[Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ban.

User avatar
Pascal123
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 10:05 am
Byond Username: Pascal123
Location: My house.

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Pascal123 » #110972

Bottom post of the previous page:

Screemonster wrote:If it was all cool and sunshine and lollipops and didn't warrant a ban why the fuck would you ahelp it instead of waiting until after the round and just OOCing "lol maybe we should tone it down it's getting out of hand"
Maybe because they expected something more along the lines of, hey, could you stop that? thanks. instead of, "Fuck you, i'm tired, i couldn't care less. make an appeal" followed by a two day ban.

I mean, it's not like they didn't BOTH state this was what they expected, right?
User avatar
rsmr
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 11:22 am
Byond Username: Rsmr

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by rsmr » #110973

Screemonster wrote:If it was all cool and sunshine and lollipops and didn't warrant a ban why the fuck would you ahelp it instead of waiting until after the round and just OOCing "lol maybe we should tone it down it's getting out of hand"

i remember it being suggested i ahelp it. not to mention i honestly thought that it would just get him a slap on the wrist, not a ban for two days. who expected saeg to materialize, banhammer held high?
User avatar
MrStonedOne
Host
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:56 pm
Byond Username: MrStonedOne
Github Username: MrStonedOne

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by MrStonedOne » #110975

1) You banned me for a poor reason.
This is out of scope of an admin complaint. Find a headmin to look at the ban, or if you can't get ahold of them, get me to in their absence. I understand why you brought that up here, but we really can't have everybody open an AC when they get an appeal denied, its just not workable.

I believe you should be able to send a message to the in-game head admins group, if not, send the pm to me and i'll forward it.
2) You locked the thread for a poor reason.
I'm really not sure how to handle this one, technically its not an admin complaint, but they only have those powers because they are admins.
3) Your ban length was unreasonably unjust, compared to more severe offenses.
See: My comments on #1
4) You act against the code of Admin Conduct and Forum Rules, insulting and berating members, and generally being hostile towards players.
The conduct in game (admin pm) that you showed, doesn't seem to be out of line to me, but tone means everything, i guess, and its hard to translate tone. The conduct outside of the game on the forum, well they were already punished for that, and spent some time on post approval, case closed.
5) You refuse to acknowledge legitimate evidence or show complete logs
As to that second part, public logs exist, and hide only asay/apm/ips/cids, admins are under no way required to help users get logs now, because of public logs. As to the first part, see #1.
6) Even other admins appear to have difficulty agreeing with your reasoning for banning a player and methods of presenting logs
I'm not even gonna comment on this.
Forum/Wiki Administrator, Server host, Database King, Master Coder
MrStonedOne on digg(banned), Steam, IRC, Skype Discord. (!vAKvpFcksg)
Image
User avatar
Pascal123
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 10:05 am
Byond Username: Pascal123
Location: My house.

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Pascal123 » #110977

It's nice to finally get a reasonable admin looking over the thread.
This is out of scope of an admin complaint. Find a headmin to look at the ban, or if you can't get ahold of them, get me to in their absence. I understand why you brought that up here, but we really can't have everybody open an AC when they get an appeal denied, its just not workable.

I believe you should be able to send a message to the in-game head admins group, if not, send the pm to me and i'll forward it.
I'm new to the forums, so i do not know how to send a "message to the in-game head admins group" regarding any of this. at the urging of a few people i do recall PM'ing you via IRC regarding the ban appeal thread, and people where fairly vocal OOCly about it. namely because it was locked before anyone could get a word in, Saegrimr was being rude, and there where still things to be presented. As stated by Saegrimr, Headmins have been on some sort of hiatus. So neither of us have had luck getting it checked. This complaint was formed after the ban expired, due to my dissatisfaction with how Saegrimr handled things, his general behavior, and lack of care for the established guidelines. the ban appeal has yet to be denied or "accepted" by any admin. It is in stasis.
I'm really not sure how to handle this one, technically its not an admin complaint, but they only have those powers because they are admins.
This point references the fact that he locked the thread within less than fifteen minutes for a "poor reason" (The reasoning being: I'm arguing with you and this is getting nowhere.) when there were still things to be said and discussed by both parties. Even the "Victims" state Saegrimrs punishments to be too severe and brash, compared to what they expected. The "Victims" in question being Rsmr and Svarta.
The conduct in game (admin pm) that you showed, doesn't seem to be out of line to me, but tone means everything, i guess, and its hard to translate tone. The conduct outside of the game on the forum, well they were already punished for that, and spent some time on post approval, case closed.
I appreciate it... but can you not see that his conduct both in-game and on the forums needs work? All he's doing is being abrasive to people, he states he's the "Worst admin of the bunch.", That he "Doesn't care" that we can "Laugh at his terrible conduct all we like.". I do not think a bit of time on "post approval" will solve this sort of behavior, i do not even think it is appropriate behavior for an admin to exercise. But i respect your decision.
As to that second part, public logs exist, and hide only asay/apm/ips/cids, admins are under no way required to help users get logs now, because of public logs. As to the first part, see #1.
This is about him showing incomplete logs, bits and pieces of said logs, and using it as non-relevant justification for why he doesn't care.
Turgent
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:30 pm
Byond Username: Turgent

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Turgent » #110993

Okay, I just had to throw my box of CnC generals away so I could type this because I was busy installing it smh.

While, I, don't ever publicly disapprove of an admin.
Saegrimir's behavior is unprofessional, they attempt to stir negative reactions from their ban-ee (now a real word) in hopes of locking down a thread, or, simply ignoring them.
This, alongside their apparent "I'm the worst of the bunch." mentality and tendency to ban instead of talking to the player or even simply messing with them in-game, leads to the point that they're ban-happy.
What Pascal did (the second ban) was complete bullshit on his part, I understand Saegrimir there, since they consulted another admin for how long the ban should be, at least, that's what they've told us.

