Staff Complaint: Tainavaa and SierraKomodo

[Kaed]

BYOND Key: Kaedwuff

Staff BYOND Key: Tainavaa, SierraKomodo

Reason for complaint: This is both a complaint about the

Evidence/logs/etc:

Admin logs with Tainavaa

https://gyazo.com/fe9669fff4f1eccc80f80b56c90a0b0f

https://gyazo.com/3609bde948e06fc2a30cf702dbc3919a

https://gyazo.com/12d38c249b1dfc77d4c81b558241746b

Post-round comment by SierraKomodo: https://gyazo.com/8ef42cc0a7729b8cbf6f684edce133ee

Additional remarks: Rules against 'ganking' are usually created for the purpose of avoiding killing sprees or wordlessly removing someone from the round. Rigidly interpreting the concept of 'no ganking' to mean you are not allowed to do anything aggressive without stopping to roleplay a bit is an unreasonable expectation to hold upon players.

To clarify a little more, I had already been told by security twice that I needed to come with them because I did not have an ID. I had declined both times, and at that point, there was an active manhunt for me about to start, because I astral jaunted away twice. The head of security arrived, and I saw an opportunity to cause confusion by swapping places with them and arresting 'myself'. My reasoning at the time was there was an AI active, and security officers not far away. If I had stopped to talk to the arriving head of security, I would have been surrounded and rendered the ploy pointless. There is a time when one has to take action in order to further the round, and roleplay for the sake if it gets in the way of ones plans. Plenty of roleplay could have resulted from capturing the head of security in my former body, which is, after all, supposedly the point of a high roleplay server? What happened instead was the player immediately went SSD, and complained to administration.

Further, and the reason why Sierrakomodo is brought into this, is that while I do not have the privilege of being part of the staff team on this server, every other server I have been on staff with wished the administrative staff to maintain a level of professionalism, which includes not disclosing the details of administrative actions publicly, especially as a means of creating an ad hominem argument. If this is not the case here, I guess this part of the complaint can be disregarded.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

I believe that I was originally bucklecuffed into the chair, or table'd. The door was closed and Sierra silently pulled me out of the office, through the abandoned security area for quite a ways before we saw our first potential witnesses in the security lobby. She continued through the brig, down the hall, past medical's main entrance, and all the way to the staffed robotics lab. This is despite having the ability to use the short-cut through maintenance, which literally every other character used to get to/from security to that location. My character, a visitor whom was an Adhomai bureaucrat who boarded to try to gather employment records from Tajara for lore reasons, obviously started screaming for help and freaking out the moment they left the sp00ky office.

She had plenty of time to stop pulling me before anyone saw.

Later when the Head of Security bizarrely managed to get my character all the way back to security without incident, the borg played by Sierra opened the door to his office, making him and my character inside visible to the gang of security outside, to which my character started screaming and the situation looked mighty suspicious. Then in the middle of the screaming and arguing Sierra's borg randomly started harmbatonning my character and got shot the fuck up and dumped down disposals. By this time the whole plan by Keknar Kaedwuff had to be aborted(?) and my character was escorted to the transfer shuttle by Ana Ro'hi'tin without further incident.

Sierra's story seemed inconsistent and I feel that she attempted to try and keep me in the round, fearing that I would be murdered the moment her borg left to recharge.

 

Taken from the complaint on Sierra by same OP, since it's probably relevant to both instances.

In this I will expand on that OOC was a rather amusing circle of people going "SALT MINE WARNING LOL!!!!" and Tainavaa appeared to belittle and even condescend Keknar Kaedwuff for his discussion with Sierra-chan.

I was not present for the original bodyswapping and cannot comment on that instance; I wasn't even aware the round had been wizard. Apparently Keknar Kaedwuff nailed down the HoS' personality pretty well.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Marlon Phoenix

[Kaed]

As a small note, I'm 'Kaedwuff' on server, 'keknar' is someone else xD

[Garnascus]

Ill get to this when I get home from work in like two hours wish.

[SierraKomodo]

Further, and the reason why Sierrakomodo is brought into this, is that while I do not have the privilege of being part of the staff team on this server, every other server I have been on staff with wished the administrative staff to maintain a level of professionalism, which includes not disclosing the details of administrative actions publicly, especially as a means of creating an ad hominem argument. If this is not the case here, I guess this part of the complaint can be disregarded.

