Player Complaint - TheOrleans

[VTCobaltblood]

BYOND Key: VTCobaltblood

Game ID: bXm-cfHm

Player Byond Key: TheOrleans

Staff involved: None

Reason for complaint: AI rulelawyering.

A traitor (ckey Athirson) stole the spare and did various non-malicious things. At the end of the round, as I presume, the antagonist decides to stop by Engineering and visit Atmospherics. Without the antagonist doing anything yet, the AI suddenly states the following:

 

As the justification for its actions, it then uses this:

 

 

Other players (DasFox, Hocka and me) then proceeded to discuss the issue with TheOrleans. I believed that he is a new AI player, as I don't remember encountering this AI before, and proceeded to give my feedback on his AI play. However, TheOrleans ignored this feedback completely and even resorted to ad hominem, which led me to believe that I cannot reason with him in any other way other than placing a player complaint.

 

  Hocka: AIs are not allowed to siphon air on crew members
 DasFox: ^^^^
 VTCobaltblood: yeah lmao what
 TheOrleans: anywas I wasn't going to do it round end
 TheOrleans: But
 VTCobaltblood: oh, you're the ai
 TheOrleans: The third law clarifies
 DasFox: Third law means you still need to protect them.
 DasFox: You can't just suddenly void it because it's fun to.
 VTCobaltblood: orleans, that's called rulelawyering and it's literally against the rules
 TheOrleans: First
 DasFox: Nope, you're breaking a rule my guy.
 TheOrleans: First, I would be breaking it if I had done it
 Athirson: oof, *AI locks me in elevator and I forget I have an teleporter*
 VTCobaltblood: you're not THE LAW, nor are you a command member to suddenly decide you have the authority to decide who lives and who doesn't
 DasFox: You also can't order crewmembers.
 DasFox: You serve them.
 Hocka: ^
 VTCobaltblood: yes
 DasFox: Period.
 VTCobaltblood: you're lower than everyone on the command chain
 TheOrleans: Anyways, the Third Law clarifies that the protection is according to rank and role SO
 DasFox: A visitor has more authority than you.
 TheOrleans: if a visitor
 TheOrleans: is going to kill the captain
 TheOrleans: I am to protect the captain
 VTCobaltblood: though the traitor didn't kill anyone
 TheOrleans: Well, I said
 VTCobaltblood: he only broke a law on stealing
 Hocka: the AI isn't allowed to kill crew members
 TheOrleans: If you touch anything (obviously important) in the atmos system, which can kill everyone
 Hocka: simply stated
 TheOrleans: I will have to knock him down
 VTCobaltblood: what makes you think he was going to touch the atmos system
 DasFox: .. That's not how that works.
 VTCobaltblood: to kill everyone
 TheOrleans: NOTHING, I ONLY STATED THAT
 TheOrleans: IF HE DID IT
 TheOrleans: I would react
 TheOrleans: I didn't syphon it
 DasFox: You stated you'd kill him by siphoning the air.
 Hocka: You threatened to
 TheOrleans: I didn't say KILL at all
 DasFox: You can't fucking do that.
 DasFox: It's implied.
 DasFox: 'Oh shit I wonder what happens when you can't breathe'
 Pratepresidenten: So heated
 DasFox: 'Oh right, you die'.
 VTCobaltblood: in the situation of atmos fuckery, you're supposed to fix the fuckery, not to kill whoever did it
 Athirson: it's ok, it was a fun game afterall lol
 Menown: LOUD NOISES
 VTCobaltblood: that's what protect means
 TheOrleans: Whatever you are just haters
 DasFox: You're just a shitter, then.
 VTCobaltblood: i mean, orleans, not going to lie, but you're a pretty bad ai
 TheOrleans: HaterFox gonna hate
 Menown: "you are just haters"
 TheOrleans: VT you were the Corporate Reporter?
 VTCobaltblood: no
 VTCobaltblood: i'm bretscher
 Menown: Calm down, all of you.
 Menown: Lmao.
 Menown: Literally just a came.
 Menown: Game.
 Menown: fuck me.
 Pratepresidenten: Hot
 Hocka: sure
 VTCobaltblood: sure
 TheOrleans: Well, you are an edgy rudeboy not like I care about your opinion
 TheOrleans: lmao
 DasFox: I'll fuck you, meowy.
 VTCobaltblood: > thinking that my character is me
 Menown: Do you know what it means to be cordial, Orleans?
 TheOrleans: You're doing the same
 Negativ9002: TheOrleans no offense but get offended.
 TheOrleans: with me
 Hocka: Menown
 Menown: hocka.
 Hocka: no offense but "it's just a game" is an argument that i despise
 VTCobaltblood: i'm considering placing a player complaint
 Hocka: i just had to say that
 DasFox: We're calling you out on your shit and you can't see it.
 DasFox: That's the issue.

