Page 1 of 1

[Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 4:41 am
by Kenteko
Post Content:
When and where this incident occurred (Game Server, forums, Discord): Sybil
Byond account and character name OR Discord name: Kenteko, Mina Nisumari, LunarMaestro
Admin: Shaps
ROUND ID HERE IF APPLICABLE: 108505 and 108508 and a war ops round in 4/26/19
Detailed summary:

So long story short, some massive situations happened where I felt wronged after doing everything I possibly could both within the rules and within my abilities as a player. Due to situations along with a crash, I was having a long time talking with Kiteme about the situation since it was extenuating circumstances, I was angry, and I had done everything within the rules, policy, and otherwise to try and resolve a situation I was wronged with.

This is not a complaint about Kiteme, but what about what came after.

So two rounds past the event, and two rounds spent talking to Kiteme to reach a resolution, Shaps broke into the conversation. I will post the conversation we had below, but the conversation spanned the end of one round and the beginning of another. It is my feeling that not only was Shaps rude, but he was dismissive and altogether damning with faint praise.

I wholly understand that admins are a volunteer position, but I feel that some level of standards are to be kept. This is the second situation (and the only one I have logs for offhand) where I have felt my complaint acknowledged and altogether dismissed and pretty much told to "get over it." If rules exist for a reason, then I feel these rules should be enforced.

The conversation for this event was as follows:

Admin PM from-Shaps: Hi friend, I'm stepping in on this ahelp. I've read briefly through the ahelp history and empathize with the frustration that you felt over getting gulagged. The situation sounds like it was sticky and complicated, which is often what happens with SS13. That being said though, I notice that the ahelps this round started a full half an hour ago as well as however long ago that the event actually happened. As someone who's been dealing with policy for nigh-on 4 years now, I advise that you take the time you've spent seeking justice for someone being dumb in SS13 and ruining your round and put it towards something more positive instead. Admins are volunteers who just try to keep everything moving, and i think that continuing to pursue events that happened several rounds ago isn't a great use of time for any of us here

Admin PM from-Shaps: That's not to invalidate your frustration or say that it doesn't matter, but after a certain point it's better to just let the matter rest and move on rather than stay stuck in trying to seek justice for something in the past. You've been a good player as I've seen, and I think you'd do well to have a good round or two to counter the bad one
==Round Break==

I requested to PM me through OOC so I could make a response.

Admin PM from-Shaps: Perhaps it's fitting that the server restart ate your response even, almost poetic in a way :smiley:

(Following is my response)

So I'll make this clear and I'll do it without the cursing that I had before because that's just stupid. Let's get a few things straight.

I understand rule 0.
I understand rule 10.
I understand that this happened a while ago.

With all that understanding, let's make this clear.

I don't care that you volunteer. I volunteer to plenty of things and am held to a standard of my job. Even without pay, even without doing anything, I'm held to the standard of doing my job.

I asked him to escalate it to Justice. I have no problem taking MY TIME to escalate something when I WAS BLATANTLY WRONGED.

I did everything by the book. Everything. I followed admin rulings, I followed rules, I chose TO NOT ESCALATE. I was wronged. I was absolutely positively wronged. Your comments even admitted to that.

I'm not putting words in your mouth, but every single thing that you said come off as "Yeah just move on even though you were wronged."

Kindly, no. You have rules. ENFORCE THEM.

The sad thing is, I'm not even asking for some harsh action. I'm not asking for anything that is clearly above and beyond. I'm asking simple enforcement of precedents that have been set in your four plus years of policy.

So I will happily take this to the forums, and I will do so as an admin complaint against you. Not Kiteme, who is a trial admin who was trying, but for you because this is not the first time I've been wronged.

Alternatively, I have no problem just leaving TG and letting you have the community you make. When you do nothing but stand and try to do everything you can to make this place better and more fun to play, and this is the response you get? When you try and follow all the rules and instead get told "lol move on."

Yea, I'll happily do so. Permanently.

==
(At this point, I ahelped as it was a long period without a response that I would respectfully wait for a response or a ticket close)

Admin PM from-Shaps: I'm going to level with you, as someone who's been headmin and been around for years, from our perspective it's honestly just not worth the time to investigate a he-said she-said that happened several rounds ago. I only stepped in on this because I looked at the tickets and saw you've been talking to Kiteme with giant walls of text for over two and a half hours.

For all the time you spent writing these massive walls of text (which I barely read tbh), you could have been eating some ice cream or watching a funny youtube video, or playing the game. Like I said, I'm sorry you had a bad round, but having the occasional bad round is just part of SS13, and this is exactly the reason why one of my fellow headmins discontinued ban requests for /tg/ years ago.

You can be indignant and threaten to file complaints all you want, but the hard fact is that 99.9% of the playerbase moves on from having bad rounds literally all the time, the admin team included. Your insistence on remaining upset about a past round is far beyond what I see from most players and is a detriment to you, which is a shame because as I've said you're otherwise a fine player. Either way, it's your call how you choose to proceed, but I won't let you continue to tie up Kiteme about something you could have been far past by now

==

(My response)

I don't write massive walls of text for the sake of being a bitch, I write and care for massive walls of text because I want the place to improve.

I think it says a lot that you clearly don't care to read my text. You are fully capable of insulting me, calling me unreasonable, or doing or saying what you want.

I am not upset about what a player did, I am upset that rules were broken and no guidance was given as to how to proceed. So it's fine to let security get away with things scot free because "IC issues?" I will have no problem acting in that light and doing what I want and simply citing this, and you, as precedence.

And now, I am upset with you clearly just telling me to drop it. Policy and rules exist for a reason and choosing to enforce or not enforce rules just subverts it. Telling me that I'm indignant and unreasonable is your right, but it also makes it clear your intent.

So I'll just see you on the forums. Have a good day.
Your ticket has been resolved by an admin. The Adminhelp verb will be returned to you shortly.

==
I feel incredibly condescended and patronized altogether. I understand administration is a hard job, and I understand it's volunteer, but I also understand that rules are in place for a reason. I am upset over the situation and how it played out, and I'm partly over it, but I'm not over how I've been treated. He admits he doesn't read my walls of text. He gives me little tidbits of how "I could go eat ice cream" or "watching a funny youtube video" like I'm a child and he's shaking keys.

I'm making this complaint not because I want to see him put up on a stake and burned, but because my frustration is that I want to make TG the best place it can be, and I want to do so within my power as a player. I'm angry, fed up, and frustrated at feeling dismissed by an admin who seems to believe in "suck it up and move it on" as if that's the official policy.

As I mentioned before, this is not the only time this has happened, but before I felt it was minor. Now, I feel this is part of a much bigger problem. The little tidbit I had before, by the way, was from 04/26/2019 (round data unknown)

PM to-Admins: So I just realized, but I'm pretty sure the RD suicided on a nukies war op.
Admin PM from-Shaps: eh, everyone gets all access anyway so I'm not so tight during war ops
PM to-Admins: Rule 5 though and it's someone being removed from command staff.
Admin PM from-Shaps: rule 0 everyone's already got all access anyway and I don't feel like pursuing it, thank you for the report though.

I never made a complaint because shit happens. I am now feeling fully and truly wronged and, honestly, dismissed.

However, this complaint is based off the true precedents this behavior sets.