 

As a note, I do not have access to see asay, msay, or staff ahelps. I also do not have access to the server moderator or admin sections of the discord chat. I am a forum moderator and a duty officer (DO's get the lighter blue OOC color). I knew about what happened because I was told by the player over steam shortly after it occured that you jumped him less than a minute after he joined and mindswapped him without a word.

EDIT: Also meant to mention that as far as I'd known, until I saw this thread, nobody had even actually handled the issue. All I had gotten was a message from Tainavaa telling me he'd talk with you and firstact, then a few minutes later firstact telling me he was berated for it.

[Tainavaa]

In this I will expand on that OOC was a rather amusing circle of people going "SALT MINE WARNING LOL!!!!" and Tainavaa appeared to belittle and even condescend Keknar Kaedwuff for his discussion with Sierra-chan.

 

This couldn't be more wrong than if you told me 2 + 2 != 4. If you're going to make such a ridiculous claim, please have some sort of evidence to back that up.

To Kaedwulf:

I also did not disclose the administrative action publicly. The only reason people know what I said to you or did to you is because you posted it in this thread. Furthermore, what administrative action?

[Garnascus]

As sierra's part in this has been explained ill just focus on your complaint with tainavaa. Messing with people who have just come aboard is bad form and something we dont let people do. On top of this i watched them make it just past the security checkpoint when they met you and where instantly mindswapped. Yes it could have been interesting roleplay and a fun experience TO YOU. Gank rules exist for a reason and while you can try to justify it with what RP could have happened if he didn't rage quit, you still broke a clear server rule mate.

[Kaed]

As sierra's part in this has been explained ill just focus on your complaint with tainavaa. Messing with people who have just come aboard is bad form and something we dont let people do. On top of this i watched them make it just past the security checkpoint when they met you and where instantly mindswapped. Yes it could have been interesting roleplay and a fun experience TO YOU. Gank rules exist for a reason and while you can try to justify it with what RP could have happened if he didn't rage quit, you still broke a clear server rule mate.

 

... What is the reason gank rules exist, then? To blindly enforce that you stop and roleplay before taking any kind of hostile action? Even the rule itself that you mention specifically refers to 'removing people from the round'. Here, I'll even copy and paste it for you.

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. 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.)

You can't just take your own rules out of the provided context to protect the upset player who got mindswapped! If anything, they removed themselves from the round, not me, by refusing to participate after it happened. And telling me the roleplay wouldn't have been fun for them isn't an argument. Roleplay happens as long as characters are alive and in the round, whether the person involved in it enjoys the result, and that specific one involves more than an interaction between two people, the entirety of security was thereafter compromised because they bailed. The fact that they were capable of remaining in the round to have an impact on things is more important than whether they 'liked where it was going'. This isn't a hugbox, it's a high roleplay server. People should be able to deal with unpleasant things happening to their character and push forward.

[Garnascus]

Oh dont get me wrong, ideally the player would have just rolled with it. The player being upset or not is irrelevant here, if my connection and work wifi wasnt being so shit at the time i would have bwoinked you myself over this. You mindswapped a freshly spawned HoS without any RP. Our rules are pretty extensive and even still they are kinda barebones in some areas (and in the process of being tweaked, stay tuned). No we cant right every single situation into our rules so no it doesnt say "yo by the way mindswapping counts as gank". Even if i indulge in a semantic debate over the letter of the rules and even if i agree this isnt a "gank" its still hilariously awful.

You do not mind swap a freshly spawned head of security, thats really all there is to it mate.

[Tainavaa]

I'm also going to point out that I didn't reprimand you past saying "Hey. Don't let mindswap be the very first thing you do as a wizard."

It was a moderate nudge, and a stern - albeit brief - talking-to at worst.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Oh dont get me wrong, ideally the player would have just rolled with it.

If the player had rolled with it would that have not made it gank? Does rolling with it make it follow the rules? You probably don't intend it but that makes this a zillion times more complex, which is always a bad thing with fundamental rules of the server. "Killing someone without roleplay" has been how it has been defined on Aurora. If you're going to redefine it that's probably well within your bounds but you really need to do it in the actual rule page.