The first ban, however, was completely unjustified. Yes, he was a dick to Rsmr, rule 1 says don't be a dick. Rsmr wanted Pascal to be reminded of this, to stop being a dick, but instead, he received a two day (48 hour) ban for something that was NOT deserving of even a one day (24 hour) ban.
As we've been told, a one day ban is usually reserved for murders, unless the ban-ee's intent is clear, I.E. they're an obvious griefer here for shiggles. And that this stacks up with each murder. (2 murders, 48, 3 murders, 72 hours, etc.)
What I don't understand, nor have been told, is the REASON for Pascal's fourty-eight hour ban from the server.
As I was there for the entire incident, this would've been best left as an IC problem, instead of slapping a two day ban on Pascal. Saegrimir themselves said "I don't look forward to shifting(prob said something else) through logs at 4 am." Which implies fatigue and, at the time, poor thought, a wish to get this over with or simply having enough of the day they've had and Pascal was adding more stress onto them.
We're humans, we make mistakes, yes, we're susceptible to poor psychological conditions plaguing our thoughts and drastically affecting our judgment.
But. This does not justify the ban, at all.
This was pointed out multiple times, with Saegrimir refusing to acknowledge certain points and, instead, choosing to ride a specific point.
They choose 'meta-friend'!

Both parties play their characters a specific way, both being rather rude and unfriendly in their ways, yes, this is okay, as long as they don't go murder random crewmembers or whatever.
They're rude to each other, as this is the gimmick! The gimmick is, in of itself, somewhat bad, as terrible and negative behavior is expected to be pardoned, simply because it's a gimmick.
Yeah, no.
The gimmick is terrible, I've not talked to either party about this, but they should tone the behavior down quite a bit. I've not seen much of either character's more rash and uncouth behaviors, but it should go without saying.
This is still unjustified, the ban, and the behavior.

The ban appeal itself was locked due to 'arguing' which is what happens when two parties come to a disagreement, which usually requires a third party to break it up. This didn't happen for quite a bit, I've only now seen someone taking action and getting the attention of head administrators to the appeal.
Saegrimir's behavior is simply unprofessional and unacceptable. I would not have expected this from such a popular community as this, but it happened, I guess!
They've caused Pascal to develop a mentality that they are "out to get them", a mentality which should never be developed by a player in a community. Ever.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Now, Pascal isn't completely innocent, as he can be a very unpleasant person. His gimmick unjustified.
The situation was very easy to upset!
Rsmr had lethals, baton and all the tools to pacify and neutralize someone. Pascal knew this, and so did I. I wanted the situation to remain as it was, which was smack-talking.
Nope.
Stan_Studnick's character, at the time, approached us as we pacified Rsmr, and, they applied lethals to a situation which did not require them. They shot at me with lethals, I shot at them with disablers.
Something happened while I was away, searching for Pascal because he went God knows where, and, over the radio, heard him cry for help. I arrived and saw Pascal smacking and, promptly, killing Stan's character. I, for one, believed that he was a traitor doing somesort of terrible gimmick. (They stole the entire armoury as a greyshirt.)
Okay, he's dead, let's hide the guns somewhere so that the lethals will stop, we thought and did so.
After taking Rsmr's headset and lethal weaponry, we released her and went back to our satellite.

THEN.
The shuttle was called due to unknown reasons, something about fire. We wait until the last minute and leave the satellite.
Where Rsmr was waiting for us with a wielded fire-axe, they said themselves, with the intent to kill Pascal.
I stunned her, took her axe and disposaled it! Pascal cuffed Rsmr and brought her into the security post, buckling her to a chair.
As the shuttle was JUST about to leave, we had only a few seconds to think. I unhappily agreed with Pascal, and we boarded the engineering pod, leaving Rsmr behind.
Nik logs on, logs off, Saegrimir logs on, and then Pascal is messaged, then, promptly banned for two days.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

What.
In my honest opinion, both parties were at fault, as they kept escalating the situation. I attempted to calm it down, but, I simply didn't, due to some fear that I still have.
I'm awe-struck at the terrible handling of the situation and poor understanding of it, and, I would like for Saegrimir to admit that the first ban was unjustified.
I'd like Pascal to apologise for doing what he did.

Why? Because neither party was right or wrong, this was an entirely gray area where both did wrong and right.
I'm not saying that there should be reprimands, I'm saying that both parties are currently at each other's throats, and that this is a terrible thing.

(I'm in a terrible mood and Pascal kept pestering me to post, so expect some terrible wording or whatever, ugh.)
User avatar
Saegrimr
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:39 pm
Byond Username: Saegrimr

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Saegrimr » #110995

Turgent wrote:(I'm in a terrible mood and Pascal kept pestering me to post, so expect some terrible wording or whatever, ugh.)
I like how you can berate me for banning pretty obvious garbage at 4am and then go on to how you're typing this up in a bad mood because someone is dragging you away from something you want to do to post.
Turgent wrote:I would like for Saegrimir to admit that the first ban was unjustified.
Excessive in duration? Probably. As i've said before I would hope he'd cool his grudge with a couple days off. This was before I learned that apparently his style of "roleplay" is just always being a shitler, so it ended up having no effect whether it was for a week or an hour.
Unjustified? No.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
Turgent
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:30 pm
Byond Username: Turgent

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Turgent » #110997

Please stop ignoring the entire post.
User avatar
Jeb
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 4:01 pm
Byond Username: Stapler2025

