Jump to content


Guest Inside_Out_Starfish

Recommended Posts

BYOND Key: Inverted_Rectum

Total Ban Length: 3 days

Banning staff member's Key: Sierrakomodo

Reason of Ban: EOR grief

Reason for Appeal:

Despite my best efforts to forget the general drama centered around the server and enjoy myself, I have once again found myself on the recieving end of what I view as an unfair decision by a staff member.

The backstory is simple, I was playing a ridiculously incompetent traitor gimmick, I had been locked in one of Odin's holding cells. After announcing in LOOC I would do it, I blew up the window with C4. Nobody actually took damage from the explosion, as I had warned everyone I was about to do it in LOOC and set the charge to explode after 10 seconds. Regardless, I was banned for 3 days due to EOR grief.

I will now list the reasons as to why I think applying a ban for this "infraction" is wrong.

1. No player was ultimately "griefed" by my action, as reinforced windows are not a playable species. If anyone's round was somehow ruined by a reinforced window in Odin being broken, I invite them to speak out in this thread (Possibly so I can berate them due to the fact that a reinforced window being broken ruined their round).

2. There has been a general inconsistency when it comes to EOR. I will give two examples.

One, quite some time ago someone playing an ERT trooper with the codename "Dragon" shot me to death as a nuke OP after the shuttle had arrived, I Ahelped about the issue and the player was talked to rather than given a 3 day ban (From my understanding, correct me if Im wrong). This incident resulted in a player being taken out of the round, and no EOR grief bans being handed out.

Two, recently another player commited End Round Grief, they were not bwoinked by an admin while in the round and banned for three days, and were still not banned for EOR grief despite commiting EOR grief even after a complaint thread was made to report the issue. As far as I am aware, this incident lead to 2 people leaving the community and no EOR grief bans being handed out.

Based on these two examples of unpunished EOR grief, one of which resulted in a player being taken out of the round, another which resulted in two players being taken out of the community, I contest the decision to apply a ban to me for taking a reinforced window out of the round.

Link to comment

End of round grief is just that. Specially when we're discussing outright antagonist actions on central command. And while yes, I admit staff being at fault for the second incident, levying a single case for a concept which is enforced about 9 times out of 10 is erroneous, and would serve to create exceptions, instead of ensuring in the future lack thereof. Regarding the second incident, I remember the case, I think. But it was back in January/February? So I can't remember all details required.


-End-round grief is punishable by an automatic 3-day ban. The moment the shuttle docks with the station, all conflict is expected to end in and around the shuttle boarding area. (Escape and adjacent corridor).
With Central Command being considered attached to the escape shuttle, due to it existing as a very minimal part during the original conception of the rule.

As I was also informed, you undertook the actions after a delay. This is very ill-advised, and more often than not, while staff are managing the initial issue, any other violators of the rule are immediately jumped upon. This is due to instances where a single issue can generate further issues that require action, thus making the delay last longer. Whereas the staff objective during a delayed round end is to resolve all problems efficiently, and proceed unto the next round.

Link to comment
End of round grief is just that.


Seeing as "Grief" is a newfangled word, in the context we're using it in it's somewhat hard to find a reputable dictionary definition on what constitutes as grief, I looked through the first page of google and found out that while the definitions are varied, most of them seem to address a central problem inherent to griefing - spoiling the game for other players, removing their enjoyment etc etc.

Now, my point here is that unlike a cargo technician, for example - a reinforced window is not a playable character unless previously posseded by an admin (And I do not believe this one was). Thus, since the reinforced window was the only thing damaged or destroyed in the accident, and the reinforced window is definitely not a sentient being (it is an inanimate object, well a simulation of an inanimate object.) there was no grief occuring from its destruction seeing as it did not lead to any players being taken out of the round or the undergoing roleplay. The crime in question was a window being broken.

Try as I might, I cant remember any player damaged by the broken window, taken out of the round by the broken window, enraged by the broken window. I can not see how the broken window would have a long lasting negative effect on the server or the community.

Windows break all the time, and a ban was handed out for every single time a window breaks, this server wouldnt exist.

In summary;

You went against public opinion and let someone guilty of EOR grief which lead to two players no longer wanting to associate themselves with the community off the hook because the someone in question is your friend, but you are willing to defend a ban for a broken window as a necessity to keep the peace.

I disagree with that.

Link to comment

Right, my opinion is:

Rules are rules, yes, but from an outsider perspective (as in, not personally involved with this), banning someone for 3 days after they break a window after round end is a shit move, and pretty much everyone will agree so. If Rectum was chosen as an example, I still think he was the wrong one, as one of the people who genuinely cares about RPing and Aurora, has been forced to take a time out for a bogus reason. A warning would've sufficed.

Link to comment

Ban lifted.

While it is noted that the conclusion of all conflict is expected during the end of the round, the actions do not fall in line with the definition of grief, as written into the rules, and did not cause larger issues. A warning would have sufficed, as commented by other admins upon reviewing the matter. The ban was placed by a Trial Moderator under circumstances when higher ranking staff were preoccupied with other matters. Such action goes counter to the guidelines of a Trial Moderator: all bans must be affirmed by an Admin, or in the case where none are present, a senior Moderator.

We apologize for the inconvenience, and the brash actions of our staff.

And as a general note, retroactively enforcing 3 day bans is not something we're inclined to do. Unless it's a chain of similar events that have been let slip for one reason or another.

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