[Hulkamania] CMDR Gungnir

Appeals which have been closed.
Locked
User avatar
CMDR_Gungnir
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 11:11 am
Byond Username: CMDR Gungnir

[Hulkamania] CMDR Gungnir

Post by CMDR_Gungnir » #617536

BYOND account: CMDR_Gungnir
Character name: Riley Bailey
Ban type: Server
Ban length: 3 Days
Ban reason: "After a ticket which did not pan out his way, opened another one attempting to get the other admin online to give them a favorful ruling, literally admitting to admin shopping."
Time ban was placed: 2021-10-26 03:41:58
Server you were playing on when banned: Manuel
Round ID in which ban was placed: 171945
Why you think you should be unbanned: It's a bit of a long story.

First things first, that note in the ticket is fundamentally incorrect. The claim that the ticket "did not pan out (my) way" and that I opened another one to "get the other admin online to give (me) a favorful ruling" are both false. I didn't care about the result of the ticket. If you didn't think it was worth doing something about, then fair enough. I'll respect that.

What I cared about is the needlessly hostile attitude that I received in that ticket. What I cared about is that after being urged by literally every other admin I've spoken to on Manuel to ahelp problems that I see, I'm told off for doing it. What I cared about is being told that doing that was bad. What I cared about is that I received, from the very beginning, nothing but disdain for daring to give a shit.

Here's the ticket.

I've been told by quite literally every other admin that I've spoken to, to ahelp things that I see. That they want to be able to do something but can't unless someone speaks up.

And then I do that, and I'm accused of "just playing player-admin", and told that you don't even see a reason to investigate it unless the people involved ahelp it. The problem- is that this is why nobody does. Because they think that it's pointless to ahelp. That's WHY I'm told to just ahelp things that I witness. Your response to that information is to tell me to 'just accept inconsistent rulings', which is basically just hammering in that it's completely pointless to even try.

Now, after you asked for the name, if all you'd said was "I've sent them a message, but they logged out before I could actually speak with them." I'd have gone "Yeah, alright. Fair enough." At least you tried. But you follow it up by continuing to tell me off for trying to ahelp a situation. So naturally, I'm going to explain my reasoning. You're telling me off for trying to do the right thing, and as I mention in the ticket, if I AM wrong and it's not actually bad and rulebreaking, I can just be told that it's fine. But if it IS bad and rulebreaking, then the admins are now 1) Aware of it, and 2) Able to do something about it.

You proceed to tell me that my desire to actually see the server thrive is 'taking it too seriously' and 'the kind of attitude that isn't healthy for it' (Apparently reporting people for griefing is bad?). You mention that even paying attention to what server people come from is bad, and so I just explained where I was coming from. Fair enough, but if you're going to tell me off I at least want you to understand why, because everything I do or think generally has a reason to it. Maybe you can explain to me why I'm wrong, or maybe it'll make sense to you. Who knows.

You instead respond with hostility telling me, in different words, that you don't give a shit, and will just enforce the rules. I point out that I've seen that very behaviour is against the rules countless times, and your response is to just slap your metaphorical dick on the table, flex your admin status and walk off.

Thus, we come to the reason of the ban. I didn't go to Thrax because the ticket "didn't go my way" and I didn't go to him because I "wanted another admin to give me a favorful ruling", I was perfectly fine with you just trying to talk to the dude, or even just saying that it wasn't too big of an issue. I went to Thrax because your handling of that ticket was unacceptable. Because all I received from the very beginning of it from you, was Hostility.

I'd thought that it was clear as day from context, and from my response to you when you intercepted that, that it was just spite. It was "You've been an ass to me, so I'm going to go talk to someone else instead." It was specifically said because I knew that you'd read it, and if you'd been a dick to me, I was going to be a dick to you. A metaphorical middle finger.

It was about the hostility. I said as much in my response to you. You could have just muted my ahelps and told me to cool off. You could have done any myriad number of options.

