Bath Salts Addict Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 BYOND Key: Bath Salts Addict Staff BYOND Key: Alberyk Game ID: Slipped my mind. Reason for complaint: It was a Revolution round, I was playing a security officer and the Captain was reprimanding another misbehaving security officer for an unrelated incident. In the middle of talking, the character of SovietCyanide/Theplahunter, who was a bartender and a rev walked into the lobby in full disguised and performed a botched firebombing attempt with a molotov before fleeing. I and another officer chase him down, and we find him to have mysteriously disappeared. If he had kept running south, he would have left the door open as we were practically right behind him. Already suspecting the bartender in my mind for his readily-available access to whiskey and rags as well as a convenient welding tank in the maintenance tunnel outside his bar that he has access to, I quickly run to the bar to see that he's conspicuously absent. With nothing found in the library, I get the idea to check the bathroom as the next most logical and isolated location to hide. Sure enough, I waltz into the bathroom and spot the bartender shoving clothes into his bag. For a brief moment, he looks (or uses examine) on me and I attempt to type something out before he suddenly runs out the other door, closing it behind him to slow me down as he clearly attempts to run away from me. I manage to tase him until he collapses outside the kitchen and arrest him, whereupon LOOC is immediately salted with claims of metagame as I drag him to the Brig and search him, finding a stash of molotovs and the same identifiable clothes I found him putting in his bag that he had used as a disguise (owl mask, psychedelic jumpsuit, I think a top hat). When the Warden puts him away, I am bwoinked by Alberyk (the exchange of which is posted below). After a circular exchange of points both sides find full of holes and flimsy, he suddenly closes the ticket without another word, so I'm thinking it's a-okay. To preface this next encounter, I have either misjudged the importance of skills that allow a character to perform certain actions beyond their occupation/department, or staff do not have a solid consensus on what is agreeable or what leeway picking certain skills even allow. I had an earlier encounter with Tishina who gave me a warning for deconstructing a wall as a detective. Her point was that as a character with no skill points allocated in construction, I was not allowed to do this. Fair enough. I had a later encounter with another moderator who's name escapes me who had asked why I, as a detective, would be able to use the cyborg control console. I argued that my character had skillpoints allocated in amateur IT, as his position as a detective requires him to be able to understand the basics of computer systems in the event an investigation requires him to actually interact with those things, and not get easily fooled by someone with some fancy techno-babble. This was deemed agreeable, and the issue was dropped. A little while later, the Brig is bombed and under siege by angry Revs, and I am recovering from an earlier attack. I head into RnD through a broken window and begin printing off nanopaste, which is something I have done multiple times in the past when there is a time of crisis and no one in RnD is available even in the presence of staff who did not bat an eyelash once. I am contacted by Exia who asks why I am printing nanopaste, and I explain that I have done this multiple times in the past with little issue, and if it helps that my character has amateur IT skills for the reasons I mentioned above. Exia says that, in their opinion, using the RnD console to print things would be both IT and complex devices. I don't really understand why that would be if I wasn't using the destructive analyzer or circuit imprinter and just the protolathe (which, in reality, would be just the same as an autolathe but, as the name implies, for prototype objects. Some servers even allow you to interface directly with the protolathe but that's neither here nor there). Regardless, I concede to Exia's point of view and promise not to use the protolathe to make nanopaste. If I am correct, not even a note was placed by Exia. Much later, I am bwoinked again by Alberyk who takes it upon himself to, based upon my previous encounter with Exia, place a permanent ban that he refused to allow me to attempt to reason with him. Evidence/logs/etc: The First Confrontation Alb starts off innocently enough. I explain my reasoning the best I can while the station falls to pieces around me. Alberyk explains his point of view, disregarding the fact that my character is entitled to hold his suspicions and that the bartender had indirectly been found linked to the crime and tried to run from an authority figure that just tried to talk to him. I doubledown on my earlier point. He ran from me. Alberyk seems to imply that because it was code green, despite an attempt on the Captain's life during a period of burgeoning unrest, I should have stopped and kept trying to talk to a fleeing suspect who was clearly luring me into a trap. (It did indeed turn out to be a trap because I was attacked by the botanist while I was arresting him) Pretty self-explanatory. Alberyk goes in swinging and goes on to make a point about the notes I've acquired over, what? 2-3 years of playing on the server? I'll need a raincheck on that one. By the by, I counted. Out of all my notes, warnings and bans tallied together excluding the two that are involved with my ban, only 6 are pertaining to behavior deemed powergamey. I plead my original reasoning again, not knowing else to really say in response, for fear of making him think I'm shitting in his cornflakes. Alberyk doubles back yet again. I point out my disbelief that a bartender would just randomly hand out full bottles of alcohol to anyone. Alberyk goes on to explain multiple ways of acquiring molotovs that would require jumping through a whole lot of unnecessary hoops just to make a molotov when there would be easier ways to attack the Captain if they weren't a bartender, neglecting the fact that the bartender was indirectly linked to the crime and the primary suspect. I explain the fact that it would be utterly ridiculous and time-consuming to go through the process of acquiring materials for a firebomb unless the bomber in question was a bartender. Command break room? Really? And if cargo can order alcohol, wouldn't those crates be ID-locked anyways? Alberyk goes in circles. Again. I go back in circles too to explain my original point. He ran. To me, it seems like Alb is finally starting to see reason. Now we're getting somewhere, right? Uh. Okay. Without another word or anything, Alberyk closes the ticket, so I assume everything is a-okay. Now here's the kicker. Unbeknownst to myself, Alberyk had sent the bartender's player, Theplahunter/SovietCyanide, this little gem: This is what really started it all. In Theplahunter's revenge-lusted mind, he immediately ghosted and began following me around as I went about my business blissfully. Not even five