[TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Appeals which have been closed.

Moderators: In-Game Head Admins, In-Game Admin, Game Server Operators, TGMC Game Server Operators

PostThis post was deleted by MrStonedOne on Sat Dec 29, 2018 9:11 am.
Reason: meme in ban appeals that adds little value to the appeal discussion.



User avatar
Anuv
 
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:34 pm
Byond Username: Anuv

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby Anuv » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:02 pm #465679

Istoprocent1 wrote:There it is Janice never admits guilt or gives full details to the admins on what really happened.

And oranges, TheMidnightRose made a huge blunder by getting into Space Law enforcement, because Space Law is not used to ban people, Main Rules and Headmin Policies are. My case is airtight.

Edit: Fixed it for you, oranges.
oranges wrote:
Spoiler:
[snip]
[2018-12-28 01:45:47.436] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: TheMidnightRose/(Emerald Gleaner)->Istoprocent/(Krokodil): Hello, what happened between you and Janice Lean.
[2018-12-28 01:46:38.684] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Istoprocent/(Krokodil)->TheMidnightRose/(Emerald Gleaner): Janice broke into the brig and captains at round start, stole captain's spare, dropped it at Thomas Lasers feet at some point, caught Janice she had given herself all access anyway, Grand Theft, Cremated.
[2018-12-28 01:47:28.394] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Istoprocent/(Krokodil)->TheMidnightRose/(Emerald Gleaner): Rule 4 - act like an antag, get treated like an antag.#Since Janice ahelped it, she might be ban baiting.
[2018-12-28 01:50:12.383] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: TheMidnightRose/(Emerald Gleaner)->Istoprocent/(Krokodil): Did you get approval to execute them? Did you discuss it with your fellow Sec? (This is where fuck up happened, instead of asking me for approval, they should have asked Janice if any of the things I said happened and either closed it as IC issue or punish Janice for ban baiting.)
[snip]


There it is. I 1) Correctly did ask if a detective can cremate me for getting AA 2) Said that I took the AA from the caps locker and used it to give it to myself so yes thus I was in his office at the time and 3) Gave all of the details that I thought were needed for my question in the given situation. I wasn't baiting. I was asking about a punishment.

Security gets ahelped by the crew for their conduct and punishments all the time. The rules literally tell you to ahelp if you think a punishment was unfair. That's what happened. I also ahelp for general questions about ingame stuff that I don't know the answer to all the time (Can I do ____ now that I'm purged by the captain? Can I bomb this cult base even though it's close to medbay? Can the AI do ____ even though he's Asimov?). That's what I did.

Your ahelp replies are nothing but you foaming at the mouth about "valids" and "antags" and rule 4. It's clearly all you care about. If I deserve punishment I'll take it. But I still stand by my own actions. I've been on Bagil over a year without any issues because I know there's more to SS13 than valids and barely skirting under rule 1 by being a dick to someone because you have a small exception in the rules that says you can. Even in your own appeal you want blood. You want your valids. Your behavior as a whole is the reason you're now here, when it should have been a minor incident, and clearly you fail to see that.

User avatar
Not-Dorsidarf
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:14 pm
Location: Space outside the Brig
Byond Username: Dorsidwarf

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby Not-Dorsidarf » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:09 pm #465682

:? It seems fishy to me that istoprocent tries to defend themself with "they committed a capital crime, spacelaw says i can kill", then when someone points out that actually under spacelaw he isn't allowed to execute and that it was a murder under spacelaw he starts screaming that "reee spacelaw isnt enforceable, admin shitters"
Image
Still, my support will always go towards the rightful Lord of Yurop, God-Emperor Donald Trump the Trumpst. Trumpingrad for life. He'll make an indiscriminate number of countries great again.


Deadcomic

User avatar
Istoprocent1
 
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:14 pm
Byond Username: istoprocent

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby Istoprocent1 » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:12 pm #465684

Not-Dorsidarf wrote::? It seems fishy to me that istoprocent tries to defend themself with "they committed a capital crime, spacelaw says i can kill", then when someone points out that actually under spacelaw he isn't allowed to execute and that it was a murder under spacelaw he starts screaming that "reee spacelaw isnt enforceable, admin shitters"


There is nothing fishy. If you read the whole thread you would have understood that I use Space Law as a guide to figure out whether people are eligible for Rule 4, since there is no "definitive valid guide". I also pointed out that Capital Crimes usually make it safe to Rule 4.