Instead you chose to throw the book at me, while being incorrect about the reason. It was never about the ticket not going my way, or wanting a different outcome.

The Second Ticket

I didn't think someone GENUINELY intending to adminshop would straight up say "cool guess I'll just admin shop then" because naturally the other admin's not going to be able to do anything about it if they know you're shopping. I'd thought that it was pretty clear that it's just an angry spite thing. But you ban me while stating that I'm "trying to get a favorful result" from a different admin after "a ticket that didn't go (my) way". I have, admittedly, been told since that there ARE people who do genuinely say that they're gonna go break a rule, and then proceed to break that rule. So, while I know I can't prove it, I'd like to say that I didn't actually intend to. I did it specifically because I knew that Thrax wouldn't be able to do anything about it. I did it because it was retaliation against the hostility, and the opening of a conversation where I could actually talk to someone about the incident, without the hostility. He couldn't change the outcome, but I didn't want it changed. I just wanted a calm, polite discussion about it which I couldn't get from you, and was kinda pissed off about it.

(I've also been told while I was writing this that my "It's hard to care about the opinion of an admin who gives me hostility." was taken as not giving a shit about your opinion as an admin, rather than simply not caring about your personal opinion, which if that's the case is a whoopsy miscommunication on my part)

References of good conduct: As of the time of this incident, I've got 62020 minutes of living time recorded. This is since I started playing in April of this year.

In this length of time, I've only received a single negative note. And it was three months and 17500 minutes of living time ago. I think this speaks for itself at the fact that I don't go around breaking the rules willy nilly. And while I know it sounds like a similar vein to "But I have a black friend" I'm friends with quite a few of the Manuelmins (the only server I play on), and I doubt that'd be the case if I was an obnoxious troublestarter.

Anything else we should know: This entire thing stems from either a miscommunicated response to hostility, or miscommunications all the way down if you hadn't actually intended to be hostile from the beginning, and I think that this is excessive in either case.
User avatar
Hulkamania
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2017 11:42 pm
Byond Username: Hulkamania

Re: [Hulkamania] CMDR Gungnir

Post by Hulkamania » #617539

So, there's multiple parts to this.

Firstly, the entire conversation about the server culture at large had nothing to do with this ruling whatsoever. This was me giving you my perspective about the situation, and nothing more or less. I often see people talking about the differences in Manuel and the other servers, and people get insanely dogmatic about it. As someone who was one of the headmins who instituted the entire server in the first place, I have strong opinions regarding it.

Secondly, I did investigate the person in question. I looked into their logs a bit, and tried to reach out to them but they were offline by the time I learned their actual identity. Going over what I DID see, I didn't think any of it was worth a note or a ban unless I found it was actually done with malicious intent. I sent them a message using the in-game system for doing such to issue a formal warning against that kind of behavior, and that was pretty much that. I did not throw the case to the side, and it was investigated to the extent I deemed it responsible.

That leads me to: My personal philosophy regarding ahelps is exactly that, personal. I told you as much during the conversation that due to our server rules and the way things are laid out, different admins have different interpretations of how each individual rule should be handled. I have always had a personal philosophy that someone who is not directly involved in a situation should not be ahelping about said situation (obviously there are exceptions, but this is a general rule of mine).

The reasons for this are multiple, but the main one is that people outside the situation lack context. If two people on the server agreed to split apart to opposite ends of the station and hunt each other down in some kind of blood sport, a bystander may only see that one person killed the other. They lack context that it was agreed upon, or escalated to, or any other multitude of situations. Thusly, if the person directly wronged in this situation, i.e. the botanist in this round, did not deem it necessary to ahelp, then I'm not nearly as inclined to treat a situation as an emergency or something that is a great wrong in the server. Sometimes people get in arguments, sometimes people LIE in character about the motivations behind any given act, and try to put the guilt upon someone else. This is a game where you do not have all the information, and that's on purpose, which is why trying to seek out rule breaks as a player who wasn't directly involved in an altercation puts you in a horrid situation to report on it.

