/tg/Station 13

Please post any positive or negative feedback for the administrator here.
This is not the place to discuss ban appeals, admin complaints, or ban requests.
This is for specific feedback for this administrator.

Excellent midis

Instantly IC'd my ahelp after the HOP finished me off after an OP (with the disk) sniped me in the chest. Ignored prayer asking why it was IC'd. Had to pester them in deadchat until I got an explanation.

I usually expect that jaded apathy from a mostly inactive oldmin, not a trial.

Edit: Did it again a couple rounds later when I got perma'd for literally going back to where the officer stripped me (the same officer, who was camping in a locker waiting for me to trespass into science because he knew I would want my stuff back) so I could get my items back. Just hit the IC button immediately.

There was particularly uninviting situation continuously happening over multiple rounds due to another player (I won't go into details unless given permission by Daturix), and Daturix handled it for me in a very concise and professional manner, as well as reassured me and apologized for the effect it might have on my gameplay experience. It's been a while since I've seen this level of politeness and dedication to a problem out of an admin. Keep up the great work.

Oldman Robustin wrote:IC issue

I don't feel like hitting the IC issue button is bad- read rule 6:

"In-game administration rulings are final.
Incidences of admin abuse, negligence or disputed rulings can be taken to the forums. If an admin says something was 'looked into, handled, resolved' etc, regarding an issue, it is unlikely an admin will provide any further information. Admins are under no obligation to reveal IC information. Deliberately lying or misrepresenting facts in adminhelps will be dealt with harshly." -The Rules

Daturix does not have to give you any information besides IC issue, which the main purpose of the button he pressed. If you think that it wasn't investigated properly/the ruling was incorrect you can make an admin complaint. Usually we don't want to reveal information relevant to the round in case you come back and decide to valid the antagonist or whatever. (Basically we don't want to affect your decisions unless the guy truly was in the wrong.)

Anyways on topic, Daturix has been a pleasure to work with and all investigations I've watched him do were thorough and he generally seems like a competent admin.

For some reasons thinks ashlizards are not valid (in my case wanting to harvest their tails for arts and crafts) and that ghost roles do not have relaxed escalation even though I told him there was a policy thread where this is laid out. He did not enquire as to where to find this thread and just kept telling me, wrongly, to not do it again.

Apparently spawning with flavor text to sacrifice corpses to a tendril and worshipping the necropolis/devil does not make them ghost role antagonist(in spite of what other (he)admins have stated in the past) and that they are in fact a religion of peace.

I feel that he could've at least enquired for the link to the thread I referenced instead of just basically going "you're wrong stop arguing with me".

More information:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 33&t=12511
https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Rules#Lavaland_Rules
https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/ ... ers.dm#L47

AdAstraPerAspera wrote:For some reasons thinks ashlizards are not valid (in my case wanting to harvest their tails for arts and crafts) and that ghost roles do not have relaxed escalation even though I told him there was a policy thread where this is laid out. He did not enquire as to where to find this thread and just kept telling me, wrongly, to not do it again.

Apparently spawning with flavor text to sacrifice corpses to a tendril and worshipping the necropolis/devil does not make them ghost role antagonist(in spite of what other (he)admins have stated in the past) and that they are in fact a religion of peace.

I feel that he could've at least enquired for the link to the thread I referenced instead of just basically going "you're wrong stop arguing with me".

More information:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 33&t=12511
https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Rules#Lavaland_Rules
https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/ ... ers.dm#L47

Round ID?

No idea, it was days ago.

It's not that I have a big beef with the IC button, its the part where he "instantly" hits it.

Like I type up a paragraph explaining what happened and literally two seconds later I get a big "IC ISSUE" in my screen.

it's a substitute for the tl;dr button

Oldman Robustin wrote:paragraph explaining what happened

If your initial ahelp is too long I'm not going to be shocked when it gets less attention. Even the courts don't put up with that.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_8

AdAstraPerAspera wrote:No idea, it was days ago.