 

The player being upset or not is irrelevant here, if my connection and work wifi wasnt being so shit at the time i would have bwoinked you myself over this. You mindswapped a freshly spawned HoS without any RP.

The player immediately ghosted the instant he was mindswapped. RP was impossible. I don't understand how he could have better roleplayed because you do not stop to emote the entire third act of Hamlet when you're in the middle of a dangerous situation. In addition, we have no way to judge OP's intent because the player mindswapped acted a poor sport and ghosted. RP in the form of emotes not required to precede an action because the mechanic of the power is what creates the roleplay. For all we know he had 20 paragraphs of mind-swapping macros prepared for the swapped character. And this is also inconsistent - is it against the rules as a form of gank or is it allowed with RP? Can you target fresh spawns if you roleplay? If so, what is the minimum cool-down period protecting freshly spawned players and how many emotes are necessary to count as adequate rp?

 

No we cant right every single situation into our rules so no it doesnt say "yo by the way mindswapping counts as gank".

You're absolutely right it doesn't say mindswapping is gank. Because gank is defined as murder. If we expand the scope of gank to "anything an antagonist does that is sudden and I don't expect 10 hours in advance" we open a really dumb can of dumb worms and it sets a bad precedent. This is twisting a rule to include another rule that doesn't even exist and has never existed using an interpretation that the rule itself doesn't agree with.

 

You do not mind swap a freshly spawned head of security, thats really all there is to it mate [...] ideally the player would have just rolled with it [...] i'm a poopoo head.

Just once again clarifying the inconsistency in Garn's ruling. This is the original thing he said with no alterations added.

 

If you're going to make such a ridiculous claim, please have some sort of evidence to back that up.

 

Hey furriend all I said was you came off a bit condescending. I don't take screencaps everytime someone comes off a little snippy and I don't feel like pulling up logs just to point at a line or two and go "look how mean he was guys". I'll withdraw this aspect if OP isn't concerned with your OOC attitude but you can't tell me my interpretation of your attitude is wrong.

 

It was a moderate nudge, and a stern - albeit brief - talking-to at worst.

By using a wrong definition of a major server rule and by redefining the rule itself. It seems like a small step but it's incorrect and establishes a precedent for fundamental rules to be up entirely to the interpretation of the staff member in question no matter how bizarre or contrary to the meaning of the rule that it happens to be. If you BWOINK'd me with a warning on ERP because I gave someone a high-five because you think high-fiving is the height of erotica then it's just as wrong a ruling as the warning in this situation.

[Jennalele]

We have always given newly spawned characters a headstart to get their bearings. They are off-limits to syndie kidnappings and maulings, they are off limits to cortical borers, they are off limits to everyone else until they've gotten situated.

Now tell me again, why should we make an exception for a wizard that immediately jumped and mindswapped with a head of security? If that was any other type of antag, I guarantee you this could clearly be gank. It was round ending for that player. The RP after may very well have been good, great or terrible. The fact is, however, is that this was dickishly unfair to the player. Furthermore, I will fetch logs when I have time to sit down at my computer.

[Skull132]

Gank is defined as murder without roleplay.

Roleplay does not have to be with the victim specifically, unless your goal is to kill that victim. The rule about gank even has this little note in it:

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, etcetera).

 

If the wizard was indeed running from security, would the head of security not count as collateral damage? And at that point, would said collateral damage not be fer within the boundaries of acceptable?

Further. No rules exist that deny the targeting of newly arrived characters. Is it usually gank to straight up murder a new arrival for no good reason? Yes. Is it gank to purposefully make an arrival zone inaccessible for no good reason? Yes. (It exceeds the note I quoted above.)

Is it bad form? Eeeh, maybe. But there already exist a series of "Wrong place, wrong time," situations where wordless murder is permitted. (Sec officer walking up to a fully armed antag doing dubious things, for example.)

[Susan]

I was sec that round. He wasn't even that big of a deal to us - I just sat in the checkpoint. The wizard didn't even really do anything to earn being robusted. We didn't even know he had mindswapped the HoS, he was of that low-impact to the round.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

We have always given newly spawned characters a headstart to get their bearings. They are off-limits to syndie kidnappings and maulings, they are off limits to cortical borers, they are off limits to everyone else until they've gotten situotion.

