[BeeSting12] Waseemq1235 - AI-Captain Incident

[Waseemq1235]

When and where this incident occured (Game Server, forums, Discord): Terry
Byond account and character name OR Discord name: Waseemq1235
Admin: BeeSting12
ROUND ID HERE IF APPLICABLE: 111721
Detailed summary:
Seemingly normal shift for an AI, all until the captain decides to order BSA parts, he assembles them in the middle of the central hallway, right on the "Space Station 13" logo. I, as an AI, obviously ordered my borgs and tried to do everything to keep him from firing it (if he had fired it, it would've blasted through half of the hallway, botany, and atmospherics, depressurizing the entire station, which is, obviously, human harm. My laws weren't asimov, they were pretty much crewsimov, but same thing, fire BSA, you fuck up the entire station. I'm not really sure about what exactly happened with the crowd of people around the BSA since I can't really hear conversations as an AI. He tries to unlock the BSA via bridge keycard panel, however I quickly kill the APC, preventing him from unlocking the BSA, then I lock him in the bridge, however that doesn't go too well as the captain has access to the APC's, so I let it slip past, he leaves the bridge. He then goes straight to the upload, and judging by his attempts to swipe-unlock the BSA, and him holding the freeform module, I tazerlock him in the upload, starts saying I'm rogue since I don't want to let him upload the law.
Soon after, my borgs decon the upload, wall the room off, and get the captain out. Stuff calms down, until he somehow uploads that law that he's been wanting to upload the entire time, not sure how, but I believe it was a maint built upload. Nontheless, the law stated "The firing of bluespace artillery can not be harmful to humans". I completely ignore this law because I am on basically crewsimov, none of my laws stated anything about human harm, it was crewmember harm. I proceed to keep him from the BSA, he gets sick with diseases and whatnot, realizing that he was actually sick with a harmful disease, I let him out of where I locked him at. He started calling me rogue (not sure exactly when he started, but it was around this time, could've been earlier or later). Sec officer, using the now overpowered launchpads, teleports my core to engineering, cards me, and confirms over comms that I am not rogue. He then returns me to the core. Captain, to what I can recall, continued calling me rogue. Some time later, I get PDA'd from the "captain" with WGW. At that time, I literally was looking for an excuse to shut the captain up because from that point I was literally fighting the captain in an indirect way, and so I thought, "This is the perfect chance to shut him up once and for all". Little did I know that it was a comms agent, however, I had absolutely no way of recognizing that was a comms agent, I didn't really do much to hurt him, he was literally dying on his own (not sure exactly what was happening with him, but he was vomiting A LOT, I believe he hand teleport). He was stuck in the wall for a while, I bolted the doors to the rooms with the walls, hoping to kill him, someone rescues him however. I'll be honest, I don't really remember what was happening after that, because I was too busy with BeeSting in admin issues. BeeSting apparentally gives me a yellow warning stating "Warned- Attempted killing the captain as the AI for getting a PDA message with WGW under the captain's name (comms agent). Be absolutely sure of their identity before validding.", which, as I have mentioned before, I had absolutely zero way of making sure that he was the actual captain, and the captain was just so annoying that, again, as I said before, I was just begging for an excuse to get rid of him. If I had allowed him to fire the BSA, well, there were two people in botany, one was in direct line of fire, not sure if there was anyone in atmos, but firing that BSA would have been certain to kill someone and ruin 2 departments, that includes atmos. Apparentally BeeSting later replies and says "The captain didn't want to fire the BSA, he said it would've been a bad idea to". He only said this to BeeSting, in no way did he say this to me OR the crew, and judging by his previous very desperate attempts to fire the BSA, I used common sense and concluded that he still wanted to fire it. Later he blows all 3 of my borgs which weren't even trying to kill him, according to what I saw. Even after the sec officer cards me and confirms over comms that I wasn't malf/rogue in any way. BeeSting later blames it on me because "I didn't confirm that he was the sender", and as I said, there was an absolute lack of way that I could've proved that it wasn't him, and therefore I believe that I do not deserve this warning.
Sorry if I made this a massive block of text. I hope that this complaint would be taken into consideration. Thank you.
Edit: On a side note, 2 people in OOC agreed with me after the round ended.
Edit2: I also believe that this entire issue would've been resolved if an admin had responded quicker/was ingame, BeeSting took a while to get to the server, and by the time he arrived, stuff was way downhill.

