[wubli] Frebbie - Misuse of Rule #8/Inappropriate Record Keeping

[Frebbie]

Byond account and character name: Frebbie - Jimmy Dean The Breakfast Sausage Machine
Admin: Wubli
Time and Server(Bagil or Sybil) incident occurred: 2018-07-16 17:44:27 | Sybil
ROUND ID HERE: 91118
Detailed summary:
I would like to summarize the complaint as directly as possible - Wubli is misusing rule 8 to apply to moderate humor or political commentary and keeping inappropriate/incomplete records of this action.

2018-07-16 17:44:27 | Sybil | wubli
Banned from OOC - OOC: Frebbie: to be fair you white south africans deserve the rape and violence. working to make a living is racist and youre denying your wealth to blacks - Referring to a South African player. Knock it off. This is not okay.

Prior to applying this ban and as rational for initiating contact with me Wubli cited Rule #8

8. Erotic/creepy stuff is not allowed.
No form of erotic roleplay is allowed on the servers, including things that could be construed as sexual by unwilling participants.

This is not an appeal of the ban or note or trying to play innocent, I'm fine with it being the only disciplinary action on my record.

If Wubli believes that my out of context OOC joke is a violation of Rule #1, not to be a dick, that is Wubli's prerogative and we could have a discussion about how appropriate this is under that context. If it's the case of Rule #7, coming close to breaking the rules, same story, we can discuss my OOC mesages in the context of the server rules. Rule #8 does not read I don't like your sense of humor and will cite it as creepy as justification to mute you. I believe that the administration and community can agree the context of creepy in Rule #8 can be understood as involving other members of the community in nontraditional eroticism or otherwise unsavory behavior such as meta stalking. I do not believe that summary ban for a collection of disagreeable OOC presence should be noted as "Knock it off. This[humor] is not okay."

[2018-07-16 17:42:16.251] OOC: 17:42:16.251] OOC: Frebbie/(Jimmy Dean The Breakfast Sausage Machine) : to be fair you white south africans deserve the rape and violence. working to make a living is racist and youre denying your wealth to blacks (164,135,2)

[2018-07-16 17:42:17.582] OOC: 17:42:17.582] OOC: Wubli/(Jill DeSouza) : dude i (171,152,2)

[2018-07-16 17:42:20.402] OOC: 17:42:20.402] OOC: Wubli/(Jill DeSouza) : ok frebbie (192,152,2)

[2018-07-16 17:42:21.370] OOC: 17:42:21.370] OOC: Wubli/(Jill DeSouza) : thats it (192,152,2)

https://tgstation13.org/parsed-logs/syb ... 018-07.zip

Wubli's disciplinary actions should be properly documented and the references to which rule(s) broken should be clear. I believe we all expect any disciplinary action to be a result of violating the server rules and documented as such. If it is not due to a violation of the server rules, but a collection of incidents found questionable as in Rule #7, I would understand it being addressed as such. I don't expect you to like every player in the community, but if you are going to take action because of /pol/ posting when someone else begins a discussion about politics, or moderate poop jokes, player notes are the appropriate place to document what you find objectionable and to give your rationale along with the disciplinary action you see fit. This isn't just about a disagreement over an alleged rule violation, but properly documenting the incident for myself and the administrative staff.

I am not mad, just disappointed. I'm a reasonable and friendly person and if you want to reach out to me regarding rules #1 and #7 in regards to OOC conversation, I'm more than welcome to have that conversation and, if we can't see eye to eye, involve other members of the administration in the discussion here on the forums. I am raising this issue because we have not had a dialog and the action taken was not appropriately documented. Please think of it like this: There's no code of conduct for OOC chat besides not being a dick and the erp/stalking/psychopath stuff, and so if you think that I'm stepping over the line, wouldn't you want to document that it is an ongoing gameplay issue, citing why you think the chat is not ok, so that other members of the administration are aware and can follow up on the on-going behavior when you aren't online? Let's have the conversation without hard feelings, I'm all about following the rules.

tl;dr
I don't think Wubli is a bad admin or should be punished or anything stupid like that - I just want to document this and hopefully have Wubli follow up on this incident and any future ones appropriately with proper rationale, documentation, and maybe a bit of dialog so that we can resolve any differences, as well as properly acknowledge Rule #8. What we have so far is not in context and not fair to myself or to another admin trying to use my notes to make a judgement on any possible future situation. Fair enough, right?

