Jump to content

[Resolved] TheDocOct, NurseKitty and player motivation


Recommended Posts

BYOND Key: FreshDriedChokie

Staff BYOND Key: TheDocOct, NurseKitty

Game ID: bQD-aTYD(?)

Reason for complaint: I'd like my last warning, and subsequent tempban as a result thereof, to be dropped.

Evidence/logs/etc:

 

[1]

Haley Mcfall says, "I'm not very trusting right now, and you're armed."

Haley Mcfall buckles themselves to the steel chair.

Steven Stanley says, "Wow, what a bunch of characters."

Max Kolt buckles themselves to the steel chair.

Haley Mcfall says, "If I don't see another shift like this for twenty years I'll be good."

Frederic Scorpius says, "Bitch."

Haley Mcfall unbuckled themselves!

[Common] Jackson Lee says, "Medical to surface. zeke max sensors"

Alissa Kihrbusihr finishes eating the dried banana.

Joe Decker says, "Shifts like this and we'll be lucky to live that long."

Alissa Kihrbusihr buckles themselves to the steel chair.

Haley Mcfall asks, "Do I know you?"

Jack Edwardson unbuckled themselves!

Haley Mcfall says, "God damn it it's the alien."

Max Kolt unbuckled themselves!

Joe Decker says, "Sir, go sit your ass down."

Haley Mcfall says, "KILL IT"

 

[2]

[Trial Moderator PM] TheDocOct: Hey there. Can I ask why you murdered that man, and then proceeded to hit other people on the shuttle?

 

[3]

Doc said he was some kind of alien, we didn't want to take chances. In character, I figure ol' Decker is unhinged after the fuckup on the station. He told the doc to sit down and he didn't. So he hit him and ran to the safety of the security room.

 

(The moderator didn't find this sufficient and our conversation continued:)

[Trial Moderator PM] TheDocOct: Simply being told that someone is 'an alien' isn't sufficient enough to start a group murder (regardless of wether the information was correct).

I don't think that's taking into account the mental state of the character. I mean, Decker's seen some shit today. And almost gotten killed three times trying to escape the station. He's not taking chances at this point, y'know?

[Trial Moderator PM] TheDocOct: That would be understandable if you had any other proof besides simply being told that they were a changeling. At the very least, you should have treated them with extreme suspicion rather than going straight to murder- moving across the shuttle, warning other people to stay away from them, but not going immediately to beating them to death.

I mean, a more composed person would have. But Decker isn't composed. Like the captain said, that's why he's a detective an not a captain. He goes with his gut, and follows his instincts, flawed and aggressive as they may be sometimes.

[Trial Moderator PM] TheDocOct: You simply didn't have enough evidence to justify exitting the sealed, protected room you were in to physically approach and attack this person you were only told /might/ be a changeling. You left the safety of the sealed airlock and fellow officers to beat them to death over an allegation, and that's just not reasonable.

I see your point, but again: Decker is not reasonable. He punched a cuffed man who tried to kill him. He argued with the Captain and the arresting officer. And he just spent the last shift trying to not be murdered by bears and psychopaths. I mean, Haley helped him and Kolt out, and if she says someone's an alien and a threat to the shuttle, he's gonna act on it. Really, you could ask these questions of any of us, but I knew what I was doing when I did it

 

Additional remarks:

Witness parties: Max Kolt, Haley Mcfall

End of round on the emergency shuttle. I was detective, and had been almost murdered by a crew member (who was not detained) and the rogue AI on station. The witness parties and I had been helping one another to escape the station. We were in the security room aboard the shuttle when a gentleman (Reiner Trovato ) approaches the door and: [1]


Max Kolt and the doctor proceeded out of the security room and I followed. I attempted to address Scorpius but he moved to evade. I hit him to stop him and he persisted. After that, both the doctor and Kolt joined in and began hitting him. And we killed him. My reasoning was that, given the tenuous circumstances of our escape (and the complete decimation of security personnel by the AI; as Kolt and I were the only survivors), that Decker was not willing to take a chance and trusted the doctor's judgment that he was a threat. When civilians moved to stop us, I struck them with a warning blow before retreating to the safety of the security room, not sure if they were hostile as well. I then received the following from the trial moderator: [2]


To which I replied: [3]


I then received a warning from said administrator on this subject.