I tried looking through 100+ logs last night and couldn't find it. although it was either on the 2nd or 3rd. I am not good with log diving yet.
My reasoning behind wanting you to not kill the ash walker was they had just got on the station and was killed mere minutes, to which I thought was a shitty thing to kill them for no reason. I didn't think it'd be an issue to ask you not to outright kill someone for no reason but If I'm wrong then I'm sorry.

Oldman Robustin wrote:It's not that I have a big beef with the IC button, its the part where he "instantly" hits it.

Like I type up a paragraph explaining what happened and literally two seconds later I get a big "IC ISSUE" in my screen.

The first time I hit IC issue was during the nuke ops round. Knowing it was nuke ops and the fact you were running around and shooting people via syringe gun if i remember correctly and running away after the crew thought it was a bad virus for awhile. I was watching you from when you were near cargo for abit while i checked the symptoms. I didn't see anything after until you ahelp'd about being killed and from not seeing anything between those two times I thought "Hmm he was running around shooting people with a syringe pretending its a plague and hes now ahelping hes getting lynched. Not an admin issue." My decision could have been wrong but the other admin on at the time didnt speak up that it was the wrong decision and they had nothing against me pressing IC issue from what I remember.

Second time I don't remember what was happening so I cannot speak upon that without reviewing the log.

But an Issue I do have with you Robustin was later on in the day you were the only Revhead, after about 30-40ish minutes of doing nothing I asked you to do something, you responded with something along the lines of "oh that's an ic issue" or so. I had to get a volunteer from deadchat to step up and be a headrev since you weren't doing anything.

Do you bwoink ash walkers too if they kill a miner that just got down into mining?

They are so serious!

Daturix you know during that Revhead round I tried to opt/trade out of the role and when that didn't happen I was going to just bomb the heads right?

I would've done it sooner but I had a sec member who kept fucking with me (which is why I ahelped and instantly got an IC issue response, I do not know if that was you).

Either way I carried out my plan and instantly took out all the heads for a Rev Victory.

Alipheese wrote:

AdAstraPerAspera wrote:No idea, it was days ago.

I tried looking through 100+ logs last night and couldn't find it. although it was either on the 2nd or 3rd. I am not good with log diving yet.
My reasoning behind wanting you to not kill the ash walker was they had just got on the station and was killed mere minutes, to which I thought was a shitty thing to kill them for no reason. I didn't think it'd be an issue to ask you not to outright kill someone for no reason but If I'm wrong then I'm sorry.

I literally told you it was 1. Because I wanted their tails and 2. It's fine to kill em because they are pretty much ghost roles antags.

The ghost role policy thread includes an example that 1. alone is sufficient. Only with golems, who are peaceful by default, instead of ash lizards.

Either way, it's fine I suppose. I just want to prevent any actions being taken against people who kill ashlizards or employ the relaxed escalation laws.

has banned me once for making solar wireart
has nearly banned me again, but cobby came on thankfully

I got really upset after getting a bwoink during rev.
Apparently capturing people from department that's been overrun with revs is bad, fixing them up with a baton to the head is even worse. Not to mention healing them after conversion.
Security should just hide in their department, use implants and commit suicide.

alphaBeta wrote:I got really upset after getting a bwoink during rev.
Apparently capturing people from department that's been overrun with revs is bad, fixing them up with a baton to the head is even worse. Not to mention healing them after conversion.
Security should just hide in their department, use implants and commit suicide.

I'd like to say the ahelp came from another admin and you had beat them to 20 health instead of using a nonharmful way to capture them which sec has alot of. Flashbangs, flashes, stun batons to help intent, disablers, tasers, bolas. If you are unhappy with me just warning you please make a complaint then.

I might be mistaken, but beating someone over the head often enough might still deconvert people.
And I might be mistaken, but there's no way to nonharmfully beat someone over the head, at least not in a fashion that will lead to deconversion.