Did you attempt to adminhelp the issue at the time? If so, what was the known action taken by administration/moderation? No. Two reasons for this: 1) the round was ending; 2) the incident slipped past me, I've only noticed it once other people started discussing it in OOC and only felt the need to place a player complaint after TheOrleans's attitude towards player feedback.

Approximate Date/Time: 16.11.2018 roughly 4:10 PM GMT

[ReadThisNamePlz]

Hello, I will be handling this complaint.

[ReadThisNamePlz]

[mention]TheOrleans[/mention] I would like you to respond to this and perhaps explain your side of this. Thank you.

[TheOrleans]

@TheOrleans I would like you to respond to this and perhaps explain your side of this. Thank you.

 

Of course I will explain my side.

First I will quote the Rule Lawyering definition

"Do not flower-pick your law interpretation to give yourself more play over a functioning command team. This is known as Rules lawyering"

Since I did nothing (yes I stated it and I will proceed to explain the reason behind that statement now), this complaint is kind of... well, hate and nothing more. If I had done it, it would make sense to create a complaint for rule lawyering.

First, it was a situation without Officers or Cadets, and I had to handle it alone as AI, in fact, I had locked that guy inside an elevator until he used the portable teleporter that he stole from the Captain's Office.

Second. The intruder was inside the Atmos Room, and, if he wished to, and known how to do it, he could have created a real problem.

I stated that threat in order to dissuade the criminal from doing anything. It is a smart decision to state a threat, since stating that threat is not breaking any law, not even getting close to it. If I had done it, we could be talking about something different, but since I didn't, I really think this complaint is pointless.

[ReadThisNamePlz]

@TheOrleans I would like you to respond to this and perhaps explain your side of this. Thank you.

 

Of course I will explain my side.

First I will quote the Rule Lawyering definition

"Do not flower-pick your law interpretation to give yourself more play over a functioning command team. This is known as Rules lawyering"

Since I did nothing (yes I stated it and I will proceed to explain the reason behind that statement now), this complaint is kind of... well, hate and nothing more. If I had done it, it would make sense to create a complaint for rule lawyering.

First, it was a situation without Officers or Cadets, and I had to handle it alone as AI, in fact, I had locked that guy inside an elevator until he used the portable teleporter that he stole from the Captain's Office.

Second. The intruder was inside the Atmos Room, and, if he wished to, and known how to do it, he could have created a real problem.

I stated that threat in order to dissuade the criminal from doing anything. It is a smart decision to state a threat, since stating that threat is not breaking any law, not even getting close to it. If I had done it, we could be talking about something different, but since I didn't, I really think this complaint is pointless.

 

Hold on, did you not actually siphon the area?

[VTCobaltblood]

No, the area has not actually been siphoned, but the threat itself is geniune, which is pretty evident both by TheOrleans's words in the logs and here. Thus, it is something worth talking about, as if the round wasn't ending, it would have happened.

Not to mention, my main issue with TheOrleans here is perhaps not the fact that an AI was threatening to break its laws, but how he reacted to other players discussing it with him in OOC. Calling everyone "haters" is extremely childish, and he even continues to do it in this very thread too. Essentially, this complaint is "if other players cannot reason with you, I will ask the staff to reason with you". I don't really want administrative action to be taken against you - I just want you to either admit you're in the wrong, or make arguments convincing enough for me to retract this complaint.

