Itanimulli

As the leader of the mercs that round...no, the mercs themsevles were not the violent party in conflict. The heisters had been fighting amongst themselves whilst the mercs calmly recruited people for decidedly safe jobs, claiming openly that they did not deal in blood. Security engaged the mercs later when they went to investigate the fact that the heisters had completely raided the vault without them. I'm unsure what the deal is with you claiming they were murderous thugs harassing crew. If we were, we wouldn't have been able to recruit them in the first place. We (I) used exploitables to cozy up to them and find a way to appeal, before seeing the need to gear up completely because for some reason Commandnando called ert. The only head in there at any given time was Amaya Stone. Not sure what Resi's saying about securing assets. Meanwhile, the heisters made off with all of your stuff and escaped, while you blew the merc's shuttle for no reason other than what I can presume is frustration of the previous round, in wich you didn't get to fight a cultist Durand that had been built too late and were very vocal about being "cock-blocked." So unwarranted was the bombing and so meta was your game that you decided that the literally mist peaceful crossfire (not particularly proud of that...) In a long time was not good enough, deemed a group of people you'd never seen before as bloodthisrty thugs (the only time you left the bar was prior to the heisters fighting eachother) and perhaps even prior to one of the heisters deciding to hurt Willow Harper. I'm not saying you should have been held liable to know more about the groups, but you apparently knew enough about the group that had arrived and that they were "bloodthisty" despite never painting themselves as such. I also feel you stepped completely out of line of non-traitor noir, disregarding his usual personality in favor of causing a bang. I would have not cared about this had you not then glosted so ferverently in OOC, saying it was obviously the Tajaran's faults they died and generally deciding to be a jerk about the whole situation. It was an intense moment ICly and reminded me of a scene from Gravity or perhaps the televised animated 3D starwars cartoon, but the ooc behaviour marred it farther than it ever should have been.

Is this...the only thing you got from this post? This one secentence? It matters in context to how I responded to you, and how the bwoink affected my perception of the round as a whole. But...why did this single scentence stick out to you so much? I'd like to think I've presented a decent defense thus far. If this one phrase unravels the whole thing somehow, please tell me why.

Oh, also, I did want to point out that I thought most of the afk warnings were fair, but not relevant to "rulebreaking behaviour" that alb says he is trying to "permanently curb." I also felt myself out of line when doc bwoinked me over looc foolishness; even in that scenario, I stopped myself before attention had even been drawn to it because it felt wrong.

I am not one to tend to...speak out. As I have said in the comaint against RTNP and to you, I feel like I make things worse for myself when I do indeed talk. I also had no clear idea what a gank was until recently; the response differed from staff to staff. Garn finally set down a headmin version; unsure if that version is set in stone, but methinks Xander also got forgiven for an accusatory gank that Garn ruled to be false. As for the hypnotize shanigans, I'd exclusively used Hypnotize in solo solo situations, in wich a solo target would be readily available, alone, and not in the vicinity of anyone else. I have learned methods of becoming a bit mire liberal with who I hypno and when I do it, but a cooldown has never been relevant because I never used it often enough consecutively. I've never been in a situation in wich hypnotise unavailable because I've never put my self, even accidentally, in that situation. I tend to switch to dominate the moment it's available. Irritably, I should have used dominate that time, as it would have given me a chance to force the HoS to take suspicion off of me, but I got careless and tried to thrall him. The situation played out almost perfectly, too. I clicked hypnotise, and lingered over the HoS's name, and clicked it. The option to hypnotise was still present. I did it again, this time to Minius. And then I did it to the HoP. Until it actually managed to hypnotise someone, it didn't dissapear. It vanished after the HoP fell, but by then the additional bars were already loadong over the other two's heads, and they dropped aswell. I didn't have a moment of "oh shit I just abused a bug," I had a moment more similar to "oh, that's odd and somewhat interesting, I shall bring it up at the end of the round to see if anyone else has done this before, and why it is not more common to see." Alb brought up a method of exploitation in the ahelp, and asked if I had used a different power completely. I calmly oblidged to tell him what I had done, going over the steps. Click hypno, click a name. It will still be there until hypno actually goes through. Not something I thought was a bug. Just a strange feature; I for one have not touched the vampire's entire kit. The most successful round I've had was dominating and then embracing as many people as I could. I don't even try to spawn bats or use the screech ability or veil step. I have never touched veil step, infact. It is like traitor; sure, I've been traitor tons of times, but don't tell me I should know the code/odd inner workings of every item in the uplink. I don't, and it's unreasonable to beleive I do. Ultimately, when alb contacted me that round, I didn't expect to get made out to be a liar. As far as ss13 goes, tons of things exist and the only way to find them is via mechanical experimentation. I attempted something new and it worked, and I was pleasantly suprised that it did. If that bwoink hadn't have gone so far south, I would have readily apologized for using abilities as unnintended, moved on, never done it again, brought it up for a few rounds and likely have called it out later for other people to avoid. Maybe even tried to propose a fix. Instead, I was accused of lying, and then banned. I also freaked out because I had heard that after three temp bans you can't come back, no matter the circumstances of any of the bans. The round went from somewhat lax and comical, to full out panic, in the span of a few admin words.

