Dumplinz

I was an AI while he was a borg unit, very good RP, cooperated, asking where he was needed as a borg unit, actually talked to his fellow borgs and crew and didn't seem like someone who would take there whitelist as anything less than serious. Heroically died pushing out the super matter crystal that was about to explode, truly a hilarious moment +1 for sure.

Ehhhh, the server going down wasn't intentional, though probably shoulda been tested on a private server, he/she didn't really know this would happen. A day away from Aurora won't be too bad.

Ban He.

I was the Captain during the round, I ordered the CMO to not clone the person who committed suicide for obvious reasons. Just so it's clear in the context. Assuming all of this was fine RP (yinzr attacking the CMO) and was all cannon. Had Delta filed a IC complaint, Wouldn't Yinzr more or less be fired or heavily demoted? I mean the CMO was definitely in the right in terms of rules, Yinzr attacked a head of staff... Seems like this belongs in an IC complaint IF the other staff's believe nothing was done "wrong".

I was captain while three Vaurca, well, two Vaurca decided to have a Duel because of honor and being shamed out of a hive. (I believe there was a "story" behind it all and even a forum post somewhere maybe?) But it seemed very unathi. The third Vaurca being a "referee" of sorts. Then I had to argue what they were doing was completely unacceptable from NT's point of view, when one of the Vaurca simply replied "we serve the Queen, Not Nanotransen!" I'm not going to pretend to understand the Vaurca lore, just stating from my viewpoint I have just as well encountered many Vaurca playing with the "honor" side of things

Haven't Been added

I recall being a Captain on a shift when some Vaurca got kidnapped as a hostage by some Antags, And basically said fuck it, we're stilling going to kill/capture the antags Hostage or not. The HoS supported me but everyone else went nuts and even ahelped (which I later found out, the admins didn't contact me at the time) And we basically told the Nukeops, we weren't negotiating a Vaurca hostage for one of their own (a Nukeops we captured). Too many white knight neckbeards.

Like I said in my post, When I was saying it was hilarious, I was implying that the situation was absurd and (I believe) was chosen because of the mechanics of forcing Phoebe to the ground to not get shot. I don't condone it, or think it was wise, but I think that is why they did it, as opposed to a realism stand point. I applaud the flank, well done, I don't know too much in terms of mechanics, But is it not possible to remove those hardsuits/ Hardsuit gloves?/ helmets? In terms of killing you, I'm simply stating, you were liable to be shot to death, the fact that you were not is an amazing feat in it of itself. The officers should not have off'd you, and I think Alb said that was too rash, I mean any time you have a perp with a slit throat after the fact, you're going to have people lose their job. I'm not defending that. I'm simply arguing against the idea that a security officer would do everything they can to secure this hostage in this situation, To which I again say no, you were liable to be shot and killed regardless of the hostage in this situation, and that isn't something that wouldn't happen in an actual real life scenario. To be clear, You being filled with 1000 bullets would be more acceptable than having a slit throat, but because you lived, you shouldn't have been executed.

As an actual police officer, In terms of the hostage situation (and really the only thing I will comment on as it pertains to this complaint). The moment you put a gun up to a hostage's head and more so threaten to kill said hostage is the moment the police will either kill you on the spot or devise a plan to kill you. It would seem unreasonable to expect just because you have a regular worker (which I assume phoebe wasn't playing captain or cmo), to expect security to let the antagonist go, there is no expectation that the person taking the hostage captive will let them live. The rescue plan sounds hilarious, but I think it's a stretch to expect the security to never disobey a hostage taker, the common idea in law enforcement (at least now since school shootings) is save as many people as you can by swiftly neutralizing the antagonist. You can't expect to save everyone, I do get the "take him alive" approach, but as soon as you take a hostage you rarely get that right anymore. Look at it from the Securities standpoint, And I know it's hard, because this is "spac gaem" It is so unrealistic to expect security to be gods and take people alive who are armed, are you aware of how difficult that is in real life? your life is actually on the line, you don't know how the person is going to react, you only know they are willing to kill to escape. Nah, 100% of actual sworn officers would tell you to take the shot over taking the person alive. If I had to add an alternative to what should have been done, Maybe.. Quarantine off the area, surround him (assuming we're talking maintc. here) Tell the hostage taker clearly that he will not be escaping, and doing anything except surrendering will lead to their death. The assumption being unless they have a strong motive to kill said hostage, they will surrender if they value their life, If they don't value their life, there can be no negotiation anyway. In the Absence of the time and personnel to make the surrounding, you take the shot, Because while you shoot at them (at least from a human instinctive standpoint) they are going to return fire instead of offing the hostage.

