LynxSolstice Posted August 17, 2023 Posted August 17, 2023 BYOND Key: LynxSolstice Staff BYOND Key: Roostercat12 Game ID: cpk-dMKB Reason for complaint: I feel that I was personally targetted by this administrator due to my note history and recent antag ban for escalation issues, due to the fact that I was banned over a personal interpretation of the rules that I, as a player, could not be reasonably expected to know of. I wasn't aware that doing mercenary gimmicks, like cracking the vault, stealthily, was against the rules, as it isn't stated on the Mercenary guide. Nor is it stated in the antagonist rules. I was given a permanent antagonist ban simply because the gimmick was poorly structured and didn't play out well. I never even shot anyone until the Security forces engaged us first. The reason I believe I was being targetted specifically, is because the other antagonists were allowed to continue with their rounds, and even come up with an additional gimmick. I was the only one who had action taken against me, and even that action was taken on a platform of notes and bans that was entirely unrelated to the reason I was banned (going along with a stealthy vault crack, versus what I was previously banned for, breaking the escalation rules.) I feel the decision to permanently ban me from antagonist roles was entirely heavy-handed and had a lack of support from the written guides and rules, as such I'd like the sentence to be reduced, or removed. Evidence/logs/etc: https://imgur.com/a/7jZPh3y Additional remarks: I was simply going along with the flow of stuff, unaware that I was violating an unwritten, cultural rule, and as such I was singled out and handed an incredibly heavy sentence.
Roostercat Posted August 17, 2023 Posted August 17, 2023 I am going to preface this by saying that I do not know you. Like, at all. That being said, it makes NO sense to say that I personally targeted you despite having absolutely no clue who you are. Secondly, you did break the rules. Your gimmick was to board the station, crack the vault stealthily by your own admission, and leave. This provides ZERO interaction with the crew and in the event the mercs get caught, which you were, it ends in all the antags being killed/arrested/fled by 45 minutes in, which is exactly what happened. This is against the rules because it generates very poor antag interactions and basically invalidates the round for everyone else. There was no narrative, and no story. Your claim that it is not written in the rules is blatantly false. Here is a screenshot from the tab that opens when you click 'Rules' on the UI. By the phrasing of this rule, you blatantly broke it by your own admission. 15 minutes ago, LynxSolstice said: The reason I believe I was being targetted specifically, is because the other antagonists were allowed to continue with their rounds, and even come up with an additional gimmick. I was the only one who had action taken against me, and even that action was taken on a platform of notes and bans that was entirely unrelated to the reason I was banned (going along with a stealthy vault crack, versus what I was previously banned for, breaking the escalation rules.) I never told you that you were not allowed to finish the round. You by all means could have stuck around and played for the rest of the duration if you wanted to. Additionally, your platform of notes and bans were related to your antagonist play. Most of them were due to escalation, but all of them still stemmed from antagonist play. We do not look for super specific notes to influence our decisions because it would mean people would constantly break different rules and never get punished just because it wasn't the same exact circumstance every time. You broke rules so often as antag that you have warnings and even bans stemming from it, so you have lost all benefit of the doubt when it comes to your antagonist play, and hence why I placed a permanent ban. You simply do not understand what playing an antagonist properly is.
Roostercat Posted August 17, 2023 Posted August 17, 2023 9 minutes ago, Roostercat said: By the phrasing of this rule, you blatantly broke it by your own admission. I never told you that you were not allowed to finish the round. Actually, you were dead. You were killed in the initial firefight. You claim that I forbade you from participating in the round, but you quite literally couldn't because you were dead.
LynxSolstice Posted August 17, 2023 Author Posted August 17, 2023 No what I meant by such, is that the other mercenaries were given no action for the poor gimmick, I was the only one singled out in this case.
Roostercat Posted August 17, 2023 Posted August 17, 2023 You were singled out in that regard because of your very poor history. The others did not have major history of bad antag play.
LynxSolstice Posted August 17, 2023 Author Posted August 17, 2023 For an unwritten rule that I had no reasonable expectation of knowing beforehand.
LynxSolstice Posted August 17, 2023 Author Posted August 17, 2023 The clarifications below do not state that mercenaries cannot break into the vault using stealth. The only point I could have interacted with security is when we were on deck 3, where we were instantly shot at.
CampinKiller Posted August 17, 2023 Posted August 17, 2023 I was involved as security. Gonna give my perspective. We had 0 clue that the merc team was there until an officer happened to jump on cameras/see a motion alarm (not quite sure which). Until that point, all of security was standing in the main ring chatting. Note that this was at, maybe, 0:25 of round time. By the time we arrived to Ops (probably 3 minutes later), every door had been bolted shut, sandbagged, and it was a position that was suicidal to assault. Before we could even reach out over common, it was reported that the mercs were heading upstairs and trying to leave. This is still before even a half hour has passed in the round. I bumped straight into you guys running from the Ops lift towards your shuttle. I misclicked (the first shot), but even then I think I didn't really have much choice but to fire as you guys ran away with all of our valuable items that we're supposed to protect. Had I simply stood there I imagine I would've been gunned down or everyone was going to keep running, since nobody on the merc team said a word to anyone prior. There was ample opportunity to interact with the crew, and especially security, when you were barricaded in an entrenched position in Ops. Instead, you and your team decided to just bounce and say nothing. Realistically had an officer not happened to see you guys on cameras, I don't think we would've ever run into you
LynxSolstice Posted August 17, 2023 Author Posted August 17, 2023 We were standing around, talking to security through the doors while the drill was going. There were interactions there. We didn't stay to hold the area because it would have just been a shootout, admittedly we probably should have but the team was restless and we headed back up using the lift. I just don't see the need to hand out a heavy punishment (Permanent unless appealed) due to my inability to know the cultural rule of Merc teams needing to be loud. I disagree that the sentence should be permanent when the previous warning/notes/ban were for lack of proper escalation against the security team and bystanders. I personally feel that I was handed out the harsh punishment because I'm not exactly known for the best antag gimmicks. If something is against the rules, it should be listed somewhere, instead I'm told after the fact that it's "seen in bad taste to do your gimmicks stealthily as off-ship boarders" by a regular member of the server.
