You guys have to calm down

[nbielinski]

The fact of the matter seems to be that there is something here that causes people to feel unwelcome or unwell in the server, I count at least five people here who have said. "This person and their actions has directly caused me to avoid her or do something I normally wouldn't to avoid being around her" And the counter argument just seems to be a repeating of, "They're allowed to do what they want to because it produces RP" and of course that does produce some type of RP. But as seen with a new player who just came in and automatically gets stun batoned into a corner for sitting on a cargo tug, its clearly not RP that is going to net new players and make the community seem welcoming.

And on that note might I remind everyone of the spree of forum posts that came not too long ago? How people seemed to be up in arms that the community is not welcoming to people, that we all seem like a bed of barbed wire, not someplace you'd like to rest. Well if we continue to let poor moods and characters that are angry and constantly show nothing but hate to one another persist, well sure it might produce a realistic view of the station if it were set in a land of nothing but sorrow, but it will also dampen any feelings someone might have that this place is someplace they can stay and be welcomed.

 

I don't understand exactly what players are expecting to happen out of this.

Should you clearly announce your attempt to kidnap someone before doing so? The original rules on ganking were put in place to prevent people from mindlessly killing everything they encounter without providing RP, not to force antagonists to provide everyone with a fair fight.

 

And simply, I just want to see someone held accountable for managing to piss more than a few people off. The way it seems to be is as follows: if something breaks, you fix it. You don't live with a rock in your shoe just because the rock has a good enough reason to be there.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Guest

[Guest]

Alright. Might be the time I say something. Calling my complaints completely pointless assaults and cases of 'haters gonna hate' would be disrespectful to Hackie, Xander and Mirk. Regardless of how they tought of me, they had issues with my play style and something should've been done about that, before it exploded into what it did.

I think paralel of my behavior with Sue's is that we both like to step into the gray area of rules, a position that can trouble some people, but is easily defended as opinion based. It's not rule breaking, but it's shitty and effects gameplay in a bad way at times. But this is where it similaries end. Ana as a character has been around since I came on the server, around at least 7 months ago. The behavior has been almost constantly same, with no change or any indication that it will change.

Players don't like it. Players are genuinely scared of speaking out against Sue. Players weren't saying anything because they are aware that they cannot dictate how Sue behaves or plays their character and that complaints will be either dealt with as isolated incidents or get crushed by her own arguments. I'm pretty sure no one wants to bully her into leaving either, but no one really has any other resolution in mind if they actually succeed in their complaint, so it's another deterent to not making complaints.

With that in mind, are players saying that they don't like behaviors of certain characters really just bitching? I honestly don't know. There are characters whose behavior bothers me and I would like them gone, but I don't complain about it on the forums. I never start complaints. It's a simple live and let live philosophy, which is why I reacted to my own complaints how I did, with hostility. Not being met with the same tolerance you've given others is very hurtful and agitating. I don't expect them to follow my own MO, however, so I don't blame them for doing it.

I've honestly loved to have Ana as security when it's convinient, but people complaining about this shouldn't be dismissed as simply bitching and complaining without grounds.

[Frances]

People seem to feel unwelcome, at least in some part, because they encounter IC opposition, and mistake it for OOC opposition. Or perhaps they simply dislike IC opposition. I do not know which, but if this is actually the case and is what most people effectively want, we will either have to make some major changes to certain rules, or create a new server which attempts to follow better these principles.

 

But as seen with a new player who just came in and automatically gets stun batoned into a corner for sitting on a cargo tug,

This is a correlative fallacy.

[Frances]

Players weren't saying anything because they are aware that they cannot dictate how Sue behaves or plays their character and that complaints will be either dealt with as isolated incidents or get crushed by her own arguments.

The only reason why this should be allowed to happen is because Sue's arguments were actually right, and the complaints unfounded. In an ideal world, a person does not win a debate for being louder, or "better at arguing", but simply for being right. In practice, I do not believe Sue has been "shutting anyone up". She will get rude if you begin the attacks (not condoning this, but just saying), and attempt to reply to you politely otherwise. Some complaints against her have been maintained (she has accumulated at least two notes from similar incidents over last fall/winter), and some have been thrown out.

((Sorry for the repeated doubleposts. I'm talking to a lot of people at once and it's easier to organize this way.))

