Athath gets Permabanned, Redux

[Omega_DarkPotato]

Bottom post of the previous page:

https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 23&t=29696

Local man gets permabanned for submitting an "exploiting" circuit during a talent show to show it off to people
aren't talent shows meant to show off cool shit ffs

anyway, alphonzo comes in and shoots him twice in the chest and claims the job's done while everyone else looks around like they don't know what the fuck just happened



Editing to provide context for alphonzo's response before peanut gallery does what it does best (not reading the linked thread):
he removed the permaban and edited the note, claiming it was to simply kick him off the server so that he wouldn't show off the exploit or something
once again because of ath's famous 2 year old note about lagging the server for santa claus to come down during christmas

the ban itself is a bit more reasonable at least, and it's gone now anyway
all that's left is the admin complaint part

[Malkraz]

all these dumb arguments over exploits would be great if they were about a ban that wasn't completely retarded

[Armhulen]

all these dumb arguments over exploits would be great if they were about a ban that wasn't completely retarded

i mean yeah it's already lifted so

[sinfulbliss]

There is no hard line drawn but I am personally of the opinion that if you abuse and can’t link to the issue/convo/any metric that shows you’re aware it’s already reported and can’t make it yourself that’s when it goes to “whoops I found an issue with the game” to being malicious. Emphasis on abuse aka actively using it to get some sort of advantage. This can be anything from maybe a quicker way to do your job to making yourself permanently unable to be seen.

officially: when it's a bug that gives you an in game advantage and you're purposefully triggering it to get that advantage

unofficially: you do it once and tell admins, you're fineeee and heck it may make for a funny or interesting round if you can do some swanky shit. but doing the exploit beyond that and someone will probs ban you

This is very surprising, so to be clear then under these definitions, the people who abused the atmos temperature pump bug should have been banned? Or I should have been banned for washing a sec jumpsuit as assistant every round to hide the name? And many other such bugs used for small advantages which have been and continue to be used without a second thought? I don't say this to be antagonizing or anything, it just seems like these definitions are not the actual opinion of admins at scale or else people would be getting banned right and left.

In practice it seems to be exploits and bugs don't matter at all from an administrative perspective except when they seriously harm the round. Usually little bugs used to give yourself small advantages don't matter enough to ahelp over. They're just accepted as part of the game and used by anyone who knows about them until they're patched. If you play long enough you probably end up finding plenty of things which you don't even remember as a bug anymore but turned out to be a bug. Like you can use a PDA with insuls if you open it beforehand and then put the insuls on with the tab still up.

[Tlaltecuhtli]

wow the dude who managed to extend its trialmin timer, retire after doing a big fuck up to prevent getting deadmin, returns and has the same stubborn trigger happy banbot personality that led to similar incident in the past
who would have known it

[Armhulen]

This is very surprising, so to be clear then under these definitions, the people who abused the atmos temperature pump bug should have been banned?

i'd tell em to knock it off but unless they kept doing it, that's where it ends at

Or I should have been banned for washing a sec jumpsuit as assistant every round to hide the name?

entirely intentional, actually!

And many other such bugs used for small advantages which have been and continue to be used without a second thought?

i have doubts you are doing these things thinking they're okay but if an admin tells you to stop exploiting responding "i didn't know, sorry" will work for you 100% of the time

I don't say this to be antagonizing or anything, it just seems like these definitions are not the actual opinion of admins at scale or else people would be getting banned right and left.

exploits are hard to catch as an admin, unless it reveals itself. i'd consider the exploit rule to be one of the lesser enforced rules but that doesn't change anything when it is.

