UponASeaOfStars

BYOND Key: UponASeaOfStars Total Ban Length: Permanent Banning staff member's Key: Melariara Reason of Ban: Reason for Appeal: I'm sorry. Let's just get that one out of the way now: I am genuinely, actually sorry. I'm not going to go "uwu I didn't mean to do a bad", because that doesn't matter- it's not about what I meant to do. If you trip and fall while holding a knife and accidentally stab someone, that might be morally less fucked up than wilfully stabbing them with that knife, but it still has the same end effect - someone gets stabbed. I get that now, and it took a few days of introspection and reaching out to people for second opinions to realise it. So yeah, I'm sorry. I know you'll look at this and think "it's only been three days, where's the deny button again?", but-- this is one of those bans where time isn't really a factor. The goal is rehabilitation, right? It says there, You can appeal this on the forums when you think you have [changed], and you can't measure change with a clock. You can only measure it by giving someone another chance and seeing if it works; I could ask you now, or in a week, or in six months, but I'd still be the same Stars: someone who tries really hard not to break the rules for any reason. It's just that the Stars of today has a different perspective on things. So how am I going to demonstrate this change? How will I prove I've learned? I've got an answer for that one too. My notes, and the reason for my ban, is because I gave the impression of being a powergamer - someone that plays exclusively to win, and focuses on game mechanics at the expense of roleplay. And I understand how people might come to that conclusion. So if this appeal is accepted, I'm going to limit myself for a while, avoiding roles that have a lot of mechanical complexity to them (such as my usual medical doctor, scientist, security officer), and focusing more on jobs that prioritise roleplay skill and writing ability, while having a very low mechanical impact. Bartender, psychiatrist, chaplain, investigator, reporter. The Idris jobs. The ones that everyone loves and that have very little ability to 'win' -- because even though I know I don't care about winning, I want to prove this to you as well. Thank you.

I'm aware my opinion doesn't really carry much weight here, but I think it's an important step to do something about old notes as well - which means either declassifying them so that the players in question can see them, or just delete them and give everyone a clean slate. (Probably the former, realistically.) The reason for this is simple: any notes created before the new system are still going to be notes, and will still be used as evidence against players. You might say 'oh, they're just notes, they don't matter', but if they're just notes and they don't matter, then they shouldn't be brought up in ban appeals or staff complaints. We can't have it both ways. What I suggest to deal with this is simple: a blanket declassification of all notes, which currently fall into three categories: Frivolous notes (that probably shouldn't exist anyway), Non-frivolous notes (that the players have a right to see), And notes pertaining to active investigations - which comprise a very small portion of notes, few enough that it'd be entirely possible to just manually reclassify those specific notes. The benefits of this are obvious: it lets players actually see their notes.

Honestly, there's really no harm in adding it other than the dev budget required to do so, and it'd go a long way towards transparency.

I'm not saying there's a secret shadow cabal of admins that will ban anyone who disagrees with them, and I don't think anyone else is saying that either. I think we're saying that people have very good reasons for wanting to remain anonymous, and it's not right to shame them for doing so. That aside, there is a strong pushback against anyone that raises this issue with the server - this thread is proof. And while I applaud the removal of reactions, it addresses the symptom, not the cause. The cause of all this is that the way things are set up - the policy - and the metapolicy that states that policy must be followed even to the point of absurdity. No, I'm not the 'champion of the people, rising against the oppression of ss13 staff'. No, I don't plan to 'start a community rebellion or something'. And no, I'm not targeting Matt and Read. I was specifically instructed to make a staff complaint because that's how things work around here - you cannot disagree with a staff decision informally, all communications must be done through staff complaints. If that's perceived as 'stabbing people in the back', then I politely suggest the problem is with the policy that dictates that all disagreements must be solved through the medium of staff complaints. I do agree, though, that my ban isn't and shouldn't be relevant here, so would it kill people to stop bringing it up? I can't speak as to Sniblet's intentions with creating this thread, because I had no idea the thread was a thing until I saw it in the forum activity (despite claims to the contrary). I can, however, say that it'd be a little silly making a policy suggestion thread without having things hashed out and discussed informally first to determine what the best suggestion would be. Otherwise, it'd just be "here's a problem, what do we do about it", which isn't really a suggestion at all.