Then again it turned out that there were more reasons the round removal was justified, when we started reading the rules.

Edit: Obviously I don't go around killing people, this time i chose to do it, because Janice was being a dick and tiding for no reason. Like one of the poster said, that its messed up that I end up not being able to play the game for doing my job, while an engineer breaking into places and not doing theirs can still enjoy playing the game.

And Anuv, you had the opportunity to stop the admin and say "This was a question, yo, I did bunch of stuff that would make me an antag, thus no action is needed.", yet you started telling how you were dragged into the cremator and randomly killed for "just having all access".
Last edited by Istoprocent1 on Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Steelpoint
Github User
 
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:37 pm
Location: The Armoury
Byond Username: Steelpoint
Github Username: Steelpoint

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby Steelpoint » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:21 pm #465686

Stealing all access, and possibly attempting to distribute it to other members of the crew, is amongst one of the most disruptive actions any person can do to screw up a round, more so for Security. In the past I've never seen admins be concerned about people who break into the Caps Office, and then getting permed, tossed on the gulag or executed, draw stray eyes. The actions are essentially advertising you are acting like an antagonist.

If the Detective had a Head of Security to report to then they should've deferred to them, but I don't recall any rules in that regard that you need permission to execute anyone from a superior if the individual warrents authorization to be executed in the first place, and anyone using space law as justification for OOC rulings should be laughed at.

User avatar
Dax Dupont
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:07 pm
Location: Belgium
Byond Username: DaxYeen
Github Username: DaxDupont

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby Dax Dupont » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:23 pm #465687

Players who attempt to break into the captain's office, head of personnel's office, or the bridge at or near roundstart for no legitimate reason put themselves at risk for being legitimately killed by the captain, heads of staff, or security.


As much as I feel isopresent goes overboard most of the time, this seems valid.

Someone breaking into the captains office opens you up for getting killed by sec. If sec executes someone their body gets throw in the execution chamber or in a locker generally.

The real argument here is, do we count detectives as part of security or not. There's a policy thread to that effect going on right now because as an admin I honestly don't know since this is a case of technicalities. Most players think they are sec as detective since they (rightfully?) ignore the fluff text and for instance on meta the detective office is in sec.

Did Janice being a 'known shitter' outside of this round have any affect on your judgement iso?

User avatar
Steelpoint
Github User
 
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:37 pm
Location: The Armoury
Byond Username: Steelpoint
Github Username: Steelpoint

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby Steelpoint » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:26 pm #465688

The Detective is apart of Security, his office being returned to the Brig on Boxstation solidified that. He has sec channel access, he has access to the brig (I don't know if he has jail cell access tho), everything in the game points to him being a member of security.

I do not think it would be fair for us to redefine arbitrarily that the Detective is suddenly no longer a member of Sec and punish isto because of that. The Detective's status in Security is, I believe, irrelevant to this case.

User avatar
Istoprocent1
 
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:14 pm
Byond Username: istoprocent

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby Istoprocent1 » Sat Dec 29, 2018 2:30 pm #465689

Dax Dupont wrote:Did Janice being a 'known shitter' outside of this round have any affect on your judgement iso?


Never said Janice was a "known" shitter. I have never had an experience with Janice that would make me want to metagrudge her in any shape or form and even now, if she gets punished for misrepresenting information and ban baiting I won't hold any grudges.

The question will never be if the Detective is or is not a part of the security, Rule 4 applies to everyone equally and Security Policy & Precedents 2 confirms that Rule 4 of the main rules also apply to security. Security are not exceptions to the rule where non-antagonists can do anything they want, as per rule 4, to antagonists.

PostThis post was deleted by Nervere on Fri Jan 04, 2019 10:37 pm.
Reason: peanut post

User avatar
DrunkenMatey
 
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 8:21 pm
Byond Username: DrunkenMatey

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby DrunkenMatey » Sat Dec 29, 2018 6:15 pm #465714

The most loathsome part of all this is isto insisting that Janice be punished for ahelping an unusual situation. People are allowed to ahelp you without it being ban-baiting. Regardless of the outcome of an ahelp or this thread, it is utter shit on your end to be demanding punishment against a player for doing an ahelp asking an admin to take a look at a situation; if you go down that road then what is the conclusion? Every single ahelp results in either a ban for rule breaking or a ban for ban-baiting? that isn't how it works. You can dispute the decision of the admin as you are doing, but don't go demanding bans. Ban-baiting is taken seriously and admins do look into it when handling situations. If this had been a ban-bait the ahelp would have been more like "HALP! FUCKIN LIGGER JUST CREMATED ME FOR NO REASON! LITERALLY NO REASON!" and then the chat logs would show them breaking into caps office and all that and then rather than them begging for their life the entire way to the crematorium they likely would have been dead silent or egging you on.