[MrAlphonzo]

I've already spoken to you about what you've been posting in OOC before. To think that the things you've said before and now would not make someone uncomfortable is foolish.

But let me see what I'm working with here.

If "You deserve rape" doesn't fall under "creepy", what would be considered creepy?

[CitrusGender]

Relevant (scrubbed) logs.



We are still deciding. People are free to post.

[Nabski]

Every day we fall further from our 4chan origins.

But that's still some pretty unemphatic shitposting there. The logs comment about has been warned about this kind of thing in the past and the fact that both admins online jumped on him I'm guessing this is true?

Also answer Alphonzo's question.

[oranges]

What a dumb thing to say in ooc, given the emotionally charged nature of the ban it's unlikely anyone else will defend this player so let me take a shot.

rule 8 was introduced originally to cover people doing creepy stuff in game (that is ic and using character mobs to simulate weird sexual shit which just makes other people uncomfortable), and lately some admins have seemed to extend it's scope to jokes of a sexual nature and so forth.

I don't like that because it's a very emotionally charged rule and can lead people to think very badly of others, even where context is provided, so I think we need to be very careful about this rule and honestly I would tighten it to clarify it's to cover in game incidents of creepy behaviour, and leave rule 1 to cover the rest, because that has less charged wording.

I believe intent does matter, and i don't think this person intended to be creepy but instead to make an inflammatory comment, probably due to a lack of maturity

This is an uncontroversial ban under rule 1, you were being intentionally inflammatory and making stupid commentary to make someone angry in ooc, politics belongs on /pol/ not in our ooc chat.

I recommend adjusting the ban to be clearly under rule 1, but including the content of the message, with some context, so if this weenie starts doing creepy stuff in game we can drop a nice big hammer on their head.

[Saegrimr]

People are free to post.

Rule 1 sure, Rule 8 is fucking stupid.

Context probably being how white farmers historically get treated like shit and driven out and quickly after the whole province drops into starvation, and this just sounds like some hee haw ironic shitposting about it.
Anybody even remotely familiar with random news articles about it would be hard pressed to think it was a serious comment no matter how tasteless it is.

[MrAlphonzo]

so if this weenie starts doing creepy stuff in game we can drop a nice big hammer on their head.

I've already spoken to you about what you've been posting in OOC before. To think that the things you've said before and now would not make someone uncomfortable is foolish.

Really makes you think.

[subject217]

Rule 1 sure, Rule 8 is fucking stupid.

Where in the context provided (Citrus' screencap) is Rule 8 mentioned?

[oranges]

so if this weenie starts doing creepy stuff in game we can drop a nice big hammer on their head.

I've already spoken to you about what you've been posting in OOC before. To think that the things you've said before and now would not make someone uncomfortable is foolish.

Really makes you think.

> in game

> what you've been posting in ooc

clearly it didn't make you think that hard dummy

[Frebbie]

I've already spoken to you about what you've been posting in OOC before. To think that the things you've said before and now would not make someone uncomfortable is foolish.

But let me see what I'm working with here.

If "You deserve rape" doesn't fall under "creepy", what would be considered creepy?

Let's reference the logs if we're going to discuss your issue with my joke.

[2018-07-16 17:42:16.251] OOC: 17:42:16.251] OOC: Frebbie/(Jimmy Dean The Breakfast Sausage Machine) : to be fair you white south africans deserve the rape and violence. working to make a living is racist and youre denying your wealth to blacks (164,135,2)

If you think /pol/posting satire is creepy, I'm sorry to hear that. I don't understand where you pull someone seriously saying, in your own summary "You deserve rape" from a satirical musing about the macabre racial instability and violence of South Africa, which the other player had been complaining about. You have a serious misinterpretation and I believe that you are either in the minority of people who would find that creepy or looking for trouble when there isn't any. Given that you are both trial admins I'd presume it's the latter.