Lastly, I did not "intend" to be hostile in the beginning, nor would I say I was ever hostile. At worst I had a haughty attitude, at best I was trying to give you my own justification for how I called a situation. A situation which might I add I did in fact investigate, leading me back to the "you don't have all the information" point from above.

Finally, this ban isn't about the incident, the ticket, or anything else. This ban is about you blatantly telling me you're going to break a rule and rubbing it in my face just because you got upset that a ticket didn't pan out the way you wanted it to. This is all hearsay but I have seen your name come up in adminbus from time to time and I am often reading about you getting confrontational and aggressive the minute a ticket doesn't go the way you want, and our interaction has only reinforced that those rumors may in fact be true.

This ban was made because you told me you were outright attempting to break a rule, and so I placed a ban accordingly. The length was chosen because I think you *severely* overinvest yourself in the game and need some time to reflect and cool off and consider why a 2d spessman game about clowns and wizards makes you so angry in the first place that you try to show up an admin by outright telling them you're going to go admin shopping.

The idea that this is about "hostility" is a lie and I think you're overestimating my own emotional involvement in any given ticket. I don't really care all that much, and I'm typing far more words than my usual amount just to throw you a bone.

tl;dr

You said you would admin shop, then got banned for admin shopping.
User avatar
CMDR_Gungnir
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 11:11 am
Byond Username: CMDR Gungnir

Re: [Hulkamania] CMDR Gungnir

Post by CMDR_Gungnir » #617540

The point behind most of this being brought up was to explain my mindset. To demonstrate what I'd seen or interpreted. How it had come across to me. Because it all paints the picture.

It all demonstrates that I wasn't pissed off that the result of the ticket didn't go my way (that's why I didn't argue with you on that factor at any point). It demonstrates that I was pissed off about what I had apparently only perceived, as hostility.

When they're upset, people will say things that they don't mean. They say they'll do something that they never intend to do ("I'll fucking kill him" is a common thing said by people who don't intend to do that when someone does something to REALLY piss them off, after all.)

If you're saying that the ban is simply in MY best interests, then I'd like to see the note at least changed to "Threatened to adminshop while pissed off. Has been told not to threaten to break the rules."

But while I can't prove it, I will adamantly insist that I wasn't adminshopping just because the result of the ticket wasn't what I wanted. I was pissed off, yes. I was being spiteful, yes. But my intention was nothing more than to flip a metaphorical middle finger, and start a conversation about the situation with someone who I hadn't received the perceived hostility from.
User avatar
CMDR_Gungnir
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 11:11 am
Byond Username: CMDR Gungnir

Re: [Hulkamania] CMDR Gungnir

Post by CMDR_Gungnir » #617583

I know that Hulk has read this, and chose not to respond. I also know that he's posted in the peanut about this thread (which he used to insult me).

As a result I am elevating this directly to request Headmin Intervention. Furthermore, I'd like to add some proof that this ban was done with malicious intent.

After venting about the situation after the round had ended in an unaffiliated, unofficial discord server for Manuel, which Hulk has not posted in since February of this year, he responded to my venting about it with an emoji of Thanos looking particularly smug. Whether he never browses the discord, but chose to this time, or always browses it but chooses not to post, he broke his streak of non-interaction just to try to provoke me. Specifically me. He had banned someone else for 24 hours for trapping people in glass cubes that lead to their deaths, and they complained about it as well, but he ignored that to specifically target me.

I'd considered the possibility that it wasn't, but after he posted in the peanut thread to insult me, I can't overlook this, and I cannot trust him to handle this appeal in a fair and unbiased manner. He took a blatantly petty and sarcastic bit of spite (which even everyone in the peanut could tell was what it was) and threw the book at it. He misrepresented why, tried to provoke me, and then sought out the peanut to insult me in it.