[nbielinski]

People seem to feel unwelcome, at least in some part, because they encounter IC opposition, and mistake it for OOC opposition. Or perhaps they simply dislike IC opposition. I do not know which, but if this is actually the case and is what most people effectively want, we will either have to make some major changes to certain rules, or create a new server which attempts to follow better these principles.

 

But as seen with a new player who just came in and automatically gets stun batoned into a corner for sitting on a cargo tug,

This is a correlative fallacy.

 

Well then in that way of thinking, there seems to be some kind of OOC opposition to it? A character constantly being rude and cruel without reason or rhyme regardless of situation, seems to be not an IC issues considering IC, characters are bound to change, to adapt and to have varying feelings besides, "lolfuckyou." To be seen as wanting to change the entire server is just a misappropriation. The rules and principles of the server seem more than fair, they have done right by me and others for a long while now. From my point of view, and from the point of view of several others, we simply want those rules and principles to be enforced.

And concerning the one line you quoted from me, its a simplification seeing as how I was not involved and was not privy to the events of the issue. Referencing an issue that has occurred and shortening it, as it were.

[Guest]

Phoebe Essel won two of the 2014 character wards, if I am not mistaken. And I personally saw Nursie tone down Phoebe's assholery to teach a bunch of interns medbay mechanics.

Winston Carton is an all around awful human being, but his dickery is for the most part opposed in the appropriate Incident reports subforum. Despite Winston being a dick, Josh is a chill dude.

Jade Rathel is dealt with ICly, entirely.

Kiwi also plays a somewhat dickish medbay cat. No complaints there.

So, with that in mind I disagree the problem here is dick characters being dicks. Obviously, there's something else that's turning this into such a huge shitstorm.

[Dea Tacita]

I disagree the problem here is dick characters being dicks. Obviously, there's something else that's turning this into such a huge shitstorm.

 

I agree with this.

[nbielinski]

Phoebe Essel won two of the 2014 character wards, if I am not mistaken. And I personally saw Nursie tone down Phoebe's assholery to teach a bunch of interns medbay mechanics.

Winston Carton is an all around awful human being, but his dickery is for the most part opposed in the appropriate Incident reports subforum. Despite Winston being a dick, Josh is a chill dude.

Jade Rathel is dealt with ICly, entirely.

Kiwi also plays a somewhat dickish medbay cat. No complaints there.

So, with that in mind I disagree the problem here is dick characters being dicks. Obviously, there's something else that's turning this into such a huge shitstorm.

 

I agree, its amazingly and delighting to see how well a person and character can change, and I agree that its obviously not, "Oh dear this person is a dick. Ban" but rather it seems to be more than just an issue with a character, but an issue with the character and the player. Just my take on the issue, I have to go get drugs jammed into my jaw and get operated on so I'm going to shut up for a short while. <3

[Frances]

I just don't think some of these characters are being such awful dicks as you say they are. Plus some of this is clearly directed at Sue, not any of her characters, because one of the arguments I see come up frequently is "Sue has done this in the past", not "Ana has done this in the past".

Ana is not a character I've seen go overboard in a way that was inadmissible OOCly. In fact, I've seen very little, if any of those characters recently.

[Guest]

Players weren't saying anything because they are aware that they cannot dictate how Sue behaves or plays their character and that complaints will be either dealt with as isolated incidents or get crushed by her own arguments.

The only reason why this should be allowed to happen is because Sue's arguments were actually right, and the complaints unfounded. In an ideal world, a person does not win a debate for being louder, or "better at arguing", but simply for being right. In practice, I do not believe Sue has been "shutting anyone up". She will get rude if you begin the attacks (not condoning this, but just saying), and attempt to reply to you politely otherwise. Some complaints against her have been maintained (she has accumulated at least two notes from similar incidents over last fall/winter), and some have been thrown out.

 

I just don't think some of these characters are being such awful dicks as you say they are. Plus some of this is clearly directed at Sue, not any of her characters, because one of the arguments I see come up frequently is "Sue has done this in the past", not "Ana has done this in the past".

Ana is not a character I've seen go overboard in a way that was inadmissible OOCly. In fact, I've seen very little, if any of those characters recently.

 

That post took me two hours to write for some reason, so I've lost my own point.

