STAFF COMPLAINT - SHESTRYING

[kait]

BYOND Key: frankynb
Staff BYOND Key: shestrying
Game ID:[/b] b80-crnN
Reason for complaint: I wish to get a different opinion of staff, and as i think, i should've had a full conversation about what i can reasonably be able to do and what cannot, if you feel like completely ruining my developed in the sake of your view of it as wrong, instead of refusing to argue how and why on something that i suspect is not regulated by the rules or regulated in a way as described to be "reasonable". If im wrong and such regulations touched on my situation exist, please provide them to me or point in the right direction. I do think what i have been doing is not an issue.
Evidence/logs/etc:
 

ShesTrying has added themself to your ticket and should respond shortly. Thanks for your patience!
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: Hi, got a sec?
  to ShesTrying: sure
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: What is your usual job?
  to ShesTrying: sec
  to ShesTrying: maybe not soon
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: so why are you hacking around maintenance?
  to ShesTrying: cause i find peace only here, and i began to be more interested in that sort of stuff, so that makes me kinda think if i wanna continue sec
  to ShesTrying: its more of my character being a weirdo and not valuing the law as of lately
  to ShesTrying: and just generally going a bit insane and being interested by weird places that this one has
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: Well, you can't go around hacking things as a security officer. You need to stay within your character's knowledge.
  to ShesTrying: Thats the thing, i might not be security soon, im laid off for the time being
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: Right, well that doesn't mean your character can magically get the knowledge of wiring that takes schooling to get
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: stop hacking as this character.
  to ShesTrying: ive been actually going around asking people to teach me shit and doing an arch of learning new shit
  to ShesTrying: for like a legit a week
  [Common] Stojan Osteriz says, "Eh, CE, s ays its 60kpa on the other side of the shutter in my office."
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: Right, but that doesn't matter. It takes years of schooling to learn wiring and stuff. Just because someone taught you the mechanics doesn't mean your character can know everything
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: You need to stop hacking on this character
  to ShesTrying: the knowdledge of this specific door and these specific vending machines here is not a years worth of knowledge i would say
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: the wires change every shift. Stop arguing with me.
  to ShesTrying: the principals of it still the same
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: It's not. And you're not going to argue with me. I am telling you, that as a character that is schooled for security, you are not allowed to hack things.
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: So stop doing it.
  to ShesTrying: a week of practice on a specific set of doors and beaing taught is not enough to at least have a simple knowdledge of what to do?
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: No, it's not.
  to ShesTrying: i keep fucking up and ending up in the medical as the result because i dont know what im doing besides the functions of this specific set of electronics
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: Again, that's because you dont know how to hack. You need to avoid pain on your character and play them in a realistic way.
  to ShesTrying: Where are the regulations about what your characters knowdlegde can and cant let you do
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: stop hacking as this character,.
  to ShesTrying: ive been doing an arch of learning this shit as ive said a week or so
  [Secondary Administrator PM] ShesTrying: I'm telling you, as a security main, you do not have wiring knowledge to be hacking. I am done arguing with you.
Your ticket has been closed by ShesTrying.
You have been warned by an administrator.
Click here to review and acknowledge them!

Additional remarks:

(((context)))
Ive been fucking around in the maintenance, just walking around.



I dont like that it requires to explain my character motivations and such, but if someone decides to just straight up tell me "dont do it. dont argue with me", im afraid i shall.

First of all, as ive said it, my character is under a massive change, and currently, it is not sure Kait returns to sec. Due to her opinion of the job, events happened, people met, her perception of her workplace shifted. Being influenced by several people to initiate her to review her life and revalue her decisions and herself, it takes a toll on her, and massively affects her schizophrenia as the result. Returning to the station in her free time, to visit the people she knows there and begin to be interested by her workplace, the station, she finds calm in occupying her mind with at least something that she can do, which she found learning new things, such as basic electricity and mechanical engineering for dummies, using the station as her way to do it. Over a week i have asked people to teach me certain things and mentioning that i have been spending time researching it all, in my opinion pretty valid for someone no BASICALLY know how to operate AIRLOCKS OF SPECIFIC KIND. The knowledge comes from practical experience only with that kind of arilcok type, its not like my character is a professional, i myself can learn how a specific model of a car runs in a week and know pretty much all about it, but have no idea of anything else besides that vehicle.

So with that said, i do not think it was necessary for the problem but i thought that motivations such actions do need to be mentioned in detail... And now, to the problem itself.