The situation preceding this was my honest attempt at doing everything in my powers using all the rules, in and out of character, to build a better community and for doing so, I got round removed. I was angry and kept Kiteme across various rounds, as Shaps said, but I felt that rules were broken and I was wronged. I understand and accept that sometimes, shit happens, but all Shaps' attitude does is effectively say "Yes it was wrong, deal with it." (Paraphrase, mine, that's how I felt). His actions simply make me feel that good, honest, positive players should not try to contribute to making a better place because either "We don't have 4+ years adminning" or "Deal with it." If that is what the precedent should be then so be it, but I need to make my voice heard as a player who wants to see this place made amazing.

I apologize for the long complaint, but thank you for reading it all.

[Deleted]

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 4:49 am
by Tallvisit
PostThis post was deleted by Arianya on Thu May 16, 2019 2:42 pm.
Reason: Peanut posting

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 4:58 am
by Dax Dupont
It has been policy that issues 'expire' after a certain amount of time/rounds. Did this issue which you ahelped occurred in the same round or the round before?

Generally only massive grief is handled upto a day in time.

The fact is when the round ends the player who did the bad might be gone but we also lose a lot of investigative power such as the things in the forensic datums (which is why admins delay the round end at times and sometimes they don't need to).

Make sure to always ahelp when something happens or ping supportmins on discord.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 5:13 am
by Kenteko
The issue in question was two rounds previous. The reason it was taking so long was because the server crashed and retrieving logs was important. It was ahelped preemptively and it took extensive time due to extenuating circumstances.

[Deleted]

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 5:43 am
by pointlesswaste
PostThis post was deleted by Arianya on Thu May 16, 2019 2:42 pm.
Reason: Peanut posting

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:24 am
by cedarbridge
Is there a particular reason you posted handmade "logs" instead of requesting official logs for this complaint?

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:37 am
by Kenteko
cedarbridge wrote:Is there a particular reason you posted handmade "logs" instead of requesting official logs for this complaint?


Frankly, I didn't see the protocol for it in the thread. I have no problems with someone getting official logs.

I asked Hulkamania for help in formatting and the like because I did not want to be called out for not following the rules or the ilk.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:58 am
by cedarbridge
Parsed logs are currently still dead, but the raws can be pulled on request.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 9:27 am
by Karp
From what I've been told from other admins involved in the situation, this entire ahelp incident took 2 hours and was ruled as an ic issue.

If a situation does not go in your favour many times there are multiple mitigating factors, both in and out of character that can reduce the punishment someone experiences that may not be elaborated on due to the sensitivity of some information(notes, ingame events, player/account history, adminpm messages) but in this incident the ingame ones don't really hold as much weight due to it being post round, but shaps wasn't the admin who handled the ticket over you being gulagged regardless.

From what Shaps has said and what I know of general administrative sayings and decisions, Shaps' intentions were to tell you that it wasn't healthy to hold a 2+ hour long desire to get someone punished over an incident in which you were gulagged, and that you could've been playing the game or doing something else to vent and relax unless the situation involved extreme levels of disruptive grief(plasma flooding, uploading antimov to the AI, spamming, crashing the server).

A lot of in character situations that slowly escalate, or maybe have slightly overescalated past that point generally don't net punishments hours later and that the net effect is just riling yourself up and upsetting yourself over the round's events. The mentality of burying the hatchet is a held and likley should be encouraged mentality primarily because holding a longstanding grudge over in character events that aren't extreme swings in escalation aren't healthy in a game that involves a lot of misinformation and subtlety, and due to how much you have to scrutinize every single thing the player does to draw blood out of that stone by a point that the player has forgotten the details of the event and how being brigged on a timed sentence isn't worth seeking retribution over after hour(s)(questioning style I reference is in the style of "When did you detain x", "how long did you leave them in a holding cell"," how did they do y", "what were the events surrounding z").

As I've also said above, shaps was not the initial handler of the ticket to elaborate for tallvisit and any other observers, in case you doubt the mentality and think this is an administrator shirking their duty, shaps made it explicit in the adminpm below that they were concerned about kenteko getting too worked up about an adminhelp/incident and that while their concerns about the situation were likley valid, sometimes the best solution is to just accept that it was a bad round and let it go for your own sake and sanity.
"Admin PM from-Shaps: That's not to invalidate your frustration or say that it doesn't matter, but after a certain point it's better to just let the matter rest and move on rather than stay stuck in trying to seek justice for something in the past. You've been a good player as I've seen, and I think you'd do well to have a good round or two to counter the bad one"

I can understand your concerns of administrators being potentially negligent or apathetic, as I used to carry this mentality years ago from the player perspective, but a complaint against a senior admin who tries to give you advice from their years of perspective and experience likley will fail to go anywhere. It may be more productive to take the discussion to policy if you believe this is a serious enough issue with rules being enforced too lightly or a blindspot not covered by our current rules page.

This is more anecdotal but I feel as if it is important: I do note your care and concern over the state of the server or the administrative team but I agree with shaps on the "It may be best to let things die" note. I've seen a huge trend of players who fail to accept that and aggravate themselves over being told "IC issue" or that the person in question was "warned" to the point that they become the negative influence they disliked on the server, accumulating notes and bans as a result of their actions. I think shaps' advice is something you should try to take into consideration as an administrator being worried or concerned about a player going towards a negative place rather than the administrator in question being condescending and attempting to humiliate you or downplay your concerns.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 1:29 pm
by Shaps-cloud
Admins aren't here to give you justice or save you from being wronged, admins are here to keep things running smoothly. I logged on, saw Kiteme had been responding to a ticket for over half an hour, and asked what was happening. He told me he'd been dealing with you for the last two rounds which was over two hours. I asked him if he wanted me to intervene, and he was visibly relieved to be freed of it. Following the precedent KorPhaeron set a few years back by closing ban requests, I then spiked the investigation because ahelps are typically handled with the understanding that doing so will have a positive effect on the server and the player ahelping is doing so in good faith. Spending almost 3 hours tracking down one questionable situation (which honestly to me sounded totally IC anyway) would not produce a good effect on the server worth 3 hours, and holding an admin hostage for that entire time rather than simply getting over it is not in good faith.

See: Rules 0 & 10

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 2:49 pm
by Kenteko
I want to be clear that there is extensive focus on the time, but I need to reiterate that most of that time was spent due to difficulties that come from both the crash and accessing logs of the event.

However, this situation is not about that time spent. The issue is in how Shaps responded.

I am completely fine in that the long discussion was handled. I'm not in any way throwing Kiteme under the bus, nor am I holding any grudge in justice or the like, and I would stop focusing on it. My complaint is to Shaps and how he handled it.

1) He made it clear he didn't read what I said with giant walls of text while giving his own.
2) He was patronizing and condescending in how he said to go away. "Go eat since ice cream or watch a funny youtube video"
3) He clearly just pulled the "I've been doing this for years" card to give himself a feeling of superiority.
4) He was clearly dismissive "You can be indignant and threaten to file complaints all you want" as if he did not care or feel like I was either going to do anything or my actions were ultimately that of a child/someone who didn't matter.

I have no complaints about Kiteme or about the event. He handled it very well with immense professionalism, he was dealing with an incredibly sticky situation, and altogether I understand he was against the wall with it. The server crashed, the logs were hard to access, etc. I made this clear in the base thing.

I have a complaint against Shaps for effectively telling me to suck it up. Many other people in this thread have demonstrated various means and ways that you can do, professionally, to inform someone that the statue of limitations has passed and, unfortunately, it's too late to do anything about. Even saying things like "Oh you're a good player but this is clearly you being petulant" in nicer words (my interpretation here).

So please, for the virtue of the complaint, I do not want it to be about the long situation, that was the build up. This is more about the admin's handling and flagrant repeated feelings of not caring over what he deems as "unreasonable" in my eyes.