[Nilons]

what is the point of comms agents being in the game if you get banned for believing them

[bobbahbrown]

This round occurred on Terry, 2019-06-27 from 17:46-19:06UTC. (src, statbus, scrubby)

[Gigapuddi420]

THIS BOARD IS FOR SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF MODERATION OR ADMINISTRATIVE POWER ABUSE.

4. This board is not for ban appeals. You may appeal a ban you do not agree with in the appropriate board. Ban appeals posted here will be moved or deleted.

Only a fraction of your post addresses what you felt the admin did wrong and it boils down to them arriving at your ahelp too late and not agreeing with you. Is there any actual way you felt the admin abused their position or did you just post this in the wrong forum?

[NikNakFlak]

He isn't appealing a ban, technically I guess it's a note but he's complaining about beesting mishandling the situation I guess? Idk seems like this thread goes in here to me.

[wubli]

This looks a lot more like an appeal rather than a complaint.
Technically, most if not all appeals are complaints about how an admin ruled. If we had an official admin complaint for every lifted ban, they'd all be succesful, and eventually, they'd lose their meaning.
Are you sure you want to continue with this as a formal complaint, or do you just want the note to be removed?

[lmwevil]

i have so many peanuts but i'll restrain myself

never has it been actionable for an admin to be AFK and punished for not dedicating themselves 100% to spessmens. AFK admins aren't counted for the IRC relay tickets so it's.. what do you expect out of this thread?

plenty of times admins simply won't be around, we can't cover the server 24/7 and it's unreasonable to expect that

[Naloac]

I was apart of the same round and Pardon the peanut but, I believe the poster is complaining of the mishandling of the situation.( in his opinion) If the AI and a few crew members allowed that BSA to fire it would have CERTAINLY had that cap eating a ban. The cap originally had no issue firing the BSA seeming not puting a thought into where it was located. I personally sat in the brig for just under 5 minutes because I stopped the cap firing the BSA. The cap according to OP blew three borgs taking them out of the round for a time, wanted the AI killed, would have probably killed two in botany and one in atmos. iirc the cap was trying to fire ON station which would have killed more. Him just saying "o that was a bad idea" AFTER being bwoinked and having a battle with apart of the crew, seems abit put on and at the time I did think beesting was being abit too forgiving considering the captains meant to be held to a higher standard than an average tider fresh from the hub. if the cap didnt realise how many people that BSA could kill why should the AI who fully believes the cap read him wgw shouldnt be killed after he made it very clear on hs intent to fire the BSA and kill a decent amount of crew members. If thats the full facts it seems like the cap should be the one eating a note not the AI who tried its best via its laws to save the crew from a non human (it believes).

Tldr: comms agent did his job, Ai trys to kill someone he believes is valid from killing a large amount of people. Why should the AI be punished for stopping a valid man (he believes) from killing a section of his law protected spessmens. If that AI allowed him to fire, the cap would be the one being punished not the person who stopped him. Although yeah its basically a note appeal

[BeeSting12]

I had multiple ahelps about the captain and the AI. It sounds like you were mad at the captain for the whole BSA thing and were looking for any excuse to make his life miserable. When the comms agent sent you that PDA message, you immediately went about trying to kill the captain, despite the fact that a PDA can easily be stolen or the messages can be faked.

