Azande Posted January 2, 2019 Posted January 2, 2019 BYOND Key: XanderDoxStaff BYOND Key: House_of_SynthGame ID: N/AReason for complaint: Unreasonable denial of a Security Jobban AppealEvidence/logs/etc: Quote I can see that you understand what you did wrong, and although it has been a while since the ban I'm going to be denying this appeal. You have had numerous chances to follow the rules, we are not prepared to give you another chance due to your history. If you wish to contest my ruling here, please take it to the staff complaints forum. Appeal denied. Essentially - I do not believe I have a strong or large history of validhunting/powergaming, at least not within the last two-three years. What it appears to me is that House of Synth is punishing me for previously existing bans that are related entirely to OOC conduct and interactions between me and staff, and not IC-security play. The reason this is unfair is that it is borderline bullying behaviour - "Oh, I can't punish you for this because your appeals were accepted, but I can definitely deny your appeals for this other punishment out of spite'. It seems incredibly unfair for me to be punished with a permanent unappealable mechanical jobban based on issues not related to that actual job/department.
Azande Posted January 2, 2019 Author Posted January 2, 2019 @ShameOnTurtles plz find admin to handle this and post any notes relating to security validhunting/powergaming.
Yonnimer Posted January 4, 2019 Posted January 4, 2019 Hi, myself and @Pratepresidenten will be handling this.
Azande Posted January 4, 2019 Author Posted January 4, 2019 50 minutes ago, Yonnimer said: Hi, myself and @Pratepresidenten will be handling this. Okie dokie.
Yonnimer Posted January 5, 2019 Posted January 5, 2019 Myself and Prate have come to a decision. We believe Synth's judgement in denying the appeal was justified. You have been given plenty of chances before, but for the time being. You haven't been showing signs that you have changed, and can be put back into security. From right after the ban to after your long break, you have still been showing valid hunting behavior, like the examples below- You will have to show us something better than this if you are to have a chance with getting your ban lifted.
Azande Posted January 5, 2019 Author Posted January 5, 2019 8 hours ago, Yonnimer said: Myself and Prate have come to a decision. We believe Synth's judgement in denying the appeal was justified. You have been given plenty of chances before, but for the time being. You haven't been showing signs that you have changed, and can be put back into security. From right after the ban to after your long break, you have still been showing valid hunting behavior, like the examples below- You will have to show us something better than this if you are to have a chance with getting your ban lifted. Only one of these notes existed when synth made his denial, the AI one I believe is ridiculous because I have laws forcing me to protect the crew. I literally am forced to work to combat armed squads trying to kill people. As for the frontlining as Journalist - I’ve since spoken with multiple staff on that issue and all of them agreed the journalist is there to report the news - and if that means reporting live action such as antags then that’s OK and even lore friendly. War correspondents exist IRL. I merely have not filed a staff complaint about that issue yet. You will note that the journalist note is SIX months old now, and I have not frontlined as a journalist since.
Azande Posted January 5, 2019 Author Posted January 5, 2019 And yes, I debated with Toaster in that incident. He refused to see my side and acknowledge that there is a large market for live action and crime reporting and that war correspondents exist.
Garnascus Posted January 5, 2019 Posted January 5, 2019 Hello I will be conducting a review of this complaint. I have already notified prate and yonni that i will be doing so. I will post all of the various points and onions i have here in this thread and we can go from there. This might take me a few days or more as i am currently pretty busy IRL but i will get to this ASAP.