I think the main point of Sue's complaints is the same one I've had. It's what the characters represent. I've been sludging through the gray area as a captain for a while now. Why? Because I think it produces RP, one that people don't seem to like. Same for Ana, she's a cop, violent or not. She represents a police oriented station and actively seems to push it down on people, regardless if they disagree with Aurora Police station or not. It produces a lot of conflict and hate. The very fact that the theme of the server isn't established makes it a gray area, allowing Sue to argument it with ease.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Guest

[Frances]

I think the main point of Sue's complaints is the same one I've had. It's what the characters represent. I've been sludging through the gray area as a captain for a while now. Why? Because I think it produces RP, one that people don't seem to like. Same for Ana, she's a cop, violent or not. She represents a police oriented station and actively seems to push it down on people, regardless if they disagree with Aurora Police station or not. It produces a lot of conflict and hate. The very fact that the theme of the server isn't established makes it a gray area, allowing Sue to argument it with ease.

This sums up the issue excellently. (Well, there's a lot of noise in the current two complaints, and not all of it is related, but at the core, this is it.)

I think these characters deserve their place and should be allowed to exist. Some people seem to believe they are a failure of proper and responsible roleplay, as an antag, head, or member of security.

Some people want players to have more freedom to be ICly abusive in roles of powers. Some don't. Which direction should the server take? I don't know. But this is something I would expect admins to eventually release a statement on.

[Guest]

You keep trying to bring more people this in one way or another. you shouldnt.

This thread is here because people are mad at Susan for one thing or another.

You cant possibly play this off as a misunderstanding, I think everyone's aware why this shitstorm is raging.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Guest

[Guest]

And Bokaza.

Yes, this is all of our own doing and it's a wonder why this wonderful ride we can't get off of just doesn't stop.

[SierraKomodo]

I think the main point of Sue's complaints is the same one I've had. It's what the characters represent. I've been sludging through the gray area as a captain for a while now. Why? Because I think it produces RP, one that people don't seem to like. Same for Ana, she's a cop, violent or not. She represents a police oriented station and actively seems to push it down on people, regardless if they disagree with Aurora Police station or not. It produces a lot of conflict and hate. The very fact that the theme of the server isn't established makes it a gray area, allowing Sue to argument it with ease.

This sums up the issue excellently. (Well, there's a lot of noise in the current two complaints, and not all of it is related, but at the core, this is it.)

I think these characters deserve their place and should be allowed to exist. Some people seem to believe they are a failure of proper and responsible roleplay, as an antag, head, or member of security.

Some people want players to have more freedom to be ICly abusive in roles of powers. Some don't. Which direction should the server take? I don't know. But this is something I would expect admins to eventually release a statement on.

 

I feel like nobody has really read or paid attention to my posts in my own complaints thread.

[Frances]

You keep trying to bring more people this in one way or another. you shouldnt.

This thread is here because people are mad at Susan for one thing or another.

I'm not sure what the first part of your statement is trying to say. Anyway, I am really intent on trying to discuss what I think is a larger underlying issue, but if you want to believe that I'm simply lying, there is very little I can do to stop you.

On a perhaps more pertinent note, after a bit of thinking, I managed to find one big difference between other characters that were cited as "acceptable" dicks, and Ana (as well as other heads, officers, and antagonists). Whereas most of the time the only consequences a player will face from getting involved with a dickish character is that they might not get what they want, dealing with an officer, member of command, or heaven forbid, antagonist is much more likely to result in you ending up in a cell, or dead.

What should we make of that? I don't know. I don't mind being maimed, imprisoned or killed for the sake of RP, but I know some people do.

 

I feel like nobody has really read or paid attention to my posts in my own complaints thread.

I tried, and so did Sue, to provide an answer to your complaint (which is that you had been shot without warning). I actually did end up siding with you once I learned Sue had a reasonably accessible method of contacting you and did not make use of it.

Out of curiosity, what else would you have liked people to do to respond to that complaint better?

[Blue]

Isn't it kinda funny how when people get upset by stuff, they're told to make player complaints.

Either they do make complaints, and then we get at it for complaining and taking everything too personally and all that jazz.

Or, they don't make a complaint and bottle up their woes. Staff and community members alike frown at them for not voicing their opinions and cite them as a reason why Aurora is filled with hate.

You just can't really win.

that's my two cents.

Edit: Also, we are all really nice to each other and get along very well. Reading this thread confirms this.

[Frances]

Isn't it kinda funny how when people get upset by stuff, they're told to make player complaints.

Either they do make complaints, and then we get at it for complaining and taking everything too personally and all that jazz.

Or, they don't make a complaint and bottle up their woes. Staff and community members alike frown at them for not voicing their opinions and cite them as a reason why Aurora is filled with hate.

You just can't really win.

