Jump to content

A Second, Slightly Smaller Staff Complaint, Inside The First Staff Complaint But I Took It Out And It Won't Go Back In - MattAtlas and Melariara


Recommended Posts

BYOND Key: UponASeaOfStars
Staff BYOND Key: Melariara and MattAtlas
Game ID: N/A - Forum behavior.
Reason for complaint: I was told to make a second staff complaint by Matt if I wanted this escalated to headstaff, so...
Evidence/logs/etc:

spacer.png

Additional remarks
I had this second, slightly smaller staff complaint inside my original staff complaint, but I took it out and now it won't go back in. Also, yes, you are all welcome and invited to laugh at this whole situation because it's honestly absurd to the point of hilarity. I'm laughing too, it's okay.

 

To clarify, I am requesting my initial Staff Complaint be handled by head administration.

It was closed within an hour of me making it, without the chance for meaningful discourse. Let's change that.

Edited by UponASeaOfStars
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

Okay, here is the issue:

You first joined in 09/01/2023

You were permabanned in 05/02/2023

It is a total of 27 days.

In less than one month, you got:

-14 notes

-2 warnings

-3 bans

This is roughly one note every two days.

Now, as you can see, in the time you have been around, you had a fair share of punishments and talks about your behavior.

Now we move on the claim of the briefcase:

You were aware that this was not intended behavior. You made no effort in avoiding it, or even reporting it in the proper channels. That is why you deserved to be banned.

  • Thanks 7
Link to comment

As I mentioned in the first staff complaint, I'm not able to read my notes, so I'm not in a position to defend myself regarding them. If they're exclusively designed as an informal admin notepad, then they're not relevant to the case; if they're designed as a formal way of keeping track of people, then they're evidence in this case, and as such I should be given a chance to address them directly. Zulu was given a warning and had their post deleted for pointing this out, but it's a salient point: it cannot be expected of anyone to defend themselves against unsubstantiated claims.

With regards to the briefcase: As has already been established, I was only aware that it was considered a bug when Melariara told me it was a bug (to which I disgreed, but kept my opinion to myself because disagreeing with the staff team is a Very Bad Idea). I then immediately offered to fix the bug. And given that I'd only had the briefcase for two shifts (the first shift where I discovered 'oh, that's cool, didn't realise it worked that way' and the second shift where I was banned ten minutes in), as prior to that the character in question used a secure briefcase that can't be opened without first inputting a code (which itself requires taking out of the backpack) and only bought the metal briefcase (the one I was banned for) when she graduated to Security Officer... you are absolutely welcome to look for evidence of me 'abusing a bug' or 'powergaming' with it, but I guarantee you won't find any. I had it for two rounds. The first one was extended, in which I spent the vast majority of it doing cute Tajara RP, and the second I was banned ten minutes in.

To reiterate: I differentiate between bugs/exploits (such as the duplication exploit that allows you to spawn infinite reagents using an IV) and intentional game mechanics (such as being able to store gas masks inside emergency boxes). 

We must then, in that case, examine my conduct from the point I was informed "hey, this is a bug, which means it's against the rules". I immediately offered to get a PR up to fix it, even though I didn't agree with the claim that it was a bug. Because that's the kind of player I am: someone who actively wants to improve Aurora. What is the correct response, if not this? From the moment I was made aware that it was considered a bug, I expressed a desire to fix it. Is that deserving of a permaban?

Edited by UponASeaOfStars
  • Like 2
Link to comment
13 minutes ago, UponASeaOfStars said:

As I mentioned in the first staff complaint, I'm not able to read my notes, so I'm not in a position to defend myself regarding them. If they're exclusively designed as an informal admin notepad, then they're not relevant to the case; if they're designed as a formal way of keeping track of people, then they're evidence in this case, and as such I should be given a chance to address them directly. Zulu was given a warning and had their post deleted for pointing this out, but it's a salient point: it cannot be expected of anyone to defend themselves against unsubstantiated claims.

If someone put a note, it is certainly they spoke to you about what you were doing. If an admin tells you to don't do something, you should not do something, does not matter if you can't see that they put a note on you. If you don't agree, make a staff complaint.

14 minutes ago, UponASeaOfStars said:

I was only aware that it was considered a bug

The game does not let you put containers that are of the same size inside each other. It even shows you a message. You were aware of this because you pointed out that you can't put the briefcase back. The fact it appears in your bag when you pick it in the loadout is indeed a bug, why would it fit because you picked it in the loadout? That is not an international feature.