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Jeb » #111000

>admin being complained about requests the topic closed because people are complaining about him


no.
Image
Guy that made a thing that got put on the homepage of /tg/station13
Defeated in the Great Purge of 2014
[Security] Fiz Bump says, "Beats me, I'm not a scientist. But this is a problem that can be solved with harmbatons."
Johnson Fitzwell asks, "HOW THE FUCK ARE YOU STILL ALIVE?"
Image
User avatar
Stan_Studnick
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 11:39 am
Byond Username: Stan_Studnick

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Stan_Studnick » #111003

Turgent I went in with actual lasers because you A: said you'd gib anyone breaking into engineering, and B: your BFF was kidnapping the captain for whatever reason. Plus, optional C: I was literally roleplaying my Dwarf Fortress character, I was even limiting my responses to what people said in adventure mode which was pretty hard to be honest. Either way even if I wasn't playing that character I'd still open the fuck up on you guys because kidnapping the captain is mutiny and it's a capital crime. As a loyal crewmember I have an obligation to protect the captain which means cranking it up to 11 and running you off with my red lasers.

Even though I don't like Saegrimr's attitude, he was justified and I'm going to have to take his side on this. Sorry, Pascal, (and friends) but I get why the two day ban happened and I don't think it's excessive given his reasoning to make Pascal calm down. I like playing with you guys but I'm just calling it how I'm seeing it.
User avatar
Screemonster
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 7:23 pm
Byond Username: Scree

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Screemonster » #111009

Stan_Studnick wrote:Either way even if I wasn't playing that character I'd still open the fuck up on you guys because kidnapping the captain is mutiny and it's a capital crime.
That's pretty much it.
Even if a couple of people have a gimmick of constantly fucking with each other, and there's no bad blood between them, the moment other players start getting dragged into it is the moment admins have to get involved.
Imagine a new player shows up and decides to observe the round, watches as some greyshirt comes out of fucking nowhere and beats the shit out of the captain or whatever 'cause that's their "gimmick". No bans happen and at the end of the round neither character is an antag. They join in the next round thinking that running in and dunking the captain 4noraisin is totally fuckin' coolbeans and BWOOOIIIINNK.
Doing antag things as a non-antag is gonna net you unwanted attention pretty much anywhere. The rest of this complaint is pretty much complaining that he didn't entertain you wasting his time with an extensive long-winded ban appeal that wasn't going to go anywhere anyway.

e: and whether or not the reason for ahelping was "just to have them spoken to" instead of just speaking to them yourself, doing antag shit as a non-antag is pretty much always gonna get you the sword of banocles hanging over your head.
Turgent
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:30 pm
Byond Username: Turgent

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Turgent » #111010

You broke into Engineering, previously, and I said that if anyone did it again, I would gib them. Empty threat.
You raided the armoury and took all the guns. Gimmick or not, that's not justified, that just makes you a very dangerous person.

I never hunted anyone, I insisted on keeping things non-lethal, and, I was making sure that my "BFF" wasn't going to harm the Captain. The Captain was released, and she was not kidnapped.
Please, show me where I had shown the clear intent of holding the Captain hostage, or even threatening to kill her.
User avatar
Pascal123
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 10:05 am
Byond Username: Pascal123
Location: My house.

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Pascal123 » #111013

Even if a couple of people have a gimmick of constantly fucking with each other, and there's no bad blood between them, the moment other players start getting dragged into it is the moment admins have to get involved.
Then perhaps they shouldn't drag themselves into it?
Imagine a new player shows up and decides to observe the round, watches as some greyshirt comes out of fucking nowhere and beats the shit out of the captain or whatever 'cause that's their "gimmick". No bans happen and at the end of the round neither character is an antag. They join in the next round thinking that running in and dunking the captain 4noraisin is totally fuckin' coolbeans and BWOOOIIIINNK.
There have been zero instances of this occuring.
e: and whether or not the reason for ahelping was "just to have them spoken to" instead of just speaking to them yourself, doing antag shit as a non-antag is pretty much always gonna get you the sword of banocles hanging over your head.
I guess everything is "antag shit" to you, huh? How else are people going to give out a form of "safeword" without breaking IC in OOC or OOC in IC.
User avatar
rsmr
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 11:22 am
Byond Username: Rsmr

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by rsmr » #111016

shortly after pascal was banned for two days after buckling me to a chair because of justified rp stuff

i shot someone down with a smg in cold blood for basically no reason. i got a 5 hour ban for non-antag murder. unprovoked slaughter.

i took a nap and my ban was over. pascal doesn't even kill anyone and gets two days? also it's my fault i was left behind since i should've gone to the dorms pod on my way to kill betrays knowing that one would be occupied by my two enemies. like considering all that, the comparison between these bans just nicely paints how incompetent saeg is. mr "i'm whining about doing my job in a crummy state of mind and then whining about being complained about for it"

lmao



edit: stan shot at betrays with lethals. i don't really blame him for trying to save the captain from what was basically mutiny, but the fact is he did try to kill betrays. it's whatever.
User avatar
Pascal123
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 10:05 am
Byond Username: Pascal123
Location: My house.