Garnascus Posted January 7, 2019 Posted January 7, 2019 so i will just go point by point in some things that i find a bit suspect. 1. @HouseOfSynth I cannot help but find your denial in the initial unban appeal a little worrying. In your own words xander seemed to have you convinced they understood what they did wrong. You denied it anyway and cited their behavior. Normally "you've had too many chances" is fine when someone is appealing a third or fourth permaban but when it comes to a job ban it puts it in this really awkward spot. Is this security job ban just supposed to always be an albatross around xander's neck? I am not saying your reasoning here is inappropriate. I would like to ask though what a situation in which xander does get unbanned would look like though. 2. Now it is totally possible that i am missing context in both of the notes that @Yonnimer provided but they do present some issues to me. The first one seems to be about a journalist "frontlining". Which, funnily enough a journalist is one of few jobs you COULD justify doing that. The closer you are physically to the carnage and bloodshed the better story you have. Long as they arent fighting antags i honestly think this is something that makes the journalist unique in their goals. Perhaps @ToasterStrudel can provide some greater context. The bulk of the note appears to be centered around a "long drawn out discussing in which xander insulted staff". I admit this can be par for the course for xander but it is possible this should not have been an issue. 3. The note by @Shadow7889 also appears to raise some questions. Let me preface this with the complete understanding that mr. shadow here is currently undergoing a trial process. I do not intend to slam you or kick your butt. This note however does appear to be very vague and does not really give us a lot of information to work with. "less involved with antags". Well what does that mean? What antags? Pirates? traitors? Did they prioritize a wizard over a dieing assistant? They yelled in all caps? If we compare it to the note set by toasterstrudes it does stand in stark contrast. I am not looking to cast any blame here or punish anyone. Just investigating! I would like to hear what all the parties mentioned have to say given my post here.
Azande Posted January 7, 2019 Author Posted January 7, 2019 2 hours ago, Garnascus said: "less involved with antags". Well what does that mean? What antags? Pirates? traitors? Did they prioritize a wizard over a dieing assistant? They yelled in all caps? If we compare it to the note set by toasterstrudes it does stand in stark contrast. I am not looking to cast any blame here or punish anyone. Just investigating! On this note - I was the AI at the time, and Security were actively dealing with a synthetic named Null who Central Command ordered us to arrest and keep contained. Null then told us apparently (I was only informed of this by the HOS at the time, not by Null himself), that he had called a Synthetic Liberation Front Terrorist Strike Team. The Head of Security ordered me to lockdown arrivals and keep this strike team out. When the strike team inevitably boarded in the yellow dock and began trying to enter the station, I opened an airlock and vented the room they were in, denying them entry to the station as I was ordered to. This successfully stopped their attack for about 10-15 more minutes until they found another way in. In essence, I was supposedly more focused on the antag/security situation than the 'crew' situation, however I'll give you some light on this. There were two crew orders being given to me at the time that I could not and would not follow. One was the Warden trying to order me to stop locking down departures/arrivals, I could not follow this order because the HOS has specifically told me to keep it locked down, and I informed the Warden of this. The second was a Tajaran Forensic Technician, they ordered me to open up the yellow dock where the hostiles were as they had bypassed my arrivals lockdown, they wanted to negotiate. I could not actually let them in because the Mercs had destroyed my cameras in yellow dock, this did not stop the Tajara from telling me again and again to let her in despite me informing her it was physically impossible. At the same time, multiple Security including the HOS were telling her to stop, and that negotiations were non-optional. She ended up getting taken hostage because she wouldn't listen and insisted on being two feet away from the enemy strike team. And finally, I justify focusing on the security situation through the fact that Command Staff and I were directly ordered by Central Command to keep 'Null', the leader of the SLF terrorist group in custody and contained for transfer. At that point, my ultimate priority was preventing Null from being rescued by the SLF strike team, and preventing him from escaping Security. CCIA are the highest in round authorities and when an order is issued by them, I have little choice but to observe such. At no point did I refuse/deny reasonable non-security orders. Orders were only refused if they contradicted higher orders, otherwise some orders were delayed because I was simply was too busy to handle them because of the security situation. If Toaster has additional examples, I would be happy to discuss those but I don't actually remember anything else regarding AI play of mine being discussed that round. Oh, and for the all-caps thing, that is an issue I'm trying to resolve. I do it basically across characters because I get excited/panic when things are going on. I am working on that, I promise.
ToasterStrudel Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 During the round that I issued the note regarding Front lining, we had gotten an ahelp from another party stating that there was a reporter running inside of a room with barricaded hostile mercenaries, and that they were told to leave a couple of times by one of them. I had also learned that they had relayed some information back to security. When I had confronted Xander on the issue, we had gotten into a debate about "Wartime reporters" among some other things, the point I was trying to get across to him was that, they were a reporter on a science station, and that it being a wartime reporter and a corporate reporter are two complete things. From my perspective, after your recent job-ban from security at the time which I also believe was about Front-lining, on top of the things you brought up in the ahelp in question that had nothing to do with the reason I ahelped in the first place the ahelp slowly turned from being about something as simple as "Hey, just don't frontline as a reporter" to a whole drawn out conversation about how the server was handled in pretty ill respect to the staff. I was trying to be patient with you, and tell you that what you were bringing up couldn't be fixed in an ahelp, and to take it to the forums, but the argument continued on. The fact that I only left it at a note after it had escalated way past that after a while is only because I was being lenient. The situation was minor that caused the ahelp, and it was completely blown out of proportion by the end, when I was trying to stay civil and finish the ahelp.
