Peppermint

You need to make a staff complaint if you are disagreeing with the ban reason, not an unban request. In case you are doing the latter however, your escalation as security has had numerous problems, and using lethal force on someone because they battoned you is not okay. Especially when they tried to talk things out and got shot at mid conversation even after they'd backed off. I will be looking forward to the proof of bias if you do decide to make a complaint, given he whole reason it came out so much later is due to the staff involved not wanting to handle their own issues, and instead waited for someone else to get on who could. Appeal denied.

Sorry, seems I misunderstood. Yes, I'd add them to lockers rather than via the loadout.

I mean, why do we expect command to be flashed anyway? No clue why sec would be doing it, nor why antags would feel the need. Also a very easy source of free sunglasses to help reduce the 'flashbangs are OP!!!' complaints.

I'm not seeing anything you said as inviting additional explanation. From 'I'll back off' to 'Mining, but fine' I do not see you contesting my judgement on it. Especially as you're also agreeing with the punishment as far as I can see? So I'm not really following the problem. I'm not saying the ticket was rushed. I am saying I didn't have time to go all flowery with my customer service words where, as with the above, to my mind the basis was covered. If you didn't understand why I was unhappy, you could have ahelped. You could have also contested the warning, which you don't seem to be doing, so I'm not entirely sure what dialogue you wanted here. I was telling you not to do something, not getting information on a greyer case. You were warned over noted due to it not being the first time poor synth play has been shown, if that's what you mean with 'resorted to the warning system', which is standard escalation. Nothing else to add, honestly.

You are contesting my attitude in calling it an excuse and not the warning itself, correct? Just as you seem to be defending your actions, and I'm not sure if you need more explanation as to why I feel your synth play there wasn't acceptable. I don't really have much to add, honestly. I still see 'other mods/admins didn't handle it' as an excuse, and I don't feel I was rude - a little terse at a push, but I was halfway out the door for a medical appointment at the time and needed to close the ticket ASAP. I'd also point out these logs were posted halfway into a round, which isn't really okay. I'll leave that to someone else to handle though, given the potential for biased. Given it just finished upon my current reply.

You can remove prints by using gloves. You can remove fibres by (as far as I know) using soap on the door. Both of which are incredibly easy to get. Entirely invalidating investigations because people don't want to put effort into being sneaky is not really something I agree with. Nor is dragging some random person in to sit in the brig for 40 minutes because the antag chose them. I also feel that the type of RP you get from this is not exactly the fun kind - similar to chasing a cloaked ninja around for 2 hours or the like, where it's really only fun for the person being chased.

Cool! I'll go ahead and lift it. Appeal accepted.

Hiya, I'm usually fine lifting a first perma. For reference, it wasn't that you said anything awful, but it was a common pattern of frustration leaking into ooc channels. Which happens. Just remember to ahelp things instead and we can look into it. That said, I do have concerns to do with your antag play as well - you have a lot of notes and warnings about it. So before I lift this, I need confirmation that you've read the antag/escalation and RP expectation ruleset in particular. Then you're welcome to give it all another try.

Heya, this isn't a -1, way too early into the trial for that. That said, some feedback from the recent raider round. - The escalation in general was really not great. I personally don't mind frontlining as HoS to much, but there's that and then sprinting in front of an emitter to deal with two antags. - Very little leeway was given to said antags. I'd really avoid AI bolting especially as it's pretty miserable to deal with and generally escalates rounds real fast in response. I'm not going to go too heavily there though as you were spoken to previously, but I do have other issues and that's to do with the training side. I'm gonna be real man, I thing you need to be really careful on insisting officers do training courses. A voluntary, or overly fun/challenging training session is one thing, but PT in the holodeck is just not going to be very enjoyable for a lot of people. Short bursts might be okay, but I feel a HoS that insists on a lot of departmental training during down time may end up making people second guess whether or not they really want to join the round if they're not going to be able to RP on their own terms. I think you can make the idea work, just needs some more consideration. Getting the crew involved in hostage stuff, fake murders, cargo weapons training, ect generally tends to go okay so long as it's not super regular. Good luck, hoping things go well.

Cool. Appeal accepted.

Okay. This is your first permaban and so I'm willing to lift it on the assumption you've read our rules fully, especially those to do with naming. Bear in mind if you join a round, you're also expected to play in it for the most part, so logging in only to AFK in the dorms to do records isn't the best look. Remember you can always ask us if you're unsure about something. I also trust that you do indeed plan to get more involved with other departments when you don't roll antag, as any further bans will be real hard to appeal. All good?

Hi there. This hasn't slipped my mind, I've just been rather busy. I'll have to answer to you by the end of Wednesday at the latest.

Hi there. There seems to be a consistent pattern that when you do not roll an antag role, you go to empty parts of the station and AFK. Whilst I am willing to believe I was wrong on how our inactivity timer works and that you were just doing records, it still does not paint a good look from my point of view when this is a reoccurring issue. Likewise you were only just unbanned after joining with a questionable name a few days previous, and 'Base Count' is not really in line with our rules. To top things off, the conduct afterward in the discord channel is somewhat worrying, especially after so many notes warnings, and bans in a very short period of time. What are your thoughts on these issues?

I tentatively support this. My only worry is that a lot of your characters tend to be fairly belligerent which in itself isn't a problem, but almost certainly would be as a command character that has much more impact on the round at large. Good luck.