seconds after I had printed myself some nanopaste had I received a bwoink from Exia, although the situation was handled nicely and to my knowledge not even a note was placed on my account. I unfortunately did not think to screencap my conversation with Exia, so if someone could be a dear and get those logs, that'd be swell. The Second Confrontation. Alb talks to me again, mentioning our previous encounter. I am assuming at this point that he had suddenly came up with some sort of judgment or verdict, since the last ticket was abruptly closed. This is the last image I have aside from my ban, as either I forgot to screencap what Alberyk said and what I said in reply, or I did and it didn't upload to imgur and is now stuck behind a Gyazo paywall. The ban in question. Nanopaste. His focus was on powergaming as that gave him a better leg to stand than metagaming, which is arguably what went wrong with my previous arrest of the bartender (which I still heavily contest that I was in the right for) This is the bwoink logs of the first interaction in full. - Aboshehab/Sharp [06:04:48] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk->Bath Salts Addict: Hi, why did you arrest the bartender? [06:04:55] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk: Sorry, dealing with something at the moment. [06:08:42] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict>Alberyk: Alright, so. [06:10:28] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk): The bartender disguised himself, ran to the Brig, and attempted to throw a molotov at the Captain and several officers. I chased him down the right hallway where he suddenly disappeared, not having gone into the library or maintenance. I already suspected the bartender since he has easy access to the materials necessary to make a molotov, so I went into the bathroom after I heard bag noises and found the bartender, who immediately started trying to hurry away from me, so I arrested him. [06:18:53] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk->Bath Salts Addict: Well, this seems really flimsy, bottles do exist anywhere else, as well bedsheets, and it looks like he was not even wearing the same thing and you ran right away at them stunning them [06:19:06] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk: Because he was trying to run. [06:19:21] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk->Bath Salts Addict): So, it was code green. [06:19:28] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict): Did you even say anything to them? [06:20:00] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): I tried to say something in the bathroom but he ran right on out of the door, so it looked like he was running. [06:20:09] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict: Okay, here is the deal, you have a lof of notes and warning, you do seems you only care about winning, and this is clearly the case, enough is enough [06:20:51] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): I mean, it was pretty obvious what he was doing. He tried to run. [06:21:10] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): I tried to talk to him, he ran without giving me a chance. [06:21:24] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict: AS I said, really flismy reasoning, anyone on the station could get their hands into it as well. [06:21:48] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): The bartender would just give them a full bottle of whiskey to do with as they please? [06:22:10] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict: Cargo, maintenance, command staff bar, the vending machine at the sec maint. [06:23:01] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): I don't think you can order alcohol from cargo, the command staff bar requires command-level access, of which someone possessing that access would not wordlessly molotov their direct superior, and the vending machine still requires bartender access unless it's hacked. [06:23:44] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict: My point still stands, however, you did not really even say he was under arrest and went stunning them just because you had some flismy reasoning, coupled with all of your notes and warnings, pretty much seems to be regular behavior [06:24:05] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): Again, I couldn't talk to him because he was running. [06:24:22] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict: Because, he did not know you were talking to them or something in this case? [06:24:48] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): We were the only ones in the bathroom. When I walked in, he even LOOKED AT ME when I started typing and then ran out the other door. This is the bwoink logs of the second interaction in full. - Aboshehab/Sharp [08:13:13] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk->Bath Salts Addict: Hi, remember what we did talk about before this round, your notes and warnings? [08:13:20] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk: I do. [08:13:42] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk->Bath Salts Addict: So, yeah, tishina was really clear on their warning, and yet, you did what exia did discuss with you, so, I am applying a ban here [08:14:30] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk: What warning did Tishina give me? About skillsets? Her basis was upon skillsets and what her idea of what deconstructing a wall was. Exia has their own opinion. [08:14:54] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: alberyk has edited bathsaltsaddict's notes. [08:14:54] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: alberyk has banned bathsaltsaddict. Reason: Managing the rd console, by printing nanopaste to heal himself. You have a lot of warnings and notes about powergaming behavior. This is a permanent ban. [08:14:54] bTy-aGFZ ACCESS: Logout: Bath Salts Addict I have a total of 62 notes (including warnings and bans) on my account, but Abosh was a dear and narrowed it down for me, showing me 47 of the notes that had "substance". Excluding the two notes (Alb's note about the last straw that I was never told about and my ban) that makes 45 notes. A fair amount in the 2-3 years I've been playing. I took the liberty of categorizing them from least to greatest and tallying them, as Alb's point seems to be a "large amount of notes regarding powergaming behavior". 14 notes are regarding questionable kills either as antagonist or non-antagonist. 12 notes are regarding memery, lowrp or generally poor play that doesn't directly involve taking someone out of a round. 6 of those notes are the "large amount" (mind you, this is notes, warnings and bans total) regarding powergamey behavior. 