I think Coolbc was saying: If there was auto-objectives, you would have less "boring assassinations/killing/gank complaints" and more easily justifiable scenarios where antags did things to clearly move toward their greater goal( and the posibility for antags to target non-sec roles, thus interacting with a greater variety of the station), I'll drop it there, Since I suppose that is very off topic. It's relevance is in the sense things like this complaint could be more justifiable if Antags weren't given a sort of blank "slate" to provide role play for the station.

oooh boy, Jboy got me, He's right, I wasn't there. You gotta be there to call people on their terrible reasoning, yup. I'm supprised we have judges that JUDGE people based on not being at places where incidents take place! Everyone pack up, This guy is far too smart, no way you can form an opinion based on what someone is talking about, nope. Good luck everyone, hes too smart for me anymore.

I'm referring to the incident I was involved in, hence why I stated earlier I was not one of the lings I'm your senario

They saw the killing take place, in a storage area, which they were not lead to I don't know how much more it can be spelled out for you. This is very irrelevant to the topic at hand. so feel free to delete this mods, but maybe this will help Jboy understand. How could they NOT have known or told anyone? They Saw it happen. it's very easy to type ;say ___ is killing ___ in the radio. Didn't lead the second person there purposefully, so you're just blantantly wrong there, Unless you are talking about the RD, in which case I did it to absorb and impersonate them to create a senario in which the rest of the station could enjoy.

...Really? The threat is allowing the entire station to know there is a changling/Antag that is attacking the crew. The person in question was the RD, which was to be absorbed and impersonated. The reason to see me as a threat was I was killing their boss.. You don't have an argument to stand on here, unless you argued to remove Changling as a whole, but that is a different story. There is an expectation they would report to the crew what they saw, and a very unlikely way of forcing them to stay silent without killing them. Getting on topic: You can't answer the question, because you believe you shouldn't have ever been killed in the first place. Though i was not the changling in your senario, the obvious answer you keep skipping: Killing you to absorb and impersonate the HoS can easily be the explanation You say "extensive" means, Another buzzword adding nothing to the conversation, congrats. Your argument is they lure you there as a "friend" they already killed, to kill you? You want Changlings to... "knock people out" to what end? they are knocked out. Now they are locked away somewhere, not apart of the game until they are found. Like your argument, there is no logical reason for a changling to take a hostage. OR you hilariously think locking them up as a security officer is a better solution. so they are out of the game because you lied, and that's fun for them. Do you hear yourself? your reasoning is absurd which leads me to believe you are just complaining to complain. Everyone isn't going to enjoy an antag round, That's the nature of an antagonist sometimes. Adding to the Roleplay is for the station, not every individual. Seriously though, it's crazy to think all your senarios proved the point i was making, You remove people from the game one way or another, regardless of whether you keep them alive, and in every one of those senarios all you are doing is using the Changling's abilities from which he has to kill and absorb people to use. Ridiculous.