I believe the warning was completely unjustified. I understand the sentiment, but how exactly can you police the "reasonability" of player characters' actions in increasingly stressful situations? I could understand his warning had this event occurred without context, earlier in the round when a present threat was not a concern to me or the lives of the crew. But this was after a rogue AI was running rampant, after a psychiatrist attempted to murder me, and after we had to call in an evac shuttle.


And furthermore, how can you decide for player the mental state of their own character? If my character does not act outside of the scope of their predefined characterstics (as I'd already demonstrated my unreasonability in attacking the man who tried to kill me), and doesn't break the rules (as I did not attempt to metagame by assuming fault until it was clear to me that he was a threat), than how can the admin decide what is "reasonable" for my character?


Honestly, I would have written it off and not given a shit if it had ended at this. But an attempt to reply further to the admin and contest the warning was met by another mod who informed me of my temp ban.

[secondary Admin PM] NursieKitty: it's not about player agency. the server has rules that are to be followed, and given that you have a history of events like this, i'm applying a short ban.

No rules were cited that I had broken. And my "past events" were already punished with a previous temp ban. Which I had taken seriously and resolved to change my behavior. This warning I'm contesting is the only warning I've received since that previous ban.


So I know this is a wall of text and probably gonna get swept under the rug, but I don't feel my behavior justified a warning, much less a ban. And I do not believe the behavior of my companions was met with the same degree of skepticism and reprimand. I'd like this reviewed and, if you all deem it possible, the warning and the tempban removed.


Not counting on it, though, honestly.

Link to comment

To be clear, here is the rule the OP broke when they continued to argue with staff about their warning after the server REBOOTED, I was a witness to that.

 

All staff ingame decisions are final. OOC and adminhelp aren't the place to argue about our staff's decisions. If you'd like to contest a punishment, rule, or actions from a staffmember, start a discussion thread in the appropriate subsection of our forums, either Unban Requests, Staff Complaints, or General Discussion (for discussing specific rules).

 

Nursie applied the tempary ban over the OPs continued argument over the warning with the Trial Mod TheDocOct.


Secondly, I was the malfunctioning AI during that round and I have not witnessed the fight at all and I turned off my attack logs to cut me off as much as possible from meta information that comes with staff permissions.

Link to comment

Well it didn't matter to my character's motivations after fighting off bears for half the round. Not to mention the psych (who I can only assume was an antagonist) who tried to kill me midround.


Nurse didn't state that was the reason for the ban. And I was given no pretense for the warning before it happened. We were talking, I was explaining myself (which unfortunately carried on past the end of round). In fact, it was only until my last message before ban that the trial mod directed me to the forums. And my response that I would be pursuing this further on the forums was met with the ban.


It clearly seemed to me that Nurse knew nothing of the situation, looked at my past warnings, and assumed I was due for some kind of ban.

Link to comment

And furthermore, how can you decide for player the mental state of their own character? If my character does not act outside of the scope of their predefined characterstics (as I'd already demonstrated my unreasonability in attacking the man who tried to kill me), and doesn't break the rules (as I did not attempt to metagame by assuming fault until it was clear to me that he was a threat), than how can the admin decide what is "reasonable" for my character?

 

To leave judging what is reasonable or not out of admin/moderator hands and solely in player hands is a very slippery slope. It's essentially asking for trouble.


And it seems to me the situation was like this:

  • Person (whom you trust or not, doesn't matter that much) states a person is something hostile.
  • Verbally stating (you or someone in the group) you are going to kill it.
  • It moves away.
  • It keeps trying to move away when getting attacked.
  • It ends up getting killed.
  • People around challenge you on killing it.
  • You use violence to respond and then flee.

