Page 1 of 2

[Saegrimr] Pascal123 - Conduct Violation, Unjustified Ban.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2015 10:49 pm
by Pascal123
Byond account and character name: Pascal123 - Betrays-Its-Kin

Admin in question: Saegrimr

Time incident occured:Wed Aug 05, 2015 9:32 am - Wed Aug 05, 2015 11:30 am

Detailed summary:
(I'll even go so far as of to post a link to a Text file under each point as to avoid clustering the thread with wall upon wall of text.)

1) You banned me for a poor reason.
Text File One: http://puu.sh/jtfJV/534693e64a.txt

2) You locked the thread for a poor reason.
Text File Two: http://puu.sh/jtfLC/3f68e4dc82.txt

3) Your ban length was unreasonably unjust, compared to more severe offenses.
Text File Three: http://puu.sh/jsUg0/64d896a771.txt

4) You act against the code of Admin Conduct and Forum Rules, insulting and berating members, and generally being hostile towards players.
Text File Four: http://puu.sh/jsUgG/2c3fd1d168.txt

5) You refuse to acknowledge legitimate evidence or show complete logs, i.e, cherry picking, regardless of the context surrounding said excerpts.
Text File Five: http://puu.sh/jtgdY/10c072b9ac.txt

6) Even other admins appear to have difficulty agreeing with your reasoning for banning a player and methods of presenting logs
(Not even going to detail this one, I'm pretty sure they'd know who they are.)

Do i expect this to be taken seriously by this administration? Not really, considering none where willing to address the matter regarding my appeal, but i've got something to prove here.

Please. Only post if it's relevant, thank you.

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

PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2015 11:01 pm
by Saegrimr
1) I banned you for two clearly defined rules: Preventing people from boarding the escape shuttle as a nonantag and using previous rounds as some justification for your actions.
2) Sure I could have left it unlocked so you could continue to not understand why I banned you, but I figured i'd save everybody else the trouble of arguing it with you.
3) Yes, it was harsh. Mainly to get you to cool your head about your basil metagrudges. Have you done so?
4) Actually sticky's given us the go ahead to call you a shit cunt bucket if I felt like it. I try not to stoop THAT low though.
5) I don't know what "context" you think would make metagrudges okay, using "muh RP" as a reason to break the rules does not fly here and is in fact another rule.

I do admire you going through all this work for a two day ban. You've certainly put more effort into it than people i've seen trying to get off a perma. He'll i'd go remove the ban right now simply because of all that shit you wrote that i'm not gonna read but its already expired.

Feel free to continue to berate me, however. I look forward to seeing the other admins glaze over this and tell me i've been too harsh again because someone is screaming again.

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

PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2015 11:09 pm
by Pascal123
Saegrimr wrote:Feel free to continue to berate me, however. I look forward to seeing the other admins glaze over this and tell me i've been too harsh again because someone is screaming again.


Well, yeah. With that attitude i wouldn't blame them, Buddy.

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

PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2015 11:11 pm
by Saegrimr
You can giggle at my conduct all you like, doesn't change the fact you broke the rules and got banned for it, "buddy".

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

PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2015 11:12 pm
by Pascal123
Saegrimr wrote:You can giggle at my conduct all you like, doesn't change the fact you broke the rules and got banned for it, "buddy".


Still as classy as usual, eh? You gonna lock this too?

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

PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2015 11:17 pm
by Saegrimr
Hey man if you're just gonna drop down to common insults like this I might as well just spawn us in the thunderdome or something, put it on the public camera network on-station, make it actually fun instead of making ourselves look retarded on a forum.

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

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2015 12:04 am
by TheNightingale
Saegrimr wrote:1) I banned you for two clearly defined rules: Preventing people from boarding the escape shuttle as a nonantag and using previous rounds as some justification for your actions.


I don't know about you, but someone trying to attack you with a fire axe just screams trustworthy. The "she's killed people before" comment wasn't justification, but roleplay... Because, yes, this is a roleplaying game.

Saegrimr wrote:2) Sure I could have left it unlocked so you could continue to not understand why I banned you, but I figured i'd save everybody else the trouble of arguing it with you.


You'll have to forgive me for this, but to me this sounds a lot like "I knew the ban was bad, and didn't want anyone to call me out on it". How close am I?

Saegrimr wrote:3) Yes, it was harsh. Mainly to get you to cool your head about your basil metagrudges. Have you done so?


I won't mention how vitriolic you seem over these so-called "metagrudges" (which don't, in fact, exist), but I'm not entirely sure that justifies going against established precedent to ban someone because of a personal stake in the matter. Rules are impartial.

Saegrimr wrote:4) Actually sticky's given us the go ahead to call you a shit cunt bucket if I felt like it. I try not to stoop THAT low though.


You're cherry-picking again. Even if Sticky says you can insult people, how about the rest of the Admin Conduct Guidelines?

Saegrimr wrote:5) I don't know what "context" you think would make metagrudges okay, using "muh RP" as a reason to break the rules does not fly here and is in fact another rule.


You're cherrypicking again, I'm afraid. The ban itself was invalid, because of evidence which had already been stated - more would have been (e.g. that the stunbaton was, in fact, a wielded fire axe), but you locked the thread because you couldn't refute the points made.