Can you really blame people for not speaking up? I have the utmost respect for Zulu and Sniblet and everyone else who says something, but I think it's understood all around that it's a very risky thing to do. This is from one of the phantoms, who we'll call E. This is from another - Gio27 (player of Walter Erdain), who has agreed to put their name to this. As E said, this is a problem that everyone knows about, but coming forward puts people at risk. If both Gio and I, both relatively new, can pinpoint the problem, then that means there is a problem - we have much less exposure to Aurora's history than others, and if it's obvious to us... (Also, for the record, I have no intent to troll the community. If I wanted to cause problems- which I don't- I'd just ban evade and flood phoron. Which I'm not doing, because that's shitty. I want to actually improve Aurora and play on the server I love.)

And again, I'm not the only person who has had negative experiences with regards to the current system and the current policies. As Sniblet pointed out in the opening post that keeps being pulled away from... (paraphrased): the forum side of Aurora is toxic, people don't listen to each other, threads are locked and conversations are ended preemptively, bans are wielded like cudgels over misunderstandings, the enforcement of rules is bizarre, inefficient and unfair, dialogue about staff decisions is restricted and constrained, consequence is prioritised above intent, and we all seem to forget that this is just a game to be enjoyed. So yes, there's a problem. The problem isn't "uwu Stars got banned for putting things in briefcases", the problem is "the system is broken and this train had so many chances to stop but we still kept going full steam ahead just because we could". The first step to improving Aurora is recognising that it can be improved, and that improvement must come from a place of good faith.

Not even the people being punished know why the decisions that were reached, were reached. I still haven't seen my own notes that were used as key evidence against me in my permaban, despite requesting to see them. To me, this thread feels like people are discontented with the way things work, and are trying to state clearly why that discontent exists, but are being shut down, sidetracked, snarked on or slandered for trying to point out a problem. So if I can pose a question... A problem exists. What are we going to do about it? I'm not referring to you or Read here, as you're both people who've proven that simple communication is not only possible, but incredibly effective. I'm referring to the policies in place that discourage such actions. And I had no idea this thread was being made until I saw it in the forum activity list.

"Speaking to someone 14 times" includes things like why are you wearing sandals as a security cadet? ("because that's the default loadout for Tajaran security cadets" "well don't do it again it's not proper uniform code"), keep in mind. Or being bwoinked and messaged on discord for this. That's not to say I defend wearing sandals or making PG-13 comments in private, but there's a reason we don't bring up jaywalking in murder trials. But, far more importantly-- one, this isn't about me (and my ban appeal was just denied anyway), so let's please stay on topic. And two, speaking to someone isn't the same as talking with someone. There is a huge difference between bwoinking someone mid-round, going "don't do that, I'm warning you, if you disagree you can make a staff complaint uwu"... and just, y'know, talking to them like a normal person. This isn't about any one individual, and I'd rather we stop pretending it is, because it's not going to make my ban appeal go any smoother. This is about the problems with the current policy and how we can best fix it - and before you say "make a policy suggestion!"... that's just "make a staff complaint!" with a different coat of paint. The problem is that people are unwilling to just talk to each other. And I get it, I really do - sometimes there'll be bad actors who abuse that leniency. But, and you may disagree, I think it's far better to be too kind, than too cruel. If you're trying to be a dictator, it's better to be feared than loved, in the words of Machiavelli - but if you're trying to be a public servant, you probably want to go more for the loved side.

To bring things back on topic before the thread is locked and the conversation is ended again... here are @Sniblet 's criticisms from the opening post, in a nice, easy-to-read format that doesn't involve Yemen or briefcases or cats cooking, at all. (Also, I'm going to start using greentext for the important parts so it's easier for skimreaders to keep track of.) You can disagree with this assessment. You can disagree with the opinions stated here. But it is an objective truth that at least three people - Sniblet, myself, and Zulu (as well as at least five other people who I'm in contact with) - have expressed the same sentiments, which proves that it is not an isolated incident. This isn't just the thoughts of a fringe shadow-cabal determined to bring down Aurora through pointing out its flaws. The question here isn't "is this a problem?", because if it wasn't a problem, this thread wouldn't exist. The question is "how are we going to fix it?", and the answer to that isn't by fighting like children or by doubling down and going 'the rules say this, so this is how it works'.