sircatnip has banned itanimulli. - Reason: Hunting down cultists as a Research borg and silently setting them on fire with zero prior interaction under the guise of Captain's orders to kill. Conflict needs to be roleplayed to some degree; you don't have to monologue to somebody before killing them, but randomly setting them on fire without any attempt to interact is against the server rules. Read the "antagonists and conflict" section, along with the rest of the rules. - This will be removed in 4320 minutes.  This is the ban I'd also like being looked into about it being a gank. aboshehab has banned itanimulli. - Reason: When recieved laws to plunder, took this as an excuse to kill someone with liquid fire. This is not plundering, you do not plunder people by just "killing" them. This was really out of nowhere and you are fully aware of the effects of your inject mixture. This is a 1 week ban. - This will be removed in 10080 minutes. This is the ban I said I'd agreed with several times now.

This was your reason for permabanning me, as you said. It's one of the most relevant things ever sheerly because you said the number of them mattered so much.

Yes, and once more. That job ban was because of afking. The only temp ban that would currently have been valid was because of rule lawyering. I would like 2 things to happen. I would like additional opinion on me displaying this habitually rulebreaking behaviour; I would like my previous bans and warnings reviewed for wich ones could have appropriately weighed in on this decision.

The synth thing was once more miscommunication. Nothing in the laws said that a captain could not designate a HoP as no longer crew. I was told this oocly. I do wonder if you harbor anger for me, considering you were the HoP in question, and you spent around half an additional hour calling me a 'shitter borg' and saying how upset you were. I simply do not understand the precedent here. I have no history of lying, and you can check As I can reference in other staff complaints, warnings are supposed to be documentation of an incident. They apparently are not removed simply because of the fact that if they are there is no documentation available about the incident. As so many people in so many resolved complaints have said, a warning is just that. A warning. About a specific incident. The only reoccurring behaviour is my tendency to leave the beginning of rounds on occasion, but so many people roundsart Cryo that I'm unsure that that is a noteworthy behavior besides the inconveniences it places on people who are latejoining.

As for your statement about not being my first time, of course not. It was however my first time attempting to use it on multiple people. And it worked. Like I said in the bowink. It was a gamble. I figured they would start moving after the first person fell, and that would be that.

Alas, I never found myself to be a particularly troublesome player. Most of my issues have stemmed from misunderstandings rather than intentional misbehavior, and most of those things have not been repeated after the first realization that I had broken a rule. Burger accidentally gave himself infinite power, but according to what you're saying, his accident was inexcusable and he should also be banned in much the same manner as what has been applied here. I could understand if I caused conflict oocly or expressed behaviors that were conducive to metagrudges or powergaming. I could understand if I'd been banned, save for the 'plunder' issue, for something that wasn't only recently clarified and that I happen to be in the right on ever since said clarification. I could understand if I was a 5-year player who had a history of getting things wrong, but instead I seem to be being banned because I'm...not as familiar with things than others. Once again I say that most of my issues have stemmed from miscommunication.