DemonFiren wrote:I might be mistaken, but beating someone over the head often enough might still deconvert people.
And I might be mistaken, but there's no way to nonharmfully beat someone over the head, at least not in a fashion that will lead to deconversion.

Iirc it's a 10 percent chance to deconvert if you bash them over the head

I'd say that I like to drag people to the brig while beating them up trying to deconvert them. And I'd say that people who don't deconvert and enter crit are getting searched for flashes.

And I don't see how different is that from 'nonharmfully arresting someone' and 'nonharmfully dealing with him in the brig if you have no implants'.

EDIT: And since there was no note given (at least from what I've seen, and there would be no point in hiding that)
it's not as much of a complaint as it is feedback.

Wonderfully handled a situation I had in game yesterday and kept me updated on the progress when things were taking a while. They even let me know the outcome so I wasn't just left in the dark about how it had been handled/if any punishment had been dished out.

Last night I ahelped a traitor using OOC in IC to get a rise out of me (stop me from validing them long enough to ahelp it) and they used the chance to kill me instead. I almost got spaced and removed from the round completely, spent 15 minutes Not Playing The Game in medbay for my trouble. Daturix 'handled' the ahelp but refused to help me in any way for my trouble until it was realized I couldn't be healed due to a completely separate issue (a cyro bug). The player got off with a slap on the wrist as well.

I feel it was extremely poorly handled and de-incentivizes me to report rule violations.

I'm not sure if this is worth an admin complaint thread but I want to put it out in public at least.

I was on at the time and saw no problems with how daturix handled the ahelp. A traitor implied using ooc in ic that they were fishing for bans and a non-antag while killing you and they got spoken to about it. The responding captain killed the guy and dragged you off to revive you shortly.

If you want to ahelp something that's great, don't do it in a dangerous situation and demand admins revive you later because you chose to start typing something instead of continuing to valid someone.

>Log on
>Daturix shitposts about me logging on in OOC

Top-tier admin.

Oldman Robustin wrote:>Log on
>Daturix shitposts about me logging on in OOC

Top-tier admin.

Wonder who watchlisted you recently for them to notice

Weekban for trashing xenobio after one scientist taunted me into doing it.
And the other scientist died in xenobio because he tried to fight me in hard vacuum unprotected, lost the fight and whined in ahelps.
HERE is the more complete description of what happened

Saul_Myers wrote:Weekban for trashing xenobio after one scientist taunted me into doing it.
And the other scientist died in xenobio because he tried to fight me in hard vacuum unprotected, lost the fight and whined in ahelps.
HERE is the more complete description of what happened

Weakest defense i've seen in a long time. Sounds like you lost the ban appeal fight and whined in a feedback thread. :^)

Saegrimr wrote:

Saul_Myers wrote:Weekban for trashing xenobio after one scientist taunted me into doing it.
And the other scientist died in xenobio because he tried to fight me in hard vacuum unprotected, lost the fight and whined in ahelps.
HERE is the more complete description of what happened

Weakest defense i've seen in a long time. Sounds like you lost the ban appeal fight and whined in a feedback thread. :^)

I've been told to make it a complaint by Armhullen, so I did.
Don't know why they needed it.

To be fair catching innocents in your shenanigans is usually 1 day per innocent

VERY NICE MAN
VERY GOOD GUY
OVERALL FRIEND OF MINE
HOPE HE STAYS HEALTHY
IF ANYONE IS LIKE ME AND INVESTED IN THIS MAN'S SAFETY, PLEASE KEEP HIM IN SAFE DISTANCE FROM DOCTOR_PORK OR EXALTED12
IM NOT SURE WHCIH ONE OF THEM IT IS BUT THEY'RE PLOTTING HIS DEATH
DONT ASK HOW I KNOW I CANT DIVULGE THIS YET

P.S. GOOD HANDLING OF MY AHELP!!