I feel like the response of "make a staff complaint" to every criticism of the current system is indicative of the problem with the system - it is far too rigid, far too disciplinary, with not enough focus on honest, meaningful communication. It prioritises a formal judicial structure and 'punishment of offenders' over actually solving problems, and doesn't place a high enough focus on the input of the many. Vox populi, vox dei, and all that. In the end, Aurora exists for the Aurora community - and that includes the staff team, yes, but that is not strictly limited to the staff team. It exists to provide a good experience for everyone, and if some people aren't having a good experience, why is it right to shut down discussion of that topic instead of addressing the issue directly? Regardless of how you feel about the merits of Sniblet's post, it is an undeniable fact that the way things work is imperfect. It has unintended side-effects that cause problems - dare I say, bugs. And bugs should be fixed. There is no one-size-fits-all boot that must be licked here. I've been on the administration team of multiple servers over many years, and if there's one thing I've learned, it's that every case is different, and every case requires a little special something that, in its absence, becomes greatly noticeable: humanity. We must focus not on the means-to-an-end, the rules, but on the end-in-itself, the enjoyment of the server - and to take whichever steps are necessary in order to maximise that enjoyment. For phoron griefers, that's a permaban. But for everyone else? Hey, sometimes that's just a one-on-one conversation... and yes, I know the rules don't say that's an option. That's my point. The rules do not dictate what is right and good; what is right and good (should) dictate the rules. The reason I bring up the mission statement of the original Aurora is because, even though I wasn't there- most of us weren't there- the statement is clear, concise, and meaningful. It doesn't take a chef to be able to go "this food tastes bad", even if it takes a chef to make it taste good.

I don't have the brainpower for detailed feedback right now, but +1 good player, very clearly cares about Aurora, remind me to edit this later

I look forward to seeing receipts for your donation to the people of Yemen, @Scheveningen , and I'm sure the victims of the humanitarian crisis you mentioned will appreciate it too. But back on topic... When you care about something, you want to see it become the best it can be. People that care about Aurora are willing to read through long posts. People that don't care about Aurora aren't the target audience of this post... but even then, there's a handy TL;DR at the bottom of Sniblet's first post. Now back on topic even more - unless the mission statement of Aurora has changed at some point while nobody was looking, it's not about creating a rigid and ordered environment. It's about creating a fair and fun environment.

With the greatest of respect to the victims of the humanitarian crisis in Yemen - my heart goes out to them, truly - you are absolutely right that their suffering is orders of magnitude larger than anything on Aurora. So if we're going to use their suffering as ammunition in a discussion about a spaceman game, how about we help the Yemeni people while we're at it? The donation link is here (UNICEF). And with the greatest of respect to you, @Scheveningen... the fallacy of relative privation (aka "there are children dying in Yemen!") is a fallacy for a reason. It in no way means we can't discuss problems with Aurora. But please, if it's a cause that you care strongly about, I highly encourage you to donate to help them instead of just using their suffering to win at spaceman forum discussions. The link I used is https://www.unicef.org.uk/donate/yemen/, but I'm sure there are other charities that can help too.

I have absolutely no problem with @Sniblet 's post, and I honestly think it's rather inspiring that they're willing to stand up and voice these concerns despite the risks of doing so. On a personal level, I appreciate it greatly - given the overwhelming laugh-reaction response to my appeal process, I'd felt rather alone and unwanted by the community. But I won't comment on my own situation, because I'd really rather like to be unbanned and I'm terrified that if I say anything at all out of line my unban request will be denied. I'll comment on the rest of it instead. So let me ask a question -- just a hypothetical. You are a security officer on the SCCV Horizon; you arrest someone for a minor crime, and in the process of searching them, you find their PDA is unlocked and on the traitor uplink's exploitables page. None of the telecrystals have been spent, but it's clear to you, OOC, that they're an antag, and IC you could make a strong case for a black-market uplink full of blackmail material, being contraband. What do you do? Do you confiscate the PDA, evidence-bag it, pass it over to the investigator, and charge this fiend with i212 Contraband in addition to their i120 Littering? You could. You have the justification to, and it's what the corporate regulations tell you to do. You'd get the antag. You'd win. Or do you quietly close the uplink, go "LOOC: Your uplink was open dummy, I saw nothing though", hand them their PDA and fine them 40 credits for Littering, then let them go off to do antag stuff? You could do this as well. It's not what the regulations tell you to do, though... and you wouldn't get the antag. You wouldn't win. It seems to me that although the staff and the playerbase both encourage the latter in-game (and anyone with access to the departmental hub discord can confirm that I've explicitly reminded antags 'close your uplinks or I'll do it for you smh'), the overwhelming approach out-of-character, with regards to policies and the enforcement of such, is equivalent to the former. That is to say, it is considered more important to enforce the rules to the letter than to be a kind and reasonable human. I have been explicitly told that there is no room for simple one-on-one conversation with regards to rule-breaks; that it is inappropriate to try and talk to admins about their decisions in AdminPMs or on Discord, and that the Proper Process of filing a formal staff complaint must be followed... even in situations where just sitting down for a few minutes would be faster and kinder for everyone involved. I have been explicitly told that intent does not matter, that all that matters is if you Did A Bad - not if you Meant to Do A Bad. As Sniblet said - the rules are an out-of-game tool that exists to improve the experience of the players. We have them because, when people follow them, it creates a better server. The end goal is not to follow the rules, but to create a better server, with the rules acting as a means to an end in that regard. ----- The original mission statement of Aurora, long before my time, reads as follows: When did we lose our way?

