Doomberg

I completed a full driving course, aced my written test (OKAY, AFTER FAILING IT ONCE. Fuck engine mechanics questions.) and then proceeded to quit because my instructor pissed me off. ... but I have driven a car before, two years ago, so whatever.

Alright. I'll leave this here for 24 hours. If no one has any objections, the ban will be lifted.

Original ban reason is as follows: "Chucklefucking. Attempting to commit suicide with a pen. Immature responses. Disrespect to staff "I suggest you resign." Bad rp.". Any thoughts on this? Do you remember the incident? Either way, I invite you to read our rules if you haven't already, before we reach a decision.

Denied due to inactivity and failure to answer questions. Feel free to create another request when you're ready and feel inclined.

Declined due to inactivity and failure to use the appropriate format as instructed.

Denied due to user inactivity. Feel free to submit another, if you are inclined to.

Seems to be sorted out, as the player in question hasn't posted any further concerns. Locking & archiving.

Unban request denied due to inactivity and failure to answer the banning staffer's questions. You are more than welcome to submit another if you feel inclined to.

Alright, despite this specific complaint's inactivity, I'd like to clarify something before I toss it into the archive. The detective performing the duties of an officer, if we can even consider this a case of that, is an IC issue unless it reaches the point of antag hunting. Furthermore, we will not be taking punitive measures in any of the following situations in the future (excepting cases where our rules have clearly been violated, such as gank, powergame, etcetera): - A member of the security force lethally shoots a fleeing or resisting suspect of a major violent crime (IE terrorism, murder, attempted murder), regardless of the suspect being visibly armed or not - An antagonist lethally shoots a member of security who is in the process of compromising, arresting or firing upon said antagonist - An antagonist lethally shoots a non-security crew member who fails to comply with demands, attempts to or succeeds in compromising said antagonist With that aside, locking and archiving. PS: Warning lifted.

I'm going to be very blunt here. With all due respect to all of you, losing extremely vocal and disgruntled players who are attacking the rest of our playerbase is no loss at all. If that's the price that must be paid to preserve the privilege of RPing as we desire without being constantly attacked and given unsolicited "criticism", then I will pay the fuck out of it.

Let me quickly put this into perspective for you - the issue is that you are, whether consciously or not, making a vague attempt at coercing people to play the way you want them to by publicly attacking and shaming those that do not.

I have a million dollar bill. You can insist it's counterfeit, but I still don't need nor want your change. Your intentions are irrelevant. When you're causing damage or directly attacking people, you need to stop, no matter how good you or others may think the cause is. Furthermore: "Positive change" in your own opinion. Whether you like it or not, standards are for the administration to set, not you. This is not a democracy, despite what people would like to think.

Alright. Since nowadays we have a propensity of discussing things of this sort using copious amounts of witty internet humor/urbandictionary language/image macros/whatever else, let me pitch in by concisely summarizing my stance on this matter. You are describing a multitude of issues, some valid, others which are (in my opinion) only issues for you and certain other people. These issues will never be solved by large walls of text with whatever measure of popular backing. These issues are solved in time, as the server and community evolve and adapt. Light as many fires as you desire, I can almost guarantee you they will change very little in the long term. Regardless, this is not what I'm here to post about. I'm far more concerned about the singular issue prevalently present in this thread - namely, that of how you think people should RP, and the means through which you are attempting to make them RP the way you and a select group of people want them to. No one has, or will ever have, an obligation to acknowledge you ICly, interact with you ICly, or act the way you want them to ICly. This will not change. It is not a change you, or anyone, can ever make, no matter how much hell you try raising. As long as players are adhering to our already-established rules of conduct and general standards, they can RP whatever sort of characters they please, in whatever fashion they please. Push as hard as you can, you are more than likely to be pushed back ten fold. But that isn't the problem here - the problem starts with you and others publicly calling out and attempting to shame whoever you deem to be RPing in an unsatisfactory fashion. Do not try to hide behind a guise of criticism, because it has gone far, far beyond that. And the moment that gets out of hand - which it is dangerously close to doing - I will see to it that this mess is curbstomped. Good day.

Good RPer, generally competent at chosen departments. Would be interesting to see her as a head.

Raymond Galloway (WAS THERE EVER A CHOICE?) Tyrus Dawson https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chPJ7x9iMw0 Lawrence Gordon I have no theme for Avery. No theme does Avery justice. Nope.

Consider this resolved unless the author changes her mind. Will leave open for 24 hours for any further comments, as usual.

As stated before, I see no reason to issue any punishment to the players in question considering the circumstances. I'll be locking and archiving this. PM me if you wish to contest it.

(( As this seems to stem from a misunderstanding, I'll forego the formal warning, but please abide by this rule from now on. For clarification: Dzheymz's reply was IC from what I can see. I'll be deleting all OOC posts now, and leave this one so you're not all incredibly confused. If you MUST have OOC discussion regarding this, keep it to PMs, and keep it civil.))

Avery gets 285. Yay? Too lazy to do the other characters I (never) play.

Okay. This is - or is supposed to be - a heavy roleplay server. This implies that some things that might be allowed on other types of servers are forbidden, and some things forbidden on other types of servers are allowed (For example: You can't play a batshit insane character, but you aren't necessarily going to get boinked for fucking someone over as security provided that it's within reason). There will always be OOC limits on IC actions, no matter what. We cannot create some sort of anarchist utopia where staff intervention over IC actions is unnecessary. And, yes, there will be policies not contained within the rules that we will need to enforce regardless - the rules cannot be an all-encompassing document and they cannot possibly cover every potential situation (merely the foreseeable ones). As for the hardsuit issue, it's not really something I would have minded as staff, but this is about more than that.

Ban lifted.

Let us keep in mind that what IC action was conducted by security following the incident does not absolve anyone of anything and is entirely irrelevant outside of a complaint against the security players in question. The ban was issued due to releasing an extremely deadly virus after explicitly being told not to do so at the time and then lying to staff when confronted about it. Regardless, this is not an attempt to bury anyone, but to clarify why said ban was issued. I have no problem with the ban being lifted. (Also, this is an antag ban. Not a server ban. FYI.)

Alright, I'm going to wait for Plahunter's side of the story before saying anything else. Do remember to stay civil.

Done and done.