Jump to content

Owen

Moderators
  • Posts

    1,001
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Owen

  • Birthday 15/08/2001

Personal Information

  • Location
    United States

Linked Accounts

  • Byond CKey
    youjustgotowened

Recent Profile Visitors

8,583 profile views

Owen's Achievements

Syndicate Cell Commander

Syndicate Cell Commander (33/37)

  1. Alright so, first things first. We (@ReadThisNamePlz & @eddymakaveli) have found that @Fluffy has shown no transphobic/homophobic tendencies in the OOC space. His characters are well within our rules and continue to maintain such. The GitHub conversation was taken out of context, and upon further review of it, we found that it was simply a miscommunication. No one is at fault for this. The Discord interaction provided, as stated, is not enough to warrant any OOC action because Fluffy was simply answering a question that was posted publicly. The mention of the LOOC conversations was deliberated on, but since you both ( @La Villa Strangiato and Fluffy) agreed on Fluffy's recollection of the interaction, we've decided that this was: Not explicit enough to get the point across that you were uncomfortable with the misgendering; and We cannot do much else without solid evidence, which has not been provided. The interaction between Levi Kersaavi and Deshan Baral has been inspected closely and we believe that until the point of this complaint, it was firmly an IC issue as it was not otherwise communicated to Fluffy. However, with the input here from both Fluffy and @Nol4, the IC misgendering/deadnaming of Levi Kersaavi should stop. This was already agreed to so there is no point in going into any more detail here. Overall, we believe that this is an IC issue. However, we'd like to extend the opportunity to LVS to make it clear here and now that you are not comfortable with your characters being deadnamed/misgendered. If you are "fine" with it then it is firmly an IC issue. If you are not fine with it, make it known now. If Fluffy continues, then it would be a violation of the first rule "Don't be a dick." We will be leaving this open to allow time for either LVS or Nol to make clear their preference, otherwise, we consider this resolved.
  2. @Nol4 We would like your input on this as well, please.
  3. It is clear that there are some strong feelings either way here. Just a gentle reminder to keep things reasonable here and try to avoid coming off as overly aggressive with your posts.
  4. Right, apologies for the delay. @ReadThisNamePlz and I have discussed this complaint at length and ultimately have found that @Bear acted entirely reasonably in this instance. There were no actual punishments given out, you were not given a warning, you were not given a ban, etc… You were informed, very politely, that this is not something that we want to see done here. In fact, Bear seems to have gone above and beyond here by keeping the ticket open and trying to answer your questions/give you explanations of why you were being told this, which he had no obligation to do after you started being rude. The bits that Bear cited in his most recent post here are entirely correct, and you should be attempting to maintain a reasonable/believable gimmick. Seeing something like “kill all of X, burn all Y,” etc. is low-effort, even if you are approaching it from a different angle. I will reiterate that you have received zero punishment here and there is nothing to even be reversed. However, to get ahead of a pattern that we are noticing developing here--it is strongly encouraged that you take a long look at how you approach your interactions here with other players. There is no need to be combative and rude, especially to someone when they are being entirely polite to you. We aren’t going to take any action here, but a serious attitude check and self-reflection are needed. No one is out to ruin your time here or make things unenjoyable for you specifically. We will be locking and archiving this within the next day or so.
  5. Application denied due to being largely incomplete. Additionally, @La Villa Strangiato provides some good feedback here in general, highlighting many of the same concerns that I and the rest of the Command WL Team share. We'd like to see you branching out a bit more with potentially a variety of characters and working to get them established. If you have any questions moving forward, feel free to reach out to me on Discord. I look forward to seeing a future application from you.
  6. Hi. @Noble Row and I have spent a while deliberating over all of this. First, we want to address the idea of there being a “limb meta” which is allegedly being abused. This is not something that Noble or I agree with, nor do the other staff who we’ve discussed this with. While that does not mean that there cannot/should not be further discussion regarding the specific values, etc. of limb targeting, this is not considered an instance of powergaming in our view. The targeting mechanic exists for a reason, and just as how you could aim at someone’s hand to prevent them from using a weapon that requires both hands, or how you can aim at someone’s head to quickly kill them, aiming at someone’s legs functionally is no different. Regardless of where LynxSolstice was aiming throughout the round, firefights were certain to break out, simply with the way that the antags were approaching the round. However, that being said, we are taking an overall look at @LynxSolstice’s antagonist conduct overall here and what appears to be a more gamey attitude to the system as opposed to conveying a real story--these are glaring issues in our opinion. Additionally, your overall attitude toward antagonist-related situations has been consistently inappropriate. At the time of writing, you have two warnings on record for inappropriately aggressive/salty