[Deleted]

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 4:30 pm
by Tallvisit
PostThis post was deleted by Arianya on Thu May 16, 2019 5:39 pm.
Reason: Peanut posting

[Deleted]

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 5:09 pm
by Fatal
PostThis post was deleted by Arianya on Thu May 16, 2019 5:39 pm.
Reason: Peanut posting

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 5:21 pm
by Kenteko
So I'll be a little real now: The thought that people work for free is a fallacy in and of itself and markedly untrue.

Let's look over what you get for being an admin:
1) Respect (forced or otherwise)
2) The power to change rounds
3) The power to control the game or day of a player.
4) Responsibility to represent the policies presented
5) The power to enforce rules.
6) The power to shape server/game culture on a direct level

Rule 0 alone means that an admin can willingly choose, as noted by Snaps, to simply not enforce a rule. That means that, if nothing else, an admin can intentionally hide and deflect rule breaking behavior (albeit for not very long possibly) for a friend, a rando, or because they find it funny. I've seen admins intelligence submit Poly, only for the player playing Poly to go and murderbone people. Even though that's clear rule breaking behavior, the admin at the time made it clear that everyone involved, including the victims, found it hilarious and instead chose to let it pass. This ultimately shaped culture and mindset for those who witnessed it.

Events can make people excited or altogether make a bad day amazing. People come on to play a game and blow off steam from reality, and sometimes having a good Blackburn or JusticeGoat event, or even a devil round when run by Virtual John can make a massive difference and cause community support, stories that get shared around, and create a great environment.

By contrast, simply shirking your duties and hiding behind the "we get nothing flag" just undermines their position and devalues those who bust their rump and do things right. That's what this is at its core.

Was I angry at the time? Yes, absolutely. Did Kiteme handle this as good a way as he could? Also absolutely, he showed amazing professionalism, persistence, and otherwise served as a pillar of community in his attempts not only to explain the situation, but calm me down. Shaps, instead, chose to attack my character, dismiss me, and otherwise patronize me because he felt he was right because "he's doing this for free."

Maybe it's just me, but I think the former (and many admins like him) should be the celebrated and the ones that should be the norm, not the latter. Thus, complaint.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 5:42 pm
by Arianya
Hi,

as a forum moderation reminder this isn't the place to have a debate or an argument about the OP, the admin in question, or anything else. I'm seeing a lot of third parties posting (both admins and non-admins) who really shouldn't be under Rule 2 of Admin Complaints.

I've already deleted several posts. Please constrain yourselves to not posting unless you're the OP, the admin in question, a headmin, or you have a peanut policy compliant post.

If you feel the need to debate about OP's worldview or the admin in question we have other subforums for that. Thanks!

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:24 pm
by Arianya
Admin PM logs:

Spoiler:
--- NEW ROUND --- is added by me to represent a new round.

[code][2019-05-16 05:32:30.933] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Luther Longmont)->Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari): Can you explain the entire situation from your perspective for me?
[2019-05-16 05:35:56.737] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): Sure. So, Johnny Westside broke into my office, or was accused of it, stealing my dog. I was pissed, but investigated into it and found that Ian was dead. As a result, and because the CE ordered that hwas B&Eing into places, I ordered security to demote him as is my right as HoP. I did not say to raid cargo, just to demote the head of security.##I also reported they had guns just to let them know.##Simultaneously, I hired Gunther to replace the QM and he is doing his bounty hunting shit. The AI, clearly not caring, did not follow orders or do anything. When I no humaned Johnny Westside, as this had reached well past escalation, he refused orders even then.##Security chose to disobey my orders as the Warden (who wanted to be acting head of security) had not been involved in command.##At this point, the Chief Engineer and myself, the HoP, wanted Johnny demoted. I baton him and drag him out, get overwhelmed, and it's a standoff.##Eventually, Beepsky arrests me and I get gulaged, despite doing everything by both
[2019-05-16 05:36:51.606] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): I even triied to call multiple ERTs to make it simple and easy, as is my right as both acting command and someone who was trying to keep it IC. They were denied.

--- NEW ROUND ---

[2019-05-16 05:38:48.649] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(Kenteko): we denied the erts because a cult was just starting up and it would''ve massively cucked them.
[2019-05-16 05:39:06.461] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(Kenteko): let me finish reading both sides of the story
[2019-05-16 05:39:09.396] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Kenteko)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): Yea, I know, but I just want to be clear I tried to keep it IC and nobody know about cult.
[2019-05-16 05:43:27.091] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Luther Longmont)->Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari): I understand your frustration, but this is an IC issue through and through.
[2019-05-16 05:44:01.997] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): I followed all rules. I did everything by the rules. I made everything IC. I did absolutely everything there and got cucked by people who couldn't care. If this were IC, there'd be job bans from flagrant incompetence
[2019-05-16 05:44:12.598] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): And revolution.
[2019-05-16 05:45:00.010] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): IC means there's IC consequences. As acting captain and HoP, I had both authority and peaceful means at hand. Neither were followed and I was arrested.
[2019-05-16 05:45:28.564] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Luther Longmont)->Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari): security and cargo both sided against you for IC reasons.
[2019-05-16 05:46:06.892] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): I want to point out, by the way, killing the dog is a bannable rule one break. And I have prior rulings and people who agree. So what am I supposed to do? Fucking murderbone?
[2019-05-16 05:47:18.504] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): I want to be clear that this has rule one precedents by the way.
[2019-05-16 05:47:44.658] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): viewtopic.php?f=33&t=14718#p369897 #Headmin ruling
[2019-05-16 05:48:05.462] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Luther Longmont)->Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari): He told me it was an accident, and I can't prove intent.
[2019-05-16 05:48:23.921] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): You don't accidentally break into the hop office, Kiteme. Hacking requires effort.
[2019-05-16 05:49:08.010] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): You refrained from escalating to the point I should have and I was round removed. I went above and fucking beyond EVERYTHING. I could've round removed him, executed him, or bombed cargo. I did none of that FOR A SINGULAR DEMOTION.
[2019-05-16 05:49:57.996] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): That's not even getting into CYBR-OS btw, who was breaking silicon rules and making it worse by making it seem like there's a war.
[2019-05-16 05:53:23.128] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Headmin_Rulings Just to be clear and show that killing/capturing Ian (and Aaron was probably the killer) is a rule one violation, Headmin ruling.##To be clear, the KIDNAPPING of Ian is what led to this entire course.
[2019-05-16 05:53:42.898] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Luther Longmont)->Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari): wait fuck'
[2019-05-16 05:53:50.709] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Luther Longmont)->Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari): that is not the reply button
[2019-05-16 05:53:56.969] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): ah
[2019-05-16 05:56:44.206] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Luther Longmont)->Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari): so, did you see him kill ian?
[2019-05-16 05:57:30.720] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): He stole Ian from a secure location, which also has rule one precedents, and had multiple witnesses to the fact. I'm pretty sure Aaron did the deed, but he did not. Him stealing Ian is what ultimately led to his death since, as I'm making clear, the dog was in the office.
[2019-05-16 05:57:58.505] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): Players who attempt to break into the captain's office, head of personnel's office, or the bridge at or near roundstart for no legitimate reason put themselves at risk for being legitimately killed by the captain, heads of staff, or security. ##That's the precedent, from the wiki.
[2019-05-16 05:58:16.079] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Luther Longmont)->Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari): I am aware. You could have done that.
[2019-05-16 05:58:52.179] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): But I did, and it was ignored by both the silicon and acting head of security. The AI actively ignored the law 2 request and the warden basically told me to fuck off.
[2019-05-16 05:59:23.083] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): More importantly, I ordered a death through proxy, which is the rule in question that I am allowed to do. So I DID do that, as is my power of command staff.