4 of those notes are regarding qualifications of another character of mine. 3 of those notes didn't really have anything I'd classify them as. 2 of those notes are for AFK'ing. 2 of those are regarding bug abuse. Additional remarks: I take issue with this because I personally feel Alberyk has some sort of personal vendetta against me. I don't know why, as I haven't done anything to purposely slight him in the past. Maybe it's because I told him I didn't like his events, because I and many others find them to be copypastes of previous events and way too focused on killing as many people as possible for the sake of memes, even going so far as to introduce specific things to make the event unplayable by certain species because, in his words, "IPCs ruin events". Maybe it's because he's insecure about his own robustness, as whenever "Noir", or "BSA" and "robust" are mentioned in the same breath, he jumps out of nowhere to exclaim how I'm not robust and gloats about some random incident or another. And now I highly suspect I'm the reason that he's gone on some personal crusade against IPCs, going so far as to talk about banning "shit whitelisters" on Discord and wiring together poorly-thought-out PRs introducing hinderances to IPCs even after the recent nerfs they received. The bottom line is that Alberyk, as a primary administrator, should have known better than to keep me out of the loop on some supposed "last straw", but tell some salty player about it and siccing him on a revenge-fueled rage, emboldened by the knowledge that I would be outright permanently banned. As stated before, I feel as if this situation was handled poorly and there was an extreme bias against me on Alberyk's part.
Faris Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 Just posting to say I'll be taking this. Stay on topic, this means that the posts should be constructive and focus on the complaint itself only. Any off-topic post made will be removed and met with a reminder to remain on topic. Only post if involved or you have something to contribute. If you are not a moderator or administrator and were not involved in the incident(s) referred to, you may not post or reply to a staff complaint regarding said incident(s). It is permissible, however, to provide testimony regarding a staff member's behavior backed by proof, in the form of screenshots or logs, or as a witness of some form that can (respectfully) verify/refute any claims made I will also heavily enforce these rules. This is the bwoink logs of the first interaction in full. [06:04:48] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk->Bath Salts Addict: Hi, why did you arrest the bartender? [06:04:55] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk: Sorry, dealing with something at the moment. [06:08:42] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict>Alberyk: Alright, so. [06:10:28] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk): The bartender disguised himself, ran to the Brig, and attempted to throw a molotov at the Captain and several officers. I chased him down the right hallway where he suddenly disappeared, not having gone into the library or maintenance. I already suspected the bartender since he has easy access to the materials necessary to make a molotov, so I went into the bathroom after I heard bag noises and found the bartender, who immediately started trying to hurry away from me, so I arrested him. [06:18:53] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk->Bath Salts Addict: Well, this seems really flimsy, bottles do exist anywhere else, as well bedsheets, and it looks like he was not even wearing the same thing and you ran right away at them stunning them [06:19:06] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk: Because he was trying to run. [06:19:21] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk->Bath Salts Addict): So, it was code green. [06:19:28] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict): Did you even say anything to them? [06:20:00] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): I tried to say something in the bathroom but he ran right on out of the door, so it looked like he was running. [06:20:09] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict: Okay, here is the deal, you have a lof of notes and warning, you do seems you only care about winning, and this is clearly the case, enough is enough [06:20:51] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): I mean, it was pretty obvious what he was doing. He tried to run. [06:21:10] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): I tried to talk to him, he ran without giving me a chance. [06:21:24] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict: AS I said, really flismy reasoning, anyone on the station could get their hands into it as well. [06:21:48] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): The bartender would just give them a full bottle of whiskey to do with as they please? [06:22:10] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict: Cargo, maintenance, command staff bar, the vending machine at the sec maint. [06:23:01] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): I don't think you can order alcohol from cargo, the command staff bar requires command-level access, of which someone possessing that access would not wordlessly molotov their direct superior, and the vending machine still requires bartender access unless it's hacked. [06:23:44] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict: My point still stands, however, you did not really even say he was under arrest and went stunning them just because you had some flismy reasoning, coupled with all of your notes and warnings, pretty much seems to be regular behavior [06:24:05] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): Again, I couldn't talk to him because he was running. [06:24:22] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk/(abstract mob)->Bath Salts Addict: Because, he did not know you were talking to them or something in this case? [06:24:48] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk/(abstract mob): We were the only ones in the bathroom. When I walked in, he even LOOKED AT ME when I started typing and then ran out the other door. This is the bwoink logs of the second interaction in full. [08:13:13] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk->Bath Salts Addict: Hi, remember what we did talk about before this round, your notes and warnings? [08:13:20] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk: I do. [08:13:42] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Alberyk->Bath Salts Addict: So, yeah, tishina was really clear on their warning, and yet, you did what exia did discuss with you, so, I am applying a ban here [08:14:30] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: PM: Bath Salts Addict->Alberyk: What warning did Tishina give me? About skillsets? Her basis was upon skillsets and what her idea of what deconstructing a wall was. Exia has their own opinion. [08:14:54] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: alberyk has edited bathsaltsaddict's notes. [08:14:54] bTy-aGFZ ADMIN: alberyk has banned bathsaltsaddict. Reason: Managing the rd console, by printing nanopaste to heal himself. You have a lot of warnings and notes about powergaming behavior. This is a permanent ban. [08:14:54] bTy-aGFZ ACCESS: Logout: Bath Salts Addict Edit 1: I added the full bwoink logs of the second interaction. Edit 2: I've added the logs for the first interaction to the main post. Will also include them here.
