staff complaint: NursieKitty

[There b pirates]

BYOND Key: ForAFriend

 

Staff BYOND Key: NURSIEKITTY

 

Game ID: b4J-axJS

 

Reason for complaint: 

Normally I would go to the player complaint forums to post on this subject, but something told me I should post it here. .

In a recent round with this staff member, I was illegally searched. I Ahelped this, as it is the only way to gain a reasonable response, let's be honest, nobody else is gonna do shit when the Head Of Security is calling the shots. I ahelp this. The moderator essentially says "So? they have every right to, there isn't any rule against that". I say "yes there is, There was no warrant obtained, there was no probable cause." after telling this to the moderator, the moderator PM's the HoS for a bit and gets back to me saying the same thing as the first time "hey have every right to, yadda yadda" I reply with "no they don't, what rules are there against this?" moderator takes the low road and says (paraphrased) "I don't have to show you nuffin!" to which I reply: "Do I have to show you the rules then?" I cite the illegal search  law: Here . The Moderator responds that "there are different rules on code blue", which amazes me, because that's completely made up, and not supported anywhere on the corporate regulations page. I tell said moderator this. the response "Well I ain't gonna do anything about it"

 

These quotes are all rough, paraphrased versions of what was said. if anyone has the logs for the Ahelp, I highly recommend they get posted publicly.

 

Evidence/logs/etc: log of round ID "b4J-axJS"

 

Additional remarks:

 

It amazes me that a moderator of the server not only cannot see anything wrong with the rules that were broken, not even the fact that they do not know that such rules exist, not only that they continue to defend the player who has broken the rules AFTER said rules were undoubtedly pointed out clearly, but continues to do absolutely nothing when there is an obvious breach of Corprate Regulation! Helllooo?! you're a moderator! You're supposed to moderate the dang game! that means knowing and enforcing the rules, not sitting there and defending every rule that's broken.

Edited December 16, 2019 by There b pirates

[witchbells]

No rules were broken! I'm really glad you linked that page. Let me show you something on it.

 

 

 

[There b pirates]

Just now, nursiekitty said:

No rules were broken! I'm really glad you linked that page. Let me show you something on it.

 

 

 

Right, this is an important point:

 

just because something is not said, does not mean that you get to make something up in its place.

 

 

I still see nothing here about the rules being any different for any other code, much less how they're different.

[Garnascus]

In addition

Quote

The station has received reliable information about possible hostile activity on the station. Security staff may have weapons visible, random searches are permitted.

This is the announcement played when blue alert is enabled. The station was at blue alert. A warrant is not needed to search anyone. 

[There b pirates]

7 minutes ago, Garnascus said:

In addition

This is the announcement played when blue alert is enabled. The station was at blue alert. A warrant is not needed to search anyone. 

I'm not going to say you aren't right but I am going to say that there was not random aspect, and I'm going to say that the search was sanctioned before the clearance hit blue. This was clear to everyone present.

Edited December 16, 2019 by There b pirates

[Garnascus]

Blue alert was triggered right after your fake announcement. So, that is not true. 

[There b pirates]

1 minute ago, Garnascus said:

Blue alert was triggered right after your fake announcement. So, that is not true. 

You're going to have to explain more, I'm afraid.  This does not say anything about the randomness, nor does it say anything about the sanctioning of the search.

[Garnascus]

I am telling you that on blue alert security can perform searches without requiring a warrant. On green alert you require a warrant to search things unless an officer directly witnesses someone steal something or hide something illegal. You used a traitor to spawn a fake announcement to the crew. Right after this command raised the alert to blue and the HoS ordered a search of you. This was completely legal to do. 

[There b pirates]

 

7 minutes ago, Garnascus said:

I am telling you that on blue alert security can perform searches without requiring a warrant. On green alert you require a warrant to search things unless an officer directly witnesses someone steal something or hide something illegal. You used a traitor to spawn a fake announcement to the crew. Right after this command raised the alert to blue and the HoS ordered a search of you. This was completely legal to do. 

Garn, normally you're very amicable in these situation, but in this case, what in the hell? 

 

There was no reason to raise to blue, the only reason being the ability to skip Cent com's warrant dispenser (which itself should be a huge nono) there was no randomness to the search, there was no warrant, there was no probable cause, there was no crime committed, there was no reason this should be legal in a million years. I can't be the only one who feels that they're taking crazy pills in feeling that  the moderator in question is doing wrong by not intervening

Edited December 16, 2019 by There b pirates

[Garnascus]

1 minute ago, There b pirates said:

There was no reason to raise to blue,

You signed your own name on the announcement man. That is a reason to raise to blue. The announcement system is not usable by crew. 

[There b pirates]

2 minutes ago, Garnascus said:

You signed your own name on the announcement man. That is a reason to raise to blue. The announcement system is not usable by crew. 

The station has received reliable information about possible hostile activity on the station.  I want you to read this, and then read what you just said.  something should seem off.

Edited December 16, 2019 by There b pirates

[witchbells]

4 minutes ago, There b pirates said:

The station has received reliable information about possible hostile activity on the station.  I want you to read this, and then read what you just said.  something should seem off.

An average joe crew member suddenly having to make the ability to make an announcement, which would either involve breaking into the bridge, building an illegal console, etc, is indeed hostile and subversive activity.

[There b pirates]

1 minute ago, nursiekitty said:

An average joe crew member suddenly having to make the ability to make an announcement, which would either involve breaking into the bridge, building an illegal console, etc, is indeed hostile and subversive activity.

actually, all you'd have to do is ask the AI.

[Garnascus]

But then it would be an announcement from the AI and not an announcement signed with your name. 