--- NEW ROUND ---

[2019-05-16 06:01:19.952] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(Kenteko): h
[2019-05-16 06:03:26.547] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(Kenteko): ok. I'm going to talk to him about ian, but he didn't directly kill it. One thing I'd like to point out is that last round the QM pre-emptively ahelped as the situation and appologized at the start of last round. I still see this as an IC issue, though.
[2019-05-16 06:04:06.747] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Kenteko)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): The round removal is breaking escalation policy. And the silicon issues are breaking silicon policy.
[2019-05-16 06:05:23.023] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): And like I mentioned, if it's an IC policy, where's the IC retribution? Where's the temp job ban from people who blatantly fucking broke law five/did not do their fucking job. It's abuse of position which, I want to point out, is also a precedence.
[2019-05-16 06:06:02.850] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): I am very sorry for the swearing, but at this point, this is growing ridiculous.
[2019-05-16 06:06:31.892] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari): I understand your frustration. The crashing has made this 10x harder on my part though, so bear with me.
[2019-05-16 06:06:46.678] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): I'm in no rush, just angry.
[2019-05-16 06:07:25.343] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari): Ok, what happened with being gulaged? security detained you?
[2019-05-16 06:07:57.360] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): I was walking the hallway and got Beepsky'd. Two sec guards were nearby, dragged me to the brig, and the warden gulaged me for 1k points.
[2019-05-16 06:08:32.319] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): A warden who, for lack of a better way of saying it, asked to be asking head of security and did not/refused to be on command channel where command was talking about shit.
[2019-05-16 06:09:35.643] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari): what reason did they give
[2019-05-16 06:09:46.893] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): "Tried to start a war"
[2019-05-16 06:11:17.288] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): Also to be clear, this was all due to wanting to demote my employee, for stealing my dog, when he was valid as is my right to do so. Not anyone else. Not do anything else.
[2019-05-16 06:15:34.183] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them): what about the AI?
[2019-05-16 06:16:01.316] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): I non humaned Johnny and ordered the AI to kill him and use his borgs. Instead of doing so, the AI basically just spilled it and did nothing.
[2019-05-16 06:16:57.968] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them): i really wish the server didn't crash
[2019-05-16 06:17:10.293] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): Me too Kite, me too.
[2019-05-16 06:25:10.563] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them): h. I'm adding a note for the QM about the dog, but other than that there isn't much for me to do. Security was well within their rights to detain you.
[2019-05-16 06:25:22.542] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them): Was the ai's law a law 4?
[2019-05-16 06:25:51.902] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): Yes. It non humaned Johnny Westside. Also, to be clear, this does mean that security can, if they so choose, just break away from the station and do whatever they want with no repercussions?
[2019-05-16 06:26:27.851] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them): looking through these chat logs they had an IC reason to gulag you. being hop does not make you immune to that.
[2019-05-16 06:26:43.395] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): What was my crime? It was a 1000 point gulag and I did nothing to anyone's life.
[2019-05-16 06:27:03.980] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them): from their perspective it was you causing the conflict.
[2019-05-16 06:27:29.139] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): Except I was not. I was doing my job and attempting to demote someone IN MY DEPARTMENT who was hostile to me.
[2019-05-16 06:27:56.439] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): Something that I had the support of another command staff, the Chief Engineer, and the AI was clearly rogue or inciting the riot.
[2019-05-16 06:28:24.745] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): Because the AI was the one spilling out confidential information constantly. I committed literally no crime and got blamed for the AI who was breaking ACTUAL rules.
[2019-05-16 06:28:32.367] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them): the chat logs indicate to me that the AI was trying to prevent the entire conflict as a whole.
[2019-05-16 06:28:47.119] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): Against his orders, and he was doing so to protect non humans versus humans.
[2019-05-16 06:29:29.264] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them): it was doing it to prevent the greater conflict that would inevitabley harm humans
[2019-05-16 06:29:33.279] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): Scroll back some more and you'll see him spill information to supply after I spoke to them about the situation. ##I also want to point out, I made no offer or anything like that to cause any sort of riot, beyond making my orders as the command staff.
[2019-05-16 06:29:43.202] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): Right, but it ignored two direct law twos.
[2019-05-16 06:29:54.105] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kiteme/(Kiteme)->Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them): because of law 1
[2019-05-16 06:30:04.854] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): Actually, the order was to kill him.
[2019-05-16 06:30:17.761] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): And he was non human. So that doesn't fly.
[2019-05-16 06:30:35.031] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): I made damn well sure of that.
[2019-05-16 06:31:24.579] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): If you want to quote space law, then realize that the Warden was guilty of Dereliction, the QM of being Enemy of the Corp and Insubordination, and I did fucking nothing of any of that.
[2019-05-16 06:32:04.475] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): You will find I did not even offer all access to anyone who did it, which would be inciting a riot. I stood my ass outside cargo, MY OWN FUCKING DEPARTMENT, and waited.##The only reason I left was to CONTINUE DOING MY JOB.
[2019-05-16 06:33:18.496] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): It should also be noted the Chief Engineer demanded I be brought back. You know, someone else with more authority than the fucking warden. The little I caught from Intercom was the AI telling him to shove it in nicer words.
[2019-05-16 06:34:06.223] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): No fucking offense intended, but I could not have done it more by the book if I was holding the book in my hand and reciting the fucking rules.
[2019-05-16 06:36:15.280] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): That's why I reported it not for rule one, despite the many other precedents for other rules. Truth be told, this was a blatant rule five break with abuse of position as malicious intent was clearly at play when someone stole my fucking dog, ignored TWO direct orders from their Asimov lawset, and then gulaged me without any sort of reason or excuse even against command staff's orders.
[2019-05-16 06:37:18.072] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them)->Kiteme/(Kiteme): And if you want reciprocity into it to help prove intent, keep in mind he asked me for all access in the beginning of the round and I told him no. That alone could prove in character grudge and abuse of power by the quartermaster to steal my dog. Tit for tat.
[2019-05-16 06:39:40.280] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Shaps/(Beatrix Abode)->Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them): Hi friend, I'm stepping in on this ahelp. I've read briefly through the ahelp history and empathize with the frustration that you felt over getting gulagged. The situation sounds like it was sticky and complicated, which is often what happens with SS13. That being said though, I notice that the ahelps this round started a full half an hour ago as well as however long ago that the event actually happened. As someone who's been dealing with policy for nigh-on 4 years now, I advise that you take the time you've spent seeking justice for someone being dumb in SS13 and ruining your round and put it towards something more positive instead. Admins are volunteers who just try to keep everything moving, and i think that continuing to pursue events that happened several rounds ago isn't a great use of time for any of us here
[2019-05-16 06:42:37.102] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Shaps/(Beatrix Abode)->Kenteko/(The One Who Stalks Among Them): That's not to invalidate your frustration or say that it doesn't matter, but after a certain point it's better to just let the matter rest and move on rather than stay stuck in trying to seek justice for something in the past. You've been a good player as I've seen, and I think you'd do well to have a good round or two to counter the bad one