In practice it seems to be exploits and bugs don't matter at all from an administrative perspective except when they seriously harm the round.

aka are noticed

Usually little bugs used to give yourself small advantages don't matter enough to ahelp over. They're just accepted as part of the game and used by anyone who knows about them until they're patched.

aka going unnoticed until they are

If you play long enough you probably end up finding plenty of things which you don't even remember as a bug anymore but turned out to be a bug. Like you can use a PDA with insuls if you open it beforehand and then put the insuls on with the tab still up.

god i hate player facing html

[Malkraz]

I am at fault for not wanting someone to hop onto the servers, in the middle of the night, where there would likely be no staff, and he would be able to share whatever the hell he wanted with nothing to impede him. In my time on staff, exploiting the code has been among the most serious issues.

what is this dopey line of reasoning lmao
athath should've been banned ages ago for knowing about exploits, imagine what he could've said when we weren't looking
ILLEGAL INFORMATION

[Fishimun]

I am at fault for not wanting someone to hop onto the servers, in the middle of the night, where there would likely be no staff, and he would be able to share whatever the hell he wanted with nothing to impede him. In my time on staff, exploiting the code has been among the most serious issues.

what is this dopey line of reasoning lmao
athath should've been banned ages ago for knowing about exploits, imagine what he could've said when we weren't looking
ILLEGAL INFORMATION

INTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS TOWER INFLUENCED HIS DECISION

[Cobby]

meow

Something being against the rules doesn’t mean it needs to be a ban out of the gate.

The question should be “Was I wrong in using these bugs?” The answer is yes.

Naturally as with all issues that don’t give a big red alert it becomes much harder to spot people abusing some of the less obvious or less “harmful” bugs because it likely means we have to both be looking at the game and looking at you specifically, so much that we are able to see you use the bug.

One admin who gave me some push back on this stance said he used some of the what he deemed minor bugs as well, so I can understand on that end if other admins also don’t enforce this rule properly because they have no right to throw stones in glass houses (not including the obvious they don’t see it as a big deal).

Not even speaking as a coder/maintainer/etc., I think it’s disruptive to the game to give yourself an advantage from knowingly unintended mechanics. Given the nature of ss13, there are many items that may seemingly feel minor enough to use that end up butterfly effecting to be round impacting, and that might be isolated to a few rounds because of the sandbox nature and limited information.

For example let’s say there’s a bug that lets you change the name of labels or remove them and it’s not intended. Let’s say the warden decides to label his armory guns and you steal one. You then proceed to remove the label via the bug. Later you get caught, the warden finds the gun but notices it isn’t labeled, so he assumes it was found at cargo since he’s not expecting the labels to come off. They search cargo and find that someone left traitor gear in one of the crates and end up bagging them.

You have effectively ruined someone’s round through the use of a what you deemed to be minor bug. This is why I don’t like people trying to justify their use of bugs because they personally feel like the impact will be minimal, and then when it finally does have some relevance they just go “well it’s just one round it’s ok”.

[Omega_DarkPotato]

For example let’s say there’s a bug that lets you change the name of labels or remove them and it’s not intended. Let’s say the warden decides to label his armory guns and you steal one. You then proceed to remove the label via the bug. Later you get caught, the warden finds the gun but notices it isn’t labeled, so he assumes it was found at cargo since he’s not expecting the labels to come off. They search cargo and find that someone left traitor gear in one of the crates and end up bagging them.

You have effectively ruined someone’s round through the use of a what you deemed to be minor bug. This is why I don’t like people trying to justify their use of bugs because they personally feel like the impact will be minimal, and then when it finally does have some relevance they just go “well it’s just one round it’s ok”.

But by this same logic, any action that conceals information could "ruin someone's round". Lying to people to get out of trouble or brigging might, unintentionally, cause people to be round removed (possibly even mistakenly round removed) so should lying to people be a bannable offense?
The only effect your "use of a minor bug" had was getting warden to search cargo - someone's round getting ruined was the result of them leaving their gear in a crate.

Second, although I know this isn't applicable to athath, who's been known to code-dive looking for bugs, there are a lot of minor bugs and issues that people might just stumble across unintentionally and believe to be unintended mechanics. (or honestly, vice-versa, as shown by sinfulbliss thinking that the washing machine hiding a sec jumpsuit was a bug) That's why I personally don't find "exploiting bugs" to be that bad - unless you're doing so in a way to directly and seriously give yourself an advantage in killing other people or destroying a station.

