Gamarr wrote:Don't start shouting for riots FNR. This is on the same tier as shouting 'BORGS ROGUE' without knowing fuckall and just starting shit, which is also frowned severely upon along with attempts to curb. These stupid fucking 'gtfo lizards!' is precisely the same, except with sapient crew as the target rather than bound-by-law synths. I entirely agree with such a ban. If an admin is doing this shit too, then that should honestly go into ban request/ admin complain/ admin feedback threads where it belongs with said log evidence and claims.
Except it's not, this is the same all-star shit tier logic that makes the rules completely inconsistent.
BORGS ROGUE = A well-intending RD/Captain who's already knee-deep in shit and/or distracted runs in and blows the borgs because they don't have time to investigate. Rounds get ruined and even players who intend to do good get wrapped up in adminhelps and thus not only do the victims get their round ruined, but intermediaries get shit on too.
"FIRE THE LIZARDS FROM SECURITY!" = Not invoking violence, absolutely 0% chance of getting unintended participants ("WELL IF OLDMAN SAYS THE LIZARDS ARE TAKING OUR WOMEN THEN I HAVE TO BELIEVE HIM, I AM NOW COMPELLED TO START ATTACKING LIZARDS" - Nobody ever), and it's much easier to recover from being slipped or losing a baton than it is to collect an MMI and rebuild the borgs.
There's virtually NOTHING in common between these two categories except some nominal link that they both involve radio shitposting. Yet you act like its intuitive that these two areas have anything in common. This is how we get shitty inconsistencies in our rules and radio ends up being "Validhunters Live Stream" when absolutely no conflict is permitted outside of antagonism.
imblyings wrote:
That being said, 'I'm bored' or 'the round is quiet' is not an excuse to actually grief someone or ever grief. I've banned and seen people banned for it, it's a horrid excuse.
I had to let out a deep sight when I got to this part. I feel like I'm beating a dead horse but people still seem to miss it.
What I told Saeg in my response was an attempt to explain why I didn't think my actions even ran afoul of the rules, not an excuse as to why rule-breaking behavior should be permitted. This is exactly the kind of misinterpretation that's going to happen when you are banning people as soon as possible without trying to get the full picture of what happened.
Going further though it's a completely ass-backwards way of enforcing rules when you ask "WHY DID YOU DO IT?" before even asking yourself "WAS A RULE EVEN BROKEN?"
Otherwise we need to start banning every roundstart push, punch, slip, insult, and virtually everything that happens in the HOP line, because virtually nobody is going to be able to justify the stupid shit they do in this game.
"WHY DID YOU PUT A BANANA IN THE HOP LINE?"
"I DUNNO I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE FUNNY"
"NOT GOOD ENOUGH, I NEEDED TO HEAR YOUR CHARACTER'S BACKSTORY AND HOW THEY SUFFERED FROM OCD-LIKE COMPULSIONS TO PLACE BANANA PEELS IN HIGHLY TRAFFICKED AREAS, ONE WEEK BAN!"
Justifications/excuses should be what takes you from bannable behavior back into tolerable behavior (well he hit me first...) not what takes you from acceptable behavior into bannable behavior, that's literally how the vast majority of civilization does its enforcement.