It's not against the rules to radio in who is attacking you, and then scream for help/with the location etc.. Killing them because this is believed to be the likely issue isn't against the rules. (this is for the "they walk in on you blatantly killing someone in the act" as a changling) You don't seem to understand. Because they Can justify targeting and killing you, how would you have RP'd the situation resulting in your death as a changling Please do not use empty words like "interact" and believe that is a quick enough explanation. What is the Interaction you speak of where you as the HoS end up dead, and absorbed, What is the degree of "RP" you were looking for in this situation, in detail. (you don't have to answer this, but I don't think you're going to get a change in the mods/admins decision if you do not). Security are not antags, and are not suppose to kill and absorb people, your question is irrelevant.

It isn't Reasonable to assume that everyone is going to play Not powergamey and immedietly radio in they are being attacked and by Whom. It is easily relateable that security often shoots or threatens to shoot in situations where they realistically wouldn't be able to due to the mechanics of the game. Here's why your Argument makes no sense: You are a target that can be justified killing and/or Being Absorbed, clear? With that being said: Because you can be killed we are talking about how you get killed. You do not gain plot armor just "because" You were not randomly killed. You were targeted, and ambushed, quite brilliantly really, To be able to lure the HoS out of security. Just because you might have acted in a certain way doesn't make it reasonable to assume people will do exactly how you handle situations I get you walked into a room, and were subsequently killed, and that sucks, But it logically makes sense why that happened, are you not getting that? If you want people to take your side of view you are going to have to explain how logically the situation should have gone. Because what you are saying now, as skull said, Makes antags being a thing impossible(or rather, Changling as a role, impossible)

this is Ridiculous, In what way are you suppose to get your "rp" before being killed? "hey i'm going to kill you..." then blam? What are you expecting out of the interaction, You didn't walk down the hallway and get shot and they just moved on, they lured you to a room where you were killed because they were Antags, which you shouldn't even be in the room as the HoS. You have to essentially be dead in order for the lings to impersonate you. I don't honestly believe you have a solid argument of the correct way this situation could have been roleplayed out. For a second, Before spouting off nonsense about the rules in black and white instead of their Intent, Think of what could have reasonably been accepted to you as roleplay where you end up dieing.

Well I can definitely tell you the reasoning would easily be getting a Head of Security's DNA/Eliminating a Key leadership role which would cause security to be in some what disarray, Additionally a Head of Security shouldn't really investigate any scene, he should relay that to his officers. As far as being an Antag and making the round fun for others, I would like to point out it doesn't say Everyone. For instance, I was a changling at one point and I lured someone into chemical storage, ended up killing him after talking shortly, Then someone walked in as I was killing the person. I was forced to kill the person who walked in because otherwise I would have been caught via the headset. It was unfortunate, but it had to be done to prevent being caught, there wasn't significant roleplay at the time but it was understandable given the circumstances. Anywho, Antags are suppose to present a fun challenge to the Station, rarely will you be killed and say "Wow! what an amazing rp experience!" you are just the cost of there being an Antag sometimes. Amazingly enough you were cloned, so it wasn't even the end of your round there, Ganking sucks, I think everyone agrees, But don't act like death is a last resort option for antags, or that there must be an amazing storyline to why an antag is killing you. As for the End of round grief, that's pretty hilarious, actually. I mean beyond beating a prisoner in cuffs, which would get you suspended out of most departments, Your "RP" is related to being killed after the fact, when cloning is suppose to revert you to the start of the round? I mean, yeah, you're lucky you didn't get in too much trouble for the EoR grief, I get being in the mindset of the character and choosing what they would do, but the rule is pretty strict on that part. otherwise, the "gank" killing, I don't believe you have any ground to stand on.