Pratepresidenten Posted January 8, 2019 Posted January 8, 2019 Making a clarification to the post made by me and Yonni. Your main argument in this complaint is that you didnt believe you had a lot of notes in regards to validhunting and powergaming. I dug up the notes and warnings from 2 1/2 years back as per your request. Spoiler And these two were post-security ban, AI note excluded as it was explained. Spoiler As seen, only some of the entries are security related, and some might as they somewhat fit the bill but they arent specified. There is also the entries regarding your frontlining as Captain pre-ban. Truth be told, the 6 months after your secban you've been relatively incident free. It was overall severty of your notes, both before or after, that raised concerns if you were ready to come back. Maybe this wasnt the right call and you should be given a second chance seeing this is your first security ban. But as I said, there was an overall concern, and it would have been a nobrainer if you had been incident free after your ban.
Azande Posted January 8, 2019 Author Posted January 8, 2019 As a note, I appealed that final note from ReadThisNamePlz and the appeal was accepted as valid. @Garnascus should that note even be in staff records still? Aside from that, thank you for posting my notes as requested. As you noted, these offenses range in date going back 2 1/2 years, and I believe my behaviour overall has improved since then, and has improved since my security ban.
Garnascus Posted January 11, 2019 Posted January 11, 2019 Still tracking this. Sorry for the long wait. I will make another post going over some points approximately 15 hours from now.
Shadow7889 Posted January 11, 2019 Posted January 11, 2019 (edited) Long work day. I do need to get better with my notes. Less vague. This particular round was either heist or a merc round I believe. The reason for this note was due to some issues between the ISD and the AI. While the AI in question wasn't entirely out of line, they were acting more as a force against the antags, and appeared to be less focused on the crew. I recall from the tickets during that round that there was some conflict with the ISD, namely between the warden and AI. However the AI was correct in refusing the Wardens demands as the HOS at the time had a standing order for the AI. I informed the AI to work with the crew more so than fight the antags, as this would help further RP between all parties involved. I apologize for my vague notes and will work on being more in depth. Edited January 11, 2019 by Shadow7889
Garnascus Posted January 12, 2019 Posted January 12, 2019 On 08/01/2019 at 12:01, Pratepresidenten said: Truth be told, the 6 months after your secban you've been relatively incident free. It was overall severty of your notes, both before or after, that raised concerns if you were ready to come back. Maybe this wasnt the right call and you should be given a second chance seeing this is your first security ban. But as I said, there was an overall concern, and it would have been a nobrainer if you had been incident free after your ban. Wait... they've been relatively incident free but there was still an overall concern and thus it was not a no-brainer of unbanning them due to being incident free? I dont really understand here. If they are incident free since they got banned they should be unbanned? We've got at least 1 warning that has now been expunged correctly and another thats got issues. What do you think @HouseOfSynth @Pratepresidenten
Pratepresidenten Posted January 12, 2019 Posted January 12, 2019 7 hours ago, Garnascus said: If they are incident free since they got banned they should be unbanned? In almost all cases, yes. Shows they've kept their nose clean and been a model player, with the exception of someone stopping to play, and just making an appeal many months later. Being relatively incident free is also fine, but some of the post-ban notes showed a few similar issues, although spaced out. We base our judgement on prior notes, warnings and bans, anything written that paints a player in a bad light will of course have a negative impact on the final verdict. Context and intent is important from both the player in question, and the staffmember noting it down. But with the explanation of these post entries, I have no issue with their secban getting lifted.
Garnascus Posted January 12, 2019 Posted January 12, 2019 Alright what say you @Yonnimer and @HouseOfSynth given the further posts in this thread? I personally think its fine to unban them.
Yonnimer Posted January 12, 2019 Posted January 12, 2019 I can't really say what prate hasn't already. Yeah. It seems fine now, given with the better explanations.
Azande Posted January 13, 2019 Author Posted January 13, 2019 4 hours ago, Garnascus said: Cool beans Ban lifted. Thank you.
Recommended Posts