[There b pirates]

5 minutes ago, Garnascus said:

But then it would be an announcement from the AI and not an announcement signed with your name. 

right, we can use that logic.

 

All announcements are sent by someone (AI, HoP. Cap, etc.)  This one was sent by... nobody? interesting. There is only one announcement sent by nobody, and that is the revolutionary's /Loyalist' announcement (and the admin announcements made from the server command line). You cannot tell me (or anyone) that any HoP or HoS would recognize that as a revolutionary or a loyalist, or even the source.. certainly doesn't indicate breaking or entering, by any degree, and there are no reasons to really jump to domestic terrorism (or any sort of crime) from what was said in there. It's very clearly a jump cut reaction, that was not legal, and for whatever reason is being defended as such?

Edited December 16, 2019 by There b pirates

[Garnascus]

Quote

DEBUG: BOREALIS: Message sent to channel_cciaa. JSON body: '{"content":"Announcer - Fake announcement:`Calling all crew to the meeting hall` - `Hello, crew . I am Firtz Ferdinand.  I am here to hold a special demonstration in the meeting hall. This will take place in five minutes. It is very important that everyone attends.  We could very well decide the future of liberties on the Aurora.  Five minutes. If you are on my side (and you know who you are) I ask that you think of why you joined me  today, and why  this demonstartion must take place, and prepare something short to say!  five minutes. I'll see everyone then.`, sent by Firtz Ferdinand!"}'

This is the announcement you sent. Crew do not have access to the announcement system in this way. This is probable cause. This is a reason to raise the alert to blue. This is a reason to search you. There is absolutely no rational way to disagree with this. 

[There b pirates]

12 minutes ago, Garnascus said:

This is the announcement you sent. Crew do not have access to the announcement system in this way. This is probable cause. This is a reason to raise the alert to blue. This is a reason to search you. There is absolutely no rational way to disagree with this. 

Right, and I'm failing to see a rational way to agree with this...

Imagine one day, your phone has a notification:

 

>I am here to hold a special demonstration in the meeting hall. This will take place at [some time]. It is very important that everyone attends. We could very well decide the future of liberties of [city where you reside].

now,  nowhere in the first world would anyone be put on random search for doing that. Questioned? Maybe. but not plucked and searched. nowhere. no one citizen (excluding mark zuckerburg) has the power to do this. and now you have this notification. you tell me how reliable this is, and you tell me how much of a threat this poses.

 

this is all in the realm of opinion argument though. The facts are:

 

HoP wanted to search me.

HoP turned the status to blue such that they could search me and bypass centcom (still a huge no-no).

Security illegally detained me and searched me. 

 

this is illegal, and there's no two ways about it. 

Furthermore, we can turn the conversation away from what happened in the round and more about how this was handled This IS a staff complaint after all. It was handled in a bad way, and  the moderator needs to learn from it. I will post suggestions in a second.

Edited December 16, 2019 by There b pirates

[Garnascus]

5 minutes ago, There b pirates said:

HoP turned the status to blue such that they could search me and bypass centcom (still a huge no-no).

Blue alert was called in response to a security threat. A crew member having access to the secure announcement system is a security threat. This is ok to do. I really do not know how else i can explain this to you. Nursie did nothing wrong here. 

[There b pirates]

3 minutes ago, Garnascus said:

Blue alert was called in response to a security threat. A crew member having access to the secure announcement system is a security threat. This is ok to do. I really do not know how else i can explain this to you. Nursie did nothing wrong here. 

Right,, I want you to show me where you got security threat from. If there's rules, I want to read them so that this does not happen again. If they're not in the rules, can you tell me how you came to this conclusion?

Edited December 16, 2019 by There b pirates

[Garnascus]

Its implied logically when we consider what the announcement system is. It can only be used by four things.

1. A head of staff ID using a communications console

2. The artificial intelligence using a special verb they have to create an announcement

3. Central command or CCIA using their own special verbs to send station announcements.

4. A traitor item used to create one announcement.

Now obviously we do not know about the 4th one IC. We only know about the first three. Your character is not a head of staff, is not an AI and is certainly not a central command agent. Thus we can deduce from this that you somehow gained access to the announcement system illegally. Thus we can further deduce that a search of your person was warranted. 

[There b pirates]

I see that clearly I'm not going to get  through to anyone in this case, so let me do the disciplinary work by providing suggestions on how to hadle future interactions. I may or may not be in the right here, but god damn, there's a whole space whale for improvement. Take it or leave it. You'll be better off if you take it. guaranteed.

 

Suggestions:

Instead of trying to say  that there are no rules against an action, try asking the player where they got the idea for the rules. Perhaps they may know something, or mis-understand something

If this does not work, then (and I cannot stress this enough) make sure that the player understands that the other players are trying their best. Most of the time, players are trying to do what's right.

Instead of saying "it's the way it is bcuz that's the way it is", tell the player why it is. show some rules, give them a chance to read up. You're not helping anyone by keeping such knowledge to yourself.

"It's too late to do anything" is better than "I'm not going to do anything". by 100 times.

Question the rules on these matters, not the players. players don't mean jack, and their motives don't mean jack. their actions are the only thing that should determine moderator intervention.

Instead of stating that you know something as a fact, ask how the other person know something as a fact. perhaps you'll see a flaw in their understanding.

ask the player how they think the situation should be handled. I'd be hard pressed to find a quicker way  to come to a amicable decision on any matter than to ask people what they want.

Edited December 16, 2019 by There b pirates

[There b pirates]

above said, if you have any suggestions for me, do tell.  I shall listen.

[Garnascus]

I have nothing else to say. I consider this resolved and will archive it in a day or so.