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Pascal123 » #111019

I would love to give you a full dignified response, Turgent... seeing as you've spent so much time writing that. but, there's only one thing in it that appears to lack an explanation that i could clarify.
Stan_Studnick's character, at the time, approached us as we pacified Rsmr, and, they applied lethals to a situation which did not require them. They shot at me with lethals, I shot at them with disablers.
Something happened while I was away, searching for Pascal because he went God knows where, and, over the radio, heard him cry for help. I arrived and saw Pascal smacking and, promptly, killing Stan's character. I, for one, believed that he was a traitor doing somesort of terrible gimmick. (They stole the entire armoury as a greyshirt.)
The reason i had "Smacked and promptly killed" Stans character, is because, as he was breaking into engineering through the window and grille, i was talking to him. Once he managed to break the window and grille, he fired a tazer round on me and promptly began to unload lethal energy gun fire. By this point, Sequoia/Rsmr ran infront and took all the energy gun fire for me, and left out the window, Stan ran in, attempted to taze me, got tazed, and i responded to his attempted lethal's with lethal.

I'm sure Rsmr can confirm this, as he was clearly shot by Stan's character multiple times.
User avatar
Stan_Studnick
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 11:39 am
Byond Username: Stan_Studnick

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Stan_Studnick » #111089

Turgent wrote:You broke into Engineering, previously, and I said that if anyone did it again, I would gib them. Empty threat.
You raided the armoury and took all the guns. Gimmick or not, that's not justified, that just makes you a very dangerous person.

I never hunted anyone, I insisted on keeping things non-lethal, and, I was making sure that my "BFF" wasn't going to harm the Captain. The Captain was released, and she was not kidnapped.
Please, show me where I had shown the clear intent of holding the Captain hostage, or even threatening to kill her.
Everything is about perspective, I didn't know your threat was empty (and really, I don't think it was but we'll never know for sure) and you didn't know what I was doing since you've clearly never played Dwarf Fortress. All somebody had to do was say "hey stop breaking into places" and I would have, I even tried to trade the guns I took (I didn't take ALL the guns by the way, not enough space for that) several times to people.

Plus I didn't know you insisted on anything or were trying to keep the captain from being harmed. What I saw though was you dragging the stunned and cuffed captain further into engineering after you said you'd gib anyone who broke in. I shot you first because you were the greater threat and my method worked out swell because you ran and the captain got away.

From Saegrimr's perspective Pascal was being entirely unruly without rhyme or reason, and he had gotten multiple ahelps about the situation which probably indicated to him that Pascal was being a real shit. I'm going to have to trust MrStoneOne's decision on this as well over anyone else, if he says the ahelp conversation made the 2-day ban seem a bit more justified then that's that.
Pascal123 wrote:The reason i had "Smacked and promptly killed" Stans character, is because, as he was breaking into engineering through the window and grille, i was talking to him. Once he managed to break the window and grille, he fired a tazer round on me and promptly began to unload lethal energy gun fire. By this point, Sequoia/Rsmr ran infront and took all the energy gun fire for me, and left out the window, Stan ran in, attempted to taze me, got tazed, and i responded to his attempted lethal's with lethal.

I'm sure Rsmr can confirm this, as he was clearly shot by Stan's character multiple times.
I'm not disputing that at all, I tried to actually kill you but you knew what my gimmick was so all you had to do was say "I yield," and I would have pressed enter on my "I will fight no more" response. I don't blame you for killing me because I was killing you, not even remotely a big deal in my book. Either way, if I were playing a different character I still would have done the same thing but with more shit-talking over the radio and how mutineers get hanged. I also accidentally shot Sequoia because I have satellite internet and my ping is usually a second or more, plus Sequoia was definitely going to kill you and said so over the radio, so I don't know why they'd absorb the laser fire for you. They also weren't there the second time so it absolutely did not happen as you remember and she was shot when I was shooting at Turgent's character. (I had gone in alone when I was killed) That's why she was saying "I think Thrathdad was murdered" after I was a ghostly apparition of my former self, and it was only until later that she discovered that I actually had been killed.

All that aside I'm pretty sure both of you would have held up in engineering because "muh rp" between you and Sequoia, so you can point to the armory break-in or previous engineering break-in all you want as justification for kidnapping the captain who showed up after both incidents but it won't matter. (this makes absolutely no fucking sense btw) By your own admission and Rsmr's admission this has been a long-standing conflict and frankly it's spiraled beyond just you two. If you're both copping bans for doing things as non-antag then maybe you two should reevaluate how you interact with not only each other but the other players as well. Honestly I would have used metaknowledge and ignored Rsmr's plight if I had known you two do this all the time, and right now I regret even getting involved. (as I'm sure Saegrimr does too)
User avatar
Saegrimr
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:39 pm
Byond Username: Saegrimr

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Saegrimr » #111100

Stan_Studnick wrote:and he had gotten multiple ahelps about the situation
Just one, from rsmr. Niknak was about to hop on too but saw i'd logged on first and opted to leave it to me and go to bed (hence why he was on in the first place).

Secondarily its kind of odd to assume someone has played dwarf fortress and that's exactly how your character will act/respond. I say this although apparently everybody on basil supposedly knows everyone elses intentions all the time because of past rounds sooooo that's out the window I guess. This is the same kind of flimsy reasoning of "this is my RP" i'm trying to get pascal to understand is bad, albeit yours actually has a stopping point it seems.
Stan_Studnick wrote:By your own admission and Rsmr's admission this has been a long-standing conflict and frankly it's spiraled beyond just you two. If you're both copping bans for doing things as non-antag then maybe you two should reevaluate how you interact with not only each other but the other players as well.
This is basically all I want.
I just want the two of them to stop being shitheads to eachother, and other people.

Failing that if you want to metagrudge eachother then whatever. As soon as either of you ahelps against the other it will be treated like any other case. That is the risk you take.
If someone is watching the round and sees you randomly drop a guy, expect to be PMed about it. Preferably with a good answer.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
User avatar
Pascal123
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 10:05 am
Byond Username: Pascal123
Location: My house.