Jennalele Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 Hello. I'm the retired administrator that posted the screenshot from Alberyk to Plahunter, originally in a private conversation with BSA. My intentions and reasoning are as follows: - Alberyk did not inform BSA of this impending punishment. It is my understanding that we are supposed to communicate these sorts of things to players to stop them from happening again- not close their tickets wordlessly and wait for them to fuck up again. - It is also my understanding, as staff, that we are not supposed to tell other players what punishments are being handed out to others. With the exception of "yeah, that rando griefer isn't coming back, go cryo him," I have never seen us allowed to say things like this to other players, because this is what happens. My intentions were to warn BSA of the potential inbound punishment. In hindsight, I should have blacked out SC's name, but I didn't anticipate any of this. I frankly anticipated the warning to end there and go no further. I consider it rather unfair, as well, that the ultimate punishment was doled out for something that he (and many, many others) have done countless times. having been paying attention to deadchat, I can safely say that if SovietCyanide had not been persistently crying out over the matter, nothing would have come of it- and if Alberyk had not informed SC that BSA was about to be perma-banned, he wouldn't have been hounding him like a hawk.
Sytic Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 snip Pointing this out: The first original known time that the image about how Alb would ban BSA permanently on his next offence was posted by SovietCyanide or plahunter himself, publically, in general chat, on the discord. Images in question:
Scheveningen Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 - It is also my understanding, as staff, that we are not supposed to tell other players what punishments are being handed out to others. With the exception of "yeah, that rando griefer isn't coming back, go cryo him," I have never seen us allowed to say things like this to other players, because this is what happens. Only chipping in to say this: The last time I was staff, a part of a transparency movement was saying stuff like this to both the players we were passing judgement to and to other players in tickets to explain how it was resolved. It's regrettable that apparently Alberyk did not inform BSA of the former detail beforehand, but he probably didn't want an argument. There's no ethical problem about staff telling whoever they like about punishments dished out unless they feel it is courteous in the moment to do otherwise. While there is the concern of certain people making it everyone's business we hope that other players are courteous enough to keep it to themselves, because it's a significant breach of trust. The fact that staff are encouraged to tell people about the resolution goes to show they're willing to speak their mind and not have ulterior motives they're not saying. In regards to the player being banned, I'll say this. BSA is the one of the few reasons why lethal shotgun munitions were removed from the armory, and also the reason laser accuracy was nerfed, and the reason why the damage was nerfed, in addition to the laser rifle capacity being nerfed from 20 to 15, because of the style of BSA's play and their inherent individual influence on the security vs. antagonist dichotomy. There are plenty of other staff members who have felt the same in regards to being really tired of having to put up with BSA's powergaming and antagonist-hunting antics in the past. As far as "the past" goes, that's how it was. I'm sure in the present some things may have changed but in terms of a human factor focus, I'm guessing attitudes and beliefs do not change that much in a given period of time.
Theplahunter Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 Right, just to clear some things up here. A. Yes I did post that log between me and alb and that was a mistake. B. I was not the only person to ahelp you printing the nanopaste, infact Eab (teilyos) was the one who said it was against the rules in the first place and I ahelped as well as he did. C. I did not ghost to just follow you to get you in trouble, I was killed in the permabrig after assaulting talc when he was emped and killed by ODIN for continued assault. I did not just ghost to follow you, I was killed and my body was not recovered. Edit - bsa was also not the only one told about my ahelps against him by aimless. Dasfox was told also and personally pmed me and yelled at me over it, stating an anonymous staff member informed him/her. As well as aimlesses prior reactions to me, saying I was "that asshole" in ooc and icly falsely accusing me of holding contraband in my bag at the end of a round for no reason and confiscating my bag.
Bath Salts Addict Posted March 26, 2018 Author Posted March 26, 2018 B. I was not the only person to ahelp you printing the nanopaste, infact Eab (teilyos) was the one who said it was against the rules in the first place and I ahelped as well as he did. This is a blatant lie. Let me put on my detective cap to prove why that is. Yes, Eab did ahelp about the nanopaste, but never directed the ahelp in question towards me in particular. He simply ahelped to see if it was allowed to print nanopaste from RnD. From his own words, he did not get an answer. He was simply told that the "issue was being dealt with", implying that someone had ahelped prior to him. Who, I wonder?