Second of all, i do not believe that what i have been warned for is in violation of any rules. The administrative work, from my understanding, is to enforce the rule-set of the server, and act in its borders, rather then going out of their way for something that they believe to be valid. 
In my opinion, if you would go out on somebody as such, at least have the decency to argue with them, or make them understand of what they did wrong, instead of being a dick and ending up on a note such as "You are wrong, do not do that, dont argue with me". That leaves me confused, a bit insulted, and not knowing what i have done wrong, since no rule, no such regulation, no dialog about the issue took place. Im not here to ruin anyone day, im here to play.

This situation, begs for a question what would be a reasonable amount of knowledge your character is able to have to preform in mechanically. And with all ive said, i truly believe that i have that knowledge with my character.

If i totally missed the point and its about "You are sec, you know its bad and you would not do something like that", well, again, my character is conflicted about their occupation. I would say its a restrictive statement. I do not think, that a person, who is mentally challenged and is about to might loose their job because of that is really unable to commit a crime, of which they have not been caught ONCE.



This might have been poorly structured or worded, and i apologize, since i am not used to writing such letters.

Edited August 26, 2020 by kait

[ShesTrying]

You can't just give your security officer the complex knowledge of wires because 'somene showed you icly.' This falls under powergaming.

Adminhelps are not the place to argue. I'm not going to spend my time going around in circles with you a in a ticket just because you want to argue and swear at me. It is your job as a player to keep your character realistic, and you were not doing that in this case. That is where I stepped in as an administrator. 

Please refrence the following: 

 

These are the rules that I saw broken with you hacking. I don't mind a character getting up to mischief. I think that can be great development, but the mischief has to fall within server rules and remain believable. In this case it did not.

[kait]

3 hours ago, ShesTrying said:

You can't just give your security officer the complex knowledge of wires because 'somene showed you icly.' This falls under powergaming.

I do not wish to repeat myself, but as ive said, in my opinion, it does not take much effort to understand in a week of time, how a certain type of airlock would work, and only the principals of work of that specific airlock type on this specific station. I would not call that "complex knowledge". Me, ICly talking about that with people and somebody multiple times explaining that to me and myself implementing that to be my interest at the time, is not just "someone showed me icly".

Quote

Adminhelps are not the place to argue. I'm not going to spend my time going around in circles with you a in a ticket just because you want to argue and swear at me. It is your job as a player to keep your character realistic, and you were not doing that in this case. That is where I stepped in as an administrator. 

Then that does not show any respect to the situation, nor do i as the result come out knowing what exactly have ive done wrong. With that rule now acknowledged, an argument will not have took place, if you would've had the time to construct the issue you are having with me doing that, this thread might not have took place. But with that said, and with that regulation existing, that does not seem to be an issue of yours.
 

Quote

About that. Those rules establish, its up to the person and his perception of the rule. For me, and how i think this might be reasonable, knowing basically how as ive said, many, many times, and which you ignored, my character does not have the knowledge of how mechanism of those sorts work, or deep knowledge of electricity, but what my character does know, plus what they have learned, and with my explanation, i would say that knowing the sequence and overall idea of how a specific thing works, and basic knowledge of tools, which is not a special knowledge on how to operate a screwdriver and such, and knowing the actions to achieve to force the door open. Even mechanical, the doors have a specific action that makes it loose power and reboot. And knowing that it has it, and knowing that one of these wires can do that, is not a complex set of knowledge.

 

Quote

Getting shocked by the electronics, because of incompetence or being careless, in my case did teach my character how dangerous this can be, but at the same time forced them to be better and take it more seriously, which they did. The intention was never to know for certain "im going to get shocked and i dont care" The only situation in which i would say my actions were questionable, is when i tried to hack an alcohol vending machine, when the conversation happened, but i had no knowledge myself, and the character also had no knowledge on how this works, which resulted them being shocked, and then coming back to it, because first of all that was the their mistake, its a fucking alcohol machine god damn, and they want to actually try to successfully do that, to  prove it to themselves and they think it would be awesome to do so. Which btw did not work. they broke it and gave up.


Additionally, thank you for the references.

Edited August 26, 2020 by kait

[ShesTrying]

I don't have anything else meaningful to add. It is against the rules, as a character who is educated for security, to be walking around and hacking doors and vending machines. Bottom line. 

[kait]

6 minutes ago, ShesTrying said:

I don't have anything else meaningful to add. It is against the rules, as a character who is educated for security, to be walking around and hacking doors and vending machines. Bottom line. 