--- NEW ROUND ---

[2019-05-16 06:45:22.887] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Shaps/(Shaps)->Kenteko/(Kenteko): Perhaps it's fitting that the server restart ate your response even, almost poetic in a way :)
[2019-05-16 06:50:30.240] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Kenteko)->Shaps/(Beatrix Abode): So I'll make this clear and I'll do it without the cursing that I had before because that's just stupid. Let's get a few things straight.##I understand rule 0.#I understand rule 10.#I understand that this happened a while ago.##With all that understanding, let's make this clear.##I don't care that you volunteer. I volunteer to plenty of things and am held to a standard of my job. Even without pay, even without doing anything, I'm held to the standard of doing my job.##I asked him to escalate it to Justice. I have no problem taking MY TIME to escalate something when I WAS BLATANTLY WRONGED.##I did everything by the book. Everything. I followed admin rulings, I followed rules, I chose TO NOT ESCALATE. I was wronged. I was absolutely positively wronged. Your comments even admitted to that.##I'm not putting words in your mouth, but every single thing that you said come off as "Yeah just move on even though you were wronged."##Kindly, no. You have rules. ENFORCE THEM.##The sad thing is, I'm not even asking for so
[2019-05-16 06:50:50.219] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Kenteko)->Shaps/(Beatrix Abode): Kindly, no. You have rules. ENFORCE THEM.##The sad thing is, I'm not even asking for some harsh action. I'm not asking for anything that is clearly above and beyond. I'm asking simple enforcement of precedents that have been set in your four plus years of policy.##So I will happily take this to the forums, and I will do so as an admin complaint against you. Not Kiteme, who is a trial admin who was trying, but for you because this is not the first time I've been wronged.##Alternatively, I have no problem just leaving TG and letting you have the community you make. When you do nothing but stand and try to do everything you can to make this place better and more fun to play, and this is the response you get? When you try and follow all the rules and instead get told "lol move on."##Yea, I'll happily do so. Permanently.
[2019-05-16 06:58:28.136] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Kenteko)->Shaps/(Beatrix Abode): We done? I'm not going to leave if you have something to say. Just close the ticket or I'll happily wait.
[2019-05-16 07:00:42.741] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Shaps/(Beatrix Abode)->Kenteko/(Kenteko): I'm going to level with you, as someone who's been headmin and been around for years, from our perspective it's honestly just not worth the time to investigate a he-said she-said that happened several rounds ago. I only stepped in on this because I looked at the tickets and saw you've been talking to Kiteme with giant walls of text for over two and a half hours.
-
- For all the time you spent writing these massive walls of text (which I barely read tbh), you could have been eating some ice cream or watching a funny youtube video, or playing the game. Like I said, I'm sorry you had a bad round, but having the occasional bad round is just part of SS13, and this is exactly the reason why one of my fellow headmins discontinued ban requests for /tg/ years ago.
-
- You can be indignant and threaten to file complaints all you want, but the hard fact is that 99.9% of the playerbase moves on from having bad rounds literally all the time, the admin team included. Your insistence on remaining upset about a past round is far beyond what I see from most players and is a detriment to you, which is a shame because as I've said you're otherwise a fine player. Either way, it's your call how you choose to proceed, but I won't let you continue to tie up Kiteme about something you could have been far past by now
[2019-05-16 07:04:34.866] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Kenteko)->Shaps/(Beatrix Abode): I don't write massive walls of text for the sake of being a bitch, I write and care for massive walls of text because I want the place to improve.##I think it says a lot that you clearly don't care to read my text. You are fully capable of insulting me, calling me unreasonable, or doing or saying what you want. ##I am not upset about what a player did, I am upset that rules were broken and no guidance was given as to how to proceed. So it's fine to let security get away with things scot free because "IC issues?" I will have no problem acting in that light and doing what I want and simply citing this, and you, as precedence.##And now, I am upset with you clearly just telling me to drop it. Policy and rules exist for a reason and choosing to enforce or not enforce rules just subverts it. Telling me that I'm indignant and unreasonable is your right, but it also makes it clear your intent. ##So I'll just see you on the forums. Have a good day.


Theres no place to link since online logs are broken, but to get the same results as I did, you can use this methodology:

Spoiler:
MARK all lines containing "ADMINPRIVATE: PM:"
MARK all lines using reg-ex filter " - .*"
REMOVE unmarked lines
MARK all lines containing "Kenteko"
MARK all lines using reg-ex filter " - .*"
REMOVE unmarked lines

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 8:32 pm
by kiteme
So, first off. I did say it was about 2 hours long, but logs read to me like it was only about an hour or so that I was PMing Kenteko. That’s my bad, It seemed to feel a lot longer than it actually was. In my eyes this was an IC issue through and through, but I stuck with it a lot longer than I should have. Retrospectively, I would just close the ticket and move on. The entire PM conversation was around 3 intertwined events during a round that would end up crashing just as I started looking into it.

QM stealing Ian, cargo “revolution”, and the demotion of the QM
Security siding with cargo, Kenteko being gulag’d for 1000 points
AI not following its laws.

None of the actual conflicts were able to be resolved in character, and nobody who played that round got closure. As I’m sure everyone knows, it can be extremely frustrating to have the server crash. I completely understood why Kenteko was irritated and I have no ill will towards them for being angry in PMs. After the round crashed, I spent the 2 rounds (relatively short ones iirc) asking pretty open and vague questions, while digging around in the logs for what I could find. I had already talked with the QM, but I hadn’t gotten the chance to talk to security. I continued digging through the logs, and it seemed to me like sec had a valid reason for the gulag. I then began looking through the chat logs for the AI not following its laws, which I really couldn’t find. This is where I should have closed the ticket, and walked away. However, I continued up until Shaps logged in. Shaps saw the ticket, and offered to take it off my hands. I had honestly had about enough rules being linked to me, so I happily obliged. At this point I had made my mind up fully about the situation, and I needed a break. Moreover, Shaps had just more eloquently told Kenteko what I was going to if we kept at it. It was an IC issue in a round that ended up crashing a few minutes later, that got dragged out over the next 2 rounds. Nothing Shaps said is something I wouldn’t have said myself. I in no way felt what was said to be an attack on Kenteko’s character, nor was it any way patronizing. It was more or less what I should’ve said much earlier, and Shaps stepped in to help me. In my little time here so far Shaps has been nothing but helpful to me and an exemplary role model.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 11:12 pm
by Kenteko
So I feel this is important judging from what I've seen and generally altogether what this thread may be trending to.

I have no ill will or complaints about how Kiteme handled it. He was a stalwart professional that went above and beyond what he was doing. I agree wholeheartedly with his actions and support what he did and how he did it fully. I understand do respect where Shaps was coming from.

However, my problem is how Shaps handled this entire thing. I have no qualms being told, quite eloquently, to just deal with it. I have had many repeated histories with other admins, such as Cedarbridge, who has given me that judgment and I have handled it because they did so in a professional way.

The problem is ultimately that Shaps came off, to me, as insulting, condescending, and patronizing. I'm going to repeat this just to be clear, but Shaps went so far as saying he did not read and likely did not care what I was saying.

Everything about it makes it feel like he wants admins to come off as the "superior" and "adult" figure instead of someone who is neutral or simply enforcing the rules. Grace and courtesy help build communities and build bridges. His responses are infuriating because, I mean, how should someone react if they admit to not reading what you say? That their "experience" automatically negates yours because of an arbitrary number.

Maybe this should be a policy discussion, I don't know. All I know is that I feel wronged, degraded, and all the other adjectives I've put in and I filed a complaint. It's all I can do, beyond leaving.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 1:44 am
by ohnopigeons
What Shaps told you was more or less policy verbatim.

Relevant quotes from the ban request closure:

godmin wrote:Ban requests will no longer be open for posting in.