If people can't be trusted to play rats, I'm really not sure I like the idea of actual, talking throwaway characters. Sure, it's not a bad idea by any means, but I can already feel the headache they'd cause forming.

How will things like uniforms be handled for heads, if that's been decided yet? Assuming it will not just be NT command any more.

I think you really need to focus more on communication. With the team, with command, with the rest of the crew; very often it's essentially radio silence as you play from the front. Now, whilst I don't think this is terrible, it does make things really frustrating sometimes when playing sec alongside you. That said, this is pretty much stock advice for every new command WL, especially the crazy folks who do so on the hardest role lol ^^. Good luck, sure you'll figure it out.

Seems all good. The only one I dislike is cargo having only one department, and moving NT out of med and to that does seem sensible. I'm also not really all too sure about Idris taking the security slot IC, given I assume NT has a much better standing security force outside of investigations - though their lore is more interesting anyway, so I can see it working out just fine.

I think this is a much better argument for them than the one someone else quoted me for - with strange amounts of hostility, might I add? -and I think it would depend greatly on implementation. I've played on servers where they were a thing, and it tended to have most folks just using the exact same skills for each job. Though I imagine it'll depend greatly on how they work, and I would always vote for a standard 'baseline' for things, with skills making you better rather than their absence making them worse. Either way, I'd love to see a test merge to see how it goes. The only part I really disagree with though is on the OOC admin/rule side. As right now, it's much easier to rule on interdepartmental knowledge whilst it becomes a lot greyer if you throw skills into the mix. For example, a sec officer rn is really not allowed to hack anything as a balance concern rather than 'this is literally impossible IC'. Yet if they took skills for it at the sacrifice of something else, surely they'd have a case that they should? Though that's a wider issue that would have to be looked at. If this does go through however, I just request we avoid things like age restrictions used on (Iirc?) Bay, as they kinda suck.

I don't see what these skills add. Like, everyone is going to take the same ones for each job. And we already have rules regarding cross-departmental knowledge.

I can't really comment for the backstory, but would like to vouch for the player's attitude and willingness to improve. Whilst my interactions have mostly been short, they show a lot of promise and I wish them the best in the application process.

Not sure why people are chiming in with the aim intent thing, given that was dealt with in round. Either way, I've accepted fault for misremembering what occurred leading up to killing Radic. Got caught up in it all, I suppose. So it's more a question of whether or not antags are allowed to finish off sec in a frantic gunfight after 1:20 or so of steady escalation, during which they said multiple times they'd kill people.

You can even see in the clip that when you dropped your rifle, we stopped firing at you directly. If I was as oh so bloodthirsty and powergaming as suggested during the ticket, a full auto here would have ended it. Though one bullet does clip you from aiming at the guy in the doorway from a poor angle, it's not until you pick your gun up again that you get shot. But according to what you were saying previously, you neither dropped your weapon nor fell down at all, but instead were shot until you fell down once and then immediatly executed, and we can see neither thing happens here. So. This really rubs me the wrong way. I have nothing more to say on this until an admin chimes in.

I've got nothing more to add than I didn't say in round. We'd escalated to the point of lethals anyway, so even if my below points didn't matter, killing Radic was fully justified to my mind and I'm not really sure what else I was supposed to do in this scenario. Given a) Active fight and b) We made it very clear we were willing to start killing people if our demands weren't met. You said that sec was planning on refusing to fight, but how exactly were we supposed to know that when it's not communicated? For all we know, you're planning to kill us when we come up the elevator, you've also been told we will kill people at this point, and then are...surprised when we do? Either way, for my side: We come in after being refused our deal with the intention of finding you guys, given I didn't actually want to put a hole in atmospherics an hour and twenty in. Aim intent thing happens, you get blasted, fight starts, ect. I assumed you dropped your weapon to surrender, though maybe it was just pain or something else. I don't know. Either way, I backed off. The fact you're calling me a lier is kind of weird, but you do you I suppose. And I'm not going to stop and type a bunch whilst getting shot at by the rest of security. You also collapsed at this point, as seen in the screenshot, and I don't really understand why you claimed you didn't. I originally assumed it was just as the fight was hectic and you didn't see, but the way you've worded this complaint as really quite malicious does makes me wonder something else. Doubly so when even in said ticket and here in this complaint, you already were 99% certain to be dead afs is. Though continued to get up and start shooting anyway, after moving with someone had aim intent on you. I backed off even tho, imo, I didn't really need to and just continuing to shoot would have been fine. Either way, the logs will show me fighting the rest of security instead who were off screen up in the little stairs section. You got back up and shot me. I shot you back down, and finished you off. Given the other choices here are to either let you continue going in/out of pain crit whilst popping off shots, or just letting you get back to the rest of your team, I'm not really sure what the other play here was. If I'd done the same, I'd fully expect to get gunned down by security whilst in the middle of a 4 on 4 firefight. Your character died in a hectic fight after the round escalated to lethals. It gave people plenty of RP, and that's just part of playing sec. Either way, I'm not biting further unless who takes this mess has questions. I really don't have anything else to add. The only thing is that Alb mentioned he didn't understand how lasers came into it or something? I didn't really follow. Either way, it's laser + ballistic damage as I entirely forgot duelweild was a thing and had both in my hands.

Really strong start on the HoP round. Keep it up!