Roostercat Posted August 17, 2023 Posted August 17, 2023 58 minutes ago, LynxSolstice said: The clarifications below do not state that mercenaries cannot break into the vault using stealth. The only point I could have interacted with security is when we were on deck 3, where we were instantly shot at. You had no chances to interact because the gimmick you were doing didn't allow it. The stealth gimmick was not forced on you, you just went with it. Additionally, that rule quite literally means breaking in using stealth and then starting a firefight are against the rules. I cannot understand the rules for you.
LynxSolstice Posted August 17, 2023 Author Posted August 17, 2023 We weren't the first ones to shoot. As for the rule "quite literally" meaning breaking in using stealth is against the rules, then why is it not mentioned within the clarifications or the mercenary guide on the wiki? It just states "This means: no unmotivated/not roleplayed out mass murders, etcetera. See the rules below for further clarification." The clarifications below are as follows: "Only resort to killing if it makes sense or drives a story. Randomly killing someone because you’re a traitor will get you removed right quick. This also means that murder for the sake of murder is punishable. However, in certain situations, murder can serve as a tool, if none other applicable. If you’re uncertain, ask for guidance via adminhelps. No ganking. While antags will sometimes kill, it is expected for you to provide interesting roleplay to your targets first, if your goal is assassination. This does not mean that you need to monologue your opponent before killing them: roleplay leading up to a murder can take place over the course of the entire round, for example, leaving the murder scene itself to be “wordless”. Collateral damage is acceptable within reason, but this means you must use common sense, and avoid creating scenarios with a lot of potential for collateral (setting bombs in high-traffic areas, etc.) SSD/AFK characters are OFF-LIMITS. Do not kill, maim, or steal from a character who is SSD. If a character goes SSD mid-roleplay, give them some time to rejoin before continuing, if applicable. If they do not come back, use judgement as to whether it is reasonable (and fair) to continue roleplay without them or not. It is acceptable to rob from SSDs if something on their person provides an item that is immediately vital to your character (helps keep the character alive). As necessary, you can ask for guidance via adminhelp. The station’s primary power source and atmospherics systems are generally off-limits in terms of catastrophic sabotage, due to the impact they can have on the round. If you think you have a really good reason to mess with either, adminhelp first to get clearance. Recalling a CT shuttle is not allowed as antag unless you get permission from staff first." No where does it clearly explain the issue of stealth gimmicks, I'm just assumed to know that cracking the vault with my fellow mercenaries in a stealth-y way, and fortifying Ops is against the rules, and since I was unaware, I was punished with a permanent antagonist ban, with a minimal chance for appeal, if at all.
Roostercat Posted August 17, 2023 Posted August 17, 2023 2 minutes ago, LynxSolstice said: We weren't the first ones to shoot. As for the rule "quite literally" meaning breaking in using stealth is against the rules, then why is it not mentioned within the clarifications or the mercenary guide on the wiki? It just states "This means: no unmotivated/not roleplayed out mass murders, etcetera. See the rules below for further clarification." No where does it clearly explain the issue of stealth gimmicks, I'm just assumed to know that cracking the vault with my fellow mercenaries in a stealth-y way, and fortifying Ops is against the rules, and since I was unaware, I was punished with a permanent antagonist ban, with a minimal chance for appeal, if at all. It does cover this. For example, here. Stealth means no interaction.
LynxSolstice Posted August 17, 2023 Author Posted August 17, 2023 I still feel the permanent removal of my ability to even consider improving from this incident was entirely too heavy handed and restrictive, especially considering the fact that such an example wasn't specified anywhere, and that it was never brought up until the gimmick had finished.
Roostercat Posted August 17, 2023 Posted August 17, 2023 It wasnt brought up until it was finished because it hadn't happened to completion until it finished ie you had a chance to generate interaction. The permanent removal is not at all heavy handed and you have a massive history, including bans, regarding antag play. There isn't a rule for every single little thing that can happen in the rules, and as I've said multiple times, the rule you break falls under this one.
ReadThisNamePlz Posted August 24, 2023 Posted August 24, 2023 Hello! I apologize for the delay. We had to wait for the logs, and my classes just started up again. Lain and I will be sustaining the Antagonist ban. I personally found that what you did was entirely unacceptable, and with the rules straight up saying that you need to drive a story and interact with characters - I find it really hard to believe that you didn’t know. Regardless, you should make an unban appeal. locking and archiving soon.
Recommended Posts