Guest Posted June 12, 2015 Posted June 12, 2015 No I am not making a third whitelist reapplication. BYOND Key: oneonethreeeight Total Ban Length: Indefinite Banning staff member's Key: Skull132 Reason of Ban: Banned from Syndicate - Ban applied to curb an attitude of arrogance and the resulting gameplay effects (powergaming, antag hunting, etcetera). [Edt. note - Whitelist also stripped.] Reason for Appeal: http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2397&start=20#p23767 This complaint, and this complaint alone, was the result of both my antag ban as well as my second whitelist stripping. I've attempted to communicate many times with staff already regarding other resolutions. They've refused to respond or comment any further, claiming it 'was up in the air for review.' I've prodded more than a few times and I've even gotten a 'Huh? I wasn't told of this' by other staff already. First off, how is negligent use of a bomb and blitzing the station powergaming? I made a mistake regarding the placement of the bomb and I wasn't aware the bomb itself was nearly max yield. It did more damage than I was anticipating. Secondly, antaghunting. I'd like instances of these events as well as player complaints backing up these 'issues'. Oh wait, there are no player complaints of this. I'm not an antaghunter. I do not actively search for reasons to shoot the literal fuck out of nukeops because muh valids. The only time I ever engage antags with respective or equivalent behavior is when they display clear hostility to me first. Thirdly. Et cetera? Really? Putting that into a ban reason in itself displays laziness and a lack of desire to put effort into elaborating further on what I actually did. Fourthly. It was never communicated to me after Baka discussed a 'resolution' that my whitelist would be stripped. The punishment was a week-long antagonist ban. There was nothing that suggested 'Oh, but we might change our minds and slap on more punishments because of this instance.' And finally, regarding arrogance. The antagonist ban was not for the neglected placement of that bomb. It was for me, in bad judgement and faith, taunting the people I had killed over deadchat (the intent was not actually serious and I didn't care that I 'robusted' them at all, nor was it my intent to piss them off, but people get offended over many things, so I cannot blame anyone for it). Okay, so how does this affect my head of staff play, exactly? Where are all of the complaints against me as a head of staff? I was given an ultimatum (Worded as, "You can either choose one of the two or come up with some equivalent resolution yourself. But you have to decide now, there's no 'I'll think about it'.") by none other than Skull, shortly after I was discussing whatever with him regarding development ideas/input. He told me I had either one of two choices. Either I were to tank an entire month's worth of a blanket ban from the server (because of one instance of me being a shit and not recognizing that I was crossing the line ONCE that clearly will repeat itself and that automatically makes me a poor addition to the community and completely undeserving of even staying, okay.), or I would tank an indefinite (it was worded permanently) antagonist ban as well as another whitelist stripping. Out of respect for the man, I restrained myself from calling him out on it. It was a very "my way or the high-way" and hamfisted method of operation.
Frances Posted June 12, 2015 Posted June 12, 2015 I was given an ultimatum (Worded as, "You can either choose one of the two or come up with some equivalent resolution yourself. But you have to decide now, there's no 'I'll think about it'.") by none other than Skull, shortly after I was discussing whatever with him regarding development ideas/input. He told me I had either one of two choices. Either I were to tank an entire month's worth of a blanket ban from the server (because of one instance of me being a shit and not recognizing that I was crossing the line ONCE that clearly will repeat itself and that automatically makes me a poor addition to the community and completely undeserving of even staying, okay.), or I would tank an indefinite (it was worded permanently) antagonist ban as well as another whitelist stripping. wut
Jamini Posted June 12, 2015 Posted June 12, 2015 Right, uh... Well. To start, I was the person who put up the initial complaint about Delta in that instance. A few of the reasons I was putting forth the complaint was, as noted by me near the end of the complaint, due to misinterpretation and misunderstanding between myself and the events. While I didn't outright object to the antagonist ban at the time (And I still don't really.) I do kind of feel, at least personally, that he's had enough time out from playing antagonists and head roles. Has he changed? No. Delta is still who he is. Change doesn't happen in a day, a week, or even a month. At his core Delta is who he is, and trying to force change from our position on him would be absurd. Any person who expects radical change from punishment like this at the core of a player is deluded. What I will argue that his time off has given him more perspective, and maybe helped delta realize how his actions as antagonist and command impact others. He has gotten to see the impact that captains and command staff, good and bad, can have on the round, and he has gotten to experience antags very much from a position where he was completely prohibited from joining them. In the time since Vira has been acting as a wonderful and reliable warden. And I personally feel that enough is enough. I say Let Delta have his antag and whitelist back. Please.
Skull132 Posted June 13, 2015 Posted June 13, 2015 Since I was the banning admin, I'll leave the decision for someone else to make. Also considering my present leave, it'll probably be faster this way. The effectiveness of a move like this depends very much on the person in question. This was moreso about resolving conflict. When a person needs to be pulled down from a, "I am holier than thou!" (specially when they are plain and simple in the wrong, but continue to aggressively defend the point regardless) attitude when a legitimate issue exists, then their wings probably do deserve to be clipped. This appeal is actually amazing illustration of this. And yes, I know that you tried to contact me personally about it, and I never did get a reply back due to being busy. Ultimately, though, the ban may be worth lifting. If only for the simple reason that it didn't really have any effect. Maybe we'll take a step back, and see about approaching this another way. And, I say "maybe" mostly because I am on vacation, and my contact with staff is minimal, so I have no clue as to what they're thinking is on this.