Update: I actually managed to sit down and talk with one of the admins about all this, and it honestly makes things way easier??? Not going to namedrop, but you know who you are- thank you for being willing to talk without the whole smokescreen of formality. It helped, a lot. So here's where I was going wrong with the whole complaint fiasco-- I was focusing on intent. Because I had no intent to do a bad, then that surely means I shouldn't be punished, right? Standard intentionalist ethics, right? Well, I fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous of which is 'never get involved in a land war in Asia', but only slightly less well known is this: Aurora is about consequences, not intent. It doesn't matter what my intent was, because the end result is that the rules were broken. So yeah, that one's on me. Even though I disagree with the procedural approach, I formally revoke my complaint, because it's kinda silly to have a complaint when I'm the one who goofed. And I say this with genuine sincerity: I'm sorry. For putting things in a briefcase inside a backpack without taking the briefcase out of the backpack, yes, but also for being too autistic (and I mean this literally, not as an insult, me being on the spectrum does not help things here) to realise it was never about intent anyway so why am I writing 4000 words on it. I had to have someone else sit down with me in an informal setting and point out 'hey, this is how it works here' in order for it to click. I'm sorry. And I'm gonna be totally honest, I can't promise I'll never break the rules again, because (as evidenced) I'm someone who actively has to be told 'hey, don't do that' sometimes. But I can promise I'll never intentionally break the rules, and I hope that's good enough... and if it isn't, then having the ban be a week, or a month, or six years, doesn't matter, because I'm the kind of person to touch a supermatter to see what it does IRL. I do maintain that this whole shenanigan could've been avoided with just five minutes of conversation instead of secret notes and formal warnings and a permaban, but hey, it's a learning experience for everyone, especially me. So yeah, I'm sorry, I won't put things in briefcases inside backpacks without taking the briefcase out of the backpack again, pls unban before the event so I can play my spacecat thanku no further questions your honor.

