eddymakaveli

+1 Mira and Lillian are great and I've had nothing but good interactions with Lily. They can be trus

I’m going to go a little against the grain here. A lot of us spend a lot of time on Aurora, and have a genuine care for it. Care for the characters, the lore, how the two intersect and how those intersections come to fruition through mechanics. Evandorf’s post rings true to me, and I commend your self-awareness in wanting to take a step back, Dessy. When we care about something and the time we invest into it, sometimes we’re a little blinded to how our emotions bleed into our interactions as a whole. And that’s okay, so long as - again - we’re aware of it. Arrow said it in his post, his DMs are open to discuss the 2IC changes and reason with anyone over them. I can personally attest that all of the head staff are pretty approachable and have no problem working through why a decision was made as it was, so long as it isn’t privileged or sensitive. They are people and not perfect, but I can genuinely say all of Matt, Arrow, Trio, Mel,***bear***, and Alb (if I missed anyone don’t fire me) are pretty great communicators and would gladly talk things over in PMs. Democracy/elections on a platform like ours only would serve as popularity contests or pushing folks’ agenda who might be aggrieved with the current staff. While this isn’t a “counter-suggestion”, previously roleplay mediums I’ve been on have had “community councilor” positions, that while not directly staff, were folks elected by the community to kind of liaison with staff and give direct feedback from the community to changes and such. I don’t have an idea of how that’d work on Aurora or even if it should even move to introducing something like that, but I am choosing to engage in your thread with good faith and this is kind of a thing that wouldn’t be full-blown elections, but might help ablate some of the issues you’ve brought up and concerns some other members of the community have echoed. lastly, as Arrow said too, I think you should maybe get more comfortable with messaging the people you feel you might be having a disconnect with directly, and I assure you that you’ll be surprised with the results you’ll get.

In the future - I will refrain from making any passing comments or imply any IC action being influenced by a character complaint, etc. I can do better, and should.

I don’t want to go too back and forth, but it’s easily checkable if I was observing the round as it was going on and had meta knowledge of what was said prior because of that. I had zero observation time and didn’t see your interaction with Levi, and if you look at my IR, I went around and asked multiple crew who would’ve known more than my captain.

To note: The only thing I asked Mel was if it was even worth it for me to make an IR to begin with or just let the situation be.

I vehemently deny it. I never said I wanted to bait Sasha into an IR. My joining the round and an IR coming from it isn't something that I am in control of. I am neither CCIA or anything adjacent. If I had that large of a bone to pick with Kaiser/50noob, I'd have pushed for a harsher punishment in the actual player complaint in which I had actual power over, it'd make no sense for me to purposefully make a character with the express intent to get Sasha into being IR'd - which again, is something I have no power over. I cannot control Sasha, and if you'd check the logs of the round, my actions weren't veiled antagonism to goad him into actions that'd bring my character into conflict with theirs.

Heya! A few things here to parse: Morgan has been made for a little under two weeks now, actually a little before or after the player complaint against Sasha was made. Speaking of that complaint, Yonnimer can attest that I was exceptionally understanding and generous with Sasha and the punishment levied which amounted to a single note that read "Be nicer, please." If any staff or even players look at my playtimes, they are typically around the same time. past 10pm pst, to about 1:30/2am - and I saw that there was a lowpop round for me to play my captain. Even if that statement was completely true, I said in the first complaint I was going to monitor his (Sasha's) play. And this would've been a means to do it ICly. My being staff has nothing to do with the IR or the round, because none of it had to do with my position as a moderator. All the actions taken were completely IC, and the only reason I didn't continue past when the antag broke the window of our meeting, was because it was late for me - not to mention my Captain didn't really have much they could contribute to Changeling interrogation. The funny thing is, there is no 'baiting'. As soon as I came up, someone brought concerns to my captain. When he asked Sasha why there was no ISD on this expedition, their job, the slightest bit of pushback got Sasha to claim he was "engaging a child's tantrum", or something to that affect. The interviews weren't to crucify Sasha, as you could see most of my questions weren't leading, they were what we call Due Diligence. The only reason the IR was even filed, again, was because we weren't able to finish our meeting. The in-round punishment that would've been levied against Sasha was going to be a whopping violation of i110 - Verbal Harassment. Punishable by... 250 credits, max. Exceptionally grievous. --- Some closing remarks from me: I do not dislike or hold ill-will against you. My character behaved as they rationally would, protecting the SCC from potential backlash in what could've been considered workplace harassment. Now for me personally? Sasha was a command member, who seemingly purposefully went and antagonized a crewman with a very severe dressing down, under the guise of giving them the carrot they wanted, which was to go on the expedition. This is nothing more than schoolyard bullying. The logs will show that the player in question even reached out to you in dsay previously to see if it could be remedied, as you wished the person who made a player complaint against you would've used ooc channels to do before resorting to a complaint, which you responded with: 'But I like the conflict' (round ID: ctP-aZFh). Conflict in roleplay requires equity in which people can respond. A command member purposefully going after a crewman, with no other command to help, is not conflict - but the punching down I was talking about. There is close to zero recourse that said crewman could have against the command member, and it is neither fun nor nice.