Saegrimr wrote:I do admire you going through all this work for a two day ban. You've certainly put more effort into it than people i've seen trying to get off a perma. He'll i'd go remove the ban right now simply because of all that shit you wrote that i'm not gonna read but its already expired.

Feel free to continue to berate me, however. I look forward to seeing the other admins glaze over this and tell me i've been too harsh again because someone is screaming again.


A good start would be removing the note, if one still exists. It's not about the ban length, however - it's about why it was placed, and the unprofessionalism and haphazardry with which it was conducted.

(And this time, it'd be nice if you replied to my points, instead of evading them and locking the thread.)

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

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2015 12:26 am
by Saegrimr
TheNightingale wrote:I don't know about you, but someone trying to attack you with a fire axe just screams trustworthy. The "she's killed people before" comment wasn't justification, but roleplay... Because, yes, this is a roleplaying game.

There were no fire axes involved, what are you even on about?
And no, "roleplay" doesn't excuse you from rules. I'm not gonna argue about this.

TheNightingale wrote:You'll have to forgive me for this, but to me this sounds a lot like "I knew the ban was bad, and didn't want anyone to call me out on it". How close am I?

No, i'm 100% solid on the ban therefore arguing with it is a waste of mine and everybody else's time. Me closing the thread doesn't magically hide it and prevent people from bringing it up.

TheNightingale wrote:I won't mention how vitriolic you seem over these so-called "metagrudges" (which don't, in fact, exist), but I'm not entirely sure that justifies going against established precedent to ban someone because of a personal stake in the matter. Rules are impartial.

They are indeed partial, you should try reading them sometime. I don't know what "established precedent" you think there is that prevents me from banning people who act on grudges from a previous round.

TheNightingale wrote:You're cherry-picking again. Even if Sticky says you can insult people, how about the rest of the Admin Conduct Guidelines?

Well ya got me there, deary me. By the way Tsaricide has been temporarily made headmin for a week while Kor is gone so if you scream about me being rude in this admin complaint loud enough you can probably get me deadminned.

TheNightingale wrote: You're cherrypicking again, I'm afraid. The ban itself was invalid, because of evidence which had already been stated - more would have been (e.g. that the stunbaton was, in fact, a wielded fire axe), but you locked the thread because you couldn't refute the points made.

I don't even know what "stun baton" was even relevant in the first place, much less a fire axe that has shown up exactly 0 times in attack logs for that entire day.
Lets go over the ban reason here one more time since you don't seem to understand.
1: Preventing someone from escaping on the shuttle as a nonantag, over shit they started.
2: Metagrudge horse shit that I have zero tolerance for.
3: OOC in IC on top of that.

TheNightingale wrote: A good start would be removing the note, if one still exists.

I'm not going to remove history of a player's conduct and history of breaking the rules because you think i'm too rude about it.

Take a walk, vigilare.

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

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2015 12:57 am
by TheNightingale
Saegrimr wrote:There were no fire axes involved, what are you even on about?
And no, "roleplay" doesn't excuse you from rules. I'm not gonna argue about this.


That's alright, I didn't know there was a fire axe either until recently. It'd help if, perhaps, the thread wasn't locked, so new evidence which came to light could be posted...
Such evidence being, the weapon in Sequoia's possession when she waited outside telecomms was a fire axe (which witness testimony from Turgent stated), presumably taken from Atmospherics nearby? This indicates hostile intent (an axe is by no means a harmless weapon), and I'd go so far as to claim keeping Sequoia locked up was merciful.

Saegrimr wrote:No, i'm 100% solid on the ban therefore arguing with it is a waste of mine and everybody else's time. Me closing the thread doesn't magically hide it and prevent people from bringing it up.


The bolding is mine - and, indeed, isn't this the point of this thread?

Saegrimr wrote:They are indeed partial, you should try reading them sometime. I don't know what "established precedent" you think there is that prevents me from banning people who act on grudges from a previous round.


I've always assumed that, for someone to be punished for something, it must first be proven... I apologise if this isn't the case - and if it's not, I have serious concerns about the justice system here.

Saegrimr wrote:I don't even know what "stun baton" was even relevant in the first place, much less a fire axe that has shown up exactly 0 times in attack logs for that entire day.
Lets go over the ban reason here one more time since you don't seem to understand.
1: Preventing someone from escaping on the shuttle as a nonantag, over shit they started.
2: Metagrudge horse shit that I have zero tolerance for.
3: OOC in IC on top of that.


