[Resolved] Player/Character Complaint - Guillermo Chauvin/MagnificentMelkior

[CampinKiller]

BYOND Key: CampinKiller
Game ID: b0j-aI8t
Player Byond Key/Character name: Guillermo Chauvin/MagnificentMelkior
Staff involved: N/A
Reason for complaint: Chauvin acts in an incredibly insubordinate and foolish manner, willingly violates simple uniform regulations on a regular basis, and constantly argues with both their superiors and their fellow officers over the simplest of things. In my opinion, the character breaks the realistic behavior rule, and there is no IC recourse due to the only rounds I have observed this occurring were antag-involved rounds, or directly related to antag actions.

The listed round is probably the most egregious example of Chauvin's behavior. During a hostage situation in engineering, they simply got up and left, despite standing orders for officers to remain on post and be prepared to assault the barricaded mercs inside of engineering. When confronted with this after the fact, they simply said "I left to make sure everything else was in order" despite the situation being the only active security threat. This resulted in me ordering them to be charged for Gross Negligence. Throughout the round they also took up a very combative tone with other officers, and even my HoS.

This is not the only round this has occurred in, otherwise I would not be making the complaint. In the prior round (I believe) I latejoined and Chauvin was the warden. I was informed that the surviving merc prisoner had their headset with all access, as well as other things. I ordered Chauvin to relieve them of their headset. Chauvin initially resisted, telling my HoS to "let him handle it" and implying that the HoS should go away. He also had completely failed to search a prisoner who was in custody for several HuT crimes, resulting in the prisoner overdosing and Chauvin being charged for Neglect of Duty. It should also be noted that his foolish and argumentative attitude was on display as he actively questioned the merc's status as a prisoner because of "self-defense" from station security.

In the final example that I have firsthand involvement in, there was a cult round a few weeks ago where an officer murdered someone in front of the entirety of command and security. After their eventual arrest, Chauvin joined and was ordered to process them for murder. They repeatedly questioned and argued with both my HoS and the Captain over the murder charge, outright demanding evidence and disregarding our and the security staff's witness testimonies that we all stated we had seen it occur. They had to be ordered several times to process the arrest, and continued to argue throughout the process.

I do not take issue with argumentative characters, or characters who question things, however it is done in the extreme by Chauvin. He regularly toes the line of being charged or suspended for his attitude. In my opinion, it is not a realistic character, nor realistic attitude for a character in his position to be taking.

Did you attempt to adminhelp the issue at the time? If so, what was the known action taken by administration/moderation? No, as it was handled ICly in round, though due to antag involvement there cannot be further consequence
Approximate Date/Time: Approx. midnight (12AM) CST, Nov 25th

[Faris]

The way you phrased this implies that this is a reoccurring issue. Can you potentially cite other times where this was an issue? 

[CampinKiller]

The two back to back rounds and then the third round from some time ago are the only times I’ve played with that character and they have acted in this manner every time. I do not have the specific round ID for the round referenced from a few weeks prior. Despite having only played those 3 rounds with this character I have heard from several others that this is a recurring issue with the character 

[Faris]

@MattAtlas and I should have this wrapped up by the weekend hopefully if we don't get busy. Gives some more time to the listed person to respond. 

[Faris]

Matt and I went over the issues listed here which we'll talk about. First I want to emphasize that going over logs does not always give us a full picture of the series of events given it only tells us certain actions with their timestamps, it does not give us locations and context for the most part. It is always more preferable to ahelp things in-round, even if you are not sure. This is not to say we have an issue with complaints, it's more that things being handled in round have a better chance of having a verdict with more information available while sometimes complaints have to be abandoned as certain things are not clear enough with the logs.

Secondly, we've given the player some time to be aware of this complaint, but since they haven't been present since the 26th of last month and a notification was sent to them on server, but it seems more doubtful they'll be around any time soon for some manner of testimony. This makes things a bit problematic as testimony is important for matters of fairness.

That being said, we did notice some rule violations in the form of how they've roleplayed which don't require testimony. These rule violations will result in a permanent ban. 

The player exhibited roleplay that is low effort utilizing internet slang and other phrases that don't really present themselves as believable manner of speech. While the incident seems minor, the punishment level is in line with our escalation of punishment as a result of a repeat rule violations, with the most recent punishment being a 1 week ban.

Some examples:

Spoiler

SAY: Magnificent Melkior/(Guillermo Chauvin) : (Ceti Basic) Epic.

SAY: Magnificent Melkior/(Guillermo Chauvin) : (Ceti Basic) Gimmie the loot.

SAY: Magnificent Melkior/(Guillermo Chauvin) : (Ceti Basic) Bruh.

SAY: Magnificent Melkior/(Guillermo Chauvin) : (Ceti Basic) Yoink.

SAY: Magnificent Melkior/(Guillermo Chauvin) : (Ceti Basic) Can we admit that that was retarded?;Epic.

SAY: Magnificent Melkior/(Guillermo Chauvin) : (Ceti Basic) Epic.

 

Edit: Locking and archiving as resolved.