As an AI, you’re not supposed to kill someone unless you’re 100% sure they’re nonhuman. A PDA message isn’t 100% sure. We hold silicons to high standards when it comes to following laws like this because they can really mess up the game by unfairly assuming someone’s nonhuman. What if nuke ops were nonhuman until proven human, or you could kill a changeling based on someone calling it out on comms?

In terms of how I handled the captain: He never actually BSAed anyone, and he basically opened up with “yea it was dumb and i shouldnt have done it” when I asked him about it. Not an exact quote but the gist of it is there. I told him off for it and left it at that.

Edit: On a side note, 2 people in OOC agreed with me after the round ended.

lol

Edit2: I also believe that this entire issue would've been resolved if an admin had responded quicker/was ingame, BeeSting took a while to get to the server, and by the time he arrived, stuff was way downhill.

fuck you, youre not entitled to have an admin get on the server whenever you feel like it.

[ATHATH]

As an AI, you’re not supposed to kill someone unless you’re 100% sure they’re nonhuman. A PDA message isn’t 100% sure. We hold silicons to high standards when it comes to following laws like this because they can really mess up the game by unfairly assuming someone’s nonhuman. What if nuke ops were nonhuman until proven human, or you could kill a changeling based on someone calling it out on comms?

Then what the hell is the point of the "WGW makes you valid in the eyes of AIs and silicons, even if their laws would normally forbid harming you" policy? You can NEVER be 100% sure that someone actually said WGW to you, due to the existence of comms agents, lings, and chameleon gear in the game (even if it was a greenshift, an admin could have spawned in antags with impersonation-aiding gear). Even if the captain walked up to the AI's core, said WGW to their face, and then walked away, the AI would still be unable to be 100% certain that it was the real captain that said that to them.

You CAN be 99.9999% percent sure that someone actually said WGW to you, though, which this AI was. How the hell were they supposed to suspect that it was a comms agent that sent them that WGW message and not the captain? They're not omniscient and don't have the benefit of hindsight. Nobody plays perfectly, and banning someone for not realizing that they were being tricked by a ghost role whose entire/main job is to trick people is absurd.

In terms of how I handled the captain: He never actually BSAed anyone, and he basically opened up with “yea it was dumb and i shouldnt have done it” when I asked him about it. Not an exact quote but the gist of it is there. I told him off for it and left it at that.

"Officer, I never actually killed anyone, I just tried to. Yeah, it was dumb and I shouldn't have done it. Okay, am I free to go now?"

He had the intent to fire that BSA with NO regard to the lives of his crew, despite REPEATED warnings. While I don't think that trying and failing to fire that poorly-placed BSA was ban-worthy, I DO think that it's definitely enough to make that captain valid.

[Shadowflame909]

From previous precedent. If a Comms Agent says WGW whilst disguising himself as someone else, and that gets the said other person killed. That's a bwoink on the comms agent. Not the AI.

I've seen comms agents getting admin gibbed over that, the same way a person in deadchat would be getting banned for saying that.

You're literally leaving the admin and playerbase with no other choice or way to stop you.

BeeSting12 hit the wrong perp here. WGW as a comms agent is very much a no-no.

[ATHATH]

From previous precedent. If a Comms Agent says WGW whilst disguising himself as someone else, and that gets the said other person killed. That's a bwoink on the comms agent. Not the AI.

I've seen comms agents getting admin gibbed over that, the same way a person in deadchat would be getting banned for saying that.

You're literally leaving the admin and playerbase with no other choice or way to stop you.

BeeSting12 hit the wrong perp here. WGW as a comms agent is very much a no-no.

Do you have a citation/source for that precedent? If so, that'd make this a lot simpler/easier to resolve.

[Shadowflame909]

I was the guy who got banned in deadchat for saying WGW.

Comms agent who got gibbed for saying it happened a good year ago and I really wasn't looking for precedent on it.

Well, info is pretty useless if you have no evidence and it's only your word against the word of the others.

But we can infer that saying WGW without easy access to punishment leads to harsher alternative punishments being dealt out.