I've checked, and throwing items doesn't show in attack logs. Being hit by items does, but throwing them doesn't. You'll note that at [08:41:27], Covers shot Sequoia with a hybrid taser (and, according to Turgent's testimony - which couldn't be posted because the thread was locked -, took her axe and flushed it down disposals), and Betrays then attacked her with his own baton. Note that despite her clearly-stated hostile intent (possession of a deadly weapon tends to do that), (1) is still what those in the trade call escalation. It's where one person starts something little, which then gets bigger, and then even bigger. And when Sequoia stated her intent to kill the accused, but failed, they chose not to kill Sequoia in return. Should people really be punished for doing the right thing?
(2) is, as said above, unproven (and arguably false). It might be better for someone more objective to take a look at the situation, given your predisposition to use metagrudging as the spooky, scary Basil boogeyman it isn't... but as it stands, I believe the claim that saying Sequoia has killed before is, in fact, a character fact, and not (as you put it) metagrudge horse sh*t.
(3) is akin to saying "round" instead of "shift". If you'd ban someone for forty-eight hours for a phrase used in-game (c.f. the 'antag token', which you can get by putting a coin in a SecTech), I'm a little worried about the future of this server.

Saegrimr wrote:I'm not going to remove history of a player's conduct and history of breaking the rules because you think i'm too rude about it.

Take a walk, vigilare.


Au contraire, you said "[you'd] go remove the ban right now ... but it's already expired". Removing the note is as close as you can get now.
Are you one of Scones's conspiracy theorists? I still have no idea who you're talking about, someone PM me and explain?


Regardless, I'm going to sleep now, so you'll have an easier time cherrypicking my rebuttal, I'm sure. On that note - Pascal provided a lot of puu.sh's (screenshots and text files) in the OP - would you care to counter those as well? I'm not saying photographic evidence is a big deal, but, well...

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

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2015 3:57 am
by Saegrimr
TheNightingale wrote:I've checked, and throwing items doesn't show in attack logs.

Funny. You must have a very old build or something, because they do.
Image

The original story I got was "We ambushed her, and took all her firearms, A revolver, a telebaton, and an energy gun, she had her weapons drawn, "
So why is there suddenly now a fire axe? Why does it even matter? I'd rather try to deal with someone wielding a fire axe than a revolver and an egun, personally.

TheNightingale wrote:Pascal provided a lot of puu.sh's (screenshots and text files) in the OP - would you care to counter those as well?

Considering its all the same shit I already covered in his ban appeal, plus some extra pointless logs of him being chatty with someone else entirely? No.

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

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2015 7:42 pm
by TheNightingale
Saegrimr wrote:Funny. You must have a very old build or something, because they do.


Thanks for checking, but I was referring to throwing an item, not being hit by an item. The axe was allegedly taken and thrown into disposals, hitting nobody.

Saegrimr wrote:The original story I got was "We ambushed her, and took all her firearms, A revolver, a telebaton, and an energy gun, she had her weapons drawn, "
So why is there suddenly now a fire axe? Why does it even matter? I'd rather try to deal with someone wielding a fire axe than a revolver and an egun, personally.


The original story you got was...

Pascal123 wrote:Eventually she decides to call the shuttle and they make the connection that we may be on T-Comms, to which we waited, around the two minute mark we departed for a pod, only to be greeted by her outside the door with another stunbaton, so we stun her and cuff her with nearby cable coils, to which she explains that she only wanted to talk, we did not buy it, and left her in a security post to handle herself and took a pod.


The part with the revolver, energy gun and telebaton came earlier, in Engineering.

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

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:45 pm
by Saegrimr
TheNightingale wrote:
Pascal123 wrote:Eventually she decides to call the shuttle and they make the connection that we may be on T-Comms, to which we waited, around the two minute mark we departed for a pod, only to be greeted by her outside the door with another stunbaton, so we stun her and cuff her with nearby cable coils, to which she explains that she only wanted to talk, we did not buy it, and left her in a security post to handle herself and took a pod.


The part with the revolver, energy gun and telebaton came earlier, in Engineering.


So it goes from a stun baton to an axe, in that situation instead.
This also changes nothing about my personal opinion where i'd rather deal with a pure damage weapon rather than a stun weapon, and this also doesn't change anything else about the entire situation objectively other than what equates to flavor text at this point.

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

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2015 10:18 pm
by TheNightingale
Correct, from a stunbaton to an axe. Your personal opinion on which is harder to fight isn't what I'm getting at - the point I'm making is that a fire axe is solely a damage weapon (like an energy sword, but less traitorous), and indicates Sequoia's intent to kill. Regardless of the circumstances leading to its escalation, it'd be justified self-defence to kill Sequoia at this point, seeing as she was ready to attack them with a fire axe. However, they didn't - and they didn't need to. They chose to do the right thing (to restrain, rather than kill, Sequoia), and they were punished for it. What method of justice is it that involves prosecuting those who make the right choice?

It was Sequoia who chose to escalate to lethal weapons, not Betrays. And it was Sequoia who was restrained because of it. So I ask you, in this situation - what should they have done? They couldn't take her with them, because the pod only had room for two. They couldn't release her, because she'd clearly indicated her intent to kill. They chose not to kill her, because they didn't need to. They could've stayed behind with her, but that would've meant two non-antags missing the shuttle, not just one.

So what should they have done with Sequoia, who'd demonstrated her intent to kill?