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Pascal123 » #111112

Everything is about perspective, I didn't know your threat was empty (and really, I don't think it was but we'll never know for sure) and you didn't know what I was doing since you've clearly never played Dwarf Fortress. All somebody had to do was say "hey stop breaking into places" and I would have, I even tried to trade the guns I took (I didn't take ALL the guns by the way, not enough space for that) several times to people.
People threaten in SS13 a lot, never means it's serious. I did tell you, Hey stop breaking into places, as did Turgent, and i believe even Sequoia. Whether or not we've played Dwarf Fortress has little to do with it. So why, would this instance be any different?
Plus I didn't know you insisted on anything or were trying to keep the captain from being harmed. What I saw though was you dragging the stunned and cuffed captain further into engineering after you said you'd gib anyone who broke in. I shot you first because you were the greater threat and my method worked out swell because you ran and the captain got away.
Of-course not, your literal first response was, "This is my fight too, there's no need to feel vengeful." before promptly firing energy gun beams at me and turgent, forcing me to drag Sequoia to safety to avoid either of us getting shot. Your method only worked out because covers ran off make an announcement regarding your usage of lethals, because you where unwilling to listen. "Chief Engineer's Desk Announcement: Lethals are bad, don't use lethals unless the other party is ACTUALLY doing bad shit.", which, by that point, you where breaking into a window, refusing to listen to my "She's not being harmed." and "You don't need to get involved" conversation. to which you just smashed the window, tazed me, and attempted to kill me.
From Saegrimr's perspective Pascal was being entirely unruly without rhyme or reason, and he had gotten multiple ahelps about the situation which probably indicated to him that Pascal was being a real shit. I'm going to have to trust MrStoneOne's decision on this as well over anyone else, if he says the ahelp conversation made the 2-day ban seem a bit more justified then that's that.
You don't even know what you're talking about here, do you?
I'm not disputing that at all, I tried to actually kill you but you knew what my gimmick was so all you had to do was say "I yield," and I would have pressed enter on my "I will fight no more" response. I don't blame you for killing me because I was killing you not even remotely a big deal in my book.
No, you're clearly just angry because you where put down.
Either way, if I were playing a different character I still would have done the same thing but with more shit-talking over the radio and how mutineers get hanged. I also accidentally shot Sequoia because I have satellite internet and my ping is usually a second or more, plus Sequoia was definitely going to kill you and said so over the radio, so I don't know why they'd absorb the laser fire for you.
Alright, so if you knew this was a legitimate issue, why get involved? The reason sequoia "absorbed laser fire" for me, was because she stood in-front as you attempted to fire lethals on me.
They also weren't there the second time so it absolutely did not happen as you remember and she was shot when I was shooting at Turgent's character.
You're very convoluted, my friend. http://puu.sh/jvBbg/8d4d48cb9c.png
All that aside I'm pretty sure both of you would have held up in engineering because "muh rp" between you and Sequoia, so you can point to the armory break-in or previous engineering break-in all you want as justification for kidnapping the captain who showed up after both incidents but it won't matter.


This was never a stated justification, it is an observation being noted by Turgent regarding the fact that you where a threat who happened to have looted the entire armory for fun only to show up and try to "Validhunt" for the captain, as confirmed by, yourself.

By your own admission and Rsmr's admission this has been a long-standing conflict and frankly it's spiraled beyond just you two. If you're both copping bans for doing things as non-antag then maybe you two should reevaluate how you interact with not only each other but the other players as well. Honestly I would have used metaknowledge and ignored Rsmr's plight if I had known you two do this all the time, and right now I regret even getting involved. (as I'm sure Saegrimr does too)
Lmao.

Just stop posting, pal.
User avatar
oranges
Code Maintainer
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:16 pm
Byond Username: Optimumtact
Github Username: optimumtact
Location: #CHATSHITGETBANGED

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by oranges » #111199

jesus christ sage, either deny the appeal and let the headmins handle the next step or lift bans, don't banter back and forth with these basil scum.
User avatar
Scones
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:46 am
Byond Username: Scones
Location: cooler than thou

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Scones » #111209

It looks like MSO basically brought the hammer down already concerning the validity of the complaint, and I have to agree with pretty much every point he made there.

This thread has reached some truly legendary drama for what is a 2-day now-expired ban.

Just move on.
plplplplp WOOOOooo hahahhaha
User avatar
Pascal123
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 10:05 am
Byond Username: Pascal123
Location: My house.

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Pascal123 » #111210

It's not just about a "ban", it's also about Saegrimr and his lack of respect towards players.
His unprofessional behavior towards players and on the forums.
His lack of knowledge or care for what is established in Admin Conduct, Forum rules, and general Rules. going so far as to seemingly assume it does not apply to him.
How apparently, what somebody else has to say regarding his behavior and method of handling something is irrelevant and pointless, the thread should just be locked.
This is what an "Admin Complaint" is about, for people to voice their opinions.

I mean, seriously. all he's been doing is nit-picking posts and throwing insults left and right to everybody who disagrees with him, even going so far as to beg for the thread to be locked because people where complaining about him, in an admin complaint.

I'd imagine the fact that numerous people have pitched in their own two-cents on his behavior, attitude, and carelessness in a complaint should indicate something to you, but i guess not.

But since it apparently doesn't, i'll indicate it for you.

He's a hardass, He doesn't give a fuck about anyone's opinion, he's right, everyone else is wrong.
His behavior needs work, all he's been doing is sifting through these posts, and picking out little details to insult and berate others about.
He handles Ahelps, Ban Appeals, and Complaints, Poorly.
He was placed on Post Approval over this.
Some people believe he is out to get them as a result of his actions.
He regularly states that he knows this yet does not care, because he happens to be an admin, and admins apparently don't give a fuck about anything.