I think I was the ERT that came in at end When the Singularity was released and the One guy Bombed the Shuttle cause "Lawl, game was over anyway" (If this is the incorrect game I'm referring to then, my bad). From reading Garn's Comment and the other's who have commented It's extremely obvious that the Slippery slope Idea is Correct, Garn isn't arguing that, he's literally just saying "I know when it's and problem and when it's not, k?" Which isn't an argument, it's an excuse. You gave him reason and logic and he simply countered with "trust me." (assuming this was the game I commented On) I mentioned that there were many many many rules the mods or admins had been super srs about rules that were akin to being the right age for the right job, or Name that's too close to a fictional character (like what? I get it, but that rule's logic is the complete opposite of what garn is saying) This thought process of when to be serious and when to not be serious is fine as long as you have a rule based reasoning, When you put your argument as " Cause I said so " You don't make just yourself look dumb, you make the mod team and the server look dumb as well. I Love this server, It add's a structure to the mechanics, limiting the rambo and abuse of the built in mechanics so you can create interesting scenarios and ultimately have fun. I see you're trying to focus on the game being fun and that's why you think this is ok, because you find it fun you know when it's not fun. That's a bullshit excuse so you can do what you want to do, If that's the way the mods and admins are allowed to act.... I mean really that's totally cool, it's a privately owned server, admin can set the rules, who to enforce and interpret etc etc. But you lose all the respect of your players by making the rules not justified but Arbitrary and yes, your "I'll know" reasoning is arbitrary when looking from the outside. I'm 100% on the side of having fun, but like Barge said there's servers for that kinda thing, this one has and enforces specific rules based on an actual guideline, anything else and the server is full of shit. Be consistent, if it's fun and games let it be that way, otherwise follow the structure that was created so everyone knows what they are getting into and everyone can have fun.

The Mutiny charge was the Crux of the Moderators argument to charge me with a warning because of Jun staying there for 30-40 minutes (in solitary). Which as repeatedly said, wasn't even charged with mutiny, but without accusing me of charging Jun with Mutiny, the Warning loses it's weight. This is Clearly If nothing else, A clarify issue "This is the way we the staff want this to be interpreted" There wasn't a Motive of power hungry or anything similarly ridiculous. Easily seen From me trying to interview and resolve the Incident Peacefully, twice. I could have just waited for Jun to come into the Brig with the weapon, But I called her into the HoS office to avoid this completely. But because people complained about things not even relating to me - Didn't Authorize the Detective arrest of whomever - Didn't Demand Authorization of the Science Weapon, Simply Asked If what they were doing was okay without an RD - Didn't Charge Jun with Mutiny Makes this Warning incredibly Unjust. Disallowing the recharging of the weapon was RP Simple, Cause and Reaction, Which doesn't inhibit the story of the game, but expands upon it. The words the Science department was saying was definitely disrespectful, and an RD wouldn't have allowed it, but they didn't have an RD so it was allowed. This issue with science is an RP Issue, No Rules were broken here, No authorization through the HoS were Required, the only thing you could mention is me saying " Hey, Don't become a problem with the Freeze gun, Or it becomes a Security issue. Completely Reasonable

The mutiny charge as said earlier is moot, I didn't get to charge Jun, because I was supposed to interview her afterwards but couldn't because I had to deal with PMs, additionally arresting a superior can easily be reasoned to be mutiny, you can disagree in the call, but the reasoning isn't off the mark. Jun wasn't supposed to be charged with anything, and came out violently, I was even trying to negotiate more before dealing with you. The warning is entirely wrong because your interpretation of the mutiny charge isn't based on any of the words it says on the wiki. Tabling someone was assault, yes, there shouldn't be confusing there, but the radio communication that I reference and you ignore is where the mutiny charge comes from. Beyond literally using the phrase remove from power, Arresting a person who is your direct superior and has no captain above him is directly eliminating the chain of command (even more because my radio was taken) effectively ending leadership within security. This is mutiny, the fulfills half of the sentence when it only needs to have one part in the description of Mutiny. You being biased was coming from your lack of evidence, witholding discussion with the accusers, and ridiculous majority rules about a mutiny interpretation when is clear that almost all the charges on the wiki are left vague and for the HoS to decide on.