That being said I don't appreciate a straw man with no constructive commentary. How about:

Frebbie, I see that this - [post the original comment in its entirety] - is political commentary that can commonly be found on /pol/ as you state, but I think that it could be misinterpreted and that it might cross the line of Rule #8

"To think that the things you've said before and now would not make someone uncomfortable is foolish." You immediately follow by posting what I said in your words rather than the original logs in question and then ascribe it to me telling someone they deserve to be raped. This both an absurd conclusion and an incredibly disingenuous way to lead your fellow administrators reading this as they approach the incident.

Air on the side of good faith, Its better to include too many context lines then not enough lines context lines
Expect onlookers to assume bad faith. If you omit details that are later deemed to be important people will assume you did it intentionally. This means doing due diligence when reviewing the logs for related or relevant bits.

https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=166

Show me the courtesy of following the same rules and respect that I show you please. I do not appreciate your rush to defame me as quickly as possible through omission and your retelling of events in a complaint that was not made against you. If you believe it was an ongoing issue worth addressing, why not put it in my notes instead of playing he said she said on the forums like this? Absolutely inappropriate Alphonzo.

What a dumb thing to say in ooc, given the emotionally charged nature of the ban it's unlikely anyone else will defend this player so let me take a shot.

rule 8 was introduced originally to cover people doing creepy stuff in game (that is ic and using character mobs to simulate weird sexual shit which just makes other people uncomfortable), and lately some admins have seemed to extend it's scope to jokes of a sexual nature and so forth.

I don't like that because it's a very emotionally charged rule and can lead people to think very badly of others, even where context is provided, so I think we need to be very careful about this rule and honestly I would tighten it to clarify it's to cover in game incidents of creepy behaviour, and leave rule 1 to cover the rest, because that has less charged wording.

I believe intent does matter, and i don't think this person intended to be creepy but instead to make an inflammatory comment, probably due to a lack of maturity

This is an uncontroversial ban under rule 1, you were being intentionally inflammatory and making stupid commentary to make someone angry in ooc, politics belongs on /pol/ not in our ooc chat.

I recommend adjusting the ban to be clearly under rule 1, but including the content of the message, with some context, so if this weenie starts doing creepy stuff in game we can drop a nice big hammer on their head.

Entirely reasonable and fair perspective.

Context probably being how white farmers historically get treated like shit and driven out and quickly after the whole province drops into starvation, and this just sounds like some hee haw ironic shitposting about it.
Anybody even remotely familiar with random news articles about it would be hard pressed to think it was a serious comment no matter how tasteless it is.

Correct.

[Frebbie]

Rule 1 sure, Rule 8 is fucking stupid.

Where in the context provided (Citrus' screencap) is Rule 8 mentioned?

Line 23

[subject217]

It's easy to see how you could conflate that, but it is by no means an explicit reference to rule 8, in my opinion.

[MrAlphonzo]

I've already spoken to you about what you've been posting in OOC before. To think that the things you've said before and now would not make someone uncomfortable is foolish.

But let me see what I'm working with here.

If "You deserve rape" doesn't fall under "creepy", what would be considered creepy?

Let's reference the logs if we're going to discuss your issue with my joke.

[2018-07-16 17:42:16.251] OOC: 17:42:16.251] OOC: Frebbie/(Jimmy Dean The Breakfast Sausage Machine) : to be fair you white south africans deserve the rape and violence. working to make a living is racist and youre denying your wealth to blacks (164,135,2)

If you think /pol/posting satire is creepy, I'm sorry to hear that. I don't understand where you pull someone seriously saying, in your own summary "You deserve rape" from a satirical musing about the macabre racial instability and violence of South Africa, which the other player had been complaining about. You have a serious misinterpretation and I believe that you are either in the minority of people who would find that creepy or looking for trouble when there isn't any. Given that you are both trial admins I'd presume it's the latter.

