Slicon ban appeal

[James566]

BYOND account: James566
Character name: Mike.os (I think?)
Ban type: AI, Cyborg
Ban length: Permanent (left perma by admin to sort it out on the fourms)
Ban reason:Banned from Roles: AI, Cyborg permanently - As an AI with standard Asimov, attempted to doorshock a space ninja with the reason, "i couldn't tell with the suit, they where harming people so i deemed them nonhuman" after being asked if they were trying to shock them. Was told that it's specified in the rules that space ninjas are human until proven otherwise such as speech modifiers, revealing non-human features, etc. where they responded with, "nothing says to assume human if you cant tell" "i shocked two doors to prevent human harm." You cannot attempt to harm a human to prevent human harm, extensively argued otherwise.

Time ban was placed: 2023-05-22 06:51:58
Server you were playing on when banned: Manuel
Round ID in which ban was placed: 206652
Your side of the story: I was an ai core that saw a ninja (that i couldn't see the race of) going around killing people, i shocked a door in an attempt to knock them down, their gloves protected them and they just teliported away, at the time was under the impression that the rules for silicon where unknowns arent human due to not having read the rules in a while, which was incorrect at the time.
Why you think you should be unbanned: I now know the silicon rules about unknowns and people you cant identify the races of, i will now read the rules more frequently (every week or so and before picking silicon after a while)
References of good conduct: i have played many rounds as heads and Capitan now and understand the position of authority i am in better, and can also understand that reading the rules every once in a while is a really good thing to do.
Anything else we should know: You may want to check the admin pm logs for the message of them saying they would " leave it perma for now"

[dendydoom]

howdy, thanks for taking the time to appeal - this ban was placed by Harricross, who i have notified to come and take a look-see.

[James566]

Thanks

[James566]

by the way, i am gonna take a nap probably wont be on for a few hours.

[Harricross]

Hi, thanks for making an appeal.

In short, I'll be lifting the ban considering your now higher playtime and the sincerity of your appeal.

In regards to the ban itself, if I tell you something, quote it directly from the rule page: "Human UNTIL the AI or cyborg WITNESSES some aspect of the player to indicate they are not human (speech modifier in chat, removal of disguise revealing non-human feature, etc)" and try to explain Asimov's law one (where I probably should have quoted it as well from the main rule page into the ahelp), "An Asimov silicon cannot intentionally harm a human, even if a minor amount of harm would prevent a major amount of harm," I expect players to acknowledge it in some capacity.

Any other admin can read the ticket here: https://bus.moth.fans/tickets/206652/10

[Timberpoes]

Shit, sorry this was so late I promised I'd do this a month ago in viewtopic.php?f=7&t=34678

The headmin team are re-opening this appeal to revise the ruling.

Players should not be punished for not knowing the rules, heck - they probably shouldn't be punished for being confidently incorrect about the rules. If those were any basis for permaing players, we'd have nobody left and half the admin team would be gone too.

People should really only be punished for the rules they actually break. And this player's history did not in any way justify a permanent role ban for this actual incident regardless of how confidently incorrect they were about the rules in the ahelp.

As a result of this ban being left as permanent on the player's record, the player had another minor ban escalated to permanent because the banning admin saw this ban and thought a re-perma was necessary. That was thankfully corrected in the above mentioned appeal and Fishy did a great job to draw everything back to sensible levels.

Accordingly, we are turning this record of a permaban it into a one-day ban instead - which represents a duration we feel fair and to more accurately reflect the severity of the rule break in play. This will give future admins a better basis for judging how to handle any future hypothetical rule breaks for this individual, too.