-It was a waste of time for the victim: Arguing for a week because you spend 20 minutes sitting out of the game is a poor use of time

-It was a waste of time for the accused: Arguing for a week because you killed a guy in a videogame is a poor use of time

-It was a waste of time for admins: See above. Made all the worse by having to track down various parties and get them to post, drag up logs, etc. Half the ban requests sat for a month because nobody could be bothered anyway.

godmin wrote:
but kor the admin I adminhelped to didn't ban the guy!


Move on then. We don't need an appeals circuit all the way to the top every time the clown punches the mime.

godmin wrote:I guess he got away with it. It's still not worth your time to spend a week getting mad about it. It's just a game in the end, and you'll be alive next round (or on the other server when you switch, or in another game if you just tab out and do something else when you die).

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 6:45 am
by Isratosh
[2019-05-16 05:46:06.892] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): I want to point out, by the way, killing the dog is a bannable rule one break. And I have prior rulings and people who agree. So what am I supposed to do? Fucking murderbone?
[2019-05-16 05:47:18.504] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): I want to be clear that this has rule one precedents by the way.
[2019-05-16 05:47:44.658] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): viewtopic.php?f=33&t=14718#p369897 #Headmin ruling

[2019-05-16 05:53:23.128] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Headmin_Rulings Just to be clear and show that killing/capturing Ian (and Aaron was probably the killer) is a rule one violation, Headmin ruling.##To be clear, the KIDNAPPING of Ian is what led to this entire course.

KorPhaeron wrote:If you perform an action which has zero benefit to you other than making others upset (like killing Ian) I will ban you if you adminhelp when someone kills you.

Did you completely forget to read the second half of that sentence in the headmin ruling that you are quoting? That piece of policy is to stop people from trying to get other people banned when they themselves are the ones instigating. Killing Ian is a dick move, yes, but has nothing to do with the admins.

That entire situation is an IC issue that you pushed (demotion) and lost. It doesn't matter how "by the book" you did it, in-character issues don't always go your way just because you did them right and that is not something you can whine to the admins about (rule 10). I would've absolutely dropped the ticket, and I would advise that you listen to Shaps' advice. He was well in his right to relieve Kiteme of the player (read: you) that would not listen. Keeping an admin over a problem this minuscule for 2 hours is deranged. Consider yourself lucky that Saegrimr isn't around, because he would have given you the same advice without the sugar coating.

[Deleted]

PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 9:13 am
by Rustledjimm
PostThis post was deleted by Arianya on Fri May 17, 2019 9:38 am.
Reason: Peanut posting

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 2:47 pm
by Dax Dupont
Isratosh wrote:
[2019-05-16 05:46:06.892] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): I want to point out, by the way, killing the dog is a bannable rule one break. And I have prior rulings and people who agree. So what am I supposed to do? Fucking murderbone?
[2019-05-16 05:47:18.504] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): I want to be clear that this has rule one precedents by the way.
[2019-05-16 05:47:44.658] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): viewtopic.php?f=33&t=14718#p369897 #Headmin ruling

[2019-05-16 05:53:23.128] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Mina Nisumari)->Kiteme/(Luther Longmont): https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Headmin_Rulings Just to be clear and show that killing/capturing Ian (and Aaron was probably the killer) is a rule one violation, Headmin ruling.##To be clear, the KIDNAPPING of Ian is what led to this entire course.

KorPhaeron wrote:If you perform an action which has zero benefit to you other than making others upset (like killing Ian) I will ban you if you adminhelp when someone kills you.

Did you completely forget to read the second half of that sentence in the headmin ruling that you are quoting? That piece of policy is to stop people from trying to get other people banned when they themselves are the ones instigating. Killing Ian is a dick move, yes, but has nothing to do with the admins.

That entire situation is an IC issue that you pushed (demotion) and lost. It doesn't matter how "by the book" you did it, in-character issues don't always go your way just because you did them right and that is not something you can whine to the admins about (rule 10). I would've absolutely dropped the ticket, and I would advise that you listen to Shaps' advice. He was well in his right to relieve Kiteme of the player (read: you) that would not listen. Keeping an admin over a problem this minuscule for 2 hours is deranged. Consider yourself lucky that Saegrimr isn't around, because he would have given you the same advice without the sugar coating.


This is indeed the case, it was reinforced by Nevere in the case of the wesoda vs the grinch.
viewtopic.php?p=464904#p464904
It specifically is meant to show that it opens you to retribution if you're a big enough to dick such as killing said dog or destroying all trees.
However this has it's limits such as no permanent round removal. Killing Ian has never ever been a bannable offense, however ahelping after someone makes your sprite horizontal for it is as this is banbaiting.

Spoiler:
This is not a peanut post I'm pointing out previous rulings.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 3:57 pm
by John_Gobbel
I am looking through the information here and note a marked difference between the logs that Arianya has posted and what Kentenko states was said here, notably the last two paragraphs of the following quote:

Kenteko wrote:
Admin PM from-Shaps: I'm going to level with you, as someone who's been headmin and been around for years, from our perspective it's honestly just not worth the time to investigate a he-said she-said that happened several rounds ago. I only stepped in on this because I looked at the tickets and saw you've been talking to Kiteme with giant walls of text for over two and a half hours.

For all the time you spent writing these massive walls of text (which I barely read tbh), you could have been eating some ice cream or watching a funny youtube video, or playing the game. Like I said, I'm sorry you had a bad round, but having the occasional bad round is just part of SS13, and this is exactly the reason why one of my fellow headmins discontinued ban requests for /tg/ years ago.

You can be indignant and threaten to file complaints all you want, but the hard fact is that 99.9% of the playerbase moves on from having bad rounds literally all the time, the admin team included. Your insistence on remaining upset about a past round is far beyond what I see from most players and is a detriment to you, which is a shame because as I've said you're otherwise a fine player. Either way, it's your call how you choose to proceed, but I won't let you continue to tie up Kiteme about something you could have been far past by now



These two bolded sections are missing from the logs that Arianya has posted.

I want to make sure that the logs are accurate before I make a post related to admin expectations.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 5:31 pm
by Kenteko
Wait, back up. Why is the source of my complaint missing?

The log is missing something. Speaking from a straight up grammatical point, why would I talk about giant walls of text when I have no walls of text to respond to? That doesn't make sense from a grammatical or even conversational tone.


[2019-05-16 07:00:42.741] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Shaps/(Beatrix Abode)->Kenteko/(Kenteko): I'm going to level with you, as someone who's been headmin and been around for years, from our perspective it's honestly just not worth the time to investigate a he-said she-said that happened several rounds ago. I only stepped in on this because I looked at the tickets and saw you've been talking to Kiteme with giant walls of text for over two and a half hours.
[2019-05-16 07:04:34.866] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Kenteko/(Kenteko)->Shaps/(Beatrix Abode): I don't write massive walls of text for the sake of being a bitch, I write and care for massive walls of text because I want the place to improve.##I think it says a lot that you clearly don't care to read my text. You are fully capable of insulting me, calling me unreasonable, or doing or saying what you want. ##I am not upset about what a player did, I am upset that rules were broken and no guidance was given as to how to proceed. So it's fine to let security get away with things scot free because "IC issues?" I will have no problem acting in that light and doing what I want and simply citing this, and you, as precedence.##And now, I am upset with you clearly just telling me to drop it. Policy and rules exist for a reason and choosing to enforce or not enforce rules just subverts it. Telling me that I'm indignant and unreasonable is your right, but it also makes it clear your intent. ##So I'll just see you on the forums. Have a good day.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 5:50 pm
by Arianya
John_Gobbel wrote:I am looking through the information here and note a marked difference between the logs that Arianya has posted and what Kentenko states was said here, notably the last two paragraphs of the following quote:

Kenteko wrote:
Admin PM from-Shaps: I'm going to level with you, as someone who's been headmin and been around for years, from our perspective it's honestly just not worth the time to investigate a he-said she-said that happened several rounds ago. I only stepped in on this because I looked at the tickets and saw you've been talking to Kiteme with giant walls of text for over two and a half hours.