Since you've felt the need to call my rank into question, I've already been promoted to a full admin before, I'm just getting reacquainted with the new systems since my departure.

But that's not important.

You slapped a "I was merely pretending" at the end of your "joke". Congratulations, you're so brave.

That doesn't change the fact that what you said made people uncomfortable. The first thing that would be read would be "You deserve rape", not the obvious sarcasm that followed. If it was the other way around, that would be fine.

This isn't rocket science.

But, none of that is important either.

You didn't answer the question.

So, here's a friendly reminder.

If "You deserve rape" doesn't fall under "creepy", what would be considered creepy?

[Saegrimr]

It's easy to see how you could conflate that, but it is by no means an explicit reference to rule 8, in my opinion.

The quote was more referencing that people can post now.
The ban was still issued under rule 8, which it really shouldn't be.

[Saegrimr]

So, here's a friendly reminder.

If "You deserve rape" doesn't fall under "creepy", what would be considered creepy?

We could pull a goofball start pushing PRs to completely wordfilter "rape" from the game, replace all instances with it with anything else or just blank the line entirely because there's clearly no acceptable usage for it in any context so lets make a hard removal PR.

[MrAlphonzo]

So, here's a friendly reminder.

If "You deserve rape" doesn't fall under "creepy", what would be considered creepy?

We could pull a goofball start pushing PRs to completely wordfilter "rape" from the game, replace all instances with it with anything else or just blank the line entirely because there's clearly no acceptable usage for it in any context so lets make a hard removal PR.

You didn't answer the question, either.

[MrStonedOne]

So, here's a friendly reminder.

If "You deserve rape" doesn't fall under "creepy", what would be considered creepy?

We could pull a goofball start pushing PRs to completely wordfilter "rape" from the game, replace all instances with it with anything else or just blank the line entirely because there's clearly no acceptable usage for it in any context so lets make a hard removal PR.

Because while "the xenos got raped that round" is clearly in bad taste it's not something we should be legislating away from ooc, and quite a bit removed form comments like "you[r race] deserved to be raped" or other ricegum tier shit.

[CitrusGender]

I don't believe this is an explicit reference to rule 8. They did use similar verbage, but admins will note/ban things without explicit reference to the rule being broken. If they did not explicitly say that it falls under rule 8 and they tell me that the original reason was under rule 1: then I will take their word for it. Furthermore, there is no expectation of admins to painstakingly log bans and the rules associated with them other than a good explanation of what occurred.

With that out of the way, I can see why Wubli would issue a rule 1 ban for this particular instance and I do not believe this is a valid complaint. There is also no difference between trial admins and game admins other than seniority. I do not believe posting that 'trial admins are looking for trouble when there isn't any' is really a good narrative to stick to.

As such, we have decided to deny this complaint.
If you are interested in discussing the application or possible change of rule 8, I invite you to make a policy thread.

[wubli]

Hello.

I would first like to say my ban is not because of /pol/posting, but because your joke was telling someone they should die and or get raped.

What I said in line 23 was: "Knock it off with the creepy OOC messages". I believe this is what lead to a confusion, since rule 8 says "Erotic/creepy stuff is not allowed", but at least I've personally only used it for IC behavior. This was not a rule 8, and I never once cited it in the ahelp nor the ban reason.

While I can apologize for my misuse of words, I'd like to ask something: Do I really need to tell someone why saying other player they deserve being raped is bad? We constantly see ironic -or real- racism and xenophobia and no one bats an eye, since we all know it's either ironic or not worth discussing - but in this case you targetted a single other person who was talking in OOC about their country's situation telling them they deserve being raped. I truly believed it wasn't necessary to explain why it wasn't okay, nor cite a rule. I will take this into account for future reference.

This was a one day ban because you were a dick to another player. As you might have noticed, I have for a while disliked the sort of things you say in OOC, but not once taken action on them because it was my personal thoughts on it. In this case, the person itself asked me to mute you. I honestly, honestly thought it wasn't necessary for me to cite a rule.

It's a rule 1. Sorry for the confusion, and please don't do things of the sort again. I will now edit the note.