Server Moderator Application Basic Information Byond Account: UponASeaOfStars Character Name(s): Aveline LaCroix, Physician; Marinette Fourier, Scientist; Si'raya Mratiirr, Security Officer AI Name(s): N/A Discord username + tag: 𝒷𝒶𝓈𝒾𝒸 𝒶𝓈 𝒽𝑒𝒸𝓀#8613 Age: 21+ Timezone: UTC+0 When are you on Aurora?: Due to my present circumstances, right now, I'm not... but usually around 2000-0700 UTC. Experience How long have you played SS13?: On and off since at least 2015. How long have you played on Aurora: In four months, it'll be six months. How much do you know about SS13 (Baystation build) game mechanics?: I like to think I'm fairly knowledgeable about that kind of thing. Do you have any experience moderating for an SS13 server?: I've been a contributor, developer, devmin, head devmin, and/or co-host for multiple servers, including HRP servers. I'll gladly share details in private. Unrelated to SS13, I also worked as a content moderator for a major dating app (it's not Tinder, before you ask), so I have professional training in communication and situation resolution. Have you read through the criteria thread; https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=4198 - and believe that you mark off all the criteria?: I have, and I believe I meet and exceed these criteria. Have you ever been banned, and if so, how long and why?: I am currently banned on Aurora. I understand this may pose a slight obstacle to my moderator application, but the criteria don't technically disqualify me. I'm working on fixing this. Personality Why do you play SS13?: Because, much like a relapsing addict, I can never quite seem to tear myself away from it. It has a certain unique charm that other games lack, presenting a novel combination of quality roleplay, science fiction settings, engaging game mechanics, and a certain je ne sais quoi. Why do you play on Aurora?: I mean, honestly? I love roleplay. I always have. The roleplay community on Aurora is absolutely astounding with their skill and ability to weave together stories in a compelling way, and I find the lore here to be incredibly interesting. Plus, having a developing world that actually expands over time is something that not many HRP servers have tried, and I think it works remarkably well here. What do moderators do?: An ideal moderator, in my eyes, would focus on conflict deescalation and peaceful resolution. Very, very few players are actively intending to cause problems - and those that are, can be identified immediately (mostly because they wordlessly bash people with fire extinguishers). If someone is not intending to cause problems, the staff team, and by extension the moderators, should just sit down and talk to them. Aside from that, moderators are responsible for being paragons, beacons for others to follow; that's not to say that a moderator can't have had a storied past, but that anyone on the moderation team should be someone that new players are capable of looking up to. In a sense, it's almost like being a mentor for the whole server. The ultimate goal, at any moment, should be maximising people's enjoyment: sometimes, yes, that means you'll have to ban a shitter who's causing problems for others. But often it means you'll be answering questions in ahelps, providing input on gimmicks in AOOC, tutoring new players in why fire extinguishers shouldn't be applied to skulls, and the like. Moderators, like all staff roles, are public servants; it's not about having power. It's about helping people. What does it mean to be a moderator for our server?: It means loving Aurora enough to want to devote your free time to improving it, not just enjoying it. It means wanting to make people happy, and being willing to take time out of your day to do so. It means being seen not as an individual, but as a representative of the staff team, as someone who speaks with the voice of authority and whose every word will be scrutinised. It means seeing Aurora for all its stars and all the space between them, and wanting to make it shine just a little brighter. Why do you want to be a moderator?: Because, against my better judgement, I actually love this server, and I want to help make it better. I know there are problems that exist with the system, and the best way to fix those problems is from the inside - by setting a good example, and prioritising kindness and communication above all else. I know I'm not perfect, and I don't expect this application to succeed given my current precarious situation-- but where's the harm in trying? What qualities do you possess that would make you a good moderator?: Firstly, I'm already familiar with the moderator tools due to my previous experiences as staff. Secondly, I'm actually pretty good at talking to people and deescalating conflicts-- which, as I stated before, I consider to be the fundamental duties of a moderator. I live my life by the principle of assume good faith - that is to say, never assume malice unless it is proven beyond reasonable doubt - and this is something the staff team needs more of, I think. How well do you handle stress, anger, or insults?: Pretty well, I think. I don't get upset when people are laughing at me, and if someone feels the need to insult me, I'll sit down later to address why that desire was there - was it a valid criticism that was expressed in an angry manner, or was it just someone being cruel? Often, it's the former. Stress is something that everyone has to deal with, but I've learned to manage it rather well. Anything Else You Want to Add: I was actually thinking of applying before the briefcase incident, so... yeah, this is genuinely a serious application. Run me through the interview, put the screws to me, and see if I crack. I fully expect to be denied, but in the words of Michael Scott, you miss one hundred percent of the shots you don't take. And yes, you may laugh.

At the very least, remove them from staff complaints / unban requests, I think. As funny as it is to have the entire staff team laughing at someone's appeal, it's... perhaps not the best look.