For all the time you spent writing these massive walls of text (which I barely read tbh), you could have been eating some ice cream or watching a funny youtube video, or playing the game. Like I said, I'm sorry you had a bad round, but having the occasional bad round is just part of SS13, and this is exactly the reason why one of my fellow headmins discontinued ban requests for /tg/ years ago.

You can be indignant and threaten to file complaints all you want, but the hard fact is that 99.9% of the playerbase moves on from having bad rounds literally all the time, the admin team included. Your insistence on remaining upset about a past round is far beyond what I see from most players and is a detriment to you, which is a shame because as I've said you're otherwise a fine player. Either way, it's your call how you choose to proceed, but I won't let you continue to tie up Kiteme about something you could have been far past by now



These two bolded sections are missing from the logs that Arianya has posted.

I want to make sure that the logs are accurate before I make a post related to admin expectations.


You're absolutely correct. I've just gone and checked the logs and added the missing sections - I don't have time at this moment to check the 3 other rounds but will do so later. I've removed the .txt and .azw3 since I don't have time to update them to correctness.

Explanation of why these were missed, not particularly exciting but important context:

Spoiler:
In logs, all logs are normally constrained to one line - like so:

Code: Select all
[2019-05-16 06:43:52.314] GAME: Derelict 4 loaded at 137,68,9
[2019-05-16 06:43:52.592] GAME: Ancient Space Station loaded at 57,127,8
[2019-05-16 06:43:52.724] GAME: Syndicate Ambush loaded at 36,174,8
[2019-05-16 06:43:52.756] GAME: Authorship loaded at 27,117,10
[2019-05-16 06:43:52.838] GAME: Abandoned Telecommunications Satellite loaded at 130,112,10
[2019-05-16 06:43:52.877] GAME: Asteroid 2 loaded at 172,207,8
[2019-05-16 06:43:52.931] GAME: Biological Storage Facility loaded at 210,152,3
[2019-05-16 06:43:53.110] GAME: Survivalist Bunker loaded at 31,87,9
[2019-05-16 06:43:53.157] GAME: Derelict 6 loaded at 24,191,3
[2019-05-16 06:43:53.190] GAME: CF Corsair loaded at 201,130,4
[2019-05-16 06:43:53.220] GAME: Asteroid 1 loaded at 178,37,10
[2019-05-16 06:43:53.299] GAME: DK Excavator 453 loaded at 176,187,9
[2019-05-16 06:43:53.333] GAME: Detached Teleporter loaded at 208,80,6
[2019-05-16 06:43:53.385] GAME: Aesthetic Outpost loaded at 35,82,7
[2019-05-16 06:43:53.434] GAME: Asteroid 5 loaded at 38,65,3
[2019-05-16 06:43:53.511] GAME: Feline-Human Combination Den loaded at 192,186,7
[2019-05-16 06:43:53.594] GAME: A Giant Ball of Paper in Space loaded at 45,185,7


So for example, one could filter by "GAME: Asteroid 5" and get the one specific loading message they want.

But the issue that arises is that ADMINPMs are a format that allow \n - new lines, and as a result are the only logtype I know of (having just discovered this) that split over several lines, like so:

Code: Select all
[2019-05-16 07:00:42.741] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Shaps/(Beatrix Abode)->Kenteko/(Kenteko): I'm going to level with you, as someone who's been headmin and been around for years, from our perspective it's honestly just not worth the time to investigate a he-said she-said that happened several rounds ago. I only stepped in on this because I looked at the tickets and saw you've been talking to Kiteme with giant walls of text for over two and a half hours.
 -
 - For all the time you spent writing these massive walls of text (which I barely read tbh), you could have been eating some ice cream or watching a funny youtube video, or playing the game. Like I said, I'm sorry you had a bad round, but having the occasional bad round is just part of SS13, and this is exactly the reason why one of my fellow headmins discontinued ban requests for /tg/ years ago.
 -
 - You can be indignant and threaten to file complaints all you want, but the hard fact is that 99.9% of the playerbase moves on from having bad rounds literally all the time, the admin team included. Your insistence on remaining upset about a past round is far beyond what I see from most players and is a detriment to you, which is a shame because as I've said you're otherwise a fine player. Either way, it's your call how you choose to proceed, but I won't let you continue to tie up Kiteme about something you could have been far past by now


In notepad++, this is treated as lines 1-5, and so when you filter for lines that contain "ADMINPRIVATE: PM:", only line 1 is kept, not lines 2-5.


This is genuinely an oversight on my part caused by not being aware of any logtype taking up more then one line. I apologize for the confusion caused. I've pinged the Headmins to re-visit this thread since they may have read the logs before this fix.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 6:51 pm
by John_Gobbel
Thanks for fixing that, Arianya.

While this topic has mostly been about the decision Shaps made, I think that Kenteko's real complaint lies in how Shaps handled the resolution of the ticket.

When looking at the post on admin expectations (viewtopic.php?f=23&t=3509) I think this complaint would likely fall under #1 posted by CitrusGender:

CitrustGender wrote:1. No Attacks/harassment towards players

...((Skipped irrelevant information))...

1.
Admins should never make continued unwanted and annoying actions towards players for the purpose of personal malice or some type of prejudice. This includes statements that are outwardly hostile to specific players and/or may be a defamation of that player's character. Admins are in a position of power and should never use their position in power to strong arm players and talk badly about them while they have no form of recourse. Only severe and/or continuous cases will be considered to be a break of this expectation, but I want to outline that a continuous harassment of players after being told to stop will not be allowed and will be met with warnings and/or demerits depending on the severity.



While I don't believe that Shaps acted with personal malice, I think it's clear that his replies can be construed in that manner, and those last bolded statements in my previous post definitely seem like defamation of a player's character. I would also consider an admin saying that they didn't even read my ahelp fully to be outwardly hostile.

I think we can all empathize with the idea that admins must maintain a level of positive character even when dealing with disgruntled individuals who may lash out. Having taken training in customer service, it all comes down to expectations:

It can reasonably be said that most players are not aware that admins will drop tickets after the round is over unless there was grievous damage (this may be unofficial policy, but I think the situation may have been resolved better if this was stated off the bat or was made public policy). Reading the logs, it can be shown that through Kenteko and Kiteme's discussion that the player was expecting some sort of resolution and the admin handling the ticket was intending to resolve the issue. When Shaps comes into the conversation, this expectation suddenly changes which is why we can see Kenteko getting obviously frustrated with Shaps, who did not convey the reasons for closing the ticket or that he was taking over, but instead dismissed Kenteko and told them to do something else other than bother Kiteme (which was antithetical to the expectations already established, I'm sure Kenteko didn't think they were bothering Kiteme but were instead providing additional information).

While Kiteme did decide to hand off the ticket to Shaps, I think Shaps broke the spirit of the following expectation when he took it over:

(viewtopic.php?f=23&t=3509)
Sometinyprick wrote:
Don't interfere with another admin's ban or adminhelp unless requested. Feel free to point out important missed details or useful information however. Higher-ranked admins are encouraged to advise and guide other admins, but overruling someone else's ban falls to the headmins.



