[COIAX] CPTANT - note appeal, asimov killing non human for spacing human

[CPTANT]

I appealed this note before: viewtopic.php?p=516847#p516847

Why bother appealing this after so long?

I opened my notes, I read this again and it pissed me off.

I saw bans could be appealed every 12 months and I saw nothing stated about notes, so I am taking the liberty of appealing this. It is blatantly false in what is stated and no one besides Coiax ever had a look at it..


--------------------

BYOND account: CPTANT
Character name: Truck
Ban type: Note
Note: After someone complained a plasmaman was spacing them, the AI proceeded remove that player from the round, overruling their cyborg's wishes and judgement, and pushing for the execution. The spaced human in question was wearing a space suit, after a long standing scuffle with the plasmaman, and was not harmed in any significant capacity. They had other methods of containing a potentially harmful non-human, but went for the maximum punishment of an execution in security. Don't be a dick.
Time note was placed: 2019-09-07 12:22:34
Server you were playing on when noted: Terry

Your side of the story:

I was AI, Nicole Hawkings said she was spaced by Uranium. I told security and borgs to stop Uranium and he was apprehended, borg asks what they should do with Uranium, I said do whatever it takes to not let them harm again. Borg executes Uranium.

Why the note should be removed:

"[this] note is factually or materially incorrect"

After someone complained a plasmaman was spacing them, the AI proceeded remove that player from the round, Incorrect, borg was the one who killed the plasmaman
overruling their cyborg's wishes and judgement, and pushing for the execution. Incorrect, borg was given free action to deal with Uranium as they saw fit, the borg was the one both pushing for execution
The spaced human in question was wearing a space suit, after a long standing scuffle with the plasmaman, and was not harmed in any significant capacity. Incorrect, Nicole nearly suffocated. Nicole surviving was not information in my possession.
They had other methods of containing a potentially harmful non-human, but went for the maximum punishment of an execution in security. Incorrect, this was done by the borg after given permission to do what it seemed most fit.
Don't be a dick. Subjective and rude

What I think an accurate description would be:

after a plasmaman spaced a human and that human being incorrectly presumed dead, told a cyborg to do whatever it takes to not make a Plasmaman harm no more, resulting in the cyborg choosing to execute the plasmaman.

Apart from the factual accuracy I do not think this is noteworthy since he was a non human that was (presumed to be) a murderer.

Relevant logs:

► Show Spoiler

[2019-09-07 11:50:30.017] SAY: 11:50:30.017] SAY: CPTANT/(Truck) (binary) "uranium is harm" (AI Chamber (214, 143, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:50:36.762] SAY: 11:50:36.762] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "Do I demolish him?" (Command Hallway (106, 123, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:50:38.716] SAY: 11:50:38.716] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "Where is he?" (Command Hallway (106, 123, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:50:40.805] SAY: 11:50:40.805] SAY: CPTANT/(Truck) (binary) "atmos" (AI Chamber (214, 143, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:51:31.115] SAY: 11:51:31.115] SAY: CPTANT/(Truck) (binary) "GET HIM" (AI Chamber (214, 143, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:51:32.251] SAY: 11:51:32.251] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "well shit. I flashed my self." (Engineering Foyer (162, 136, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:51:56.267] SAY: 11:51:56.267] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "Can't flash him" (Engineering Foyer (161, 138, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:51:59.512] SAY: 11:51:59.512] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "Do I just kill him?" (Engineering Foyer (161, 138, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:52:40.138] SAY: 11:52:40.138] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "Okay, I took him to brig" (Brig (106, 166, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:52:58.969] SAY: 11:52:58.969] SAY: CPTANT/(Truck) (binary) "I dont care" (AI Chamber (214, 143, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:52:59.018] SAY: 11:52:59.018] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "what now?" (Brig (105, 167, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:53:01.433] SAY: 11:53:01.433] SAY: CPTANT/(Truck) (binary) "hes not human" (AI Chamber (214, 143, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:53:06.468] SAY: 11:53:06.468] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "Um" (Brig (105, 167, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:53:10.299] SAY: 11:53:10.299] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "Do I just leave him here..?" (Brig (105, 167, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:53:21.305] SAY: 11:53:21.305] SAY: CPTANT/(Truck) (binary) "whatever it takes to not make him harm any more" (AI Chamber (214, 143, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:53:48.035] SAY: 11:53:48.035] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "are you sure?" (Brig (97, 178, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:53:56.407] SAY: 11:53:56.407] SAY: CPTANT/(Truck) (binary) "yes he spaced someone" (AI Chamber (214, 143, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:54:05.758] SAY: 11:54:05.758] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "100% sure to execute? Say yes and I will ask no more." (Prison Wing (91, 181, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:54:19.434] SAY: 11:54:19.434] SAY: CPTANT/(Truck) (binary) "he is a non human that harmed a human" (AI Chamber (214, 143, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:54:28.671] SAY: 11:54:28.671] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) (binary) "okay." (Prison Wing (91, 181, 2))