Hiding a jumpsuit vs "I can telekinetically slash people from range while in blood as a slaughter demon" (Another exploit used by ath)

'course I'm a nobody lol but hopefully my words have some sort of effect here

[sinfulbliss]

You have effectively ruined someone’s round through the use of a what you deemed to be minor bug. This is why I don’t like people trying to justify their use of bugs because they personally feel like the impact will be minimal, and then when it finally does have some relevance they just go “well it’s just one round it’s ok”.

I totally understand this rationale. But I would counter that if these bugs are minor in themselves, and go unfixed for an extended period of time, they simply become a part of the game which most people, after playing long enough, come to discover through some way or another. No different than they would any other hidden feature, and pretty much everything in SS13 is hidden until you see it done, not just bugs. No one knew you could slam someone's head into a table until they saw it done, for instance.

Anyway my point is similar to Omega's in that anything could lead to something greater. A bug could do this, or even someone just being falsely accused of being a ling. A few days ago someone accused a guy of being a ling so I arrested him, searched and found a flash so I mindshielded him out of an abundance of caution, and the guy was a headrev. It was a very close crew victory too, it may have gone very differently without that false accusation. But no one gets banned for false accusations.

Likewise if a bug is integrated into the game to such an extent, which all minor bugs are on account of them still being around in the first place (bugs that still exist likely are too insignificant to be worth bug reporting or noticed by anyone anyway), then it's no different than any other feature causing the butterfly effect. Why is it intrinsically worse if a bug were to do this?

'course I'm a nobody lol but hopefully my words have some sort of effect here

Hey man don't knock yourself for being a player, player opinion matters too you're not a nobody just cause your name ain't colored.

[Shadowflame909]

athath poked the tiger too much and now it's looking for any excuse to maul him

ath needs to find a new gimmick immediately or he's just gonna keep getting perma-banned and it's gonna be harder to shake off each time

[Not-Dorsidarf]

Jannies are frothing at the mouth to ban people who provide free bug testing of our code.

To be fair, it's in the rules they enforce. So like if you want people to stop being banned for exploiting why don't you start the discussion in policy discussion or become a headmin and remove it yourself

What exactly is a bannable exploit as opposed to a fair-to-use bug though? When temp pumps were added you could heat plasma indefinitely without making a burn mix - that was patched out soon with a temp limit. But no one was banned for it of course. Where's the line drawn?

There is no hard line drawn but I am personally of the opinion that if you abuse and can’t link to the issue/convo/any metric that shows you’re aware it’s already reported and can’t make it yourself that’s when it goes to “whoops I found an issue with the game” to being malicious. Emphasis on abuse aka actively using it to get some sort of advantage. This can be anything from maybe a quicker way to do your job to making yourself permanently unable to be seen.

If you know it’s not intended then don’t use it, that’s the fool-proof way to avoid finding yourself in a bug abuse ban.

Or ahelp if you're unsure

actually as this ban proves you'll be rage-banned anyway if someone with more seniority disagrees, and then in the morning after they cool off and abort they'll straight up lie in the admincomplaint and pretend that it was a temporary "stop them from messing up the event" ban when it's literally worded as a "You've failed us for the last time, banned forever" forever-perma.

Because really, who reads that ban reason and then buys alphonso's furious backtracking ?

"T-there are plenty of instances where a ban of indeterminate length is applied while the facts are straightened out. There is precedent!"

[Armhulen]

Jannies are frothing at the mouth to ban people who provide free bug testing of our code.

To be fair, it's in the rules they enforce. So like if you want people to stop being banned for exploiting why don't you start the discussion in policy discussion or become a headmin and remove it yourself

What exactly is a bannable exploit as opposed to a fair-to-use bug though? When temp pumps were added you could heat plasma indefinitely without making a burn mix - that was patched out soon with a temp limit. But no one was banned for it of course. Where's the line drawn?