I have made a bug report on GitHub about this issue and once more did not believe it to be a bug until told it was a bug. But I remain unable to convince you. Also, let me clarify a few things, then. Warning by readthisnameplz in 2018-04-06 09:01:05: Warning added by readthisnameplz, for: Walked into the bar, randomly took a hostage, bartender shot them with a nonlethal beanbag, proceeds to masacre everyone in said bar with the exception of the SSD's and a guy in a suit. Then proceeds to huntdown Diceman on the janitor bike and beheads him. None of this had proper escalation, while they were sabotaging the station, the members in the bar had no idea. This can be seen as ganking and is indeed murderbone. Please re-read the rules and Ahelp in the future when you plan to do major antag activities.. || Notes regarding the warning: Nothing to really add besides if they do this again I suggest a temporary bam.  This was something I discussed with garn. This situation was not a gank. Warning by readthisnameplz in 2018-04-08 07:42:37: Attempted to lie to me about being killed by the CE, claimed they never damaged them, though they attacked them multiple times with a screw driver and other items, as well as a ton of disarms. . || Notes regarding the warning: Nothing more to really add to this. .   This was a misunderstanding that I made a complaint about that was not taken off because 'it was just a warning' and 'didn't mount to much.' Note by flimango 2018-04-15 07:46:01:as a traitor, used their voice changer to name themselves "Nill Bye, The Science Guy". Asked not to break immersion. ….this is ammunition? sircatnip 2018-05-02 18:40:48 sircatnip has banned itanimulli. - Reason: Hunting down cultists as a Research borg and silently setting them on fire with zero prior interaction under the guise of Captain's orders to kill. Conflict needs to be roleplayed to some degree; you don't have to monologue to somebody before killing them, but randomly setting them on fire without any attempt to interact is against the server rules. Read the "antagonists and conflict" section, along with the rest of the rules. - This will be removed in 4320 minutes.  Once more, not a gank according to headmin definitions. aboshehab 2018-05-11 21:09:25 aboshehab has banned itanimulli. - Reason: When recieved laws to plunder, took this as an excuse to kill someone with liquid fire. This is not plundering, you do not plunder people by just "killing" them. This was really out of nowhere and you are fully aware of the effects of your inject mixture. This is a 1 week ban. - This will be removed in 10080 minutes. The only ban I agreed with, because it was essentially rule lawyering on my part. yonnimer 2018-11-25 08:19:09 Spoken to about attacking command as a borg. Seems to have been them beliving they could, if other memembers of command said they could. Didn't know clarifying to someone how something icly works is grounds to use as ammunition in a ban. pratepresidenten 2018-11-29 09:32:30 Warning added by pratepresidenten, for: Wiping at roundstart AI when you spawned as malf. Only left an "ahahaha" in ahelps before quitting. If you dont want to play malf, thats fine, but leave a better ahelp.. || Notes regarding the warning: They quit entirely after having readied up and all that. Kinda dumb.. It was late, I was tired, and getting something I thought I had turned off smacked with with realization that I should indeed sleep. So I ahelped, though wasn't exactly clear on the ahelp since I didn't see anyone in adminwho at all. Once more, nothing worth banning someone over. thedococt 2018-12-07 06:01:43 Asked medical in LOOC repeatedly to clone them after suiciding for antagonistic reasons; told not to use LOOC in this manner or in general to try and harass for cloning. This one I do think is another valid note, because it was in poor taste and shouldn't have been done. Did not get a warning for it, though.

Also. This would need some heavy species related stuff. A skrell running into a G2/Unathi/Vaurca shoulsn't knock it over.

I would like to hide things in my orifices yes.

Make a fightin manual called linebacker.

So I have no clue what I'm doing and have had bad experiences with this type of thing in the past. But here we go. So A round of Vampire has ended! [Game ID: bXK-dC4t]. BYOND Key: itanimulli Staff BYOND Key: Alberyk Game ID: bXK-dC4t Reason for complaint: Okay so, how do I put this.. I was accused of intentionally abusing a bug....but I did not intentionally abuse a bug. I could understand a 1 day ban. But this is ridiculous. I was permanently banned for abusing a bug I did not know was in existence. I'm unsure of how to convince those Evidence/logs/etc: Additional remarks: I clicked hypnotize. I clicked the name of the person. I clicked hypnotize. I clicked the name of the person. I clicked hypnotise. I clicked the name of the person. This is usually how hypnotize works. This is what I did. Apparently, this is abusing a bug, because I inadvertently skipped over the hypnotize cooldown. This does not seem like grounds for a permanent ban. Also, I was given a sloppily worded ban reason that just raised additional questions. Yes, this is a staff complaint, I will have to make an unban request depending on the end result. https://imgur.com/e8YSLSR This is the ban reason. I would like to know what other warnings/notes I have gotten in regards to this, that pertain to me abusing bugs or being overall untrustworthy. I had some warnings by RTNP when they were a trial mod that were not erased 'because they had already expired' and the like. And a few other warnings I got were for being afk or having to leave irl. Any time someone has a warning, it's 'just a warning, deal with it' or 'it doesn't mean much' but that appears to be the deciding factor here in me being banned. I thought bugs were supposed to be reported on GitHub, in the first place. I don't think anyone knew this was even a bug until just recently. I sure didn't.