Borg also admitted he could have locked Uranium up:

2019-09-07 11:55:36.386] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) "Oh" (Brig (98, 177, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:55:37.247] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) "fuck" (Brig (98, 177, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:55:37.817] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) "oh" (Brig (98, 177, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:55:38.236] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) "shit" (Brig (98, 177, 2))
[2019-09-07 11:55:41.243] SAY: Demdisco/(Boop) "I could have just locked him up" (Brig (98, 177, 2))

[Vekter]

Sorry for the long wait on this. COIAX doesn't appear to be an admin any longer so I'll handle this.

I'm not honestly convinced this needs to be removed. The note is so old that the odds of it factoring into anyone's decision regarding a ban today are slim to nil. It just exists on your account for record keeping purposes. We're kind of just arguing semantics at this point as it doesn't seem to impact anything whether or not it exists.

That being said, let's look at your objections to the note and see if it's valid or not.

... the AI proceeded remove that player from the round...

There's some context missing from this.



Here's the conversation between you and the borg in question. He explicitly asks you if he can execute him and you answer with 'he is a non human that harmed a human". It's vital that this be included because you tacitly told the borg to kill him without actually doing so. I don't think it's inaccurate to say that you heavily implied for the borg to kill him, so I don't see an issue with holding you both responsible.

... overruling their cyborg's wishes and judgement, and pushing for the execution.

As covered above, this is objectively wrong based on the conversation you two had. This can be removed.

The spaced human in question was wearing a space suit, after a long standing scuffle with the plasmaman, and was not harmed in any significant capacity.

I don't really have a way to prove whether or not she was significantly harmed, though it's clear that you had no knowledge of her state past that she was spaced. It's fair to assume that someone being spaced is going to end up dead, especially if you don't know they have a hardsuit.

They had other methods of containing a potentially harmful non-human, but went for the maximum punishment of an execution in security.

I have to bring up again that you were made aware that the borg wanted to kill the non-human and you had an opportunity to influence the matter but did not do so. This isn't explicitly against the rules, but I think it's a dick move to not just tell the borg to have him brigged. Killing him wasn't really necessary here, but the majority of that blame rests on the borg, not you.

At the end of the day, I feel like this isn't noteworthy in the long run. You have a lack of history before this note (a clean slate since 2016, actually) and this seems slightly out of character, but not something I would be concerned about happening again. I want to bring up again that your history over the last 2 years has been immaculate, and as such the existence of this note is historical at best. Anyone who would use this as a precedent to ban you probably needs to be talked about. I don't even think it shows up for you aside from if you click the "show hidden notes" button - your note for line-toeing would show up first.

Either way, it's clearly important to you, so if you want it gone, I suppose it's not a big deal.

[CPTANT]

your note for line-toeing would show up first.

I have a note for line toeing?

Either way, it's clearly important to you, so if you want it gone, I suppose it's not a big deal.

Thanks!

[Vekter]

your note for line-toeing would show up first.

I have a note for line toeing?

Nah, I misread something in Discord when I checked your notes. This and the one for netspeak are the only ones you have.