I don't believe Shaps made the effort to fully assess the situation when he took over Kiteme's adminhelp, and instead of reviewing the discussion and expectations from both parties, he dismissed it, which not only shows a poor example for Kiteme as a trialmin and sets bad precedent, but also undermines the conversation that had already taken place between Kentenko and Kiteme and lead to the following argument between Shaps and Kenteko...

Which ultimately led to the message which "broke the camel's back" so to say, and led to Kenteko's post on this forum:

Arianya wrote:
[2019-05-16 07:00:42.741] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Shaps/(Beatrix Abode)->Kenteko/(Kenteko): I'm going to level with you, as someone who's been headmin and been around for years, from our perspective it's honestly just not worth the time to investigate a he-said she-said that happened several rounds ago. I only stepped in on this because I looked at the tickets and saw you've been talking to Kiteme with giant walls of text for over two and a half hours.
-
- For all the time you spent writing these massive walls of text (which I barely read tbh), you could have been eating some ice cream or watching a funny youtube video, or playing the game. Like I said, I'm sorry you had a bad round, but having the occasional bad round is just part of SS13, and this is exactly the reason why one of my fellow headmins discontinued ban requests for /tg/ years ago.
-
- You can be indignant and threaten to file complaints all you want, but the hard fact is that 99.9% of the playerbase moves on from having bad rounds literally all the time, the admin team included. Your insistence on remaining upset about a past round is far beyond what I see from most players and is a detriment to you, which is a shame because as I've said you're otherwise a fine player. Either way, it's your call how you choose to proceed, but I won't let you continue to tie up Kiteme about something you could have been far past by now



I think the second paragraph of Shaps' post here shows the crux of the problem in that he made disparaging comments which made the situation worse. When a solid player who always tries to contribute positively to the round ends up writing "walls of text," it means that they are trying to solve the problem the only way they can besides writing an admin complaint. I'm sure we've all been in similar situations and we all know that it's an awful one to be in.

Players are actively encouraged to write adminhelps and hash through problems, so despite the fact that Shaps was correct under policy and common practice to close the tickets, the disparaging way in which he ultimately did so is the problem. Even the way in which he phrased his initial comments in the conversation can be seen as hostile given the context of the entire logs. It is a direct contradiction to the idea that players should freely and often submit ahelps because it implies that ahelps don't matter and that admins will make comments like this if you do ahelp:
For all the time you spent writing these massive walls of text (which I barely read tbh), you could have been eating some ice cream or watching a funny youtube video


Hulkamania has said that in order to make the tg community a better place, players need to step up and take the initiative to do so (whether that be here, in the discord, or in the game through player behavior or adminhelps). When an admin actively discourages ahelping like this, especially with a player who contributes a lot to every round I see them in, there is a deeper problem that needs to be addressed.

I hope that this can provide some context into why Kenteko decided to post this admin complaint and can be a lesson on handling ahelps in the future.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 4:14 am
by Dax Dupont
The policy on how long an admin should "go back" in rounds/time was discussed a while back in adminbus, lost headmin term with the headmins so its official. It should probably be noted down somewhere public however the rules already state you should let go of previous rounds.

Like I said be aware that a good bunch of issues can only be resolved with full accuracy while the round is still ongoing due to technical limiting factors.

Re: [Shaps] Kenteko - Administrative Attitude

PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 8:04 pm
by Hulkamania
This complaint is denied.

I'm going to address the complaint itself, then a few things revolving around it. As Kiteme has said, the situation itself was an IC issue but he wanted to do his due diligence in making sure it was taken care of. I've mentioned many times that from a player perspective you don't really get the full picture, which is just the way that things roll. It may not have been the original two hours that he estimated, but it was a very long time to investigate an occurrence from a previous round which is quite commendable. Trial admins are fully fledged administrators in their own right but may not be as experienced in certain areas, like when it's best to just tell a player to let go or that something was an IC issue. Kiteme was looking to get as much information as possible before he gave a ruling and Shaps saw how much time it was taking, made their own judgment about it, and wanted to help a less experienced administrator move on to more pressing things.

The core of this complaint is that Shaps didn't care, or was overly dismissal of you and your complaints. Merely looking at how much time, energy, and effort the administration took into handling this situation should tell you the exact opposite story, that they care enough to let you say everything you wanted to, even when your language became a bit more hostile.

That's why I reported it not for rule one, despite the many other precedents for other rules. Truth be told, this was a blatant rule five break with abuse of position as malicious intent was clearly at play when someone stole my fucking dog, ignored TWO direct orders from their Asimov lawset, and then gulaged me without any sort of reason or excuse even against command staff's orders.


No fucking offense intended, but I could not have done it more by the book if I was holding the book in my hand and reciting the fucking rules.


This kind of language shows how frustrated you are, and when you've reached that level of frustration admins can very easily take it as hostility which impacts how much further they're going to be willing to work with you. Shaps stepped in right when you began speaking this way to Kiteme, again helping out a newer administrator from a tough situation. Shaps recognized your anger, and they ALSO recognized that when they took over you weren't going to let this particular issue die anytime soon, but continue to fight for it. The only thing to do in a situation like that is to close the ticket as quickly as possible and step away. Nothing they did was cruel, malicious, or otherwise targeted at you, they only said that you should probably move on from this scenario. Both administrators here gave you way more time and effort than a lot of other staff members would have, showing themselves going above and beyond what we would normally ask one of them to do, thus the complaint is denied.

A few other things that I would like to address here that aren't as important to the complaint itself. The entire "admins are volunteers" thing isn't even relevant here, because they came to a ruling that was soundly made in both this and the previous example you cited.

PM to-Admins: So I just realized, but I'm pretty sure the RD suicided on a nukies war op.
Admin PM from-Shaps: eh, everyone gets all access anyway so I'm not so tight during war ops
PM to-Admins: Rule 5 though and it's someone being removed from command staff.
Admin PM from-Shaps: rule 0 everyone's already got all access anyway and I don't feel like pursuing it, thank you for the report though.


There is absolutely nothing wrong with this logic. Shaps is recognizing that while the rule may indeed have been broken, they are exercising their right as an administrator to not pursue it because the CONTEXTUAL SITUATION warrants it. I feel as if you're losing sight of the context surrounding the situations you're involved in, rather getting caught up in the specifics of the rules.

I will have no problem acting in that light and doing what I want and simply citing this, and you, as precedence.


This kind of attitude is what we see from someone who feels wronged in a scenario because the context permitted someone to get away without punishment, and thus want to retaliate against the administrator somehow. This does not help your case, nor will an admin ever care that you say this. It only makes you look childish and unable to handle the situation you were put in. The common form we see of this is "Well if X did Y and didn't get punished I'm going to do it every round."

Furthermore you threatened to leave the server.

Yea, I'll happily do so. Permanently.


This sets a poor tone for the conversation with the administrator, as it very much reads like you're saying "if I don't get my way then I'm just not going to play here anymore." No administrator is going to care.

Looking into the situation itself, it seems almost entirely IC. Someone killed your dog, you tried to act against them on that, then security acted against you for acting on that. Someone being valid as a non-antagonist doesn't necessarily mean you're totally free to just murder them and security is forced to look the other way, particularly when you go so far as to remove their humanity via law changes.


I hope all this information has given you a clearer understanding of both what's expected of administration, and why they come to the decisions that they do. Players don't get the full picture, that's unfortunate, but sometimes you just need to trust that when we tell you a situation is handled, that we did our due diligence in making sure it was handled.