I have just explained myself and this is not a satisfying reply to what i have said, if im being honest. I have expected more of a conversation, then "just that, and thats it".
Non the less, thank you for your reply.

And i also think its important to add

Quote

It is against the rules,

Does not do a great job at understanding the rule, since the rules imply the wording such as "reasonable", and believable, which is subjective and only achieved to be understood through dialog and reasoning. I would not have a problem with any of this, if the rules have gone about every possible scenario in which i would have no questions, and they were well established on almost everything, which is impossible, so thats why they are the way they are. Having space for debate and relay on the perception of every individual what they think is believable, and when we have situations such as this one, when something believable for me and something i have explained and provided arguments for my views, the reply of "it is against the rules", is pretty... well.


Also, this thread exists for me to clear up what you thought was wrong, and to find out what i did wrong since i had no clue, but as it looks, you have no interest to spend your time on it. The only problem i have, is that it does not only restrict what i can do as my character, but also makes me question anything that could be related to that, as other characters, other actions and such, since you have not provided anything to your counter argument, making the reason clear.

Edited August 26, 2020 by kait

[CakeIsOssim]

Hello, me and @Pratepresidenten will be handling your complaint! Allow us some time to deliberate and we'll be back with you in a little while.

[Pratepresidenten]

Okay. We've talked it over, and come to the conclusion that although the warning is valid, more effort could have gone into explaining why this was an issue.

It is as you say, impossible to have rules dictate every single scenario, which is why a little time should be set aside to explain what the problem is, and to help the offending/inquisitive party understand.

Now, the issue here is that we try to enforce a balanced workplace for the sake of fairness, keeping departmental characters within a certain skillset expected from their department/job. There is, of course exceptions and cross-department knowledge, but engineering in all its forms and security is not one that we approve of.

I understand that time can be taken to learn things icly, but the whole taught icly business isnt something we approve of either, as the simple mechanics involved in doing X thing would likely not line up with what is actually required both in training or experience.

Does this clear it up for you @kait ?

[kait]

30 minutes ago, Pratepresidenten said:

Now, the issue here is that we try to enforce a balanced workplace for the sake of fairness, keeping departmental characters within a certain skillset expected from their department/job. There is, of course exceptions and cross-department knowledge, but engineering in all its forms and security is not one that we approve of.

Well. If its more about the balance, and not what my character can reasonably be able to have simple knowledge about or learn, then i just have a problem with how restrictive and wide it is. That leads me to question everything, such as "what if my character is a reporter but i had him be in a militia for like 4 years, would that be no the cross knowledge that would be approved? Since that sounds even force balance then security/engineering".

I find funny that the administrator, whom gave me the warning mentioned nothing about the balance, and more that it did not make sense for them, and that it comes out only right now.

 

Quote

 I understand that time can be taken to learn things icly, but the whole taught icly business isnt something we approve of either, as the simple mechanics involved in doing X thing would likely not line up with what is actually required both in training or experience.

well, the thing is, that i was setting up a possible direction change but as of the time being given the warning to CEASE, i have to stay in security. And once again, i must argue, that the such small amount of knowledge (such as knowing the basic functions of a singular type of an airlock), which is not a compassion to the knowledge of engineering.


In conclusion, that leaves me a bit concerning about, for an example "Can i, remove windows? Does my character know how to basically just unscrew it and pop it out? Or is it considered to be the knowledge that i cannot know, even tho it is basic i think", and that sorts of things.

I dont mind the balancing, but i legitimately think that it almost does not affect balancing that hard. For me, the concern was more that, its so simple and basic, that even after a half hour long youtube video, and a bit of practice will grant you again, a basic way to understand it. And i valued what i saw as the common sense, and the direction to which i was trying to go with my character, more. Since even looking at it like that, it has, and probably would create more scenarios for me and everyone else involved, since i had a bit more control.

Not that i agree, but if balancing in any way, is more valued then roleplay potential, alright.

[Pratepresidenten]

Restricting character knowledge is a necessity to maintain a good roleplaying environment for everyone. Sure, some are special in real life and they're able to go above and beyond what most people can do, but if we let one person do this, we'd have to let everyone do it. And that, would drag down the overall quality of roleplay on the server.

That being said, the warning will stay, as it was valid, but the admin in question will be talked to regarding the way this warning was handled.

Tthis matter is considered resolved, and Ill archive this in about a day or so.