That doesn't really represent the problem well :/

A certain category of players has been catching a lot of flak recently for reasons I feel are unjust. This does not mean there's anything inherently wrong with the complaints system, simply that people don't seem to be agreeing on how the game should be played.

[Erik Tiber]

Isn't it kinda funny how when people get upset by stuff, they're told to make player complaints.

Either they do make complaints, and then we get at it for complaining and taking everything too personally and all that jazz.

Or, they don't make a complaint and bottle up their woes. Staff and community members alike frown at them for not voicing their opinions and cite them as a reason why Aurora is filled with hate.

You just can't really win.

That doesn't really represent the problem well :/

A certain category of players has been catching a lot of flak recently for reasons I feel are unjust. This does not mean there's anything inherently wrong with the complaints system, simply that people don't seem to be agreeing on how the game should be played.

Except it is rather dishonest of you to imply that Sue's behavior is at all comparable to Bokaza. One is someone who got metagrudged, the other one is a player who has had chronically problematic behavior, who's so far had the advantage of being one of the more popular members.

There is a common factor, that being the inconsistency with which actions are punished. Sue has engaged in behavior that would have gotten many other people boatloads of complaints. And when people finally come forward, now a thread is made complaining about others being open about these complaints, a thread where you are conflating two completely separate things. This is nothing new, this problem has always been here, and now it's simply being brought to light.

[Frances]

Except it is rather dishonest of you to imply that Sue's behavior is at all comparable to Bokaza. One is someone who got metagrudged, the other one is a player who has had chronically problematic behavior, who's so far had the advantage of being one of the more popular members.

I actually can't see how Bokaza was metagrudged against on a personal level. Complaints made against him were made following certain convictions or beliefs, which puts him in the exact same situation Sue has been in, with the only difference being you don't think Bokaza deserved any of these complaints, while you think Sue did. However, calling Sue one of the server's most popular members is honestly false given I've seen a lot of people hate her (sorry, Sue) and absolutely no one defend her or speak for her besides me. Going as far as to say she has benefited from an "advantage" due to this is also something I can't agree on, given that complaints against her were handled by a multitude of staff and mods, and saying that the administration has been overly lenient towards her would essentially imply that the administration as a whole is crooked.

 

There is a common factor, that being the inconsistency with which actions are punished. Sue has engaged in behavior that would have gotten many other people boatloads of complaints. And when people finally come forward, now a thread is made complaining about others being open about these complaints, a thread where you are conflating two completely separate things. This is nothing new, this problem has always been here, and now it's simply being brought to light.

People are speaking up about being upset, and there is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing bad about the act of making complaints alone - what I would like to discuss is why people feel the need to make these complaints, because there are a lot of behaviors I'm seeing go heavily criticized that I don't think should be criticized.

And I'd like to see if I'm alone in thinking that way. I might be. If I am, that's too bad. But until I'm proven that I'm the only person remaining on the server to think that way, I'm going to try my best to defend these users, because I believe the way they're being treated is unfair.

[Erik Tiber]

Except it is rather dishonest of you to imply that Sue's behavior is at all comparable to Bokaza. One is someone who got metagrudged, the other one is a player who has had chronically problematic behavior, who's so far had the advantage of being one of the more popular members.

I actually can't see how Bokaza was metagrudged against on a personal level. Complaints made against him were made following certain convictions or beliefs, which puts him in the exact same situation Sue has been in, with the only difference being you don't think Bokaza deserved any of these complaints, while you think Sue did.

The difference is that Sue has repeatedly engaged in repeated borderline or outright grief and has an extremely hostile attitude towards anyone that slights her. I'm unsure of how Bokaza's character going and acting as a security officer is at all comparable to going and shooting restrained suspects, repeatedly going Dirty Harry as the detective, and consistently engaging in absurd levels of police brutality and then justifying it as a character quirk. If you can't see the difference, you would need to be either completely disbelieving of the testimony of everyone in that thread, in which case they're all lying for some reason, or you'd have to be willfully ignorant.

However, calling Sue one of the server's most popular members is honestly false given I've seen a lot of people hate her (sorry, Sue) and absolutely no one defend her or speak for her besides me. Going as far as to say she has benefited from an "advantage" due to this is also something I can't agree on, given that complaints against her were handled by a multitude of staff and mods, and saying that the administration has been overly lenient towards her would essentially imply that the administration as a whole is crooked.