Theplahunter Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 Is your arguements that I ahelped you and you got caught breaking rules, but supposedly I have a vendetta against you when this is the first time I've ever reported you or had friction with you so that makes the report of you rule breaking invalid? You're trying to make this an anti bsa conspiracy like I was following you, rubbing my hands together and twirling my comical moustache muttering "Oh he will powergame soon and then I'll report him to my associate alberyk and get him banned! Muahahahaha!" I was not following you to get you in trouble, I did not ghost just to stalk you. Eab brought it up in deadchat and I came over and found it to be sus so I reported it.
Alberyk Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 You were permabanned due to printint nanopaste, which was pretty much using the rd console, that is really something far beyond your character's skill and related job. Now, let us look at some of your notes, which are a lot; On the subject of ignoring character's skillset and behavior: Ban in 2018-02-08 20:17:16, which you were hacking an autolathe as the detective: aboshehab has banned bathsaltsaddict. - Reason: Used OOC reasoning to influence IC actions and knowledge by hacking an autolathe as a character that has no electrical knoweldge. You know better. - This will be removed in 4320 minutes. Warning in 2018-03-12, which is literally the same thing you did in this round: Warning by tishinastalker: Deconstructing walls as a detective with zero training in engineering skills. Stick to your skills and your department. Note in 2017-11-22 23:33:22 Had someone ion them as an IPC once to test out the EMP shielding of a vulcanite limb. Told to not play with ions for the sake of self-preservation. Now, on the matter of powergaming, playing to win; Warning in 2018-03-20 08:06:19 Warning by datberry: Headgibbing a dead and cuffed cultist only because their character had a few screws loose from a conversion, this isn't enough reason to be headgibbing people as a nonantag, especially that your IPC was acting mildly nuts most of the round, going to a headgib was quite extreme. Ban in 2017-11-08 Banned by cakeisossim from Head of Security, Warden, Detective, Forensic Technician, Security Officer, Security Cadet - Having a history of overescalation of headgoring, being warned for it, and then it happening again. Feel free to appeal this on the forums. Warning in 2017-10-28 04:48:47 Warning added by sircatnip, for: Executed a downed, and restrained Mercenary with a shotgun as a Detective and headgored them because his teammates were trying to rescue him and he "needed both his hands free" - Security absolutely shouldn't be executing suspects as non-antags, and even as a synthetic you're expected to play a sane and well rounded character, just run away or pull them, don't execute them because they might be freed. Calm down with all the headgoring.. || Notes regarding the warning: Doesn't seem to agree with the warning, but, apply a permanent secban if this kind of thing keeps happening. Security shouldn't be executing people because they're an inconvenience.. Note in 2017-10-25 12:35:54 Spoken to about stunning someone immediately after spotting them. Person was a suspected threat and carrying a chain sword on their belt. Apologized for jumping to stuns though they were alone. Warning in 2017-10-24 22:00:22 Warning added by superiorform, for: After being trapped in a room with a traitor (with good reason) and battoning them down (with good reason), picked up his esword and hit him three times with it, instead of just running, as assistant. Stuff like that is really unnecessary, and seems a bit validhunty. In future, run if you can.. || Notes regarding the warning: Didn't agree with it, but round end, we have to go. "Honestly, that's what happens when you risk attacking someone with an esword.". Anyway, those are some example, and this is a lot, people have been banned for less. You were banned, and warned, for ignoring your character's skills and job before, I find little issue in applying this ban when you did, a third time the same thing you were told more than once to do not, coupled with so many notes and warnings. Now, in the bartender's case, I did speak to garn and the team at time about it. We did find your reasoning flismy, and I did let you go without any punishment, until I did stop to read your notes, and saw more than 50 notres, and I did mark, that it was enough to put notes and warnings, a ban had to be applied. I do not have a bias against you. I do prod other people, I tell other people how they are unrobust, I make fun of them as well, all of this while joking with them, you are not special to me at the point I would get out of my way to mess with you. And the ipc pr is not even done, there is an entire disscussion with changes being done about it, and a I did few ipc changes, mostly bugfixins, when compared to devs like fowl or lohikar. I am sure I never said I would ban someone based on their ipc status, because I did not take in consideration you were an ipc when I banned you, just the fact you do have a lot of notes and warnings on rule breaking behavior and you did not change your ways.