 

That's a completely valid stance to make; however OP was warned with the wrong rule being cited.

 

Now tell me again, why should we make an exception for a wizard that immediately jumped and mindswapped with a head of security?

 

Whether or not the spirit of the rules is more important than the literal definition of the rules in terms of creating roleplay is probably not an argument we want to engage in here, especially since I'm not the OP complaining and am arguing the part of someone that was his major target later in the round and got a feel for his antaggy'ness.

If that was any other type of antag, I guarantee you this could clearly be gank.

If these antags killed him, yes. Otherwise it's only what you said before - unsportsmanship-y.

It was round ending for that player.

It was stated clearly that the player immediately ghosted and complained to dministration. The player took himself out of the round by his own free will and choice. If he had not done so, he would have remained in the round. This argument is incorrect.

The fact is, however, is that this was dickishly unfair to the player.

That is a better and separate argument than "it was gank". Gank is not the rule that was broken, but the unwritten rule of sportsmanship for fresh-spawns.

This argument is all I really have with what I've experienced from OP and my understanding of the rules so I think I can leave this for OP to settle unless someone needs more of my statements.

[Tainavaa]

Hey furriend all I said was you came off a bit condescending. I don't take screencaps everytime someone comes off a little snippy and I don't feel like pulling up logs just to point at a line or two and go "look how mean he was guys". I'll withdraw this aspect if OP isn't concerned with your OOC attitude but you can't tell me my interpretation of your attitude is wrong.

 

It is, though. My attitude isn't art.

 

By using a wrong definition of a major server rule and by redefining the rule itself. It seems like a small step but it's incorrect and establishes a precedent for fundamental rules to be up entirely to the interpretation of the staff member in question no matter how bizarre or contrary to the meaning of the rule that it happens to be. If you BWOINK'd me with a warning on ERP because I gave someone a high-five because you think high-fiving is the height of erotica then it's just as wrong a ruling as the warning in this situation.

 

Except we've gotten people before on forcing others into a state without due roleplay - and it wasn't me that got those people. If the admins are no longer happy with that being enforced then fine.

Also your anecdote is silly and unapplicable.

The one thing I did wrong here that I see, is that I didn't ask the wizard himself if anything happened with security beforehand. In retrospect, that wouldn't have changed much, my message to him would still be "Hey, don't let mindswap be the very first thing you do".

Oh, and the person I thought was being very unsportsmanlike was Firstact, not Kaedwuff. That's just my opinion though.

[Skull132]

Here's what I'm thinking at the moment. Regarding Sierra, they were not informed by staff of the action taken against you, if any. Only Moderators and Administrators have access to information concerning punishments, other than the involved parties. It should be noted that the reporting party is considered an involved party. However, staff are kept to a higher conduct standard, a point enforced in the complaint against SueTheCake. Because Sierra is effectively under my own direction (by the virtue of being a Forum Moderator), and under the direction of Gollee (by the virtue of being a Duty Officer), I'll have a quick word with him and see what we want to do about the passive-aggressive remarks he put up onto OOC.

Regarding the ruling of gank or no gank. Technically it is not gank (as gank is murder), but if such an action is done without roleplay preceding or roleplay involving the victim, it's just bad roleplay. As such, the way we determine whether or not it was gank/bad roleplay in this instance is to ask whether or not you had a valid roleplayed out reason to take the body of the Head of Security. Had it been your constant goal to take the body of the HoS to fuck with the sec team, then roleplay with the victim on some level, even if from other rounds, is expected. Though I'm more inclined to believe this to be a case of an opportunistic play, with the preceding roleplay with the sec team involved.

It is bad form to take the body of someone who just arrived, yes.

It is also bad form to just GTFO of a situation that is disadvantageous to you, and to quit the moment something like this happens. Actually, he didn't even adminhelp.

Also, no notes nor warnings were made on your record for this. Just as clarification. 2 cents from Kaed and also Firstact regarding what I said above, please?

[Shadow]

Dear Santa, please teach people how to lock and archive inactive complaints.

Locking and archiving.