comments in LOOC, and you’ve been spoken to numerous times regarding the same issue. This recurring problem, spanning your entire history on the server, shows no sign of improvement on its current course. I’ve attached just a few examples from the aftermath of the recent round to explain what we are referring to here. The comments made on the Discord, similar to your prior instances in LOOC which you’ve been spoken to about, are not at all acceptable to see in our players. As a result, Noble and I have decided to place a permanent antagonist ban. You may appeal this decision when you feel you are ready. During this period, we strongly encourage you to reflect on your attitude and actions, especially when engaging in non-antagonist roles moving forward. We do genuinely hope to see a positive change in your conduct. We will be locking and archiving this in the next 24 hours.
  7. @Noble Row and I will be taking this complaint. Give us some time to go through logs. In the meantime please post your side @LynxSolstice
  8. Reporting Personnel: Helena Artigas Job Title of Reporting Personnel: Captain Game ID: crS-dm9p Personnel Involved: Essie Porter, Bridge Crew: Offender Logan Wright, Head of Security: Witness Ebele Mambwe, Executive Officer: Witness Secondary Witnesses: Lape, Personal Artificial Intelligence: Provided translations and record transcript of the events as they transpired Time of Incident: 21:50 - 22:10, Ship Time Real Time: ~5:30 PM EST - 7:00 PM EST (not sure on exact IRL timing) Location of Incident: Bridge, Helm Nature of Incident: [ ] - Workplace Hazard [ ] - Accident/Injury [ ] - Destruction of Property [ ] - Neglect of Duty [ ] - Harassment [ ] - Assault [X] - Misconduct [X] - Other: Failure to Execute an Order, Slandering a Head of Staff, Assault with Bodily Fluids, Violation of Privacy Laws, etc. Overview of the Incident: At the specified time and date, the mentioned individuals were present on the Horizon's Bridge. Following Executive Officer Mambwe's response to a hail over the vessel's hailing channel, Bridge Crew Essie Porter made inappropriate remarks, referring to the present individuals as "useless bureaucrats." Despite being asked to speak up, she refused, and both Mr. Mambwe and I issued direct orders, all of which she refused to comply with. Consequently, I directed Head of Security Logan Wright to charge her with i109 Slandering a Head of Staff and i111 Failure to Execute an Order, the latter already having two instances on her record. Porter became belligerent, expressing discontent in Freespeak, which was translated by Mr. Mambwe's pAI. She proceeded to throw her bag at Mr. Wright, resisted a calm disarmament request, and spat in Mr. Wright's face during proper detainment procedures. Following suspension by Mr. Mambwe, Porter continued obstructing processing in security's internal systems and refused to communicate in anything other than Freespeak. After she arrived in the brig, Mr. Wright reported ongoing intentional obstruction, including but not limited to, manipulating radios to broadcast her interrogation to the public hailing channel, belligerent behavior, refusal to cooperate, and continued harassment of superiors. Porter's conduct is deemed improper for an SCCV Horizon crew member, even more so for a member of the bridge staff entrusted with loyalty to the Stellar Corporate Conglomerate. Her actions raise potential concerns about confidentiality breaches and refusal to follow any orders, no matter how legitimate. Due to these issues, I recommend Porter's removal from the SCCV Horizon and a termination of her employment. Her behavior poses a persistent problem, as her security record reflects, and undermines trust in her abilities, mindset, and dedication to the job. Myself, Mr. Wright, and Mr. Mambwe are all more than willing and eager to discuss this matter with you further at a time most convenient for you. Mr. Wright, in particular, had to deal with persistent abuse and non-compliance outside of the incident displayed in the transcript. This was a persistent issue which lasted well over two hours. Submitted Evidence: Attached is a transcript of the interaction as provided by Lape, the personal artificial intelligence of Mr. Mambwe. The original fax that was sent to HR/SCCIA during the shift that occurred contained this transcript, as well as Porter's security records and another summary of events as they occurred. Would you like to be personally interviewed?: [X] - Yes [ ] - No Did you report it to a Head of Staff or a superior? If so, who? If not, why?: No, I was the captain on duty, and the executive officer and head of security were both present for the incident. I faxed the SCCIA with a preliminary incident report, prior to filing this one. Actions taken: Essie Porter was suspended for the remainder of the shift, and charged with i109 Slandering a Head of Staff, i111 Failure to Execute an Order, and i118 Violation of Privacy Laws. I believe she was also charged with spitting all over Mr. Wright upon her arrest, but I was not able to verify before the shift ended. Additional Notes: Transcript - 2466-01-21.txt
  9. Alright. I'm willing to lift the ban then. Keep in mind what is appropriate or not moving forward. If you have any questions, feel free to ahelp. I'll be closing this in a bit.
  10. This was the exact ban reason: You were spoken to several times in about 1-2 months about playing a believable character and advised to thoroughly read the rules. Can you explain to me what is wrong with the behavior you've demonstrated leading up to and resulting in the ban? I want to make sure you understand the expectations here. I also want to hear what specifically will be different if you are allowed back.
  11. +1, Bear reminds me of the Clinton-Lewinsky Scandal. Great mod material, better historian
×
×
  • Create New...