Alberyk Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 Now, on the area of punishment; from the rules: There are different types of punishments staff may hand out, depending on the specific incident and severity of offense. •Verbal Warning/Warning: A warning is the lightest type of punishment we will dispense. Generally, this means you'll be informed of the rule you've broken, and we'll let you resume playing after you ensure us you won't break the rule again. •Jobban: A jobban will prevent you from selecting/playing a specific job on the pregame screen - jobbans are handed out for problematic behavior which is specific to a job. Note that if you're jobbanned from a job, you should not ask to be assigned to that job in game, as this might be seen as evasion and get you a ban. All attempts to evade a jobban (e.g. by multikeying) can result in a permanent ban being issued. •Temporary Ban: Temporary bans are handed out for situations where a single warning may not suffice, and will prevent you from playing the game on our server for a set amount of time (usually applied with lengths of 1, 3, and 7 days). All attempts to evade a temporary ban (e.g. by multikeying) will result in the ban being made permanent. •Permanent Ban: Permanent bans are issued in two general cases. First, to force communication with staff regarding an issue which was left unresolved, usually due to the player logging out mid-discussion. Second, as a final attempt to curb a player's behaviour, following warnings and temporary bans. There are notes about this behavior, which were explained above, there ares warnings about your behavior, which were explained above, there are jobbans and temporary bans, which were explained above. So, still, you did not change and your behavior was still an issue, so, I did follow this guidelines and applied a permaban. Now, this would surely be an unwarranted perma if there was a lack of precedents, which is not the case.
Evandorf Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 I was playing as Tokash, the warden this round. In regards to Theplahunter ghosting your actions I can say that he was active in communal for at least 20 - 25 minutes after he was processed. He and another prisoner who was processed after him gave me many IC headaches. Sorry if I posted this multiple times but my mobile wasn't working properly.
Theplahunter Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 And sytic can confirm he killed me (which was warranted) and aimless can confirm I assaulted talc because he got emped.
Sytic Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 And sytic can confirm he killed me (which was warranted) and aimless can confirm I assaulted talc because he got emped. Yeah, although I don't see how this matters.
Bath Salts Addict Posted March 27, 2018 Author Posted March 27, 2018 There are notes about this behavior, which were explained above, there ares warnings about your behavior, which were explained above, there are jobbans and temporary bans, which were explained above. So, still, you did not change and your behavior was still an issue, so, I did follow this guidelines and applied a permaban. Now, this would surely be an unwarranted perma if there was a lack of precedents, which is not the case. You say this, but this wasn't some permanent ban out of the blue after you've decided that enough was enough. You would've done that during the incident where you accused me of metagaming the bartender, but you didn't have a leg to stand on. Instead, you decided to go behind my back and place me on some arbitrary "final straw" that you did not even tell me about, but rather went ahead and told some random player who I had previously wronged in that round and was salty as a result. You knew outright banning me for the first incident would be questionable and more difficult to justify. You go on to talk about precedents and nitpick all of my notes and warnings to help you in your case, but I looked at my notes. As I said before, out of all my total notes, warnings, and bans, only six are ever for hard powergaming. You can go ahead and bloat the truth, and pick out little pieces for you to stand atop, but the truth is very few of my notes are ever for "powergaming". Do I have a lot of notes? Yes, I'll admit that. Are a majority of my notes for validhunty/questionable behavior when acquiring valids? Yes, I'll admit that, but in that regard I've certainly eased up quite a bit. But apparently that isn't good enough, and you'll jump down my throat for the second biggest perceived issue and press that instead. Is your arguements that I ahelped you and you got caught breaking rules, but supposedly I have a vendetta against you when this is the first time I've ever reported you or had friction with you so that makes the report of you rule breaking invalid? You're trying to make this an anti bsa conspiracy like I was following you, rubbing my hands together and twirling my comical moustache muttering "Oh he will powergame soon and then I'll report him to my associate alberyk and get him banned! Muahahahaha!" I was not following you to get you in trouble, I did not ghost just to stalk you. Eab brought it up in deadchat and I came over and found it to be sus so I reported it. And you did this with the full knowledge Alberyk confided in you (but, again, not me. Weird, huh?) that I would likely receive a permanent ban for even the smallest slight. Does this not seem a bit questionable to you? Even you yourself claim that I've done nothing prior to this incident to wrong you, but at the drop of a hat you'll practically rage at me in LOOC and even follow me around (after your character's death) as a ghost with your finger poised over the ahelp button (again, I'm calling bullshit on the idea that Eab ahelped before you did. In his words, someone else mentioned the situation well before he did). And yet because I slighted you just once, you went through all this trouble just to get revenge and now you're complaining about the treatment others are giving you.
Alberyk Posted March 27, 2018 Posted March 27, 2018 I would have applied a permaban anyway if the bartender's arrest did not happen, only based on the nanopaste case. I did decide that the arrest was not really an issue, so I did not really place a note, and then after reading fully your notes, noticing that after abo's ban, tishina and berry decided to apply a warning, where after a regular ban did not work in curbing your behavior, a perma or at least another temporary ban should have applied, so I noted that punishment should have been escalated if anything else was to happen, something that was done with other players before. Your ban was not only based on powergaming, but on the account of all rule breaking behavior, with such thing as bug abusing. The permaban was not out of nowhere, I just showed you were already warned and banned for similar behavior the past months, and as the rules on punishment dictates, if warnings and temporary bans do not solve the issue, a permaban is the next step. And no, I do not need to tell anyone that their next accident will result in a perma ban, mostly when there are already bans and warnings, the rules are clear on that.