[PKPenguin321]

From previous precedent. If a Comms Agent says WGW whilst disguising himself as someone else, and that gets the said other person killed. That's a bwoink on the comms agent. Not the AI.

I've seen comms agents getting admin gibbed over that, the same way a person in deadchat would be getting banned for saying that.

You're literally leaving the admin and playerbase with no other choice or way to stop you.

BeeSting12 hit the wrong perp here. WGW as a comms agent is very much a no-no.

Do you have a citation/source for that precedent? If so, that'd make this a lot simpler/easier to resolve.

Spamming has always been bannable. WGW gets a pass, but if you push it and do it consistently in a way that seems like spam we can ban you at our discretion. Generally we mute first so you have to be a bit of a serious shitter to get banned for this but it happens.

Using a voice changer to read WGW as somebody else is generally very poor form (and a really good way to get WGW outright banned in the distant future for being ban-baity), though I don't believe any written rule exists. I personally would have told the comms agent to knock it off at the very least.

I don't have written precedent, but I've handled a good few of cases like these.

Comms agent who got gibbed for saying it happened a good year ago and I really wasn't looking for precedent on it.

But we can infer that saying WGW without easy access to punishment leads to harsher alternative punishments being dealt out.

I already explained most of this already, but this actually happens all the time. WGW makes you valid to anybody including the admins and if you're spamming it from some remote location in space it's very common that we'll just delete you in one way or another.

I saw some confusion about the nature of this thread, so let me also say that this isn't necessarily a ban appeal even if it's the OP claiming innocence. He's complaining that Beesting made a bad ruling and acted too hastily, which is perfectly valid thing to be upset about (though I personally would have just gone for a ban appeal). Whether Beesting is genuinely at fault is ultimately up to the headmins.

[BeeSting12]

The captain was certainly valid to the crew, but the AI had no right to kill him over the BSA since he is still a crewmember under that lawset, and can’t be harmed.

I’ve never heard of that precedent shadowflame but if a headmin says it’s a rule then remove the note or whatever.

[ATHATH]

The captain was certainly valid to the crew, but the AI had no right to kill him over the BSA since he is still a crewmember under that lawset, and can’t be harmed.

I’ve never heard of that precedent shadowflame but if a headmin says it’s a rule then remove the note or whatever.

Doesn't saying WGW make you valid to even silicons that would normally be forced to not harm you by their laws?

I found this headmin ruling on the wiki:
https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Headmin_Rulings
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 16#p327160

Does this only apply for Asimov AIs?

[PKPenguin321]

The captain was certainly valid to the crew, but the AI had no right to kill him over the BSA since he is still a crewmember under that lawset, and can’t be harmed.

I’ve never heard of that precedent shadowflame but if a headmin says it’s a rule then remove the note or whatever.

Doesn't saying WGW make you valid to even silicons that would normally be forced to not harm you by their laws?

I found this headmin ruling on the wiki:
https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Headmin_Rulings
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 16#p327160

Does this only apply for Asimov AIs?

Yes, but that's drifting from the topic of this thread. Avoid further posts about this, clarification has already been posted above.

[Calibraptor]

Just gonna note here that I was at one point admin gibbed and ate a ghost role ban for reading WGW as a comms agent in order to get somebody lynched, so I'd say the comms agent probably should have been spoken to.

[Hulkamania]

As has been stated this was pretty much a note appeal. I will not be commenting as much on the note itself, rather BeeSting's handling of the situation.

BeeSting did nothing wrong as far as administrative negligence or abuse. They performed their job to the best of their ability and acted in good faith, applying a note for something that was noteworthy to begin with. If you are going to kill someone, it is on you to determine if the person you're killing is truly valid or not and accepting the consequences otherwise. BeeSting determined that you wanted someone to be killed when you had no proper reason to do so, thus applying a note. Nothing was abusive or over the line on his part and thus this complaint is being denied.