[KangTut] High Impact Dolphin - Rule 8 Note Appeal

[High Impact Dolphin]

Byond account and character name: High Impact Dolphin; Bingus McGringus
Noting admin: KangTut
Note type: Warning
Note reason: Warned - Sent smut over the comms to allied stations, claims he's done this before and was never called out about it. Seemed apologetic about it.
Time note was placed (including time zone): 2018-09-25 03:11:29 GMT
Server you were playing when noted(Sybil or Bagil): Bagil
Your side of the story: I sent the first bit of BRAAAP copypasta across the stations through comms and was bwoinked, warned, and noted for it. Later made a policy discussion topic in which Nervere claimed that rule 8 did not cover this
Why you think you should be unnoted: In the aforementioned policy thread, (https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 33&t=19717), Nervere directly states that "Rule 8 is only for cases of ERP and, for some cases, targeted sexual harassment," and that "[This instance] is not something that falls under this rule." As such, I'd like to ask the note be removed since the ruling has been declared incorrect by a headmin.

[Cobby]

They ruled that it shouldn't be governed by rule 8, not that the situation wasn't worth admin-attention. "It’s not something that falls under this rule."

[High Impact Dolphin]

They ruled that it shouldn't be governed by rule 8, not that the situation wasn't worth admin-attention. "It’s not something that falls under this rule."

Then what made this case worth admin attention if the only rule KangTut cited in ahelps has been deemed to not be appropriate for use in this EXACT instance?

[somerandomguy]

They ruled that it shouldn't be governed by rule 8, not that the situation wasn't worth admin-attention. "It’s not something that falls under this rule."

Then what made this case worth admin attention if the only rule KangTut cited in ahelps has been deemed to not be appropriate for use in this EXACT instance?

Spamming

[BeeSting12]

It was more for the spam than the smut. We allow reading smut/sending smut but if it gets spammy, it's against the rules. You got the lightest note you could get, he even included the "seemed apologetic" detail.

[Nervere]

Cobby is correct in his interpretation - my ruling defined the correct usage of rule 8 and said that the particular instance brought up in the policy discussion thread is not a rule 8 issue. Just because something is gross and doesn’t fall under that rule, though, doesn’t mean it’s not punishable. In this case, your offense was spamming all 3 stations with a huge wall of text. Spam is a rule 1 issued, and you’re right to say that the note seems to imply the issue was rule 8, so I’ll change the note such that it says your offense was the spam.