Bath Salts Addict Posted March 28, 2018 Author Posted March 28, 2018 I would have applied a permaban anyway if the bartender's arrest did not happen, only based on the nanopaste case. I did decide that the arrest was not really an issue, so I did not really place a note, and then after reading fully your notes, noticing that after abo's ban, tishina and berry decided to apply a warning, where after a regular ban did not work in curbing your behavior, a perma or at least another temporary ban should have applied, so I noted that punishment should have been escalated if anything else was to happen, something that was done with other players before. Your ban was not only based on powergaming, but on the account of all rule breaking behavior, with such thing as bug abusing. The permaban was not out of nowhere, I just showed you were already warned and banned for similar behavior the past months, and as the rules on punishment dictates, if warnings and temporary bans do not solve the issue, a permaban is the next step. And no, I do not need to tell anyone that their next accident will result in a perma ban, mostly when there are already bans and warnings, the rules are clear on that. So to break this one down... [*]The bartender incident was deemed a non-issue, so out of the blue you decided to take a look at my notes and without ever really bringing it up with anyone (except Theplahunter) and ignoring the fact that multiple people before you have read those notes, you decided to place me on that arbitrary "last straw" that acted as the catalyst for everything that happened. [*]After my talk with Exia concerning something I was not doing out of maliciousness but rather a misunderstanding of what skills operating the RnD console fell under, when it was likely deemed a non-issue by they themself, you decided to swoop in and apply a permanent ban, thus disregarding the decision of a subordinate moderator who most likely read the note you placed and, again, saw the situation as the misunderstanding that it was. So you don't need to tell anyone that they're treading on extremely thin ice, but you'll gladly tell some random player that. ...Why? What benefit did you perceive in your mind, what desirable outcome did you foresee by telling Theplahunter that instead of literally anyone else? If the arrest was deemed a non-issue, then why did you word it the way you did, and why did falsely reassure him that he was in the right?
Alberyk Posted March 28, 2018 Posted March 28, 2018 I already explained how escalation of punishment does work on the rules, you were warned by notes, warnings and banned, both jobbans and temporary bans, I do not know why would you not expect to be permabanned if you did keep up with such behavior. The rules are more than clear in this. And yes, I did apply the permaban even after Exia did look into it because; Exia told me in msay that he did not even read your notes after he closed the tickets, and I do believe it is in my power as primary administrator to handle this kind of thing, mostly when I did try to get in contact with exia again over msay and he did not reply. I already explained it was not the first time you did this kind of thing, coupled with other issues And yes, I might agree that telling plahunter was probably not the best decision, because I did not expect him to act in such manner during and after the entire situation, but it is mostly due to him requesting the outcome. And I told plahunter that I could not really do anything about him being arrest and put into holding, due to him being valid, even with a really flimsy reasoning.
Bath Salts Addict Posted March 28, 2018 Author Posted March 28, 2018 Again, to break this down. [*]Exia likely understood and saw the issue as what it was: a misunderstanding of the skills required to operate the protolathe. Hence that, they did not see what I did as malicious and elected not to place a note on my account. If they had, they would have assuredly done so as per their duties as a moderator. [*]You, without bothering to communicate properly with another staff member that could have been argued as "being involved", made an on-the-spot decision without getting the full story or properly looking into that particular incident. Why, exactly? What necessitated a hasty judgment without opening proper channels of communication? The note wasn't going anywhere, and I was blissfully ignorant of it's existence. Instead, you made a grandiose display over the overwhelming trust you have in your fellow staff members and decided to make something that was deemed a non-issue an issue.
Alberyk Posted March 28, 2018 Posted March 28, 2018 Again, to break this down. [*]Exia likely understood and saw the issue as what it was: a misunderstanding of the skills required to operate the protolathe. Hence that, they did not see what I did as malicious and elected not to place a note on my account. If they had, they would have assuredly done so as per their duties as a moderator. As I said, not the first time you did this kind of thing. You used the protolathe, research equipment, to print nanopaste to repair yourself. You were warned and banned for similar behavior; "ignoring your character's knowledge and job to do something you are not really supossed to.". So, no, I do not believe it was just a misunderstanding. aboshehab has banned bathsaltsaddict. - Reason: Used OOC reasoning to influence IC actions and knowledge by hacking an autolathe as a character that has no electrical knoweldge. You know better. Warning by tishinatstalker: Warning added by tishinastalker, for: Deconstructing walls as a detective with zero training in engineering skills. Stick to your skills and your department.. || Notes regarding the warning: . [*]You, without bothering to communicate properly with another staff member that could have been argued as "being involved", made an on-the-spot decision without getting the full story or properly looking into that particular incident. Why, exactly? What necessitated a hasty judgment without opening proper channels of communication? The note wasn't going anywhere, and I was blissfully ignorant of it's existence. Instead, you made a grandiose display over the overwhelming trust you have in your fellow staff members and decided to make something that was deemed a non-issue an issue. I did speak, at least until they just stopped replying due to going afk, to exia and I did read the tickets. I do not really see how I am even involved in this case. The note argument does not matter when you were already warned, banned and spoken about rule breaking behavior, if you keep breaking the servers rules, you will be banned, that is more than clear in this case, claiming you were ignorant that you had a past with said issues makes little sense when I already showed evidence this was not the first case, and staff did talk and punish you already.