There is no hard line drawn but I am personally of the opinion that if you abuse and can’t link to the issue/convo/any metric that shows you’re aware it’s already reported and can’t make it yourself that’s when it goes to “whoops I found an issue with the game” to being malicious. Emphasis on abuse aka actively using it to get some sort of advantage. This can be anything from maybe a quicker way to do your job to making yourself permanently unable to be seen.

If you know it’s not intended then don’t use it, that’s the fool-proof way to avoid finding yourself in a bug abuse ban.

Or ahelp if you're unsure

actually as this ban proves you'll be rage-banned anyway if someone with more seniority disagrees, and then in the morning after they cool off and abort they'll straight up lie in the admincomplaint and pretend that it was a temporary "stop them from messing up the event" ban when it's literally worded as a "You've failed us for the last time, banned forever" forever-perma.

Because really, who reads that ban reason and then buys alphonso's furious backtracking ?

"T-there are plenty of instances where a ban of indeterminate length is applied while the facts are straightened out. There is precedent!"

any ban that doesn't stick don't mean shit, and pretty much everyone agreed that guns were jumped and ATHATH would most likely have ended up entirely unbanned if it was just talked out instead of someone going on and ending the discussion with their admin tools

I mean, would you fault admins for placing shitty bans if someone went rogue and tried to ban as many people before getting deadminned? Is that really setting precedent, or is that an admin yarting their yorts?

[bobbahbrown]

yarting their yorts (yorted)

best,
bobbah 'bee' brown

[chocolate_bickie]

Tl,dr: Players asks permission to use bug from event runner. Gets it. Gets banned for using said bug before actually using the bug. Banning admin(not event runner) relents when other admins call them out, reduces it to a note.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

Jannies are frothing at the mouth to ban people who provide free bug testing of our code.

To be fair, it's in the rules they enforce. So like if you want people to stop being banned for exploiting why don't you start the discussion in policy discussion or become a headmin and remove it yourself

What exactly is a bannable exploit as opposed to a fair-to-use bug though? When temp pumps were added you could heat plasma indefinitely without making a burn mix - that was patched out soon with a temp limit. But no one was banned for it of course. Where's the line drawn?

There is no hard line drawn but I am personally of the opinion that if you abuse and can’t link to the issue/convo/any metric that shows you’re aware it’s already reported and can’t make it yourself that’s when it goes to “whoops I found an issue with the game” to being malicious. Emphasis on abuse aka actively using it to get some sort of advantage. This can be anything from maybe a quicker way to do your job to making yourself permanently unable to be seen.

If you know it’s not intended then don’t use it, that’s the fool-proof way to avoid finding yourself in a bug abuse ban.

Or ahelp if you're unsure

actually as this ban proves you'll be rage-banned anyway if someone with more seniority disagrees, and then in the morning after they cool off and abort they'll straight up lie in the admincomplaint and pretend that it was a temporary "stop them from messing up the event" ban when it's literally worded as a "You've failed us for the last time, banned forever" forever-perma.

Because really, who reads that ban reason and then buys alphonso's furious backtracking ?

"T-there are plenty of instances where a ban of indeterminate length is applied while the facts are straightened out. There is precedent!"

any ban that doesn't stick don't mean shit, and pretty much everyone agreed that guns were jumped and ATHATH would most likely have ended up entirely unbanned if it was just talked out instead of someone going on and ending the discussion with their admin tools

I mean, would you fault admins for placing shitty bans if someone went rogue and tried to ban as many people before getting deadminned? Is that really setting precedent, or is that an admin yarting their yorts?

is this replying to the wrong post or something it seems totally unconnected to what i said, armhole. like, obviously the bigdick admin running in swinging to enforce his opinion with a permaban is the core issue with that ban lmao why does that even need to be said?