[Deleted]

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2015 10:26 pm
by LNGLY
PostThis post was deleted by NikNakFlak on Sat Aug 08, 2015 11:50 pm.
Reason: please be constructive

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

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2015 11:08 pm
by Saegrimr
TheNightingale wrote:So what should they have done with Sequoia,


Probably not ambush the captain in engineering in the first place.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 3:40 am
by Stan_Studnick
Two things:

Pascal you have a real fucking problem with the IC/OOC split. You got really pissy with me for a couple of rounds because of general banter in bluechat, I saw you turn into a complete cunt but you weren't doing anything too bad and I could have been mistaken so I didn't say anything then. Later on I started to pick up other instances of that and I think you actually argued one time about it. When Sequoia was busy beating the piss out of you on the escape shuttle during a different round and everyone else stopped her, none of us held any ill-will toward her or Rsmr after that. Seeing what has happened, I can probably guess you were giving her shit and she probably thought you were a traitor... either way she got spaced and shit like that happens sometimes. You need to learn that metagrudges aren't okay, IC and OOC are different realms and if you can't separate the two then maybe Basil isn't the server for you.

Saegrimr you can also be unnecessarily callous and mean.

Feel free to continue to berate me, however. I look forward to seeing the other admins glaze over this and tell me i've been too harsh again because someone is screaming again.


These are your words, yeah we all have our moments (I'll be the first to admit to my short temper) but you are kind of overboard sometimes. I'm not saying that's what happened here at all, I'm just making a statement about it, I think you were entirely justified in banning Pascal because he did go too far.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 4:40 am
by Pascal123
Pascal you have a real fucking problem with the IC/OOC split. You got really pissy with me for a couple of rounds because of general banter in bluechat, I saw you turn into a complete cunt but you weren't doing anything too bad and I could have been mistaken so I didn't say anything then. Later on I started to pick up other instances of that and I think you actually argued one time about it.


I have little idea of what you're talking about, Stan, i hardly even know your characters, honestly.
It just seems like you're mistaken here, or maybe you just need to specify.

When Sequoia was busy beating the piss out of you on the escape shuttle during a different round and everyone else stopped her, none of us held any ill-will toward her or Rsmr after that.


Nor did i, we're practically friends OOCly. It'd have been great if Saegrimr hadn't pre-maturely locked the thread, you know? So Rsmr could get his word in on it?

Seeing what has happened, I can probably guess you were giving her shit and she probably thought you were a traitor... either way she got spaced and shit like that happens sometimes.


I have no idea which shift you are pertaining to, here. If you're talking about the shift where she tried to kill me on the shuttle, i did nothing, she merely attacked me on a whim, and i happen to be fine with that. If you're talking about the shift pertaining to the ban, I'm pretty sure the logs and screenshots clearly indicate she had an intent to harm from the beginning.

[You need to learn that metagrudges aren't okay, IC and OOC are different realms and if you can't separate the two then maybe Basil isn't the server for you.


This is just seems like another instance of somebody mistaking persistent character relationships with metagrudging/metafriending.

Thanks for the post, though. Unlike Saegrimr you can be discussed with logically.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:06 am
by Pascal123
http://puu.sh/juL7h/52d8270865.png

Again with the premature locking of a thread before anyone, not even the "Victim" has a chance to state anything regarding the ban, judgement, or punishment.

Classy as usual. Your appeals last than ten minutes before being locked by you, yourself, and you even stated how much you would like to lock this as-well. Remind me why they haven't sacked you yet?

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:10 am
by Saegrimr
There is no discussion. You did the thing and got banned. That incident is also leading me to believe you really don't understand escalation, or proper responses to things seeing as you kidnapped and sex changed someone for spray painting the floor outside of your department.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:12 am
by Pascal123
Saegrimr wrote:There is no discussion. You did the thing and got banned. That incident is also leading me to believe you really don't understand escalation, or proper responses to things seeing as you kidnapped and sex changed someone for spray painting the floor outside of your department.

I understand escalation, it is you who does not. There are many things you do not understand.
And it was in cargo. though it's not like you give a damn about anything. You're Saegrimr.
You don't even give a damn about what the "Victims" have to say, either.

They where right when they told me I'm wasting my time with you.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:16 am
by Saegrimr
Last I checked cargo is a department, and unless you have some miracle hard proof that everything I have banned you for actually did not happen despite logs... you're right, I really don't give a damn. I fully expect you to continue complaining and raising a shitstorm in OOC for the next week or so provided I don't get another ahelp about you doing something stupid after tomorrow.

Protip: Stop doing stupid shit and i'll stop logging on to basil to deal with the ahelps against you.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:19 am
by Pascal123
So you're admitting to not giving a damn, Nice. At-least you're honest about it.

Why don't you go ask Rsmr/Svarta for their input? I know for a fact Rsmr made an account and verified it simply so he could post on the appeal, about the absurd ban length and fact that there was a fire-axe and, subsequently, had harmful intent. Only for you to lock it.

I fully expect you to continue complaining and raising a shitstorm in OOC for the next week or so

Well, you're correct to expect this, not many people like you. Not even the people you ban for like you. They don't like your behavior, they don't like your attitude, frankly, they think you're a terrible admin. But hey, at-least you're a Sybilmin, right? you don't have to see it with your own eyes. Ignorance is bliss.