Guest Posted June 13, 2015 Posted June 13, 2015 Okay apparently I didn't outline that I was completely wrong for taunting people like I should've. I apologize for that. Arrogance? I don't know. I don't think I'm arrogant, but I'm going to apologize for it anyway. I think I've finally realized that my actions have a more profound effect on people than for others, and I really need to be careful on how I approach things. I should've been more patient but I'm frustrated about this whole ordeal, and not just at you folks. I'm equally as tired of how I react to things sometimes, and I'm working on cutting down on impulse and more on thinking before doing anything. I should've been more patient with Skull, as well, given that he'll be busy for another week or so, give or take any other complications. For what little it's worth anymore as I've said it multiple times and I'm sure people are getting tired of it, I'm sorry.
Skull132 Posted June 13, 2015 Posted June 13, 2015 It's not really a point of asking for patience -- I know you asked twice, I arranged my head and actions in a manner which didn't get you an answer. I cannot expect someone to wait indefinately, and everyone has the right to request their bans be lifted, unless outright barred (a limitation that I never outlined for you, as such, is not applicable to you). What is written above are my thoughts on the matter, as the administrator managing it, outlining both the intended effect, and the situation at the time. We'll see what the others think and move on from there.
Frances Posted June 13, 2015 Posted June 13, 2015 I mean, if Delta's happy, and everyone is happy, then so be it. Delta's admitted (even to me) that he has issues with temper and I can see poor antag play combined with a poor attitude towards players culminating in an antag ban, and opening the door for a possible appeal/discussion later on (which we're at, here). Don't get me wrong, I think the main focus of this appeal (as Skull intended) should be on the behavior Delta displayed (maybe being dismissive, or rude to others at time). However, call me a concerned onlooker, but there's a few minor things that bug me about the way this has been handled (which doesn't mean we should ignore the reason the ban is here and what there is to discuss. Yeah.) The head whitelist ban hasn't been explained. There might be a good reason for it to have been put in place, but if so I'd like to hear about it, because I can only think of bad ones atm. Giving a misbehaving player an ultimatum, specifically in the case where both suggested options appear to be arbitrary punishments. Like "would you rather be globalbanned for a month or antagbanned forever?" What purporse does this serve, exactly? It's not the first time I've seen staff do this and I'm honestly confused by it. So yeah, these two things. They're not quite the focus of the issue, but they're not minor either in my eyes.
Guest Posted June 14, 2015 Posted June 14, 2015 Is this a whitelist ban appeal and antag, or just antag? I was always under the impression that whitelist revocation required a reapplication, as that is what I've had to see people do when they had all Head positions revoked.
TishinaStalker Posted June 14, 2015 Posted June 14, 2015 Antag. It was a whitelist strip, not a head of staff ban. Head of staff ban = appeal. Whitelist strip = reapplication required
Skull132 Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 The way I perceive it. This is mostly for FFrances. If an individual has issues along these lines, then one way attempt to counter is to remove their ability to play any roles of authority. Force them to be in positions that are lower in the foodchain to see if an understanding of humility can help (because, part of the issue here is the lack of humility). The second preferred alternative was to give him a time out to cool off and think about it, specially considering a few factors that were raised to me that I would rather not levy here, out of respect for the man in question. And for point two, if you imagine me as rolling up and going all, "Yo dawg, you're banned," then you're grossly mistaken. There was a 3 hour (if memory serves, anyways) discussion between myself and Delta, ending with the decision. You know how I work: identify an issue, raise the issue, discuss the issue, review potential solutions (in this case three), pick one and execute. Then run adjustment and re-engage as necessary.
Guest Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 I would prefer you raise the new factors in question, please. Respect or no. Point two, well, would you like another discussion to see if anything's adjusted?
Skull132 Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Well, you said you had stress from real life sources if memory serves. Hence the effective break offer until that subsides. But, anyways. I'll go batting this over the heads of the admins, get their opinion, as discussed with you today.
Guest Posted June 25, 2015 Posted June 25, 2015 Hi, it's been a week. Any updates on my antag ban appeal?
Guest Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 It's been 12 days. Can I ask what the hold up is for?
Guest Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 Apologies for the delay in response, the reason for it was lack in communication and irl things on most of the staff. Last time we spoke about your antag appeal the staff came to the conclusion that since you had recently got your whitelist back, we wanted you to take time to ease into the heavy round influencing roles. The original reason of 'to help reduce an arrogant attitude' would most likely have been for nothing from of the impact of getting everything you want at once. However the amount of time that was mentioned to see for review has past, I'll collect the staff opinions again and have an answer for you in 24 hours.
Guest Posted July 2, 2015 Posted July 2, 2015 Now the server crash is out of the way, I have not received any negative comments about this app. Application Accepted.
Recommended Posts