If he refuses to change, if you refuse to make him change, even if he's got multiple people complaining about him, and nobody really seems to like him, then there's no point to a complaint at all, is there?
Last edited by Pascal123 on Mon Aug 10, 2015 7:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ivan Issaccs
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:39 am
Byond Username: Ivanissaccs

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Ivan Issaccs » #111211

The crux of this matter is that as a player, I was told logging in one day that Pascal got banned for two days for locking someone in a room in OOC.
Initially thought it was a joke as thats the most ridiculous ban I can recall anyone copping.
Then this drama bomb explodes where Saeg proves he is just a belligerent, uncompromising and unwarrantedly hostile, incapable of recognising a very obvious IC issue in game and then goes full on North Korean dissenters punishment on those involved and tops it be squealing at every opportunity to have this locked and swept under the rug rather than attempt to work out the issues.
At the bare minimum the note should be removed and I think this is really a case for reviewing Saegs admin status because after all of this, as a player, can say I wouldn't want to adminhelp being genuinely greifed because I wouldn't expect it be handled reasonably if Saeg is on the server.
LNGLY
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 1:26 am
Byond Username: LNGLY

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by LNGLY » #111227

smegmir this isn't 4chan

you can't just do whatever the fuck you want and lock the thread when people call you on it because 'I DONT LIKE THIS DISCUSSION'

when is the deadmin coming, christ
User avatar
Stan_Studnick
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 11:39 am
Byond Username: Stan_Studnick

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Stan_Studnick » #111231

Saegrimr wrote:Just one, from rsmr.
My bad, I thought Svarta ahelped too.
Saegrimr wrote:Secondarily its kind of odd to assume someone has played dwarf fortress and that's exactly how your character will act/respond. I say this although apparently everybody on basil supposedly knows everyone elses intentions all the time because of past rounds sooooo that's out the window I guess. This is the same kind of flimsy reasoning of "this is my RP" i'm trying to get pascal to understand is bad, albeit yours actually has a stopping point it seems.
Really, I don't expect you or anyone else to magically know what I'm thinking. Either way I try not to be a dickhead about stuff and even though my usual characters are just giant crystals of sodium chloride I avoid doing stuff that warrants admin involvement. When that does happen, I like to neatly explain why I'm doing things and what's happening. Don't get me wrong, that portion of my post wasn't any way a critical tenet of my argument, I was just trying to elaborate on stuff.
Pascal123 wrote:<a bunch of shit>
Go read the logs, they're publicly available. Rsmr wasn't "absorbing lasers" to save you, they got caught in the crossfire like I said. (hence the "I'll save you" bit) I'm not going to go tit-for-tat with you over something that really isn't that big of a deal. Sorry I mistook your lizard for Turgent's lizard, all liggers look alike when the lasers are flying, but really I was absolutely justified in going after you because you kidnapped the fucking captain. Call me a validhunter if you need that to sleep at night, I don't give a fuck. I eagerly await the metagaming you're going to pull on me though, I can't wait to go round after round of Betrays-His-Kin trying to kill Stan Studnick because that sounds like fucking oodles of fun.

I'm still firm that Saegrimr did absolutely nothing wrong here.
User avatar
Pascal123
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 10:05 am
Byond Username: Pascal123
Location: My house.

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Pascal123 » #111250

One word.

Lmao.

That is all, thanks.
User avatar
Saegrimr
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:39 pm
Byond Username: Saegrimr

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Saegrimr » #111279

Pascal123 wrote:He's a hardass, He doesn't give a fuck about anyone's opinion, he's right, everyone else is wrong.
I'm glad we've finally reached and understanding here. Next time don't break the rules, and try not to cry as loudly next time.
Pascal123 wrote:His behavior needs work, all he's been doing is sifting through these posts, and picking out little details to insult and berate others about.
That's because i'm trying to address the details that matter. I'm not going to bother with your crying about how i'm mean to you, so i'll instead reply to things I can in fact correct about the ban.
Pascal123 wrote:He was placed on Post Approval over this.
Nah. Not yet, anyway. This was for a different time when I told people they have shit opinions in a non-administrative manner.
Pascal123 wrote:Some people believe he is out to get them as a result of his actions.
I'm not responsible for your own delusions. Feel free to believe whatever you want, won't change anything.
Ivan Issaccs wrote:Then this drama bomb explodes where Saeg proves he is just a belligerent, uncompromising and unwarrantedly hostile, incapable of recognising a very obvious IC issue in game and then goes full on North Korean dissenters punishment on those involved and tops it be squealing at every opportunity to have this locked and swept under the rug rather than attempt to work out the issues.
Why would I waste my time on something that is very obviously not an IC issue anymore?
Why should I have to cave and be the humble and apologetic saint while everybody else screams at me because they don't like that they got caught?

Please tell me, because I really don't think any of you are following the progression here and are instead focusing only on ME being the asshole. Don't misunderstand. I am being a gigantic asshole. You seem to think this entirely one-sided, however. I'm more than willing to work with someone who works with me, the moment you start being a pain in my ass is when the care train leaves.