I'm sure if you asked everyone on Bagil to post their opinions on here, you'd have to lock it, because it'd just be flooded with hatred.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:26 am
by Saegrimr
I had been checking basil occasionally to ask about the axe thing just out of personal curiosity, but it doesn't really change what you did. Theres plenty of places for him to complain here.
Are you assuming i'm hawking over your every move? Who do you think even ahelped in the first place?
"halp bein griffed" usually leads to someone looking into it. You drew the shit straw of having me come on and look.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:30 am
by Pascal123
Saegrimr wrote:I had been checking basil occasionally to ask about the axe thing just out of personal curiosity


Nice joke, what happened to not giving a damn? You never asked.

but it doesn't really change what you did. Theres plenty of places for him to complain here.


But the only relevant spot would have been in the appeal, at the time.

Are you assuming i'm hawking over your every move?


Sure seems like it.

Who do you think even ahelped in the first place?


Svarta. Duh. just like Rsmr, though. I'm fairly certain they weren't expecting you to respond and ban for an absurd reason/length.

"halp bein griffed" usually leads to someone looking into it.


No, "halp bein griffed" usually leads to admins ignoring it due to lack of detail.

You drew the shit straw of having me come on and look.


Perhaps you should stop looking into Ahelps, then.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:32 am
by BangingDonk
Why do you keep doing this, anyways? It seems like you're always pulling shit like this, regardless of escalation, antagonist status, or what have you. Do you think this makes you a fun person to play with?

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:33 am
by Pascal123
BangingDonk wrote:Why do you keep doing this, anyways? It seems like you're always pulling shit like this, regardless of escalation, antagonist status, or what have you. Do you think this makes you a fun person to play with?


To be fair, i only do this sometimes.
And only with people who know it's not serious.
For months, before Saegrimr began nit-picking me, My notes have been clean.

Bagil is vastly different from Sybil, We're mostly friends OOCly. Though i fully expect you not to realize this.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:47 am
by Saegrimr
Pascal123 wrote:For months, before Saegrimr began nit-picking me, My notes have been clean.

Bagil is vastly different from Sybil, We're mostly friends OOCly. Though i fully expect you not to realize this.


Multiple admins have already expressed that they absolutely don't want to get involved in this because of the whole "We're mostly friends OOCly".
Nobody wants to poke the metafriend beehive, I guess because they actually care about their image there. Or they really don't want to deal with you personally because, as one put it, you would also accuse them of having a grudge.
Whatever their reasons are, i've been regularly pestering adminbus to comment on this with zero takers, openly inviting them to either tell me i'm wrong or tell you to fuck off. Neither has happened so i'm gonna assume they still wish to not touch this with a ten foot pole, and the only active headmins are both gone for the week so they get to come back after a while and see me being a 2rude dude with you throwing a huge cryfest because you got caught doing stupid shit by an admin who would rather remove shitty players than cater to the basil circlejerk.

Since you've basically dropped straight down to ad-hom level long ago because you cannot refute that what you've done is pretty fucking dumb, i'll see about getting this one closed too. Feel free to get the rest off your chest until then.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:55 am
by Pascal123
Multiple admins have already expressed that they absolutely don't want to get involved in this because of the whole "We're mostly friends OOCly".


What does this have to do with metafriending? It means we're chill towards eachother. That, no matter what, we're friends. IC is strictly IC.

Nobody wants to poke the metafriend beehive, I guess because they actually care about their image there. Or they really don't want to deal with you personally because, as one put it, you would also accuse them of having a grudge.


This is just you nit-picking, and, again, there is no "Meta-friend beehive". The only person I'd accuse of having an admin grudge on me right now, would be you. And i think it's pretty clear that you do.

Whatever their reasons are, i've been regularly pestering adminbus to comment on this with zero takers, openly inviting them to either tell me i'm wrong or tell you to fuck off. Neither has happened so i'm gonna assume they still wish to not touch this with a ten foot pole, and the only active headmins are both gone for the week so they get to come back after a while and see me being a 2rude dude with you throwing a huge cryfest because you got caught doing stupid shit by an admin who would rather remove shitty players than cater to the basil circlejerk.


I could imagine this may be because the admin in question is, you That the complaint is directed towards, you that the topic is, you.

Since you've basically dropped straight down to ad-hom level long ago because you cannot refute that what you've done is pretty fucking dumb, i'll see about getting this one closed too. Feel free to get the rest off your chest until then.


You say this as though anyone would expect anything different from you.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:57 am
by Saegrimr
Pascal123 wrote:This is just you nit-picking, and, again, there is no "Meta-friend beehive".


Shit this could be a forum signature.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:58 am
by Pascal123
Saegrimr wrote:
Pascal123 wrote:This is just you nit-picking, and, again, there is no "Meta-friend beehive".

Shit this could be a forum signature.


Very relevant, my friend. i agree whole-heartedly on this pointless statement.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 7:11 am
by SvartaSvansen
Okay, so... The reason I haven't responded till now was because I couldn't remember my password and I wasn't receiving the email. I FINALLY guessed right. Forgive me, I don't post on the forum very often.

