Faris

They're not being banned. Garn is waiting for an opportunity to speak to them.

I'm concurring with you.

Locking and archiving. Deeming this complaint invalid as it was already resolved by a staff member in round.

I am not fond of the concept of bringing in staff presently working for other servers. And from what I can see and what I am being told, there's the habit of playing for a bit, applying for a position and then disappearing. I don't recall playing with you nor do I recall interacting with you, so I do not know how you are. I'll be honest in saying that there's not much of a chance in my opinion.

Chapter 5 added.

Leaving this open for one more day before deeming it invalid as it's always been resolved by a staff member. Refer to my previous post if you'd still like to pursue it.

There's an a lot of variables that need to be accounted for that make this a mechanical thing to be extremely unfeasible.

It's alright, I understand how frustrating this can be when it happens. I'm going to move this as a policy that's already present.

That is already something we enforce when noticed or reported. Rules don't mean people will never do it. A character will not know who an exterior antagonist is without evidence providing it or told.

They have a job and a certain obligation to the round just like everyone else. Drive the narrative, have fun. They simply have more sway to the flow of the round itself., hence the whitelist. There's really not much to it. The wiki pages for the jobs also outline things enough in my opinion. Some include both do's and do not's. A Director should not be using what ever their dangerous experiment on hostiles when not needed, similar as a scientist should not charge out of his lab with a bag full of guns. Voting for dismissal.

Send an adminhelp next time. I doubt anything will occur, as we know little to nothing. The round is over and as time goes, what people saw and recall becomes less reliable. This includes intent and reasoning, something that not easily grasped from text logs. If this happened, this is a big no. It's a rule violation I'd expect a person that has played this long to be familiar with. Do not do it again.

Completely reasonable and sufficient. You have my support.

I had a few questions but they're addressed by Catnip, there is one question I'd like you to answer. From a personal standpoint, your activity seems sporadic and distant. This could however just be us not being in at the same time. Could you describe your overall activity to me? What sort of obligations do you have that you are willing to divulge?

Have you ahelped people that are doing this without driving the narrative? If a person is just sitting in the bar as a crew member with special powers not doing anything else, then that's a failure on the antagonist and is dealt with.

I don't think we should force them to wear it. I view this the same as hardhats and such.

I have more time on SS13 servers then the date ive placed in the App that is simply the date i started being fully active on Aurora, i have been playing Engineering and CE roles for over 5 years on multiple servers including heavy roleplay servers, including but not limited to TG station, Paradise station and Hypathia station when it was active. If the concern is flow management i am often taking that role within my department already, i also feel ive done well in the role and have been told that by multiple players within the department aswell as being put in the role of acting CE about 6 times in the last 2-3 weeks. I appreciate your confidence honestly. Get the players to post feedback for you, I'm interested on what they have to say.

It's been stated that this is already mechanically unfeasible due to a large number of variables that need to be accounted for. Anyhow, per my previous post. The player already has a few methods to properly conceal themselves. The fact names are shown is for ease of of gameplay, you don't have to know everyone, my characters for example won't know new comers. This is really a roleplay standard which we enforce when we find people taking it to the extreme as while the examine option is very easy to use and look back at, in-character, your character is not guaranteed. The mechanics provided are meant to complement and assist in your roleplay. There are still in-character limitations people should adhere to. I'm not sure what to add more here as this is already covered by the rules.

This is the implementation. Is this satisfactory [mention]Fortport[/mention]?

I think this is a bit too soon, as your cited date is less than a month. There's a lot of expectation for people with a command whitelist to help manage the flow of the round and I don't think you've been around long enough to grasp that fully.

Azande is correct. If a staff member deemed this a none issue, then a player complaint on the same situation would not be valid. Do you want to make this a staff complaint instead? Alternatively if this has happened more than once and you have gripes with the player, you'll need to modify the post to include things other than this singular incident. [mention]Chen Yakumo[/mention]

Our goal is simply to asses whether there was a point or a reason behind a murder. Since this is a role play server we generally expect them to be a bit better than "i want the captains ID". Now by your testimony and that of the OP it seems to me this condition is reasonably fulfilled. Does it suck that someone was removed from the round? Yeah sure it does but we have to remember that death is part of the game. Either they killed someone to drive a story or they did not. I dont think his notes about similar situations are relevant here if he didn't break a rule. As i said it seems to me he had a good reason and a point to do what he did. Its kind of unreasonable to go "well normally this would be ok but you've went too far in situations really similar to this before". Now given these two points i feel the warning should be expunged entirely. If i am misrepresenting you or you do in fact feel he broke a rule please dont hesitate to argue it. I concur with Garn on this.

I don't entirely agree with Ally's sentiment here. Sure I've seen Eve in the more public mediums joke around, yes they've been struck twice, but I don't think it's that bad to discount them the possibility of a trial. Per my own interactions. Publicly, we've joked and messed around. Privately, in casual conversations or in a more "serious scope, they've been able to keep the proper demeanor and mannerism. It gives me the belief that they more often than not, know the time and place for jokes, and the time and place for a serious composure on thing. So I believe, per my own interaction with them that they're suitable for a trial and I believe they'll do quite well with it. You have my support. Also, praise Syn. Edit: That being said, I'd prefer if this was the last time you'd receive a strike on the discord.

Deeming thing resolved. Locking and archiving.

I can't really accept it, at least at this time. While I'm all for chances and teaching people, that's how we operate originally, I cannot with good conscious give you a new chance this soon from your permanent ban. I'll be willing to give you a chance a few months down the line, no less than six months from the date of this post. I advise you try a few other servers, especially ones with a similar mindset to ours. I'm also going to preface this by saying that if you do get unbanned in the future, you won't receive the same amount of chances as before. There's only so much we can oblige a player with before it becomes too much. Appeal denied.

We do not delete complaints. They're archived.