Garnascus

Yeah man i am sorry but this does not really look acceptable. Miners assaulting a raider ship like this is unfortunately inappropriate.

I apologize i completely forgot about this . I will get this now after @Karolis2011 posts their side.

Done. Locking and archiving.

I will remove this in the morning when i wake up.

This will take a few days for me to check through some logs and stuff. I've had some college stuff come up.

I will look into this after drago posts.

Ok so from what i understand the ID issue seems to be resolved here in the post xander made. Keeping it under the fax machine is fine. The rest of this complaint seems to center around how much or how little xander fought with antags while playing a captain. It seems we have the following situations. 1." Xander has been repeatetly playing his captain/HoS in a way that is frontlining and putting themselves in needless danger." 2. Xander had "multiple chances to retreat" 3. Xander took on heisters "with his baton and disarm spam". Now based on testimony from others and xander the following is alleged to have happened. 1. Xander was in fact just trying to save someone. A testimony from one of the raiders is quoted here. So based on xander's testimony here It appears this is all in regards to the situation HERE So if this is the logical procession of what actually happened in round i do not think i see an issue yet. 2. Xander alledges he was not intentionally frontlining but instead leading security as best he could with radios compromised. So if i assume that everything in this post here is factually then i do not think i see an issue. Its perfectly reasonable for a captain character to lead security from the front. It seems that they where taking pre-cautions to stay with or along side security. Do you recall the character names of some security members so that i can attempt to corroborate this @Azande ? I am not saying i believe you over arrow or arrow over you i just need to verify one way or the other. @AmoryBlaine Mentioned that they where watching the situation with summers and has testified that it looked like xander was trying to save summers. Do you have any information on this other situation i have quoted?

Well i am sorry but this pretty clearly sounds like an IC issue. Players are not necessarily required by the server rules to follow every order given by ERT. A lot of this seems to stem from evilbrage playing a criminal character with certain skills. This is what our rules state. So under the letter of the law here it is perfectly acceptable to be a criminal cargo tech who might have problems with authority (ERT) and is able to hack into an escape pod. It seems to me that given the context of the round jaylor's actions where reasonable. I imagine i would be similarly miffed if i found my fellow cargo tech murdered. I suppose the hickup here is the records jaylor has to be a security officer. Given the context of the rest of the character its probably not ok. So, i do think the warning should be expunged unless my snail brain is missing something egregious.

Locking and archiving.

Its more nuanced than that but the captain can suspend you for almost any reason he wants. We have IRs and CCIA to review captains who abuse doing this and it can even become an OOC issue with a complaint like this one. Again i am saying it is perfectly reasonable given our setting for a captain to suspend you for the comments you made. I cannot really say anything else without repeating myself. I understand you might have a different opinion on how the RP environment could be setup. That is fine but we have just decided on a different way here at aurora. I really do consider this resolved and i will be archiving it in 24 hours.

Will finish this in about 15 hours.

You certainly can but that will likely gain you the ire of your fellow crew and your direct superiors. Which is what happened here.

Im sorry i was playing WoW and i forgot to PM you. Its actually still saved in discord i just didnt send it..... I will read the rest here in a bit.

Alright so as i understand it your character kingston dean was suspended for the following reasons. 1. Making derogatory remarks to species working aboard the aurora. Said remarks are logged here. 2. Admitting to the remarks in a recording You are contending the following things. 1. You should be allowed to voice your opinions of xeno crew as long as you are not literally discriminating. 2. That you should have been allowed to keep your contractor uniform 3. The situation should have been RPed more 4. You did not commit battery on The vaurca when you threw your headset. I will just go through these point by point as i see them. So our corporate regulation's page on our wiki does state the following It is reasonable to me that a captain or a HoS might call your ability to do your job as a security member into question if you voice certain derogatory statements about xeno crew. Under the letter of the law here they do have the right to suspend you for it. Under suspension protocol items pertaining to your job are confiscated. It appears that nantei was going to let you keep your uniform if you changed out of it when you left the brig. While its still probably the property of your contractor you're no longer able to work as security so you cannot be wearing it. The situation seems to have been RPed exactly as i figured it would. The captain showed up and told you whats what. That is their prerogative as captain and im afraid they did have proof you said the things. Finally, on the note of battery i found this log So it would appear you did do this. All in all i do not really see a problem with how anyone played this situation. Its entirely acceptable for you to play a character like this but it will of course meet consequences. Which manifested in this round.