User avatar
Istoprocent1
 
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:14 pm
Byond Username: istoprocent

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby Istoprocent1 » Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:23 pm #465742

Spoiler:
DrunkenMatey wrote:The most loathsome part of all this is isto insisting that Janice be punished for ahelping an unusual situation. People are allowed to ahelp you without it being ban-baiting. Regardless of the outcome of an ahelp or this thread, it is utter shit on your end to be demanding punishment against a player for doing an ahelp asking an admin to take a look at a situation; if you go down that road then what is the conclusion? Every single ahelp results in either a ban for rule breaking or a ban for ban-baiting? that isn't how it works. You can dispute the decision of the admin as you are doing, but don't go demanding bans. Ban-baiting is taken seriously and admins do look into it when handling situations. If this had been a ban-bait the ahelp would have been more like "HALP! FUCKIN LIGGER JUST CREMATED ME FOR NO REASON! LITERALLY NO REASON!" and then the chat logs would show them breaking into caps office and all that and then rather than them begging for their life the entire way to the crematorium they likely would have been dead silent or egging you on.


The shitty part is that I was not able to play the game for the full duration of the ban and am still banned from security jobs. People need to be responsible for their actions. Janice turned a question into an ahelp, then talked an admin into punishing me by using indirect language and making it appear that "all she did was give herself all access". Admin is at fault equally as he was not being objective and whether it was honest mistake, neglect or malice a player was barred from playing the game, even if said player had no prior history of misconduct and did nothing wrong by the rules.

@Headmins, can this be resolved?

User avatar
actioninja
Code Maintainer
 
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 6:40 am
Location: comatose
Byond Username: Actioninja

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby actioninja » Sun Dec 30, 2018 2:58 am #465758

Istoprocent1 wrote:Janice turned a question into an ahelp,

That is literally one of the entire purposes of ahelp existing. Asking a question without disclosing round info to all of ooc. I've used ahelp in this manner a shitload of times and never even gotten as much as a warning for it. The wiki page for definining ahelp has it written that you can use it to ask questions.
You are not helping your case here.

User avatar
Istoprocent1
 
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:14 pm
Byond Username: istoprocent

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby Istoprocent1 » Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:07 am #465759

actioninja wrote:
Istoprocent1 wrote:Janice turned a question into an ahelp,

That is literally one of the entire purposes of ahelp existing. Asking a question without disclosing round info to all of ooc. I've used ahelp in this manner a shitload of times and never even gotten as much as a warning for it. The wiki page for definining ahelp has it written that you can use it to ask questions.
You are not helping your case here.


And you are peanut posting in a Ban Appeal thread, which you have no connection to.

My comments in bold.

Spoiler:
oranges wrote:Anuv and Admins
[spoiler][2018-12-28 01:40:16.889] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #10: Anuv/(Janice Lean): Can the detective really cremate me for having all access - heard by 3 non-AFK admins who have +BAN. (Question)
[2018-12-28 01:44:04.135] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: TheMidnightRose/(Emerald Gleaner)->Anuv/(Janice Lean): I will look into it
[2018-12-28 01:44:36.000] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Anuv/(Janice Lean)->TheMidnightRose/(Emerald Gleaner): Thank you. Tried talking, he didn't say a single thing. Shotgunned me, I knocked him down once to try and flee, then didn't resist. He didn't even cuff me, I could have ran. Then cremated me. (Question turned into ahelp, where Janice withholds important information of her antagonistic actions. Sidenote: You didn't stop resisting - you were stunlocked after that, because if I recall correctly my only pair of cuffs were on the mime and that was another reason the dialogue was kept short. Aside from that there was another dude fiddling with the mime who was bucklecuffed to chapel's chair for the duration of our interaction, which meant it had to be quick and without any errors on my part.)
[2018-12-28 01:46:15.061] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: TheMidnightRose/(Emerald Gleaner)->Anuv/(Janice Lean): How did you end up getting AA
[2018-12-28 01:46:39.555] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Anuv/(Janice Lean)->TheMidnightRose/(Emerald Gleaner): The spare was taken from the cap's locker early on in the shift (Skirting around the fact that she was in the bridge at round start and related to the theft of the spare by using vague and indirect language)
[2018-12-28 01:56:15.991] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: TheMidnightRose/(Emerald Gleaner)->Anuv/(Janice Lean): Did you use the card for more access to yourself? or did you attempt to return the ID before the Det hunted you down
[2018-12-28 01:56:43.909] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Anuv/(Janice Lean)->TheMidnightRose/(Emerald Gleaner): I used it to give myself AA but I didn't go to the armory or used it to get more loot or anything
[2018-12-28 02:07:00.461] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: TheMidnightRose/(Emerald Gleaner)->Anuv/(Janice Lean): This has been resolved