I WAS UNAWARE THIS WOULD DOUBLE POST, VERY UPSET RIGHT NOW, NOT HAPPY!!

I LEAVE THIS POST HERE SO PEOPLE CAN KNOW MY MISTAKE AND LEARN FROM IT, MY MINOR IS HISTORY

I would like to say Daturix is a fairly agreeable administrator. They are often fairly eager and ready to assist players be it with mechanical or interaction based questions or issues and do so with some fervour. They are certainly of a fun-loving and fun-encouraging breed of administrator that I think a majority of us could aspire to be. I wish them well for their continue administration work, and look forward to having the opportunity to keep working alongside them.

awesine wrote:

not a lie but i don't think i've literally ever had an interaction with you, ever, IC or OOC
feel free to remind me if we have though

Spoiler:

if you can't tell this is negative

If you haven't had any interactions with them and that is their honest thoughts towards you, it may speak volumes of your character. I do not see, however, how this relates to their ingame conduct as an administrator.

i'd judge someone who managed to piss the whole server off with hours long consecutive ooc rants by their cover too.

I will say this, I don't know this person but I can agree that admins shouldn't be outwardly saying that want to rule 0 people. We note people for metagruding all the time, we should at least be above saying that we want to rule 0 people outwardly. Still, I do not think they actually would rule 0 you though: and if they did, they would need to give proper reasoning.

it's a stupid thing to say where people can see you saying it

awesine wrote:

not a lie but i don't think i've literally ever had an interaction with you, ever, IC or OOC
feel free to remind me if we have though

Spoiler:

if you can't tell this is negative

Every interaction I've ever had with you, concerning you or even hearing about you is negative. You and I had an issue some time ago regarding a ruling when i was a canidate and was nothing but salt in ooc. Whenever about things youre doing, they are always something stupid or just to cause shit.
I have yet to see a reason to think otherwise. And theres few people I actually hold an opinion of.

I believe transparency is great Citrus. I said i wish to do so to him upon a conversation about perma's and rule 0's. It was on topic for the conversation and my opinion. I mean this is coming from someone who wishes to rule 0 goof for he brings nothing. I've gave players shape up or ship out talkings to. But I haven't seen awesine for a decent bit so perhaps he's doing better than before.

Okand37 wrote:I do not see, however, how this relates to their ingame conduct as an administrator.

decisions that result in applying an in-game ban absolutely fall into in-game conduct are you kidding me

having negative interactions with someone and getting assblasted at them over the forums over subjective shit (not outright trolling like oranges with the movie spoilers) and jumping straight to rule 0 in-game ban is super shitty admin conduct

in-game bans are, except for outstanding cases where the community at large is being put at a detriment, applied for in-game conduct and the fact that you're flagrantly showing off how you somehow don't understand this rustles my jimmies

like i can disagree vehemently over a plethora of issues on the forums or on github, but you don't see me rule 0ing everybody who so much as supports secborgs when i don't

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Okand37 wrote:I do not see, however, how this relates to their ingame conduct as an administrator.

decisions that result in applying an in-game ban absolutely fall into in-game conduct are you kidding me

having negative interactions with someone and getting assblasted at them over the forums over subjective shit (not outright trolling like oranges with the movie spoilers) and jumping straight to rule 0 in-game ban is super shitty admin conduct

in-game bans are, except for outstanding cases where the community at large is being put at a detriment, applied for in-game conduct and the fact that you're flagrantly showing off how you somehow don't understand this rustles my jimmies

You're treating an offhand comment and opinion as relating to their ingame conduct as an administrator. We don't hold what people say in the NTR hut or out of the game against them, why would it be any different in this situation?

"getting assblasted at them over the forums over subjective shit" added with "jumping straight to rule 0 in-game ban" doesn't make sense. Daturix didn't get upset at them over the forums or apply a rule 0 ban to them, in fact awesine was the person to bring it up in this feedback thread-I don't understand what point you're trying to make with this. Could you elaborate here?