I think you are Confused from When I stated "you're lucky you don't have officers in there if it Became a Security Issue" Implying That I was not of the mind it warranted sending anyone to stop, regardless of the lack of a head, Which easily can still be ordered by the Scientist and supervised, Sure. But it can easily be Reasoned if the Scientist Supervising the Weapon Testing could be inept and not responsible enough for this. Was he/she? I don't know, But i didn't press the issue, because it wasn't my department. I'm Assuming you are referring to this phrase, because it is the only one with a stretch of it's intent you can come to your Conclusion. But like I said and you Agree, This isn't an OOC Issue, there isn't a Rule clearly understood and broken without care, It was just an interaction.

I will say, On my Part, I believe I attempted to Flash in the first Incident (which failed due to eyewear) And that was the only time I ever actually Physically interacted with someone. In which Case I believe Jun Dragged Hive into the Detectives Office and may have tabled him more then a couple times, I did order the arrest though. He started speaking as he was being dragged to the cell. With Jun I attempted to Remove Jun's Ear Radio, as she was informed this was Private, And no Decision had been made for her disobeying an order, I Intentionally didn't try to fight in any of these Scenarios because Darius red is 54, a bit too old to be doing such things.

When i say "leading" I mean the Lab assistant was the only one I was conversing with, and the Scientist you named was not really interactive with me. the "I didn't give you permission to do that!" is hilarious, I never stated that, That was either an outright lie if you were told that, or you took hearsay as fact. I took the Catty Attitude as Disrespect and dealt with it in IC, Which noting, NO repercussions happened via paperwork or whatnot, just the denial of the Recharge, That's it. I don't Fault you being "afraid" I mean you are suppose to RP that, Voice complaints and what not, but in Game. This being an OOC issue is so far-fetched without any supporting evidence is pathetic. As much as a Jerk as I may sound in this Complaint here, it is in no way representative of how I acted in the game, Which I kept in professional. The Moderator however had enough people complaining that he must have assumed he had to take a Direct Action. The Confusion is from either Lies, or errors in Communications, Which you should be able to Support before you make a Warning If I said "Science department, I am the Law, Everything you do comes through me!" Then I'm in the wrong, But that statement is extremely ridiculous, And no reasonable person would make it. So don't claim I did without proof. If I Did something incorrect about the Brigs times, Prove it. Cite a Source. Because I'm citing the Book that leads to the wiki, and i even posted the link on the First post. (Which It Wasn't even suppose to get this far!, but Jun Attacked me when admitting she was going to go against an order, Which forces me to deal with the Situation publicly.) Easily I can interpret what Jun did as Mutiny, Assault A head of Staff, Disobeying an Order, Misuse of Coms, But it didn't even get to that level, Because I had to deal with a Moderator (The Mod clarifying isn't wrong, His Judgement is completely off the mark, however.) And Saying I handled to Situation Aggressively? Fine, This is such a Moot point in reference to the Complaint, This isn't about "You Rp'd ___" It's How Did I break a Rule warnting a Warning

I Wasn't asking for authorization, I never pushed the subject of their experiments, was it claimed I demanded paperwork? I stated my opinion icly that a science team (and mainly lab assistant) didn't have anyone supervising them, but I didn't personally stop them, or order it stopped. I never ordered the arrest or knew it was even going on, I only saw the debate in IC, So I said in ooc detectives are cops irl, so I see juns point of view, again nothing being broken on my part Stop calling it SSD please, the examination showed no closed eyes, he was walking back and forth and toggled the detective door. He was RPing ssd walking (unless this was somehow a bug, buy unlikely as he responded immediately when arrested. Too add, I didn't even touch the guy, Jun tabled him a couple times. And I tried setting him free after he kept saying SSD SSD! so I tried freeing him, the warden accidently reset the door, so he attacked me. The freeze gun wasn't a threat itself, but easily reasonable to see a science team unsupervised with is dangerous (a lab assistant leading it, no less, buy everyone ignored that). So back to what's important, how was a rule broken? Everything has a reasonable thought process, regardless if you disagree about it being "nice" or in reg, we are RPing, our actions are intentionally not by the book.