Bath Salts Addict Posted March 28, 2018 Author Posted March 28, 2018 As I said, not the first time you did this kind of thing. You used the protolathe, research equipment, to print nanopaste to repair yourself. You were warned and banned for similar behavior; "ignoring your character's knowledge and job to do something you are not really supossed to.". So, no, I do not believe it was just a misunderstanding. You're comparing those two things to an entirely different situation without proper context. Hacking something and deconstructing a wall are pretty solidified in the way the skills system is implemented (or at least how each individual staff member interprets them, there's nothing set in stone from what I take away from all of this). A protolathe, on the other hand, is something I assumed was covered under my own interpretation of the required skills, something I've done countless times in the past without anyone batting an eyelash. Exia made clear to me their point of view on what skill(s) the protolathe operated under and I conceded to that point of view. If you had looked over the conversation like you claimed you'd have seen that. If it was a malicious, clearly intentional violation of the rules, I'm certain they would have taken action right then and there. I did speak, at least they just stopped replying due to going afk, to exia and I did read the tickets. I do not really see how I am even involved in this case. The note argument does not matter when you were already warned, banned and spoken about rule breaking behavior, if you keep breaking the servers rules, you will be banned, that is more than clear in this case, claiming you were ignoring that you had a past with said issues makes little sense when I already showed evidence this was not the first case, and staff did talk and punish you already. I'll refute that point by quoting myself. The note wasn't going anywhere, and I was blissfully ignorant of it's existence. To make myself more clear, I fail to see what necessitated an immediate, on-the-spot verdict for something a staff member perceived as a non-issue when you could have waited a short period to get the full story and opinion of a colleague. Seeing as I've now had to quote myself, it's becoming evident that we're both just arguing in circles here and we've both made our points abundantly clear. It would probably be for the best that we wait until Abo has reached a decision, as I believe he wants to get this handled as quickly as possible.
Faris Posted March 29, 2018 Posted March 29, 2018 Sorry for the delay, it's taken me a while to get to this. This complaint is arguably the hardest one I've had to handle, it's quite straight forward, the facts are all there, it's just the decision took me a few days to go over. I've went through a lot of evidence presented here, evidence I've acquire. I've questioned more people than I ever had before. The allegations here were quite serious so I treated them seriously. This complaint revolves around three people. Alberyk BSA SovietCyanide I'll start with [mention]SovietCyanide[/mention]. Them revealing administrative PM's about the nature of BSA's stance and pressing an issue they're asked not to. Inflaming the people on discord at the time and causing a mess. What was revealed to Soviet was revealed as a courtesy due to their adminhelp, other members of the community are entitled to ask about the outcome of their ahelps and we sometimes oblige depending on the circumstance. Due to this, I'm applying a warning. That being said, people witnessing the round informed me that Soviet did not follow BSA for the whole time, so hardly looking for errors. Yes he ahelped it but he wasn't the first to report it to us. As for [mention]Alberyk[/mention]. A lot of things were brought to question. Overall, I've found no issue with the punishment put in place, more on that later. There were however a few issues which I'll address now. They dismissed the first ahelp regarding the arrest without notifying BSA of the outcome. With the addition of tickets, this should be more of an incentive to properly finish up tickets. They were able and allowed to inform Soviet certain details pertaining to the matter. The issue from this stems that if they obliged Soviet, they should have also obliged BSA. So what does this mean? Per my investigation, I've found no evidence that Alberyk really had any ill-intent with this. The only frustration from Alberyk I see here is the frustration of having to deal with a long term player having recurring issues. BSA in comparison to the community at large, even when compared to long term players that frequent security has an abnormally large amount of negative staff entries. There was proper escalation in punishment, with 3 active warnings at the time of this post not counting the previous ones. 2/3rd of your entries happen over a course of a year, which is where most of your warnings and bans are from. In fact, only 2 of your 12 warnings really happened over a year ago. Now, you could argue that there was a lack in proper escalation of punishment, which in reality is false. 3 active warnings, other notes and a 3 day ban from myself recently warrants on the minimum a week ban. A permanent ban in my view is justified considering the situation. Yes, it may seem this particular incident is minor but things build up. This incident alone would have just gotten them a note, but it was not alone. I also feel like I adequately explained that Hammerstein, another character of yours that should have more IT skills than Noir does not have the know how to do RnD. This includes both progressing through the RnD levels and printing things. So if Hammerstein could not, I'm not sure why you assumed Noir could. The topic of [mention]Exia[/mention] was also brought up. After reviewing the logs and speaking to them, they concur there was an error on their end where they neglected to read the entries. Alberyk did not really overstep his bounds here, he spotted an error, he intervened. So in summary. [mention]SovietCyanide[/mention] is receiving a warning. [mention]Alberyk[/mention] will be informed of the issues I've found along with briefing the moderator and administrator team on proper communication, especially with our new system. The ban on [mention]Bath Salts Addict[/mention] will remain as is. They are encouraged to appeal in the future.
Faris Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 Deeming this fully resolved. Locking and archiving.
Recommended Posts