This isn't really what I wanted to happen, all this bitterness being stirred up from one ahelp. I don't mind conflict between Alana (Sucks) and Betrays. In fact I enjoy the drama. But when it gets excessive like forced surgery for drawing graffiti in the cargo lobby (that's what I meant by "right outside") or being locked in a room and repeatedly beaten into crit, healed, and beaten again for being annoying over comms (I admit I was taking it too far, I was just bored; but really it was just a drunk lizard speaking a LOT over comms, in that poor gentleman impression he does)... It stops being fun.

I've started ahelping these instances because I was told several times by more than one person that these things are ahelpable. And I admit I have a bad habit of not speaking up about things.

I don't want to be dragged into petty arguments over this. I don't want IC/OOC to be blended here. I just want to express that certain things that are "har har" fun for one or two can really ruin a round for another guy if you overdo it, and it's something that should be kept in mind when you play an abrasive character. There's a difference between being a jerk ICly and being one OOCly, and sometimes it's a fine line where intent alone defines which side of it you're on. As a nonantag, no less.

Also, just a side note: I'm not sure what you mean by your "friends OOCly" comment, because you've explicitly told me we're not friends.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 7:18 am
by Stan_Studnick
Pascal, just fucking stop.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 7:23 am
by Pascal123
Okay, so... The reason I haven't responded till now was because I couldn't remember my password and I wasn't receiving the email. I FINALLY guessed right. Forgive me, I don't post on the forum very often.


At-least you got the chance to, unlike Rsmr. Perhaps Rsmr may post later... who knows.

This isn't really what I wanted to happen, all this bitterness being stirred up from one ahelp. I don't mind conflict between Alana (Sucks) and Betrays. In fact I enjoy the drama.


This is precisely what Rsmr stated OOCly, as-well... Saegrimr or his harsh punishments are never what people intend.

But when it gets excessive like forced surgery for drawing graffiti in the cargo lobby (that's what I meant by "right outside")


I can agree whole-heatedly on this, Svarta. Hence why i apologized OOCly, and, by extension, To you right now.

or being locked in a room and repeatedly beaten into crit, healed, and beaten again for being annoying over comms (I admit I was taking it too far, I was just bored; but really it was just a drunk lizard speaking a LOT over comms, in that poor gentleman impression he does)... It stops being fun.


Now... this particular incident really involves me very little, more-so, somebody else. Though I'm not naming names.

I've started ahelping these instances because I was told several times by more than one person that these things are ahelpable. And I admit I have a bad habit of not speaking up about things.


They are, and i can understand why you'd see it fit to Ahelp. People tell me i should Ahelp things often enough as-well.

I don't want to be dragged into petty arguments over this. I don't want IC/OOC to be blended here. I just want to express that certain things that are "har har" fun for one or two can really ruin a round for another guy if you overdo it, and it's something that should be kept in mind when you play an abrasive character. There's a difference between being a jerk ICly and being one OOCly, and sometimes it's a fine line where intent alone defines which side of it you're on. As a nonantag, no less.


This is honestly what Saegrimr refuses to acknowledge... we where both playing a long. Saegrimr merely makes his own judgement and sticks to it no-matter what. In this case, It is metagrudging, apparently.

Also, just a side note: I'm not sure what you mean by your "friends OOCly" comment, because you've explicitly told me we're not friends.


This was stated ICly, Svarta. OOCly? I like you. You're cool.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 7:31 am
by Saegrimr
Pascal123 wrote:This is honestly what Saegrimr refuses to acknowledge... we where both playing a long. and saegrimr merely makes his own judgement and sticks to it no-matter what. In this case, It is metagrudging.

I refuse to acknowledge what, that your gimmick of being a Space Asshole is interesting and unique? That you regularly doing stupid shit as a nonantag but its somehow okay because "we're friends OOC"?
Its apparently not okay if people are ahelping about it. That's when it stops being friends having a laugh and starts being an issue that needs to be dealt with.

Maybe you should take the hint that your antics are maybe going too far, even for your "friends".

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 7:35 am
by Pascal123
Saegrimr wrote:
Pascal123 wrote:This is honestly what Saegrimr refuses to acknowledge... we where both playing a long. and saegrimr merely makes his own judgement and sticks to it no-matter what. In this case, It is metagrudging.

I refuse to acknowledge what, that your gimmick of being a Space Asshole is interesting and unique? That you regularly doing stupid shit as a nonantag but its somehow okay because "we're friends OOC"?
Its apparently not okay if people are ahelping about it. That's when it stops being friends having a laugh and starts being an issue that needs to be dealt with.

Maybe you should take the hint that your antics are maybe going too far, even for your "friends".


You see... you talk about Ad-Hom, revert to this, then state you wouldn't stoop as low as me, then try and play a good guy. Merely to attempt to get some sort of response out of me to justify locking the thread down.
It's like you did not pay attention in the least to anything Svarta just wrote. Perhaps because you've stated clearly that you do not care previously.
I'm sure if Rsmr made a post right now, you'd still be no different.

It's this combination of attacks that would make me question just what makes you think you're a model admin here. though, you stated it yourself, you're the "Worst Admin of the Bunch". And your reputation precedes you.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 7:53 am
by Saegrimr
I never said I wouldn't stoop down to your level, a thread that's nothing but back and forth namecalling won't get anywhere except be a carnival show for everybody else to enjoy.

