/tg/Station 13

Byond account and character name: Hathkar - Janina Merryman
Admin: Daxyeen
Time and Server(Bagil or Sybil) incident occurred: Bagil
ROUND ID HERE: 94335 https://tgstation13.org/parsed-logs/bas ... und-94335/
Detailed summary: Ruled that cremating someone who was defending their workplace from an intruder is not noteworthy or an instance of over-escalation. Beesting informed me it was out of his hands, since Dax gave such loose wording of "robust them".

17:22:03: Censored/(Censored): This isnt a complaint, I'm just warning you guys before I kill her so here's what happened between Janina and me : I saw the CE afk in his office so I go in and loot his toolbelt. Janina comes outt of nowhere, flashes me, loots me and stuffs me in a welded locker. Now I'm just going to take revenge
17:22:25: PM From DaxYeen/(Caroline Dupont): robust them

Full story/details: After getting free, the assistant flashed/killed me, then cremated my body. This feels a bit like overescalation, since I was permanently taken out of the round after inconveniencing them for ~5 minutes at most after they tried to steal from my department. Beesting informed me it was out of his hands, since Dax gave such loose wording of "robust them".


tl;dr: Cremated for nonlethally defending my workplace from an intruder, Dax approves of it.

I am said assistant and I was minding my own business doing assistant things such as looting the afk CE in his office.
You decided on your own to initiate conflict with me by flashing me, stealing all of my items and leaving me cuffed in a welded locker.

Let it be known I was not threatening you nor your workplace yet you went out of your way to grief me in the CE office when I assume you were trying to fix the SM to get rid of the sink.

What I was doing with the CE had nothing to do with you, so as the instigator of the conflict you have to accept the consequences of your actions should I fight back : in that case, being permanently removed of the round.

Please Hathkar you need to realize your actions have consequences. If you attack a player because their actions don't line up with your own moral compass it is reasonnable for them to fight back and unreasonnable for you to complain about losing said fight.

EDIT : I want to make it clear my actions had literally zero impact on Hathkar. The station was all dark because of a power sink and the CE sat still in his office from round start to round end. The toolbelt the CE was wearing was not being put to good use considering he was AFK whereas I could have used it to help fixing the power faster than with regular tools. The alternative is that the afk CE stays still in his office wasting a head role slot and all the tools that come with it.
I did not intend to cause grief to Hathkar nor to the engineering department. I just saw ressources that were not being used and that no one was going to use and tried to take them to participate in the round in a meaningful way. I don't understand why it would be legitimate to steal my belongings and trap me in a locker when none of my actions had a negative impact on anyone's round.

You may instigate conflict with another player within reason (you cant completley destroy their department, kill them unprovoked, or otherwise take them out of the round for long periods of time) but they are entitled to respond with violence. If you think its unfair or excessive they killed you for taking their ID, consider not stealing next round.

If you are the instigator in a conflict and end up killing or severely impairing the round of the person you are fighting, you should make a reasonable effort to return them to life at least once or make amends, only seeking round removal if they continue to pursue you. This protection doesn't apply to an instigator being killed.

This is a case of chicken/egg but I think breaking into someone's department makes you (the assistant) the instigator.

Also I hope that ahelp is not intentionally dishonest.

I edited my first post to clarify my line of thinking further.

Eskjjlj wrote:I am said assistant and I was minding my own business doing assistant things such as looting the afk CE in his office.
You decided on your own to initiate conflict with me by flashing me, stealing all of my items and leaving me cuffed in a welded locker.

Let it be known I was not threatening you nor your workplace yet you went out of your way to grief me in the CE office when I assume you were trying to fix the SM to get rid of the sink.

What I was doing with the CE had nothing to do with you, so as the instigator of the conflict you have to accept the consequences of your actions should I fight back : in that case, being permanently removed of the round.

Please Hathkar you need to realize your actions have consequences. If you attack a player because their actions don't line up with your own moral compass it is reasonnable for them to fight back and unreasonnable for you to complain about losing said fight.

EDIT : I want to make it clear my actions had literally zero impact on Hathkar. The station was all dark because of a power sink and the CE sat still in his office from round start to round end. The toolbelt the CE was wearing was not being put to good use considering he was AFK whereas I could have used it to help fixing the power faster than with regular tools. The alternative is that the afk CE stays still in his office wasting a head role slot and all the tools that come with it.
I did not intend to cause grief to Hathkar nor to the engineering department. I just saw ressources that were not being used and that no one was going to use and tried to take them to participate in the round in a meaningful way. I don't understand why it would be legitimate to steal my belongings and trap me in a locker when none of my actions had a negative impact on anyone's round.

You instigated the conflict by going into the engineering department and stealing stuff. Under escalation policy, you're allowed to start conflict within reason so this is fine. Hathkar attacked you and welded you into a locker in the gravity generator room- this is also fine, she's retaliating with violence- allowed under escalation policy. At this point, you're valid for permanent removal from the round and Hathkar can be killed, but you must make an effort to clone them.

You decide to adminhelp and alert us to the fact you were going to take revenge. I'm honestly not a huge fan of these types of ahelps (I usually tell the player to use their own good judgement and refuse to give them any input on what they should do). Dax responds with "robust them," which is somewhat vague. I did ask her and she said she didn't mean cremation though. You decide to take this and run with it, cremating Hathkar who graciously took the high road and kept you in the round. I would have noted you or banned you for it if you hadn't been given the green light by Dax right there.

Dax made a mistake but it's not like she needs to be deadminned over this or whatever.

With robust I meant beat them up not cremate them because getting welded in a locker is shitty.

I should've realized players take it to extremes and should've been more clear in the wording.

I'm not entirely sure how robust them went to "cremate" but sadly our player base doesn't always have capability to take the sane course of action.

Also I was unaware about the gun stuff and all he had, the ahelp conviently left all of that out. I'll need to remember you just can't trust players words as there's almost always something hidden or just straight up lies.

I should've been more clear and for that I apologise and I already mentioned in adminbus that my wording was poop before this appeal.

I'm also gonna stop replying to ahelps when I'm tired because as ? can attest I went to sleep shortly after replying to that ahelp.

PS saying I approved of the cremation is facetious, while you have a valid complaint, please don't make false claims.

My mistake then, I was under the impression that you approved of it afterwards.

Hathkar wrote:My mistake then, I was under the impression that you approved of it afterwards.

No it was before, it was basically 'can I have revenge because they welded me in a locker' and I went 'yes' instead of 'yes but within reason' and that ended up getting you cremated. Wording can be everything and I'm truly sorry it ruined your round. I would be upset too in your place.

Thank you for your understanding, Dax.

I suppose this is resolved and can be closed.

I'm glad to see the involved parties have resolved this amongst themselves.

Just to give the headmin's view quickly, we're upholding this complaint, for the reasons Dax themselves has acknowledged. Admining while tired can lead to unclear rulings and while we expect some level of common sense from players, it's not really fair if we give a vague ruling and then punish a player for working within that ruling barring gross misinterpretation of the ruling, hence why BeeSting said what they did.

As a result, we'd advise Dax to be precise in their rulings, and to get rest when it's needed!