Nope, I was banned before I even reached it. Actually, I think the shuttle left beforehand. Someone must have dragged me there. I was already gone before the round ended. I guess I have to make a staff complaint now but yeah. If the warden really believed it was an ooc issue, I suppose they'd have ahelped it, but they said 'not my issue' in looc so I went ahead with it icly. It was referenced icly several times by multiple characters, too.

Apparently I didn't make it clear enough that I was back, despite rping and being responded to twice. I also didn't know I had even abused a bug until I was told about an hour later in the round that I had done so. And what does this have to do with Shawn Carson? I had an IC reason to attack him, and kill him. He removed my breath mask and that is deadly to vaurca. I planned to kill him from the outset after he said I had resisted arrest. AS for the priest, she actively began attacking me while I was draining someone of blood. And the station was about to leave. I injured her to discourage further resistance, and wen t for a thrall. Apologies for not giving better notice out-of-round. I do really wish I'd have had this player complaint done before such a sudden ban.

NBT itself will change how sec behaves, because they will have to actively move around/provide security, especially if hostile mobs become a thing in NBT. Increasing prices is a big "Meh" for me. It sounds good in practice, but it will only serve to limit people even further, and gimmicks tend to be what drive a round...irrespective of those gimmicks being good or not. Remember, it's not always traitor/ninja/merc. Vampires, Wizards, Changelings, and Revs also exist. None of them use an uplink. If anything, they usually involve less people than even merc or traitor, especially wizard. Half the time, security just straight up says "go away" right at the beginning of the round. It's really annoying, because everyone knows that's not gonna help the rp, but they pass if off as "Oh well its the normal thing to do" but really it just leads to the antag getting stuck in one spot and then dying in like medical or research.

Fair. Sometimes I wish mechanics changed based on pop.

I for one think i can be of assitance with sprites. Esspecially if these are all one peice. They'd just be nifty voidsuits with no helmet. Or, like, someone can tell me what is wanted.

I'd like to see them flicker. Like GITS when they shoot. Pop in for a split second before being invisible again. But now that I've read the other thread, yeah, nah, solo antags should be a helluva threat on their own. On top of that, the whole vault-a-palooza scheme is gonna become simewhat unviable when the bluespace disruptors get added.

Fair 'nough. I just find the discord to be a constant hall of mirrors in wich a single shitpost is amplified sixfold.

I aim to please senor.

Also. A thing to note about the skrell thing: the moment that PR came up, the number of played skrell skyrocketed. I'm not saying he intentioned to do that on purpose, but you have to admit it was pretty damn beneficial. Besides, he makes meme PRs almost all the time.

Leave my dad alone. In less memey ways of going about things, I could raise a staff complaint about almost every single one of you, and yet none of you would be able to use the same excuse fowl enjoys: Consistence. Fowl is always like this. Literally always. You will never not find fowl being a foul fowl. There's no point in arguing with him, and if you haven't learned that by now, here you go here's some important info. You'll know when fowl's being genuine, because it will catch you off guard. But when you get those verbose posts about mundane topics that all have ridiculous premises, how are you really angry at this? It's literally like when you told para " If you ever ping me for 'i have a meme' and you have thee fucking ADUAICITY to not even UNCLUDE THE MEME IN THE PING I will unleash a whoop ass upon you with a force so through that it will scour the very earth upon which you stand and all that witness it will have never before seen something so terrifying nor will they ever again ". Literally. Imagine if Para took this serious. You'd probably be looking at them with the same confusion that I look upon this staff complaint.