Here's what you need to understand.
1: What Svarta or RSMR says does not matter at this point. Their opinion is now irrelevant unless it pertains to more information about the Thing You Already Did.
2: My opinion nor attitude doesn't matter either, otherwise i'd just perma you and be done with it.
3: You're still banned, and still going to get banned in the future if you keep being a shitnugget.
4: Your "RP" sucks.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 7:58 am
by Pascal123
Saegrimr wrote:I never said I wouldn't stoop down to your level, a thread that's nothing but back and forth namecalling won't get anywhere except be a carnival show for everybody else to enjoy.


Then perhaps you should cease name-calling, harassing, and generally insulting forum members. In a complaint, no less? How are we expected to believe you take anything seriously, here.
Treat others as you would like to be treated, happens to be a thing, you know?

1: What Svarta or RSMR says does not matter at this point. Their opinion is now irrelevant unless it pertains to more information about the Thing You Already Did.


It does have relevance in this thread. Specifically because, you refuse to allow the "Victims" to post their own thoughts on a ban appeal before locking it.
See point two.

2: My opinion nor attitude doesn't matter either, otherwise i'd just perma you and be done with it.


It does matter, especially in this thread. Specifically because, again, you're acting completely against what would be expected from reading forum rules, and admin conduct. generally stating it does not apply to you.
See point four.

3: You're still banned, and still going to get banned in the future if you keep being a shitnugget.


Do i even need to say it?

4: Your "RP" sucks.


Ditto.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 8:01 am
by Saegrimr
Do you actually even give a shit about your ban or are you just here for the old "Help Saegrimr said mean things to me!" thing in some hopes to get back at me?

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 8:40 am
by rsmr
Hi. I'm here. Took me a while, but here I am. Hold your applause, please.

Some points i'd like to clear up:

1. I had a wielded fire-axe from the bridge. Whatever. Just clearing that up as fact.

2. I planned to kill Pascal's character with the axe. I was pretty convinced it was just necessary at that point.

3. I 'unno. Everyone knows Sequoia kills people casually. I mean it's not unprovoked, and usually wasn't meant to escalate to murder and ends in cloning when it does.

Point is that pascal certainly wasn't unjustified thinking I was planning to kill him with a fire axe after I preached about death warrants over comms after he antagonized me (we call this a "motive"). i mean the first time i was walking in with a revolver because i was like "oh ok someone's fucking gibbing people just for entering engineering. that's not cool. as the captain and only security force i should take responsibility and cautiously investigate". & i got robusted, w/e

also, when i ahelped this, i really just wanted an admin to give Pascal a slap on the wrist. You know, sorta say "hey this is a little much can you take a step back?" not ban him for two days like what the shit saeg? you silly dork.


i went to talk in the ban appeal that referenced me in every single post but it was locked so quick like, what? oh you're being stubborn and don't want people poking holes in your logic so you lock it before anyone can really give you a reaming? come on. pathetic administration on your part, saeg.


as i saw it, you told me in the adminpm when you arrived that you were basically cranky about having to leave the high praised sanctuary that is sybil, and just wanted to get through the issue so you could leave asap. like, what kind of professionalism is that? is this some cartoon? come on, that's just tacky. silly saeg. if you're just going to be impatient and give someone a two-day ban for something that was easily worth no more than a slap on the wrist, you need you ~re-evaluate your position of power~.

you weren't there for like three minutes. you literally told me "oh well pascal's being difficult so i'm just gonna ban him for two days" and fucked off back to special snowflake lizard land sybil.


saeg did you get your admin status from a serial code on the back of a box of cereal
good grief what a mess this is.



oh edit because why not: Pascal & I both play notorious assholes who beat people up for being impolite. we play very similar characters and everyone can point that out. we do a lot of the same things for a lot of the same reasons. our justifications are nearly identical. that round was just a fierce clash of wits that featured me getting tag-teamed a lot. which isn't unusual, as sometimes it happens the other way around with people. him & i are pretty much just as guilty as the other about anything here. were our positions switched, that scene would've gone ~exactly the same~. like, the only thing pascal's done that i haven't is have the courage to speak up to a clearly corrupt admin.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 8:58 am
by Saegrimr
So lesson learned, don't ahelp a situation against your super best buddy if you aren't willing to deal with his eventual punishment for acting like a shitter.

rsmr wrote:oh edit because why not: Pascal & I both play notorious assholes who beat people up for being impolite. we play very similar characters and everyone can point that out. we do a lot of the same things for a lot of the same reasons. our justifications are nearly identical.

The fuck is wrong with you people?

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:01 am
by Pascal123
rsmr wrote:oh edit because why not: Pascal & I both play notorious assholes who beat people up for being impolite. we play very similar characters and everyone can point that out. we do a lot of the same things for a lot of the same reasons. our justifications are nearly identical.

The fuck is wrong with you people?[/quote]

So, out of all of what Rsmr posted, this is all you can pick out and comment on?

Some people happen to like there being variance between characters.
Life ain't all sunshine and rainbows, friend. Not everyone's the nicest guy in town, and people happen to like that being reflected in-game. Makes it feel more alive.

