't rush for decisions when all you have is a guy's testimony (which would considerably lower the CCIA punishments) or employ better means of obtaining tangible evidence (which would be somewhat difficult to set up unless you're using evidence gathered with the help of security/IAA on-shift). as with previous point. It doesn't matter how long do you spend on your investigation. If you don't have enough evidence, you don't have enough evidence. Using only radio logs and testimonies is not a reliable way to make a correct decision. Imagine piecing up a puzzle but 3/4 of the pieces are missing. You just can't reliably tell what on the puzzle most of the time. No matter how long do you look at it, you'll just think yourself into a corner and then slap your best guess. And piecing puzzles with only 1/4 of pieces would be completely fine by me, but the success or failure of this process can result in a player losing a character.

There seems to be a misunderstanding on what is to be considered "valid knowledge". A guy saying "He did wrong, i swear to god" is not "valid knowledge" Matching or unmatching testimonies and using this alone to make a decision show extremely poor results as can be seen in presented cases where crimes just appeared out of thin air. Short of direct confessions conversation itself is not a mean of proving guilt anywhere in the world. What is done through conversation (interview, interrogation) is search for further leads to actual solid evidence. Again if you were able to reliably use an idle chat to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt there wouldn't be an issue. When you're out of nowhere being accused of something you haven't done that's where the lack of evidence is located. A thing that did not happen can not be reliably proven due to who would have thought the lack of evidence. And despite the fact that actions my character is being accused of never happened (and therefore can not be proven) i heard nothing about the lack of evidence (as you'd expect and as you said there would be). No evidence - no crime. There's your justification Except courts do "check attack logs". Forensic science is an entire field based around "checking attack logs" IRL. We have some representation of it on the station btw. And if courts can't prove the suspect did X they don't charge them for X. And CCIA shouldn't either. Why do they do it is the question that is the cornerstone of the problem here Wrong. There actually is plenty of evidence that make one side's testimony more credible than the other's, much like how real investigation works, if one has lied before, their credibility drops significantly You don't seem to understand how a real investigation works. You talk to people involved, you look for evidence, you try for confession. If all failed you drop the investigation. I don't know how law enforcement from where you are from works but going by "oh so he lied before he's therefore guilty" is not how things are generally done Oh man, i'm so glad CCIA has this great method that is based on matching testimonies. Surely I can be completely calm knowing they will not get themselves into a dead-end following this method and start accusing people of things they didn't do with at least 90% probability? Oh wait, the method doesn't actually work and i have two counts of proof in a span of a month. Good thing i established that fact at the beginning of the thread otherwise someone would have to explain to me how to match testimonies from an IR with only two people involved.

talking to witnesses and making the decision based on whether you feel like you trust this particular dude over that particular dude is not a sufficient evidence to conclude an investigation in any shape or form. People lie, you can't tell the difference. If you could there wouldn't be a problem but you can't. And apart from this unstable source of information CCIA has absolutely zero means of obtaining any sort of solid evidence that would make them actually fit for an investigation As much as you can't claim that your IC lack of evidence can be used to stick tangible charges So they spoke to people involved and based on their accounts which may or may not be true arbitrarily decided to punish me? Is that your understanding of solid evidence? What actual evidence they have to deem one side more credible than the other? The answer is none. Also proves that you just really want the CCIA to use meta knowledge so your characters won't be punished in the future. The fact that i wish for any and all CCIA actions on my characters removed there proves that i really just want the CCIA to use any solid evidence that could actually prove the guilt or innocence of people involved. Which is currently not the case.

The tonality of the notices doesn't bother me as much as the context in which they are given. The context being false accusations. I could understand dismissiveness in the case of charges being completely valid with solid proof backing them up. However when the subject of the discussions is something that was quiet literally made up by the investigators that's where i start getting sceptical The fact that notes stick to a player is the major part of the problem. The investigation process is not nearly accurate enough to justify sticking notes to a player that may or may not influence further staff decisions. The cases presented highlight it pretty well. If the mistake probability is that high either employ better means of uncovering facts to lower it or don't take investigations at all. Whether the resolution to the incident is chosen to be a realitic one or a an attempt to moderate undesirable behaviour, charging a character for a non-existant crime is a poor choice of means to carry it out. If the issue with miscommunication is acknowledged i'd consider it resolved, hoping such things will be handled more gracefully in the future

If the organisation the entire purpose of which is to investigate certain incident is not equipped to properly investigate such incidents what exactly is the reason for its existence? If you don't have any means whatsoever to deal with misinformation you might as well just flip a coin on an incident report to determine the result. And you don't need a whitelisted person to flip a coin. Not to mention flipping a coin is not something that is generally considered a distinctive proof of guilt That's what i was told to do, that's what i'm doing. Refer to exhibit e of the initial thread.

BYOND Key: MO_oNyMan Staff BYOND Key: The list includes but is not limited to Synonno, UnknownMurderer, SRVODeath Game ID: Reason for complaint: Multiple incidents stack up to lead to this complaint. I will be listing them in chronological order Act 1 Act 2 Act 3 Finale Evidence/logs/etc: Exhibit A: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=90&t=11084 Exhibit B: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=122&t=11217 Exhibit C: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=11210 Exhibit D: https://imgur.com/a/Hs1FR53 Exhibit F: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=98&t=11303 Exhibit E: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=122&t=11301 Additional remarks: The list of staff involved is incomplete since i'm not exactly sure who was involved in misjudging incident reports in question