 

Frankly anyone reasonable would act in the way it and the people around did. I can understand the IC reason of being "overly cautious and PTSD:d", but allowing that as justification would just open a floodgate of people skirting that line in horrible ways.

Link to comment

And it seems to me the situation was like this:

Person (whom you trust or not, doesn't matter that much) states a person is something hostile.

Verbally stating (you or someone in the group) you are going to kill it.

It moves away.

It keeps trying to move away when getting attacked.

It ends up getting killed.

People around challenge you on killing it.

You use violence to respond and then flee.

Frankly anyone reasonable would act in the way it and the people around did. I can understand the IC reason of being "overly cautious and PTSD:d", but allowing that as justification would just open a floodgate of people skirting that line in horrible ways.

I mean, I can understand the floodgate thought line.


EDIT: Although, I still say that there's equal danger in a mod who is not familiar with my character, has not played the round I played, has not been following my character through the circumstances which brought them to a particular situation, to be able to just decide my decisions were "unreasonable" and reprimand me.


I was quick to admit to the mod that I understood where he was coming from. But honestly these situations do not arrive often enough or have sufficient justification enough for this to be the new law of the land. I stated that in this particular situation, given the state of the station and the absence of all other security personnel, it seemed reasonable in my character's mind.


And yes, Nurse did tell me I was getting a ban before it happened. However, my conversation with the trial mod DocOct had no precursor to the warning. I was in the process of answering his questions and explaining myself and I received a warning.


Again, I'd have just let it be had it ended at the warning. An unfortunate circumstance that let to maybe pushing the line a bit. But the ban (for what some of you have assumed was "arguing with the mod", which I did not do, and which Nurse did not state as the reason for my ban) was absolutely unwarranted. And I fear there's a more dangerous slippery slope in the inconsistency in mod communication and the inevitable loop of bans a player with warnings is doomed to if just the mere fact that you've had discrepancies in the past is reason enough for ban.


I already served my time for those warnings. And the entire basis for this ban seems to be a warning which I was given no chance to appeal before both were already in place and on my record.

Link to comment

I believe the warning was completely unjustified. I understand the sentiment, but how exactly can you police the "reasonability" of player characters' actions in increasingly stressful situations? I could understand his warning had this event occurred without context, earlier in the round when a present threat was not a concern to me or the lives of the crew. But this was after a rogue AI was running rampant, after a psychiatrist attempted to murder me, and after we had to call in an evac shuttle.


And furthermore, how can you decide for player the mental state of their own character? If my character does not act outside of the scope of their predefined characterstics (as I'd already demonstrated my unreasonability in attacking the man who tried to kill me), and doesn't break the rules (as I did not attempt to metagame by assuming fault until it was clear to me that he was a threat), than how can the admin decide what is "reasonable" for my character?

 

The simple answer to this is that the reasonability of character actions will be policed when they break the rules.


Now, yes, this isn't an immediately obvious situation when it comes to escalation. With proper escalation, this certainly wouldn't have broken the rules, and this wouldn't have been an issue at all. However, here are the two main issues that caused me to come to the outcome I did:


1. You had not encountered this person (the victim) before. If you had, you mentioned no incident with them that would have caused you to be suspicious of them or given you any motivation to distrust them or believe they are a changeling. As a part of escalation, you're required to have some sort of interaction that leads you to conflict, and someone approaching the window of the security cell and being called out as a changeling with no proof or sign of hostility (no, an insult doesn't count) doesn't qualify.


2. You did not stop, or give the victim any chance to respond or react. Honestly, if you had gone out and whacked them once or twice, that might have been reasonable due to the circumstances of the round. However, you did not give them an opportunity to disengage, and, in fact, they actually appeared to be trying to get away from you as you chased them down the hall of the shuttle to continue beating them. In addition to the fact that you did not have sufficient escalation to initiate the fight, you also had no sufficient reasoning to continue the fight when you encountered essentially no resistance for a significant portion of it. I do not have logs available, but I also believe that they had tried to talk to you, asking you to stop, and that did not deter you either.