What's so hard to understand? It's not like it's not one of the things that have been explained and repeated to you multiple times.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:06 am
by rsmr
ayy. pascal & i aren't even pals. more like mutual acquaintances at best. not that you care, but, yeah.


Saegrimr wrote:The fuck is wrong with you people?



oh no we play neurotic sociopaths on a game about neurotic sociopaths in a metal deathtrap masquerading as a space station

isn't that practically the premise of the game? like is it that big a surprise that sometimes people don't play as nice people? it's almost as if there are ~unpleasant people in real life~ and that we're trying to reflect that realistically for fun knowing we're not really that shitty ooc.

if only if i could think of a rude, unpleasant person who takes severe actions for little things on a short-fuse. sequoia? betrays? hrmm, no, thinking irl here. name starts with an "s" and ends in "aegrmir". anyone else wanna take a guess with me? it's a doozie.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:12 am
by Pascal123
1. I had a wielded fire-axe from the bridge. Whatever. Just clearing that up as fact.


This clearly states harmful intent. it is evidence that could not be provided due to you locking the thread, but you don't seem to care. Point two and four.

2. I planned to kill Pascal's character with the axe. I was pretty convinced it was just necessary at that point.


This states escalated and harmful intent on the "victims" part. thus justifying my IC reaction. this could not be presented due to your thread lock. Point two.

Point is that pascal certainly wasn't unjustified thinking I was planning to kill him with a fire axe after I preached about death warrants over comms after he antagonized me (we call this a "motive"). i mean the first time i was walking in with a revolver because i was like "oh ok someone's fucking gibbing people just for entering engineering. that's not cool. as the captain and only security force i should take responsibility and cautiously investigate". & i got robusted, w/e


This is the "victims" personal opinion and views on the matter, which could not be posted, again, due to you prematurely locking the thread. Point two.

also, when i ahelped this, i really just wanted an admin to give Pascal a slap on the wrist. You know, sorta say "hey this is a little much can you take a step back?" not ban him for two days like what the shit saeg? you silly dork.


Doesn't Rsmr and Svarta stating practically the same thing tell you anything? apparently not. Your attitude and conduct needs work. Point four.

i went to talk in the ban appeal that referenced me in every single post but it was locked so quick like, what? oh you're being stubborn and don't want people poking holes in your logic so you lock it before anyone can really give you a reaming? come on. pathetic administration on your part, saeg.


Again, Point two.


as i saw it, you told me in the adminpm when you arrived that you were basically cranky about having to leave the high praised sanctuary that is sybil, and just wanted to get through the issue so you could leave asap. like, what kind of professionalism is that? is this some cartoon? come on, that's just tacky. silly saeg. if you're just going to be impatient and give someone a two-day ban for something that was easily worth no more than a slap on the wrist, you need you ~re-evaluate your position of power~.


This indicates you did not give a damn about resolving the adminpm, were tired, and do not regularly admin Bagil, thus have little knowledge of it's players, and their mentality.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:21 am
by Saegrimr
Pascal123 wrote:So, out of all of what Rsmr posted, this is all you can pick out and comment on?


Probably because not a single word of it matters.
The axe clears up a minor detail that doesn't affect the ban whatsoever.
"I planned to kill Pascal's character with the axe." Might have mattered if it was reflected in the logs, or in the initial PMs, or through IC knowledge that wasn't you using "validhunting captain" as an excuse after you instigated shit in the first place.

He is right about one thing, the moment you started being difficult in the PMs is when I gave up and decided you were gone so you could take some time to type up a reasonable response in a ban appeal. I have all the time in the world, but i'm not going to spend it dancing around telling you that i'm not another admin trying to stealthily grudge you.

Pascal123 wrote:and do not regularly admin Bagil, thus have little knowledge of it's players, and their mentality.

I don't give a shit about your mentality unless you're breaking rules.
Congratulations, you broke rules. Twice. Enough that someone complained about it and someone had to log on to deal with you.

So did you or did you not do the things?

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:26 am
by Pascal123
But still, we should try and get this back on track.

This thread is more about Saegrimrs poor decisions, lack of respect towards players, ignorance of the established rules and admin guidelines, and general devil-may-care attitude and unwillingness to give a damn about anything.

It's less about what we think about him, his decisions, and way of handling things, even though it is still relevant. We're just attacking him at this point. We shouldn't stoop to his level.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:29 am
by Saegrimr
Oh okay so this IS just about me being a meany poopy head and hurting the sensitive feelings of the hardened space asshole veterans of basil.
Pascal123 wrote:Life ain't all sunshine and rainbows, friend. Not everyone's the nicest guy in town,


I'll just stop posting then since this is no longer about a ban.

[Deleted]

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:33 am
by rsmr
PostThis post was deleted by peoplearestrange on Mon Aug 10, 2015 9:53 am.
Reason: Doesn't add to the discussion.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:34 am
by Pascal123
I'll just stop posting then since this is no longer about a ban.


No, this is about you, the bans are just context.
I'd say i thought it was clear... but you don't care about anything. Lmao.

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:37 am
by Screemonster
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"

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

PostPosted: Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:40 am
by Pascal123
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?