I'm not implying that, but I am pointing out that she has engaged in rather egregious behavior in the past and so far, it seems, people have felt reluctant to come forward with complaints. I'm not saying the administration as a whole is crooked, or asserting the existence of a conspiracy. It's just that people simply do not want to put out complaints about her, because they don't want to be retaliated against by her. Or because of differing attitudes and differing tolerances from different behaviors from different players. As others have mentioned, if it was a bald that did this, they'd be job banned. If it was some new player, they'd be job banned. Because the behavior is frankly absurd.

There is a common factor, that being the inconsistency with which actions are punished. Sue has engaged in behavior that would have gotten many other people boatloads of complaints. And when people finally come forward, now a thread is made complaining about others being open about these complaints, a thread where you are conflating two completely separate things. This is nothing new, this problem has always been here, and now it's simply being brought to light.

People are speaking up about being upset, and there is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing bad about the act of making complaints alone - what I would like to discuss is why people feel the need to make these complaints, because there are a lot of behaviors I'm seeing go heavily criticized that I don't think should be criticized.

And I'd like to see if I'm alone in thinking that way. I might be. If I am, that's too bad. But until I'm proven that I'm the only person remaining on the server to think that way, I'm going to try my best to defend these users, because I believe the way they're being treated is unfair.

I'm unsure of how it's unworthy of complaint if she's been showing a pattern of misbehavior and letting OOC rage get in the way of IC conduct. Including disobeying orders, regularly killing or using lethal force with little to no justification, using lethal force repeatedly as a detective in direct contravention of SOP, and an incredibly hostile attitude. Her entire counterargument consisted of calling everyone else a sore-loser who didn't like getting outrobusted.

I guess probably because she sees this thread as what it really is; everyone who ever got robusted or arrested and got mad about it coming out of the woodwork to whine and complain and embellish whatever they can to make it look like there is a problem larger than a cat who swears a lot.

You didn't see this as problematic, and yet you're complaining about a personal attack against you because someone said they were disappointed?

In the thread, it was really nothing but you engaging in poor faith debating and defending them despite literally everyone bringing up bad interactions they had with her. It's quite obvious to see that you're biased in her favor, given that you're repeatedly equivocating two blatantly different things and completely glossing over Sue's entire history, dismissing all counterarguments as some manner of metagrudging hivemind, and expecting that everyone just happen to have logs of everything on hand. You're holding her to a double standard.

[Guest]

I'm unsure of how it's unworthy of complaint if she's been showing a pattern of misbehavior and letting OOC rage get in the way of IC conduct. Including disobeying orders, regularly killing or using lethal force with little to no justification, using lethal force repeatedly as a detective in direct contravention of SOP, and an incredibly hostile attitude. Her entire counterargument consisted of calling everyone else a sore-loser who didn't like getting outrobusted.

I can attest to that. Even if you can justify every last one of these, it would still go that no other player has such a long list of questionable and agressive behavior. I'm trying to point out that it really does seem Sue is just here to robust shit, fuck over antags and will look for any excuse to do it. This is not metagrudging, I'm not doing it because I hate Sue, but because almost everyone wants it to stop.

Edited April 16, 2015 by Guest

[Gollee]

Sorry Frances, but I am forced to agree with Inverted, Erik and Bokaza; I believe that there is a large difference between the Bokaza complaints and the Sue complaints; and I believe you are biased in the second instance.

[Frances]

It sucks that this thread is going to turn into another "let's debate Sue's actions" discussion, though if anyone wants to bring any other input to save it, they're free to do so. Otherwise, it'll probably end up locked soon. Anyhow, in the meantime.

 

---

---

repeatedly going Dirty Harry as the detective, and consistently engaging in absurd levels of police brutality and then justifying it as a character quirk.

I know at this point that you are misinformed, because the only two incidents I know of involving Sue as the detective have both been provided ample justification for. Tell me concrete stories of admin action being taken against Sue. Link me to threads. Anything, at this point. But stop throwing around hyperboles of "she did bad" without providing actual foundation, because I've spent roughly 70 posts replying to these today and I'm honestly getting tired of it.

 

If you can't see the difference, you would need to be either completely disbelieving of the testimony of everyone in that thread, in which case they're all lying for some reason, or you'd have to be willfully ignorant.

Except no one provided anything? Aside from one incident Brage mentioned, which Sue herself mentioned was essentially Brage refusing to cooperate OOCly over a bug, which makes him look at fault more than anything else.