Reporting Personnel: Morgan Sullivan Job Title of Reporting Personnel: Captain Game ID: ctS-aSy7 Personnel Involved: Sasha Kaiser (Research Director), Offender Levi Kersaavi (Security Officer), Victim Tsi Jho (Scientist), Witness Secondary Witnesses: Roy Ral (Security Officer), Witness Kristian Denisovna (Chef), Witness Time of Incident: (If unable to provide, leave blank) Real Time: 10:40ish PST, 05/23/2024 Location of Incident: Research Hallway Nature of Incident: [ ] - Workplace Hazard [ ] - Accident/Injury [ ] - Destruction of Property [ ] - Neglect of Duty [x] - Harassment [ ] - Assault [x] - Misconduct Overview of the Incident: As I came from the living quarters lift, I was informed by officer Kersaavi that Director Kaiser and the research team had travelled down to Adhomai without a security escort. Upon prompting Director Kaiser for an explanation - I was met with a flurry of expletives and accused of 'indulging a child's tantrum' over the science channel. Director Kaiser stated that his team all had proper weapons training and did not need any members of the Security Department to provide guard. We agreed to speak on the matter once the research team returned. Upon conducting an interview with officers Kersaavi and Ral (attached below), officer Kersaavi stated that when he volunteered to go on the expedition - Director Kaiser proceeded to mock his romantic relationship over the public channel then when approached in person, began to dress Levi down under the guise of requesting the officer remain quiet to 'prove himself'. He called Levi a flurry of insults, questioned his ability to do basic job functions, among more - and when officer Kersaavi spoke to his own defense, Director Kaiser proceeded to then disqualify the officer from the expedition for speaking - something that leads me to believe that the interaction was setup specifically for Director Kaiser to humiliate and degrade Levi whilst dangling the proverbial carrot of what the officer wished to do. Officer Ral confirmed the public channel mocking as well, the only part he was directly able to corroborate. To note: Officer Kersaavi says that prior to this week, he'd never spoken to Director Kaiser. Upon interviewing other crew members, Scientist Tsi Jho confirmed the words that were exchange and spoke of a history in which Dircector Kaiser has called officer Kersaavi "a fucking fool", as well as "useless" to the officer during the aforementioned exchange regarding who would be attending the expedition. Chef Denisova spoke of a history regarding Director Kaiser in which she's 'grown used' to his inflammatory nature. Lastly, when I brought this up to Kaiser upon his return, his answers in our incomplete meeting left me unsatisfied, and his behavior did not seem that befitting of SCC command. I would note as well, per his records, this is the same crew member who violently assaulted a lab assistant as a scientist during a shift and was arrested for such - only contributing further to a pattern of behavior. Submitted Evidence: --- Would you like to be personally interviewed?: [ ] - Yes [x] - No Did you report it to a Head of Staff or a superior? Yes, I attempted to take action myself, as captain. Actions taken: Meeting with Director Kaiser that was unable to continue during the shift. (OOC note: Antag action prevented it from continuing, hence my making it an IR) Additional Notes:

Hello! I wanted to add my own piece as one of the handling staff. To keep it real, Sasha is not a 'bad' or 'unbelievable' character. In fact, I am sure that many of us that who have worked within the corporate sphere - have had a boss exactly like Sasha. Someone incredibly demanding and sometimes degrading, with standards that seem impossible to meet. The issue comes with the fact that sacrificing believability for collaborative storytelling and other's enjoyment of the game, is a core aspect of Aurora in general. In many logs we combed through, a lot of Sasha's complaints or criticism weren't entirely out of bounds or unreasonable, but where it erred was when they would continue to be at a '10' - and not giving people space to breathe. I am not saying that you need to walk on eggshells, but understand that Sasha's position as a member of command puts it so they could likely be a huge bully without consequence for anyone they treat in that way that /isn't/ command. Someone who tires of his attitude/antics and might be inclined to say something in return or even defend themselves, could quite literally be arrested and have it on their employment character IC. As large of a collection of megacorporations that the SCC is, it wouldn't think it worthwhile to employ someone whose attitude and workplace demeanor could open them up to civil litigation - even in the corporate dystopia that Aurora takes place within. Though Sasha doesn't only go after non-command members, the punching down that occurs without a real means to curb the behavior - sticks out as the reason that Yonnimer and I made the decision that we did. We understand that you're enjoying playing the character and that you are not doing so to purposefully make others have a bad time, We are not asking you to play the loveable, always friendly and polite boss - Sasha can absolutely still be a huge asshole. What needs to change is the fact that at the drop of a hat, he goes to '10' and does so for the rest of his interactions with the object of his ire and adjacents. We understand that it might take some time to tune the behavior to something a little more acceptable, and we won't be on your ass about it. The intent isn't for you to think "Ah, if I am even a little mean to someone I am going to be ahelped and banned", because that isn't true at all, and we don't want you walking on eggshells, more so just a bit more cognizant of how he can come off. As always, if you disagree with the decision or what we've said, every player has the right to file a staff complaint to contest the decision.

Hey! @Yonnimer and I will be handling this complaint. It'll take some time to search the logs in question and allow for others’ testimony to be given. While others are allowed to chime in regarding the in-character behavior of Sasha if they'd have experience with it, we would remind you of our rules for player complaints if you plan on posting anything.

As I said, you've provided no proof that you are not ban evading and your circumstances do not exactly motivate me to lift the ban. "I will try to fix it" is not enough. Appeal denied.

Hey, you were banned because you couldn't connect without a VPN, and when you said you didn't have one both times - your location still changed. Our system also /still/ detected a VPN, both times.

Gillian is one of my favorite people to roleplay with on the server and they show all the traits that someone should - when applying for a commadn WL. They enable antag gimmicks, they give meaningful interactions with folks in their department, and their characters feel alive - being an actual cohesive part of the setting and lore. +1 from me.

+1, anytime I had weird or vague questions about the machinist's workshop starting out - I could always ask lmwevil to help. They're exceptionally friendly ooc, and never come off as a know-it-all or someone who is too stubborn to change their views on a thing.

Certainly. My main reasoning for making this a warning and not just a note is that: 1) It'd be something that the player would have to acknowledge before logging in again, as I've seen happen before on other warnings without the other party being online. 2) There's been a lot of discussion - both on the forums and discord - regarding cracking down on cliqueish/elitist behavior that happens in the medical department. While the incident may seem like it's just IC - it is not reasonable for a medical employee to refuse to disclose medical information to the CMO on the grounds of 'I have not seen you before/ I do not trust you', with an extended argument being that they didn't think the CMO was doing a good job so they'd not cooperate. The rules state that a character must be realistic - and there's no job that you'd not be instantly fired from for behaving in such a way towards your boss. The CMO was a newer character and if I put myself in their shoes, I'd likely not want to try medical/CMO again. Antag involvement was present, by my measure, but again - your character must still behave realistically if you yourself are not an antag. I am not against this being downgraded to just a note, but I felt it was important that the sort of behavior that I believed was going on - be curbed by issuing a warning.