Skull132

I can change the code of flammenwerfer fuel to instacoat someone, upon getting werfed. Flammenwerfer fuel is actually very nasty: a goopy type of petrol, basically. It sticks to everything and is a PITA to get off, so this change would make sense. As for mob-related fire mechanics, yeah, they kill very fucking slowly. for some reason, they don't apply damage right off the bat. I need to look into that.

I don't think NT would use an Asimov-style lawset. The specific usage of the word "Employee" exists because NT really doesn't care about non-employees. Their safety, past a certain point, is completely irrelevant to NT. Which is why the AI is pretty much allowed to do whatever the fuck they want with non-employees.

Holy necro post buttman. Also, if we enforced rules to the letter 100% of the time, we'd have to ban just about everyone for something.

I was actually going to comment on this at some point. I still have a few staff complaints to do my rounds in, but the last player complaint was submitted like a week ago. Are our players finally laying off the salt? Or did they simply figure out that complaints garner no immediate actions, and are now trying to figure out better ways to get each other banned? Find out. Next time. On the Aurora.

It should also be noted that command staff have no responsibility at all to actually give you the access you claim to be trained for in your records. If you joined as an assistant, but are playing a fully qualified medic, for example, then no one is actually required to give you the MD job. Similar principle for smaller access and permission grants. The standard is the job you have mechanics wise, and the access you're granted by that.

Ditto. BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT~~

This isn't happening as a result of the posts, so dw. the collars will be implemented ingame, da. No one will have it instantly, though. We want to RPz it out. It'll act similar to this, yes:

If Vaurca sec officers have been mandible chewing people, then I think NT would indeed remove them from the role. And Chaz's original reasoning for it is also sound.

Yah, the issue is, intent was very clearly illegal detention. Which is kidnapping. Which usually comes with assault, and not minor assault. Though it would have been clearer if an actual weapon were used, like a baton.

Just so I understand correctly: Assault on a Head of Staff is written so it is considered to be the Assault charge (significant injury) on a Head of Staff. Assault (and even Minor Assault) assumes damage to be incurred. Ordinarily pushing and tabling would only really be battery. Does this mean that Battery against a Head of Staff constitutes Assault on a Head of Staff regardless of injury? It's intent to overpower and disable in this case, though. Clearly so. Battery is just unwanted physical contact.

I'm kind of with Eliot's last reply here. Because Jun wasn't actually charged with mutiny, instead with assaulting a head of staff (which grabbing and tabling a head of staff in a clear attempt to arrest/overpower him is), and disobeying of orders, I don't think Dumplinz should be in immediate trouble. But there are a few issues that I would align with getting used to the bigger set of trousers that you have as a HoS, that have become apparent as we go through this complaint. I will also clarify. Mutiny is, word for word, "To openly rebel against or attempt to remove command staff with violent intent." It is actually a very clear directive, as are all regulations. They are all written in a manner that is not open to interpretation, as having them open to interpretation would cause a heap of issues. As such, in order to convict someone of mutiny, you must be able to prove that their end goal, with your arrest, was to remove the command staff from power and subjugate their own rule over the station. Since this was just an attempted arrest of a head of staff, wrongful though it may be, exceeding official powers with a side-order of sedition would be applicable. Going over the logs, I'm not really sure why most of the conversation started hinging on whether or not mutiny was applicable...?

And also shows that he is incapable of understanding why his appeal was rejected. I do believe I made it quite clear.

No. This is not an issue for general community decision. The only people with actual power over this decision are the people affected by Plahunter's inability to control himself. Only their opinion matters on this front. (Because guess what. Chances are Plahunter's not going to give a shit about you; but as history has shown, he is very capable of picking up old grudges, and to do so extremely quickly.) And as far as I'm concerned, none of them have commented with positive reception (they probably have read both the unban appeal and this thread), and we even had a few negative messages from people involved: http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=4851&start=10#p48512 http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=4851&start=10#p48545 http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=4851&start=20#p48560 Democracy is not applicable in this affair. And as it stands, I'm not seeing a reason to alter my decision.

Seriously, though, we didn't ask you to make this.

This is the ban reason on the tin. The fact is that he went right back into his old MO after being unbanned. This included metagrudging against other characters, and going to ridiculous lengths (and badRP) to get back at them.

Anyone can say that they're sorry. Anyone can promise you the stars and the Moon. Anyone can beg for another chance. But all of that is completely and utterly irrelevant if you are unable to act in a mature fashion after being given your nth chance. And quite frankly, maturity is the issue here. You were banned because you were acting like a child towards other players. You were rebanned because you were still acting like a child towards other players. And interestingly enough. Back in September, when I had my runin with you, you were again acting like a child over an issue. Allow me to remind you: you threatened to sue some SS13 folks because they booted you off their team, and were potentially keeping your contributions to the project. Seriously, you hadn't changed one bit back in September. And that's, what? 3.5 months ago? I would also like to present your current actions as proof of the matter that you have not changed. A mature individual understands when their time is up, and does not beg as a child would. Though, this is a bit of a catch-22, ain't it? And TF, it's an argument of gain over loss. Due to Pla's history here, the fact that he pretty much spent a month or two attacking our players before getting his first ban, unbanning him now carries the risk of subjecting said players, who are still active, to the same conduct. (This fear is actually a legitimate one, as after being unbanned he continued to go after the same people as before.) Even if we swiftly ban him again, I do think that there's a reasonable limit on how many times we can ask someone to go through with that in a game.

Tbh, I would like to keep the forum open. It's very good engagement to have ideas discussed and so on. As long as people understand that we have other priorities right now, I think it's fine?

We've been here before. Unfortunately, as I said, you used up your chances. Learn from it, and move on. That's roughly the best advice I can give you. Appeal denied.

...No one got the Army Men reference.

Why even stay here if it's detrimental to your health, hooyah?

"6 months ago." So you obviously haven't taken the full year to change, despite claiming to the contrary. Anyways, here's the deal. The reason you were banned for was harassment of other players, and metagrudging said players on top of that. If it were griefing the server, then fine, whatever, no on really cares. But the shit you were banned for is personal, thanks to your own actions, to where having you unbanned will affect those players. Asking for another chance is all fine and good, but there's a certain point where doing so gets silly. Considering the amount of outright warnings, discussions (even before you were initially banned), chances given, and your actions over the last 8 or so months (following your failure to hold up parole), I think this circus is getting very silly, and my will to keep entertaining it is lacking. Plus, how many times can we ask the people involved to give you a second chance?

Unfortunately, I had the please of watching your shenanigans roughly 6 months ago. Which were on par with the shit you demonstrated a year ago. You really hadn't changed back then, and you probably haven't changed now. Even if you have, though, I think you've used up the amount of times you can claim it here.

Apparently you felt "like it's been enough" last time as well. How is this time going to be any different?

...I'm sorry. Is this really the best you can do? I don't mean to be abrasive, or offensive, or getting in your face, but. You've been banned at least twice for the same thing. And literally the only thing you can come up with, "Hey folks! It's been a year! Can we give this whole deal another shot"? I, really don't know what to say.

Note, Tish. 5 is too much. If 5 Vaurca die, then it's probably emergency shuttle anyways. 1 to possibly 2 should be the limit in that case.