Garnascus

Sounds fine. I have always been of the opinion that too many different outfit items of varying styles turns this into a Halloween dress up contest. We need our own style.

Done, locking and archiving.

Gonna change to the note to reflect what you did to olivia's character as its the opinion of myself and borya that its the biggest problem here. Everything else is ok. The note from the juggy is also gonna be expunged. Cult constructs have essentially no agency. They have to follow the cult orders.

Locking and archiving.

I am sorry but we cannot really do that. Any temporary ban will result in the removal of your head of staff whitelist. This has been our interpretation ever since alberyk took over the managing of them. The wording has been updated to more accurately reflect this.

Note has been expunged and replaced with a note linking to this complaint. Locking and archiving.

This might actually be a good idea. Its the one thing i like about the sec discord. Sometimes serious topics crop up and the flow of general conversation dilutes it a bit too much.

Funnily enough this is actually correct. It WILL tell you that you're shot with a rubber bullet if you are shot from a distance but if you are point-blanked it will just tell you that. I just tested this in-game. I think @NewOriginalSchwann was fine here given that context.

Forgot to lock and archive this. Ban was lifted a while ago.

As i understand it any ban will result in the removal of a head whitelist. @Alberyk can correct me if i am wrong. About a day before you where banned you received a note on your ckey for being rude in tickets. So, logically doing the same thing again would result in a temporary ban of 24 hours. Thus that seems to be the logic of reverting the original 3 day ban.

I will look into this tomorrow.

This timeline of events here is really hard to pin down. Im gonna need some extra questions answered. Ok, so you where a cult zombie. Your existence is extremely limited. If all of this is true it sounds like a reasonable premise to go into medical. I am extremely interested in wtf a medical staff member is doing with a laser rifle. Again so far i do not really see any problems here. Until this point you had not attacked anyone lethally right? What i assume one of the problems here is the juggernaut was shot at with a laser and assumed from this point on "ok time to go ham". Yeah this seems to inform my earlier hypothesis. So, i dont know WHEN this happened but when someone tries to shard a wounded person it will not work if they are "not dead enough". If this is the case it will give you a message something along the lines of "Hey this guy aint dead enough". Now we all know sometimes it can be REALLY hard at a glance to tell how wounded or dead someone is in this game so what i reckon happened is he just assumed you where a goner and tried to tip you over the edge a bit. Unfortunately you where not actually that dead and in the context of the juggy's crazy escapade i can understand the mistake. I mean i really have a hard time here assigning agency equally here. I understand cult contrstucts need to listen to the cultists but unless i am missing something here it seems like dil never said "Go kick the shit out of that guy". Its certainly implied that if you shoot a laser at someone they are gonna come after you. Which is what the juggy did. Is anything that i quoted from dil's post not true?

@icedcabbage When you get a moment please detail your side of things here. I shall take this complaint.

Sorry this got lost in time. My classes hit me hard. TLDR here is i do not think the ban is invalid here. Everything else has i believe been addressed. @Resilynn let me know if thats not the case.

Going to lock and archive this and consider it resolved.

Its already easy enough to figure out who the vampire is based on who the bloodl-loss victims where last with. Physical signs would just make it easier to catch the antag.

If any sec members who played during the round read this please go ahead and post what happened from your perspective. Really hard for me to tell what actually happened during this round.

Yes, just now. Keep it civil or just let me finish this.

Matt is definitely engaging in some choice words i would try to avoid. The sentiment though is not lost on me. You definitely engaged in behavior i would describe as "dickish" and "assholeish". I am certain matt just had a hard night arm wrestling american chefs for overcooking his spaghetti but never the less i will admonish him for this @MattAtlas . If we can move on from this particular point there is still this whole "investigation" point that i do not really understand. Is your contention that people can and have PMed admins in the past about things? Its rarely as nefarious as it sounds. Usually just goes like this 1. Player PMs staff about X 2. Staff asks if they ahelped 3. Staff looks into it 4. Staff makes a determination This with the caveat that anything past "IM BEING GRIEFED" or "Joe schmoe is spamming the n word on discord" is usually responded to with "You need to make a complaint/ahelp". Might be i need to remind staff of this.

Dude, i am literally looking right at your notes. You have FOUR instances of being rude and passive aggressive to people in OOC or LOOC. Two of them i gave you and all of these instances in the past year. Thus the comments you made against vrow definitely follow as also being passive aggressive because it is how you operate. I do not really know how else i can explain this.

When we finish or deal with an issue related to a player we generally make a note on their ckey detailing what the issue was and what the result was. Usually this manifests in the formula of "Player did X told them not to do X". If the player continually does X greater and more severe punishments can accrue. Lets assume for a moment a player has thrown someone down disposals and killed them. Upon investigation they claim it was an accident due to lag or some other reason. Someone with a clean record is likely to be given the benefit of the doubt and get off with just a note telling them to be more careful. Now lets say they do this same exact thing again a few months later. They claim once again that it was an accident. Its a lot harder to believe they are genuine but lets say the stars align and they are only warned for their behavior. In just a few short months the player once again "accidentally" throws someone down disposals and this time their chances are up. They have defied fate too long and are banned. The point i am trying to illustrate with this example is that it is absolutely permissible for us to moderate off of someone's "reputation" as you say. In my example we can clearly establish a pattern of problematic behavior. In his case its tossing people down disposals. In your case it is being rude, passive aggressive or otherwise to fellow players in OOC and LOOC, You have a handful of notes documenting this in just the past six months. In the context of your notes the comment you made does indeed to be directed at vrow. You unfortunately have too many notes and instances of passive aggressive behavior for us to believe this is your one moment of being genuine.

Yeah you're not really wrong. The forums are a meme zone outside of the complaints section which every so often has a wildfire break out. Discord is similiar in that topics come and go very quickly and the chat can move pretty fast depending on the time of day. As a new player just trying to get feedback this would definitely be off-putting. I have noticed people are way less likely to give feedback if they have nothing but positive experiences. I do not really have any advice for how to get some other than a vague answer of "give it time" but i reckon you have to be doing at least a few things right.

For the purpose of this complaint i can only really speak to the legitimacy of the ban. Suggestions and policy updates are beyond the scope of a staff complaint. You would need to create a policy suggestion. I will just start by asking @MattAtlas for more information on why he banned you. I assume you have proof of this?

Ok, ban lifted. Someone can archive this later when i forget.

Well, alright but thats kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy on your part. We cannot really unban someone who has had a lot of chances without at least some idea that they are improving. Playing on the server is usually how its done. I also think one of your comments in the original appeal encapsulates the issue here. We do not really consider the two separate. It is your behavior in the aurora community as a whole, Going "well its just on the forums" is not an acceptable defense. Our policy on whitelist removal does state that too many administrative actions can get it removed. You acknowledge that a permanent ban from the forums on your part was reasonable thus a whitelist strip does logically follow here. I know i have already covered this but again, we do not consider it separate and it is clearly stated so. The forums are one medium you can receive too many administrative actions. I believe a reasonable definition of "too many" would include a permanent forum ban. Thus your conduct was not acceptable for a whitelisted person. Even if i can empathize that you do not enjoy playing while you are banned it does not really change how our policies work. We pretty much always take play-time into account if someone is for example appealing an antag ban. If they have not played since the antag ban was placed its almost certain to be denied outright. The forums are part of our community and it is entirely possible to be server banned for forum conduct. Admittedly it is extremely rare for that to happen but i have personally done it. So, the TLDR here is i cannot really find much to agree with you here man.