BYOND Key: UponASeaOfStars Total Ban Length: Permanent Banning staff member's Key: (This is the staff member's BYOND key/Ckey who placed the ban) Reason of Ban: Reason for Appeal: Alberyk said to make an appeal, so here we go, round three! I'm entering a plea of no contest - that is to say I still maintain my innocence (in that I had no intent to powergame or abuse any bugs), but I get that I'm not going to be able to convince you I had no malicious intent, so there's no real point in trying. Plus, I mean, you probably don't like me much after the whole staff complaint thing, and I get that, I don't like me much either. So instead, I'd like to propose an alternative punishment: community service. (Yeah, you can do your laugh reacts now. Get 'em in while they're hot.) But hear me out here. There's no malicious intent, so there's no need for a permaban... but clearly the staff team still thinks some level of punishment is necessary. The current situation doesn't really benefit anyone, so how about we turn it into something that benefits everyone? Maximise the good? Here's what I suggest. I'd like the ban to be set to 31 days (10 March 2023), and then reduced by one day for every bug I fix. This doesn't include 'could not reproduce' closed issue tickets, but it does include PRs stuck in review limbo. So if I fix eighteen bugs, that's a thirteen-day ban. If I fix three bugs, that's a twenty-eight day ban. If I fix thirty-one bugs, I've done my time and served my sentence. When I return, I'm given amnesty for my previous sins, but any further bans cannot ever be appealed. I feel like this is fitting, given the original ticket was all about the now-infamous Briefcase Backpack Bug (BBB, not to be confused with the Better Business Bureau). But hold on, what do you get out of it? How does the staff team benefit? One, optics. In my previous staff complaint, I raised the point that staff tend to go for the most harsh penalties possible, instead of sitting down and engaging in meaningful dialogue with offenders. Going for community service instead of a life sentence is a pretty good way to prove me wrong there, isn't it? It'd help the Aurora staff reputation become more positive. Two, bug fixes. I mean, come on, there's 631 issues on the tracker right now, and if I'm fixing 31 of them, that's 5% taken out right there and then, plus any CNRs. Objectively, Aurora as a community would benefit from having someone take a deep-dive into fixing bugs for a while, and I'm happy to be the one to do so if it means I get to enjoy the rest of the current event arc. Three... well, this can go one of two ways. Either I come back and I'm the turbomegashitter that staff seems to think I am, in which case I'm instantly banned (and if this happens, I officially forfeit my right to appeal, and you can quote me on this) -- or I come back and I prove that my reputation is unfounded, and in your eyes, turn over a new leaf, which means there's a good player floating around who isn't causing problems. The downside, of course, is that it means giving me another shot and hoping I don't do anything as heinous as putting things in briefcases or wearing sandals as a cadet or putting tricord, inaprov and butaz in the same beaker, ever again. And if I do, then so be it, take me out back and let me see the stars one last time, then put one between my eyes. But if not? Then hey, mission accomplished, right? Reformation.

Alright. After a little consulting, I think I've got a plan. @Alberyk, I'll reach out to you on discord.

Regarding the briefcase: again, intent. I'm going to offer a little evidence here: my track record suggesting that I make bug reports when I find bugs. If I were the type to look favorably upon bugs, I wouldn't make bug reports to get them fixed. It's fine if you define it as a bug, but at the time I did not consider it to be a bug. If I'd considered it to be a bug, I'd have made a bug report. Hell, the moment it was pointed out "hey, we consider this a bug here", I immediately offered to fix it. "Why would it fit because you picked it in the loadout?" Because that's how the loadout works. It puts items in your backpack. You might say "abuse of bugs, regardless of intent, is a punishable offense", but abusing something requires an intent to abuse it. What advantage was provided? What benefit was gained? What did having a loadout briefcase in my bag for one extended round and ten minutes of the next round bring me? None. As for the notes - again, I'm not able to defend myself against notes that I can't see, so if they're relevant, let's talk about them. If they're not relevant, they have no place being brought up here at all. So I ask again, as I did in the first complaint: what purpose does this serve? How does this ban improve Aurora? Are we to take it that my presence was so odious, so detested, that I actively made the community worse just by being a part of it? Are we to assume that Aurora is a better place with me gone? Because that is the role of a ban: for when all else fails, a weapon of last resort. If that's not the case... then you know what else would work, without removing a player from the community?