 

It's just that people simply do not want to put out complaints about her, because they don't want to be retaliated against by her.

Retaliated how, exactly? If your biggest fear in life is that someone on the internet might say mean words at you, you might want to reevaluate your life. Furthermore, the fact that Sue usually only ends up displaying hostility with reason (I'm not saying it's my favorite approach, but there is always a foundation of logic behind it) makes this even sadder.

 

As others have mentioned, if it was a bald that did this, they'd be job banned. If it was some new player, they'd be job banned.

No player has stated that. The only people who would be in favor of jobbanning the bald are the same who would want to jobban Sue, whereas the people who do not think Sue was to blame (such as Doomberg) have clearly stated they would not ban the bald either. This point is essentially moot.

 

Her entire counterargument consisted of calling everyone else a sore-loser who didn't like getting outrobusted.

Except her entire argument consisted of explaining clearly both her IC and OOC reasoning for every action she was accused of. How can you say laughing at people is all she's ever done?

 

You didn't see this as problematic, and yet you're complaining about a personal attack against you because someone said they were disappointed?

I do not think Sue should be rude to other people in the way that she often is, but I understand her not having the patience of a saint after dealing with 10000+ complaints. You are free to call her out on the way she phrases her arguments, though I ask you try not to ignore their content while doing so, which would be tone policing. (And you'll notice that although I called out Inverted on that jab because I found it ruined his credibility, I still did my best to address his full argument.)

 

In the thread, it was really nothing but you engaging in poor faith debating and defending them despite literally everyone bringing up bad interactions they had with her. It's quite obvious to see that you're biased in her favor, given that you're repeatedly equivocating two blatantly different things and completely glossing over Sue's entire history, dismissing all counterarguments as some manner of metagrudging hivemind, and expecting that everyone just happen to have logs of everything on hand. You're holding her to a double standard.

I actually do believe I made my best effort to reply to every single point that was brought up (while several of my points were ignored repeatedly, and I had to repeat them 3, 4 times to multiple people). If there are any counterarguments I have ignored, feel free to bring them up here and I will reply to them now.

As of now, we simply have differing opinions. But I don't think it's fair to call me biased (though there's little I can do to stop you or change your mind) - the only reason why I am defending Sue is because I believe she is being wronged, not because she is my friend.

[Guest]

Retaliated how, exactly?

 

We spend enourmous ammounts of time on the forums flinging shit at each other, and then we usually go back ingame and play together as if nothing happened. I have one more than one occasion had a nice round with someone I have gotten in a forum scuffle with. We're not afraid of bad mean words, we've been throwing them around for 9 pages in the other complaint thread.

Look at the top of your post, where you imply that debating Susan's actions is not only petty and pointless, but also will lead to the thread getting locked as if it is against some unsaid rule.

For reasons which have not been explained the Staff is very protective of Susan and lets her shit on people whenever she feels like it. Not on people's arguments, not on people's characters, on people themselves.

Lets talk about Zonk.

Zonk is the username of the person who made the first complaint about Susan. I dont know if that is his Ckey because I have never seen the person. I think that il be right in my assumption that Zonk is an entirely new player - an entirely new player with no reputation to lose by asking someone to do something about Susan. Suddenly, we have 3 huge threads whining about Susan, all triggered by this one new guy making a single complaint against Susan.

To me, this means several things.

1. Zonk only made the complaint because he didnt know who Susan was, he just assumed he's dealing with a garden variety shitsec officer.

2. Everyone was far too scared of the Staff protecting their favorite player to make a complaint untill that point.

3. Everyone was unconvinced anything would be done even if they made a complaint.

I personally identify with number three, but I still cant help but admit Im worried that once you become Headmin again, you're going to try to get me in trouble for complaining about your friend.

[Chaznoodles]

1. Zonk only made the complaint because he didnt know who Susan was, he just assumed he's dealing with a garden variety shitsec officer.

 

This seems like alikely possilbility. From my perspective, it seems like players don't make complaints about the player in question for -lack of better words - fear of being presented with hostility or a different attitude in-game.

 

2. Everyone was far too scared of the Staff protecting their favorite player to make a complaint untill that point.

 

Kek

 

3. Everyone was unconvinced anything would be done even if they made a complaint.

 

I second this. From what I've seen in previous complaints, they get closed because 'nobody's reaching a conclusion' and nothing ever gets resolved. I feel like this closing of threads needs to stop, in exchange for attempting to assist the players in reaching a decision.