As pointed out before, at no point made Janice an effort to stop the admin on his tracks by saying that it was just a question and not an ahelp, because she was guilty of acting like an antagonist and had it coming. Which is why it is ban baiting.

@Headmins, can we get this resolved before other peanut posters trash this further? This case is crystal clear.

I do understand that headmins may have a dog in this race as they recommended actions over discord as lmwevil pointed out. Whether they were given the full story or not by TheMidnightRose or whether there was bias or not is up for debate for the admin team.

User avatar
lmwevil
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 3:09 pm
Byond Username: Lmwevil

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby lmwevil » Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:45 am #465761

there has been a lot of peanut posts holy heck

clarification: the headmins made a verdict based on what rose communicated in adminbus, it should be noted that it wasn't exactly instruction nor do i know how much they knew at the time

now on that note this thread appears to be derailed hard, gonna lock it until rose or the headmins formulate a reply

User avatar
Nervere
 
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:38 am
Byond Username: Nervere
Github Username: nervere

Re: [TheMidnightRose] istoprocent - Unjustified Ban

Postby Nervere » Fri Jan 04, 2019 11:27 pm #466995

Space law can't be used as justification to create/defend bans, and neither can it be used to defend your actions. It's a roleplaying suggestion, but it has no relevance to our rules. Speaking of Space Law, the page for it says this, and everyone who cited it in this thread should keep it in mind: If you cite Space Law in an adminhelp or anywhere outside IC communications, you will be laughed at. That being said, this ban was less about space law and more about how you played security. What I mean by this isn't that you have a poor history with security and this was just another run-in with it - in fact you have no prior administrative history as security, even if your playstyle is rather questionable.

The issue is more that you decided to cremate someone for having all access, about 20 minutes after they grabbed it, because it's a capital offense under Space Law. We expect players in security roles to have a better understanding of punishments for people than valid vs. not valid. Having all access is a pretty serious offense, but it doesn't warrant instant cremation. It's telling how you didn't take time to attempt to process the prisoner, or even just kill them without cremating them. It was a jump from stunning to permanent round removal. You use rule 4 to justify what you did, but the act of possessing all access is not in itself acting like an antagonsit. This is not good faith security play, and it's not the sort of behavior that we want to encourage, either.

The biggest defense here for your actions is rule 1 precedent 5:
Players who attempt to break into the captain's office, head of personnel's office, or the bridge at or near roundstart for no legitimate reason put themselves at risk for being legitimately killed by the captain, heads of staff, or security.

This is relevant as Janice was part of a group of people who busted the captain's locker open in bridge near the start of the round.
The reason why we have this protection in place for heads of staff and security is because there's always that round where some shitter hacks open some door in bridge or captain's quarters and all hell breaks loose. In situations like these, security needs the extra leeway to defend themselves and heads of staff from people breaking in. However, this same privilege granted to security does not carry over 15-20 minutes after the crime has happened, especially if the person has not acted antagonistic since then. Sure, the criminal is still open to full punishment - the factor of time does not change this. However, taking it upon yourself to stun + cremate them as soon as you find them is excessive behavior that stems from approaching the game from a validhunting mindset. Such an approach to the situation wasn't the right response and, dare I say, violated the spirit of the precedent.

As for Anuv's involvement in this, there is no fault to be had in his part. He ahelped your actions in a situation that he thought was excessive and unreasonable. His ahelp was phrased as a question and his actions seem to be in good faith. I would likely have considered Anuv's ahelp banbaiting if he were acting antagonistic for the greater part of the round, but that's not the case. Regardless, your unrelenting zeal to see Anuv punished for ahelping makes this seem like this thread was partially motivated by the desire to have him banned. This isn't what this forum is for, ban requests are closed and it's going to stay that way.

Your appeal is denied.

Previous

Return to Resolved Appeals

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users