As I mentioned in the first staff complaint, I'm not able to read my notes, so I'm not in a position to defend myself regarding them. If they're exclusively designed as an informal admin notepad, then they're not relevant to the case; if they're designed as a formal way of keeping track of people, then they're evidence in this case, and as such I should be given a chance to address them directly. Zulu was given a warning and had their post deleted for pointing this out, but it's a salient point: it cannot be expected of anyone to defend themselves against unsubstantiated claims. With regards to the briefcase: As has already been established, I was only aware that it was considered a bug when Melariara told me it was a bug (to which I disgreed, but kept my opinion to myself because disagreeing with the staff team is a Very Bad Idea). I then immediately offered to fix the bug. And given that I'd only had the briefcase for two shifts (the first shift where I discovered 'oh, that's cool, didn't realise it worked that way' and the second shift where I was banned ten minutes in), as prior to that the character in question used a secure briefcase that can't be opened without first inputting a code (which itself requires taking out of the backpack) and only bought the metal briefcase (the one I was banned for) when she graduated to Security Officer... you are absolutely welcome to look for evidence of me 'abusing a bug' or 'powergaming' with it, but I guarantee you won't find any. I had it for two rounds. The first one was extended, in which I spent the vast majority of it doing cute Tajara RP, and the second I was banned ten minutes in. To reiterate: I differentiate between bugs/exploits (such as the duplication exploit that allows you to spawn infinite reagents using an IV) and intentional game mechanics (such as being able to store gas masks inside emergency boxes). We must then, in that case, examine my conduct from the point I was informed "hey, this is a bug, which means it's against the rules". I immediately offered to get a PR up to fix it, even though I didn't agree with the claim that it was a bug. Because that's the kind of player I am: someone who actively wants to improve Aurora. What is the correct response, if not this? From the moment I was made aware that it was considered a bug, I expressed a desire to fix it. Is that deserving of a permaban?

BYOND Key: UponASeaOfStars Staff BYOND Key: Melariara and MattAtlas Game ID: N/A - Forum behavior. Reason for complaint: I was told to make a second staff complaint by Matt if I wanted this escalated to headstaff, so... Evidence/logs/etc: Additional remarks I had this second, slightly smaller staff complaint inside my original staff complaint, but I took it out and now it won't go back in. Also, yes, you are all welcome and invited to laugh at this whole situation because it's honestly absurd to the point of hilarity. I'm laughing too, it's okay. To clarify, I am requesting my initial Staff Complaint be handled by head administration. It was closed within an hour of me making it, without the chance for meaningful discourse. Let's change that.

Thank you, Zulu. This kind of behavior - immediately ruling the staff complaint as handled without an opportunity for an open and honest dialogue, utilising the maximum possible force instead of attempting to engage in conversation and find peaceful, non-disciplinary resolutions - is exactly what I'm talking about. Is it really that hard to just put away the hammer and sit down and talk to people? Is it really that hard to be honest, and transparent, and talk instead of being judged and sentenced behind-the-scenes and then punished without recourse? When people speak out, they are silenced, because it is against the rules to speak out. With regards to the notes: again, let's discuss them if they're relevant. If they're purely intended as a notepad for the staff team, then they're irrelevant to this case. If they're intended as a history of warnings given to someone, then they're evidence in the case, and as such, should be made clear. And yes, I stand by the quirk of game design comment, because SS13 is weird and BYOND is a hell codebase and it's absolutely full of silly interactions like that. I know of at least one codebase where you're immediately dusted if you touch the supermatter, but you're perfectly safe to drag it around with CTRL-Click as long as you don't bump into it. SS13 is weird, and anyone who thinks it's a perfectly logical game is pretending.

Also remind me please, what unfair advantage does this provide over just wearing the armor? Powergaming must create an advantage over the alternative, correct? It is far more 'advantageous' to simply wear the armor and have a cardboard box to hold the cuffs/flash, as well as like, five other things of your choice. Putting your armor in a briefcase actively puts you at a disadvantage, because you lose the protection it offers and have to play inventory tetris to get it out in a hurry, and you still end up with less storage than just having a cardboard box. If I were a powergamer I'd just wear the armor, it's totally fine on code green anyway. My actions do not line up with the actions of a theoretical powergamer. My actions line up with the actions of someone who likes RP and doesn't play to win.

It's a little difficult to defend myself against notes that I can't see and haven't been informed of until now. If you want to discuss the notes, you're welcome to discuss the notes, but in order to do so we'd need to actually see the notes. The permaban in question was successfully appealed already, and was related to character knowledge rather than powergaming. I expressed surprise that it was considered a bug. I think I've established already that I disagreed with the assessment that it was a bug instead of a quirk of game design. It's not that I didn't know briefcases can't be put back in your bag; it's that I considered that one of the quirks of SS13 inventory management. See above. I can't defend myself against notes that I don't know about, so there's no evidence to suggest that any of those notes are even accurate if I haven't been given the chance to refute them. It's clearly angled at exposing a problem with Aurora that, in less than two months, I've been able to identify. As I already stated, this isn't about me. This is about how people are treated here. It's about whether or not it best serves the community to take the approach of an indefinite ban when literally just going 'yeah, that's a bug, don't do that' would suffice.