Okand37 wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Okand37 wrote:I do not see, however, how this relates to their ingame conduct as an administrator.

decisions that result in applying an in-game ban absolutely fall into in-game conduct are you kidding me

having negative interactions with someone and getting assblasted at them over the forums over subjective shit (not outright trolling like oranges with the movie spoilers) and jumping straight to rule 0 in-game ban is super shitty admin conduct

in-game bans are, except for outstanding cases where the community at large is being put at a detriment, applied for in-game conduct and the fact that you're flagrantly showing off how you somehow don't understand this rustles my jimmies

You're treating an offhand comment and opinion as relating to their ingame conduct as an administrator. We don't hold what people say in the NTR hut or out of the game against them, why would it be any different in this situation?

are you serious? the statement was clearly not taken from the hut and has repercussions directly tied to the game

if an admin comes up to you and seriously says they want to rule 0 ban you it doesn't really matter where it's said, it relates to the game directly
him having no serious amount of interactions with the player in question ingame makes it so much worse too

PKPenguin321 wrote: are you serious? the statement was clearly not taken from the hut and has repercussions directly tied to the game

if an admin comes up to you and seriously says they want to rule 0 ban you it doesn't really matter where it's said, it relates to the game directly
him having no serious amount of interactions with the player in question ingame makes it so much worse too

I don't think I can see where you're coming from. I gave the hut as an example; We don't generally hold things that people say in OOC, discord, forums, or really anything out of ingame in regards to their opinions unless its currently breaking the rules (see: IC in OOC, OOC in IC, spamming, etc.) I did not state it was from the hut, however.

What I am getting at is that they never stated they were going to and, from what I can read here, never specifically went out of their way to target them. They shared their opinion on a topical manner relating to whatever conversation was at hand. You don't have to have a large amount of interactions with someone to have only negative ones or to only hear about their negative ones. Have you considered instead of trying to make an immediate counterargument you merely asked daturix here or over private messages why they thought that to gain the reasoning for their thoughts?

I might, additionally, suggest taking a look at awesine's notes if you yourself would like to know why daturix might share this view, but it is inevitably their own to explain their thoughts if they so desire. The sum of the point I am trying to make, however, is that they were sharing an opinion-not a ruling.

Regardless, this isn't the place to bicker like children. I would once again press that you approach daturix for the reasoning behind their thoughts or perhaps some examples before trying to defend or attack anyone on either side of the argument.

Bitch stop juggling like 10 ahelps on both servers simultaneously are you literally a masochist

Calibraptor wrote:Bitch stop juggling like 10 ahelps on both servers simultaneously are you literally a masochist

Don't you mean on ALL 3 servers?

His sig asked me to tell him how good or bad of an admin he is
The answer is I don't know

Called me a shitty player for politely disagreeing with him over discord. Didn't even apologize when 2 other admins told him insulting players for having an opinion is bad

I make a policy thread about said issue and within 10 minutes it was ruled my interpretation of the situation was correct.

They pretty good but shouldn’t let their anger get the best of them



Otherwise, goodmin

Dax Dupont wrote:Called me a shitty player for politely disagreeing with him over discord. Didn't even apologize when 2 other admins told him insulting players for having an opinion is bad

I make a policy thread about said issue and within 10 minutes it was ruled my interpretation of the situation was correct.

I am allowed to have opinions. Especially when I specifically state they are my personal opinion in a salt channel for debating in an unoffcial discord (ie being off hours at a friends house). If you were to try to find a less profeessional area you couldn't. If being told to not express my opinion in that area as I cannot have one that is unfavourable towards players in an unofficial (ie off hours area) then its unrealistic as it'd be one sided to allow one party to have opinions but not the other.
The policy's ruling has nothing to do with me as an admin and only begs to insult.