Fun post coming!
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
User avatar
Saegrimr
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:39 pm
Byond Username: Saegrimr

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Saegrimr » #111280

Lets recap here chronologically, in the most biased manner because its coming from me so obviously its 100% biased.
-I ask question
-He claims he would have them killed for fun
-I ask if she actually tried
-Yes
-I check attack logs, shows absolutely nothing
-I glance chat logs. "Let's ambush her"
-Inform you about the rules for stranding people
-Something something precautionary measures
-Make half-assed comparison about bolting toxins roundstart
-You accuse me of being biased

This is the key moment, right here. The point that based on recent logs and your attitude that I assume you're full of shit and not worth trying to reason with at 4 am.
-Tell you in the meanest rudest assholest way, that, oh wait no actual quote here nevermind. "Accusing me of being biased is only making me actually biased against you so I suggest you just stick to the original story"
-Assume i'm Niknak, okay sure honest mistake since he was just on.
-Remove stealthmin which I use regularly to watch people who think noadminstime2grif at late night. Ha ha self-deprecating humor! I'm the worst! No humor? Okay.
-Accuse me of faking the name, at which point I decide the best way for you to believe its not me faking a name (something we're not capable of doing in admin PMs) is for you to see the ban message and explain on the forums.
-"And you insulting me? Also nice."
<- Kinda weird, the only insult I made was against myself. However knowing your habit of accusations at this point I shrug it off and wait for the appeal.

APPEAL TIME!
So while I was waiting for the appeal, I went through and started checking the logs, at which point I found your accusations of a "validhunting captain, she's killed people in previous shifts!" which really, REALLY fucked over whatever IC escalation you think you had, and updated the ban reason accordingly. Now as to not just recap everything i've said in the ban appeal regarding the ban, lets go back to the shitflinging!
-You jump right to accusations that i'm not "proper" before actually seeing how shitty I actually am.
-I make some mildly disparaging comments about you wildly assuming things over a characters "mean words".
-"Guess we might as-well bore ourselves to death, then." Which doesn't cover anything about the ban other than what looks like "I was bored so I decided to be a shit"
-Tell you that your fun doesn't come at the expense of others (it doesn't!), with threats of a perma if you keep doing what appears to be obvious metagrudging (100% valid reason to remove you too, later uncovered to be a meta thing where you both are just assholes to eachother fnr, whatever)
-Accusations of cherry picking, and "Not sure why i'd expect any better, Lmao"
-Ask you to confirm that you did not do the things that you did, and if you can't i'll be closing the thread.

By the way that is something I CAN do because if everything on my end looks like shit, and you would rather accuse me than attempt to prove you actually weren't being a shit, then the appeal is going to be denied.

BREAK TIME: Alright so can we get a count on who is being overtly hostile here and while yes I am not gently cradling him whispering it'll be all okay, i'm also not outright calling them a cunt. Yet, anyway.

-Vigilare posts assuming PDA logs and chat logs that they weren't in the round for, and for a character defense which really has no place in ban appeals anyway but whatever. I'd rather address the tangible evidence about logs, and not be the feels police.
-I post ALL PDA MESSAGES AND CHAT MESSAGES sent from rsmr that round, up until the point you jumped him anyway because after that its mostly just you two shit talking eachother while he's restrained. (By the way, public logs are a thing and you should go use them because I know you don't care about and logs I "cherry pick")
-Accuse me again of cherry picking, this time with again using things that happened in past rounds as justification. Something I told you is pretty dumb.


Here's where i've decided that your reasoning for your actions and the reasoning for wanting to be unbanned are both bad. I've told you why you were banned, and i've provided why it looks like you were the aggressor throughout the entire situation. Clearly none of this is going to your head so any semblance of care i'd have about this is out the window.

-This is the point i'm actively antagonizing you, with my very sarcastic gee gollies and scarequotes "RP". I inform you of the lack of fucks, and tell you to suck it up.

(Minor point here "I don't even know why you're so concerned with the final two minutes of a round, anyways." is one of many awful excuses to use for appeals. This is why people who maxcap bomb the escape shuttle 1 second before landing still catch the same ban evne though "hurr it was only one second!" This is a binary "WAIT UNTIL END OF ROUND" deal.)
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
User avatar
peoplearestrange
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 12:02 pm
Byond Username: Peoplearestrange
Location: UK

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by peoplearestrange » #111315

This is raipdly becoming a "I don't like you" vs a "I don't like you either!" thread.

I'm gonna get a headmin to comment so we can put this all to bed.
Whatever
Spoiler:
oranges wrote:singulo.io is the center point of rational and calm debate, where much of tg's issues are worked out in a fun and family friendly environment
miggles wrote:it must have been quite the accomplishment, killing a dead butterfly
WeeYakk wrote:If you take a step back from everything watching the community argue janitor related changes is one of the most surreal and hilarious things about this game. Four pages of discussing the merits of there being too much or too little dirt in a video game.
Operative wrote:Vote PAS for headmin! Get cucked and feel good getting cucked.
TheNightingale wrote:I want to get off Mr. Scones's Wild Ride...
NikNakFlak wrote:Excuse you, I was doing intentional bug testing for the well being of the server. I do not make mistakes.
Fragnostic wrote:stop cucking the first shitshow ever that revolved around me.
This is my moment, what are you doing?!
Anonmare wrote:Oranges gestures at the thread, it shudders and begins to move!
Saegrimr wrote:
callanrockslol wrote:all you have to do is ban shitters until the playbase improves/ceases to exist, whichever comes first.
IM TRYING
Screemonster wrote:hellmoo is the mud for grown adults who main reaper in overwatch
Kor wrote:
confused rock wrote:...its like if we made fire extinguishers spawn in emergency boxes and have them heal you when you put out fires rather than them being in wall storages...
Are you having a stroke
bandit wrote:you are now manually GLORFing
MrStonedOne wrote:The best part about the election is when I announce my pick because I'm just as surprised as everybody else.
PM:[USER]->IrishWristWatch0: Yeah, im make it on but how im make the station to to sun and not go to sun

OOC: Francinum: Five Rounds at PAS's
"You are destinied to defeat Dr. Uguu and his 5 Robot Masters
(All-Access-Man, ShootyBlackCoat Man, ChloralHydrate Man, Singulo Man and TeleportArmor Man)"
I'm a box
User avatar
Saegrimr
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:39 pm
Byond Username: Saegrimr

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Saegrimr » #111316

peoplearestrange wrote:This is raipdly becoming a "I don't like you" vs a "I don't like you either!" thread.