You arguments aren't convincing enough. You're speaking from a meta perspective of this particular case, ignoring the larger problems with your view on how to play AI. You don't interpret the Protect law correctly. The AI is not supposed to kill the crew, and it cannot act as makeshift security. Instead, it's supposed to prevent or undo damage done with the tools it has. Bolting down the door to atmos, for example, would be an acceptable decision for an AI to make. Killing a crewmember to protect others is not.

[TheOrleans]

In fact, tbe area was not syphoned, that's why I said this complaint is totally pointless.

No, I am not wrong, stating a threat in ordee to dissuade is a smart idea, and probably actually doing what I threatened to do wasn't so smart.

And yeah, I call you haters because that's what you are, when I stated that the OOC chat exploded in a ball of hate and... well, that. And here you are, starting a complaint against me... because you want me to say you are right, while you are saying I rule lawyered, being this a false accusation.

Since VT started a complaint, accusating me of something false (and he knew it was when starting it), I ask the Staff to close this complaint and warn him not to state false accusations.

[VTCobaltblood]

So now you're claiming your threat was a deliberate lie? Then, I wonder, why did you not say this in OOC, and continued to rulelawyer the Protect law, with phrasing such as "if a visitor is killing the captain, I am to protect the captain", and "he was a criminal, Protect is according to rank and role"? Now you're bordering on outright lying, and also continuing to do the very same thing that led me to post this complaint: dismissing anything anyone has to say with "you're all just haters". I will not respond to this further, as it is pointless - waiting for the staff to resolve this.

[TheOrleans]

So now you're claiming your threat was a deliberate lie? Then, I wonder, why did you not say this in OOC, and continued to rulelawyer the Protect law, with phrasing such as "if a visitor is killing the captain, I am to protect the captain", and "he was a criminal, Protect is according to rank and role"? Now you're bordering on outright lying, and also continuing to do the very same thing that led me to post this complaint: dismissing anything anyone has to say with "you're all just haters". I will not respond to this further, as it is pointless - waiting for the staff to resolve this.

 

I, in fact, stated that the Protect law says that the protection is according to the rank, which is a truth, not rule lawyering.

And I also said in the OOC chat that a threat is a threat, nothing more.

You are asking the Staff to warn me for... something that I could have done, althought I didn't do it? Yeah you are way too salty.

And by the way, I started calling you hater after I was told by the adminship that I had to manage the haters, and all the hate, so this is my way of handling it.

[TheSleepyCatmom]

Being an abrasive person isn't a way to handle hate. Trust me, I know from experience. All you're doing is irritating people and making yourself seem like a total tool. Rule Lawyering wasn't the issue here. Law Lawyering is. Threatening to straight-up murder a crewmember by venting a room is not something you should be doing as an Artificial Intelligence, criminal or not. Criminals are still members of the crew, and unless ordered by Security (who has the authority to wish anyone detained if they're dangerous), you're not at liberty to ignore a crewmember's orders unless they're in a highly restricted area. As far as I'm aware, he was an Engineer this round anyway, being in Atmospherics isn't illegal as an Engineer. Regardless of his access.

In the end, you've simply a history of, what I like to call, 'Irritable behavior'. Both ICly, and OOCly. Now, don't get me wrong. I have the same history and, in fact, it can be stated mine is more severe than yours. But I truly think you need to take a step back and look at this from another perspective. You need to see it from our side, where all we know is he has an ID. This is an Amber-Level infraction. He didn't steal guns, he didn't kill anyone. This is what, a ten minute brig time? You spent more than this locking him into areas anyway.

React appropriately to situations, and don't threaten to murder people because it's just a threat. You're not serving the crew, or protecting them if they think you're off your rocker and ready to murder people who're committing trespass. This is what it stemmed from. Not simply because 'we're haters'. This isn't Youtube or Vine, we gave you criticism. We're people who like to play a game, and what you did was react poorly in a game we all enjoy. This is what the complaint, in the end, is really about.