I will get this after @Karolis2011 gives their side.

I can take this but it will take a few days. Securing the spare ID as a captain is not really powergaming though.

You are banned now.

Give me a few days and i will check logs.

Current ones look like you're carrying a body pillow. These ones look way better.

So As a result of this complaint administrator liasons to CCIA now have the authority to check round logs in circumstances like this. I consider this resolved now. Locking and archiving.

I will be locking and archiving this in 24 hours.

I believe you This is not necessarily a permanent goodbye. The stipulation set by cnaym is around 4 weeks. Which is pretty much what i would expect in a case like yours before considering an appeal. It is unfortunate this will undoubtedly come at the cost of your lore writer position. You might possibly be able to re-apply as a lore writer IF you successfully appeal your ban. I am afraid that is the best you can hope for in this case.

Alright, i can work with that. As i understand it the particularly egregious nature of the complaint coupled with your long history of notes is what lead to the ban. You have a total of 81 notes and 12 warnings stretching back into 2016. While it is true that the older notes are the less relevant they are in deciding action against a player they are relevant when determining patterns of consistent behavior. I have some findings after reviewing your notes 1. In 2016 alone you have four separate notes related to being very rude in OOC or LOOC. You also have a temp ban for metagrudging 2. In 2017 you have a temp ban for a week for raging in OOC, a temp job ban from cyborgs for poor play, Two notes and one warning on, again, raging in LOOC and OOC. 3 In 2018 We have one or two notes on raging and some other notes related to playing with other players and not against them during stressful rounds. 4. In 2019 We have one note on storing as the AI after some passive aggressive comments in LOOC. We have a note on tasing someone as sec because you did not get healed first. We have yet another warning for raging in LOOC. What is left is in regards to the complaint you opened on contextual and your behavior exhibited in round toward pennant. "rage" "salt" "aggressive" Spending just a few minutes reading through your notes was enough to see the very clear and very consistent pattern of problematic behavior you have exhibited. It seems very reasonable to me that you have a consistent pattern in the behavior you exhibit here at aurora. What i do not want to imply is that your behavior from four years ago is an albatross around your neck. I am very sorry bygone. I do not mean to bully you or otherwise demean you by relaying this information. The fact that you went so long without getting permabanned is quite frankly all the proof i require of some divine intelligence at work here. This is truly not something i enjoy telling another human being but the idea that a permaban for your actions up until now is "too severe" is frankly untenable. This brings us to the complaint you created against contextual and the specific criticisms you have of cnaym/prate's judgement. It seems to me you have the following objections to make. 1. Your behavior was not OOCly motivated 2. This behavior is exclusive to a particular kind of character you play 3. You did not mean to insult the player with your shitborg comment as we do with shitcurity comments. So, given the sum of your behavior, your notes, your warnings and your bans i feel that it provides important context your actions here. You clearly very clearly aggressive micromanaged pennant. You called them a "shitborg" in ahelps. It seems very clear to me you viewed the situation as pennant playing WRONG and you playing RIGHT. You where openly hostile to them IC when in fact they had never actually complained about you. It seems to line up perfectly with your general attitude and how you tend to treat other players when you are upset or you think they are not playing how they should. I would have to ask @Cnaym for clarification but i reckon this about what he meant when he made that comment. I understand how you feel. It is not enjoyable for any of us to tell a player they are not welcome in our community. I must unfortunately agree with the judgement given by both cnaym and prate.

If you are not contesting the decision made by cnaym and prate i am not sure what we can do here. This seems like an appeal.

Yeah that makes sense then skull.