Given both of those circumstances, I chose to give you a warning. I'm sorry that you feel that this takes away your ability to play your character to the extent you want, but in this circumstance, the extent you played your character ended up breaking the rules based on what I saw and how the situation was explained.

Link to comment

I was not who gave you the warning, so I will be justifying the ban made on my part.


I was not involved disciplining your actions until thedococt's issue had been solved. Shortly after that happened, I witnessed you charging into a basketball court on Odin (where a visitor, an intern, and the changeling were playing basketball) and assaulting the changeling without hesitation or provocation, not attempting an arrest, but going straight to beating the changeling to a pulp.


This is in line with a history of behavior I've noticed in your player notes, and behavior I've seen from you in round. Namely, a ridiculously quick escalation to violence from you. This behavior is consistent, recent, and frankly, you don't seem to be learning from these incidents, despite multiple warnings and one other ban.


I feel that the most damning detail of this, however, is that this incident happened almost immediately after thedococt applied a warning to your account for an unreasonable escalation of violence against the changeling. To go and do the exact same thing after being given a warning for something is probably one of the worst conceivable ideas.


In short, you received a warning for behavior that you have a history of. You continued with this behavior after the warning and received a ban.

Link to comment

I was not involved disciplining your actions until thedococt's issue had been solved. Shortly after that happened, I witnessed you charging into a basketball court on Odin (where a visitor, an intern, and the changeling were playing basketball) and assaulting the changeling without hesitation or provocation, not attempting an arrest, but going straight to beating the changeling to a pulp.

 

Okay, this is fucking laughable. Honestly, I'm laughing right now.


You know why? That was NOT me. That was Max Kolt. And you know why I know that? Because he specifically told me after the fact that he ambushed the changeling in the basketball court. I, on the other hand, was hiding the security room onboard the shuttle (responding to DocOct's messages) until the end of round: 1) Because I was busy responding to the mod and 2) because I didn't want to get jumped by the changeling. I'm honestly stupefied that you, a mod, made a mistake like that. Given I assume you have the ability to follow players.

 

I feel that the most damning detail of this, however, is that this incident happened almost immediately after thedococt applied a warning to your account for an unreasonable escalation of violence against the changeling. To go and do the exact same thing after being given a warning for something is probably one of the worst conceivable ideas.

Well, whatdoyoufuckingknow. I was absolutely right. Your basis for banning me was wrong. Because if you go back and look in that game's logs, you'll see that was Max Kolt. NOT ME. Joe. Fucking. Decker.


And what makes this even more baffling, I might add, is that I touched base with Max after the fact to see if he'd been reprimanded for beating the changeling to death with me in the shuttle. And guess what, he wasn't. While I, Joe Fucking Decker, was trying to explain my reasoning to the mod, he didn't receive even a PM that whole time. And it was only after he attacked him in the basketball court that he got a mod PM.


Clearly, that business I said about a lack of mod communication and you blustering into the situation without knowing it or the parties involved was more true than even I realized.


EDIT: But please, let us brush past my point that mods without knowledge of the incidents they're intervening into will automatically assume that someone with warnings is at fault.


EDIT2: And if you need further proof, I was detective. I did not have privilege on my ID to open the shuttle security room. And once Max had left, I was effectively locked in there.

Link to comment

Thank you.


Honestly, I can understand and accept the warning at this point, given DocOct's rationale.


I apologize if I got heated, though.

 

Do you still wish to appeal the warning or would you like this thread locked and archived with the ban part of it being resolved.

Link to comment

Naw, just archive it.


No sense keeping this going.

 

Locking and archiving.


I'd like to apologize on behalf on the team regarding the ban. While this is not something that should happen, it does happen and we're glad you appealed it so we could correct the matter.

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