(Also, if the adminbus has spoken about me (does this count as leaking?) then it'd probably also have mentioned that there've been countless times when I have been upset with the result of a ticket, that I've gone "Right, cool, I'm gonna go kill and cremate the guy, then." and then never actually proceeded to do it. Because that'd be against the rules, and I'm just saying dumb shit that I don't mean because I'm pissed off.)
User avatar
Hulkamania
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2017 11:42 pm
Byond Username: Hulkamania

Re: [Hulkamania] CMDR Gungnir

Post by Hulkamania » #617584

I do not believe you threatened to admin shop, you quite literally made the ticket and asked for the other admin online to handle it instead of me.

I recognize this was done while you were upset, but being unable to control your emotions and having them result in an outburst is not my concern, nor something I'm interested in policing.

I am not unsympathetic to someone getting mad about a situation, I am however not going to excuse their behavior because of those emotions.

I'm denying this personally, I welcome any headmin response to the thread if they see it fit.

(I forgot to hit send on this last night)
User avatar
CMDR_Gungnir
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 11:11 am
Byond Username: CMDR Gungnir

Re: [Hulkamania] CMDR Gungnir

Post by CMDR_Gungnir » #617626

Someone else had brought this up and then it got deleted for supposedly being peanutting, despite the fact that it was clarification of a rule. As a result, I'm going to bring it up myself.

Firstly- Adminshopping rules should REALLY be listed on the primary rules page, because the ONLY thing we have about them is the singular line of text in the Headmin Precedents page: "Admin shopping is defined as going to different admins until you get a favorable ruling."

But that's not too important to me here, because I already knew it was a rule. That was the entire reason why I said I was doing it. However, slapping me with a ban for what I'd assume most people could tell was just petty sarcasm, and listing my ban reason as being because I did the thing, and then after having me clarify it, still proceeding to tell me I did the thing, I feel the need to point out that I did not, in fact, do the thing.


Adminshopping is defined as "Admin shopping is defined as going to different admins until you get a favorable ruling." Specifically going from admin to admin to try and get a favourable ruling. Now, if Adminshopping is against the rules, then it'd be pretty obvious that an admin CANNOT give me a different ruling if they know I'm adminshopping. With that in mind, I'd assume that it's perfectly reasonable to ask another admin for a second opinion if they're aware that you've spoken to another admin. It isn't (or at least, shouldn't be) a crime to hear OPINIONS, even if another admin has given their ruling on the matter. Which means stating "Okay, cool, I guess I'll admin shop, then" is a confession that I've already spoken to an admin. And if I"m admitting that I've already spoken to an admin, and an admin can't overturn another admin's verdict if it's known adminshopping, then I CANNOT have been "going to different admins until (I) get a favorable ruling."

I feel like that's a little too lawyery, but my autism makes it hard to figure out how to put in enough words to actually show that I'm putting effort and thought into my appeal, without coming across as Ben Shapiro tier 'debate' logic. But having shown I'm putting said effort in, I can summarise it as "If I know admins can't change a verdict if they know someone's spoken to another admin, and I fully admit that I spoke to another admin, then I can't really be trying to go to another admin for a favorable ruling".
User avatar
tattle
In-Game Head Admin
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2020 11:04 pm
Byond Username: Dragomagol

Re: [Hulkamania] CMDR Gungnir

Post by tattle » #617839

When admins interact with a player through ahelps, we generally assume that you're being serious, especially when it comes to you explaining your motivations. When you say plainly "I'm going to adminshop" and then you pose your initial adminhelp to another online admin (adminshopping), you are breaking the rules.

That being said, we do not agree with Hulk's philosophy in the ticket, "unless you're directly effected by something you shouldn't ahelp it." Even with administration tools we can't be everywhere at once, at the end of the day it's easier for us to resolve a false-positive than it is for us to find every incident that needs to be addressed.

We will be upholding the note, as at this time the ban has expired.

Headmin Votes:
Dragomagol: Uphold
NamelessFairy: Uphold
RaveRadbury: Uphold
Help improve my neural network by giving me feedback!

Image
Spoiler:
Image
Avatar source
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users