Now, from the rules:

Quote

Abuse of bugs, regardless of intent, is a punishable offence. All bugs should be reported on GitHub. If they are immediately gamebreaking, please contact server staff via adminhelp, in an attempt to find a temporary resolution.

Don't matter if you killed the entire station with a but or not. You were clearly using it.

I see no problem with the staff decision about this.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment

Regarding the briefcase: again, intent. I'm going to offer a little evidence here: my track record suggesting that I make bug reports when I find bugs. If I were the type to look favorably upon bugs, I wouldn't make bug reports to get them fixed. It's fine if you define it as a bug, but at the time I did not consider it to be a bug. If I'd considered it to be a bug, I'd have made a bug report. Hell, the moment it was pointed out "hey, we consider this a bug here", I immediately offered to fix it

"Why would it fit because you picked it in the loadout?" Because that's how the loadout works. It puts items in your backpack.

You might say "abuse of bugs, regardless of intent, is a punishable offense", but abusing something requires an intent to abuse it. What advantage was provided? What benefit was gained? What did having a loadout briefcase in my bag for one extended round and ten minutes of the next round bring me? None.

As for the notes - again, I'm not able to defend myself against notes that I can't see, so if they're relevant, let's talk about them. If they're not relevant, they have no place being brought up here at all.

So I ask again, as I did in the first complaint: what purpose does this serve? How does this ban improve Aurora? Are we to take it that my presence was so odious, so detested, that I actively made the community worse just by being a part of it? Are we to assume that Aurora is a better place with me gone? Because that is the role of a ban: for when all else fails, a weapon of last resort.

If that's not the case... then you know what else would work, without removing a player from the community?

Quote

"Hey, Stars, that's actually a bug! If you're gonna spawn with a briefcase, take it out of your bag at roundstart until we get a fix up for that. Thank you!"

 

Edited by UponASeaOfStars
Link to comment
7 hours ago, UponASeaOfStars said:

"Why would it fit because you picked it in the loadout?" Because that's how the loadout works. It puts items in your backpack.

No, it is a bug.

7 hours ago, UponASeaOfStars said:

You might say "abuse of bugs, regardless of intent, is a punishable offense", but abusing something requires an intent to abuse it. What advantage was provided? What benefit was gained? What did having a loadout briefcase in my bag for one extended round and ten minutes of the next round bring me? None.

Yes, you had an advange in having extra inventory space due to a bug. To show you that, I tested this:

We have two bags:

image.png.304f1ef32896e94fb0541a87cce367dd.png

The first one has a briefcase inside (the bug)

The second one has no briefcase inside (without the bug)

I filled them with oxygen tanks of the same size.

The second bag can hold up to 14 oxygen tanks.

image.png.8eae83dd147c94b035a1616f7c11b224.png

image.png.c5566bbf0386874db3038f88f66377dd.png

Now, I did the same thing with the first bag.

image.png.eb618496ec1f5f5f966f903899a165db.png

image.png.4c41ca790e37d0dd9fc032b524b2d52b.png

As you can see, it can fit up to 10 (for a total of 11 items) oxygen tanks, since the briefcase takes some space.

But, what if we filled the briefcase with oxygen tanks?

image.png.18ca0b2854e163048357c8ea67cd6279.png

image.png.c95fb53df8cab46b2c51e4e878fa6ce6.png

The briefcase can fit up to eight of them.

Some simple math:

10+8 = 18

18>14

With this evidence, we can prove that this bug does provide extra inventory space. So yeah, there is an advantage.

Anyone can reproduce this.

Anyway, the ban is staying.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, UponASeaOfStars said:

So I ask again, as I did in the first complaint: what purpose does this serve? How does this ban improve Aurora? Are we to take it that my presence was so odious, so detested, that I actively made the community worse just by being a part of it? Are we to assume that Aurora is a better place with me gone? Because that is the role of a ban: for when all else fails, a weapon of last resort.

To answer this: the purpose of a ban is to punish people who did not learn from being spoken to, warned, and temporarily banned. Why do we do that? To make sure everyone follows the rules. Why do the rules exist? To make sure the server does not fall apart and things continue to exist for people to play here.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...