Calling people salty over lodging a complaint is a terrible idea, by the way.

[VTCobaltblood]

As far as I'm aware, he was an Engineer this round anyway, being in Atmospherics isn't illegal as an Engineer. Regardless of his access

The antagonist was a corporate reporter

[TheSleepyCatmom]

Makes sense then. Still, you don't threaten death over bloody trespass.

[TheOrleans]

Being an abrasive person isn't a way to handle hate. Trust me, I know from experience. All you're doing is irritating people and making yourself seem like a total tool. Rule Lawyering wasn't the issue here. Law Lawyering is. Threatening to straight-up murder a crewmember by venting a room is not something you should be doing as an Artificial Intelligence, criminal or not. Criminals are still members of the crew, and unless ordered by Security (who has the authority to wish anyone detained if they're dangerous), you're not at liberty to ignore a crewmember's orders unless they're in a highly restricted area. As far as I'm aware, he was an Engineer this round anyway, being in Atmospherics isn't illegal as an Engineer. Regardless of his access.

In the end, you've simply a history of, what I like to call, 'Irritable behavior'. Both ICly, and OOCly. Now, don't get me wrong. I have the same history and, in fact, it can be stated mine is more severe than yours. But I truly think you need to take a step back and look at this from another perspective. You need to see it from our side, where all we know is he has an ID. This is an Amber-Level infraction. He didn't steal guns, he didn't kill anyone. This is what, a ten minute brig time? You spent more than this locking him into areas anyway.

React appropriately to situations, and don't threaten to murder people because it's just a threat. You're not serving the crew, or protecting them if they think you're off your rocker and ready to murder people who're committing trespass. This is what it stemmed from. Not simply because 'we're haters'. This isn't Youtube or Vine, we gave you criticism. We're people who like to play a game, and what you did was react poorly in a game we all enjoy. This is what the complaint, in the end, is really about.

Calling people salty over lodging a complaint is a terrible idea, by the way.

 

First, related to what I marked in your text, he stole the Spare-ID and the Portable Teleporter from the Cap Office, and I found him in front of the AI Upload Access, then he tried to break into the Bunker, and then when he teleported he ended up in Atmos.

And well, about the other things you said, I don't know if you were there or not, but the OOC chat literally was a ball of hate against me, and not in a kind way, trust me. That's why I decided to just stay ''defensive'' and ignore them

[TheOrleans]

Makes sense then. Still, you don't threaten death over bloody trespass.

 

I didn't threaten him over a trespass. I threatened that, if he touched anything in the Atmos system (to do something dangerous, or to hurt people) I would syphon the area in order to protect the crew.

It was a threat to dissuade him from doing that, nothing else.

[ReadThisNamePlz]

Okay, so, 1. Do not insult the person who made the complaint. It is the explicitly against the rules of this forum.

2. The issue is that you threatened to vent the area, while yes. You are lawed to protect by rank and role, you are also lawed to not allow any harm to come to any crew member by your hand. Now, if you bolt doors and shock them, that's a different story.

Now, I understand that you didn't actually siphon the area, but your reaction to those informing you that it isn't allowed is also unacceptable. You shouldn't deflect when people are trying to help you, you should take in what they are saying and think on it with the intent to learn.

We all make mistakes as AI, and other roles, we are human outside of this game. I make mistakes in tickets from time to time, I'm not different.

Anyways, since you didn't actually siphon the area, I don't think you need a warning or any other type of administrative action outside of a note.

[ReadThisNamePlz]

[mention]TheOrleans[/mention]

[mention]VTCobaltblood[/mention]

Do either of you have anything to add to this? If not, I'm going to be applying the note and simply closing this.

[VTCobaltblood]

Nothing to add.

[TheOrleans]

Idem

[ReadThisNamePlz]

Wonderful, locking and archiving within the next 24 hours.