I'm gonna get a headmin to comment so we can put this all to bed.
It was already that long ago. I've already tried and after a couple of days of asking any admin to comment I finally got MSO to come around.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
User avatar
peoplearestrange
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 12:02 pm
Byond Username: Peoplearestrange
Location: UK

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by peoplearestrange » #111320

Locking until comment.
Whatever
Spoiler:
oranges wrote:singulo.io is the center point of rational and calm debate, where much of tg's issues are worked out in a fun and family friendly environment
miggles wrote:it must have been quite the accomplishment, killing a dead butterfly
WeeYakk wrote:If you take a step back from everything watching the community argue janitor related changes is one of the most surreal and hilarious things about this game. Four pages of discussing the merits of there being too much or too little dirt in a video game.
Operative wrote:Vote PAS for headmin! Get cucked and feel good getting cucked.
TheNightingale wrote:I want to get off Mr. Scones's Wild Ride...
NikNakFlak wrote:Excuse you, I was doing intentional bug testing for the well being of the server. I do not make mistakes.
Fragnostic wrote:stop cucking the first shitshow ever that revolved around me.
This is my moment, what are you doing?!
Anonmare wrote:Oranges gestures at the thread, it shudders and begins to move!
Saegrimr wrote:
callanrockslol wrote:all you have to do is ban shitters until the playbase improves/ceases to exist, whichever comes first.
IM TRYING
Screemonster wrote:hellmoo is the mud for grown adults who main reaper in overwatch
Kor wrote:
confused rock wrote:...its like if we made fire extinguishers spawn in emergency boxes and have them heal you when you put out fires rather than them being in wall storages...
Are you having a stroke
bandit wrote:you are now manually GLORFing
MrStonedOne wrote:The best part about the election is when I announce my pick because I'm just as surprised as everybody else.
PM:[USER]->IrishWristWatch0: Yeah, im make it on but how im make the station to to sun and not go to sun

OOC: Francinum: Five Rounds at PAS's
"You are destinied to defeat Dr. Uguu and his 5 Robot Masters
(All-Access-Man, ShootyBlackCoat Man, ChloralHydrate Man, Singulo Man and TeleportArmor Man)"
I'm a box
onleavedontatme
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:26 pm
Byond Username: KorPhaeron

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by onleavedontatme » #112161

>adminhelping over missing the shuttle
>banning for causing someone to miss the shuttle
>being an asshole is my RP :^)
>we're metafriend grudging but we adminhelped anyway why didn't you consult your basil friendship chart you jerk
>this complaint has too much complaining
>nearly 80 fucking posts
>left an entire week

This thread is terrible I guess I'll read it more in depth tonight
User avatar
Pascal123
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 10:05 am
Byond Username: Pascal123
Location: My house.

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Pascal123 » #112328

Lmao.

It's honestly a bit funny how this thread transformed into an official Saegrmir hate thread with people just pitching in on how much they hate Saegrmir and his antics, and how they're unsure of why he's still an admin.
All over reasons which i think are pretty clear, even Saegrmir here acknowledges but refuses to correct them, and admins refuse to acknowledge.
rdght91
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2015 3:36 am
Byond Username: Roadhog1

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by rdght91 » #112725

Can we fucking lock this thread please? Yeah, Saegrimr is a dickhead sometimes but this kid's whining negates any of that.
User avatar
Alarmclock
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 12:00 am
Byond Username: Alarmclock

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Alarmclock » #112801

Ayo, I think everyone needs to chill. Saegrimir is a cherry picker banner at some times but he also lets some things slide and does cool events. I think we all gotta chill and go back to ERPing in the dorms with our ligger in-game gf.
onleavedontatme
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:26 pm
Byond Username: KorPhaeron

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by onleavedontatme » #113191

rdght91 wrote:Can we fucking lock this thread please? Yeah, Saegrimr is a dickhead sometimes but this kid's whining negates any of that.
Alarmclock wrote:Ayo, I think everyone needs to chill. Saegrimir is a cherry picker banner at some times but he also lets some things slide and does cool events. I think we all gotta chill and go back to ERPing in the dorms with our ligger in-game gf.
I mean yeah basically I was trying to think of a nicer way to say this but I've been sick and not wanted to deal with the giant complaint thread that got left for a week while I was gone for some reason.

Banning two days for making some guy miss the shuttle was fucking dumb but your defense (we're metagrudging!) was worse than the actual IC stuff. I mean I guess I could remove/clarify the note to say you've been warned to not go overboard with whatever relationship it is you have with that other player instead of the missing shuttle thing.

You were both not 100% pleasant to each other as well as far as Saeg being abrasive goes.

As much as I love lifting saegrimr's bans (more than any other admins!) everyone involved in this acted somewhat poorly so I think we should just move on with our lives.
User avatar
Pascal123
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 10:05 am
Byond Username: Pascal123
Location: My house.

Re: [Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ba

Post by Pascal123 » #113246

Respectable verdict. Honestly though, at this point, everything that could be said has been said, and Saegrimr appears to have changed slightly as a result.

I don't know why it hasn't just been locked. It honestly lost it's purpose, turned into a thread where everybody started pitching in their own two-cents, nothing could be done to bring it back on track.
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users