[Pandarsenic]

I can't wait for yet another different admin to continue harassing ATHATH by banning him for doing nothing just before the next event

[Rohen_Tahir]

Local admin finally gets revenge for 5 seconds of lost server time after two years (heroic)

[bastardblaster]

This is what, his 3rd Perma and immediate lift?

[capn_monkeypaw]

It's at least his fifth incident involving exploits.

[Super Aggro Crag]

cool it with the exploits athhat

[Whoneedspacee]

people who play this game for fun are not welcome anymore

make way for the balance andys and rules lawyers

[Stickymayhem]

people who play this game for fun are not welcome anymore

make way for the balance andys and rules lawyers

rules lawyrences was right there bro

[Kel]

where were these people who gave a shit about exploits when you could wall skate with cardboard boxes and stealth implants to go at mach 9 speed? even though it was pretty impactful for awhile nobody really gave a shit.

[Malkraz]

wallskating was fun and I didn't even know it was unintended
bring it back

[terranaut]

people who play this game for fun are not welcome anymore

make way for the balance andys and rules lawyers

Accurate

[MooCow12]

Isn`t the "No exploit abuse" rule more about protecting the integrity of a round / server itself? Special events obviously have their own set of rules and if admins are going to conflict with that then maybe only the people who are coordinating and running the event should be in control while admins either help them or deadmin themselves instead of making a special act of them abusing their admin powers on a player they don`t like.

[capn_monkeypaw]

Guys, both of these things can be (and are!) true at once:

1. The reaction of the admin team to ATHATH'S perma was universally "oh no fonzie what is you doing?" Everyone thought it was an overstep, no one is defending it and it's been corrected. Please read the admin complaint thread for more insight.

2. ATHATH has a years-long history of taking advantage of exploits. Admins are getting really tired of it. The maintainers are sick to fucking death of it. He has been repeatedly warned, noted and banned for this sort of thing going back to 2019. In addition, multiple admins and coders have informally tried to talk some sense into him. We've all gone way the fuck out of our way to draw a big, bright red line for him that we've lit up with floodlights and warned him not to cross. How many times do we have to scream "ATH FOR FUCK'S SAKE, STOP FUCKING AROUND WITH EXPLOITS" at the top of our lungs before he gets the message? With his level of talent and experience, he could be a leader in this community. The kind of person who sets an example for everyone else. Instead, he spends his time being a pain in everyone's ass and it's eventually gonna catch up to him.

[Cobby]

Isn`t the "No exploit abuse" rule more about protecting the integrity of a round / server itself? Special events obviously have their own set of rules and if admins are going to conflict with that then maybe only the people who are coordinating and running the event should be in control while admins either help them or deadmin themselves instead of making a special act of them abusing their admin powers on a player they don`t like.

explaining how to do an exploit in great detail specifically to people who arent going to fix it, not checking to see if its reported, and washing your hands when surprise surprise these people use it on live is ignorance or malice, hence why I think its also dumb for admins to actively encourage exploit abusing as well as players. Doubly so when admins get mad when players do it but the admin doesnt ever clarify when they abuse bugs themselves where that line is drawn, or if they do it's in channels specifically obscured to everyone but other admins.

The disconnect between the game and code here for me is personally confusing, and thats not even considering my stake in the code. As an admin I dont see how it isnt dickish to subvert the game balance/flow using unintentional mechanics, regardless how small you personally perceive it, as we're simply gauging if youre dickish enough to be F1'd. I can respect the first time done since the damage is already done and you were not aware of it, but after that you should at worst just not do it again, at best report it in a well documented way.

Like I said earlier its also one of those rules admins dont get big red alarms on so its a pita to enforce, which for other topics people seem to take on the idea that it doesnt happen or it doesnt matter enough to bother. This makes it frustrating to discuss.

[Super Aggro Crag]

Pretty sure the ATF would get ticked off if you went on America's got talent and showed everyone step by step how to make pipebombs and Luty SMGs from the comfort of their home

[capn_monkeypaw]

hence why I think its also dumb for admins to actively encourage exploit abusing as well as players. Doubly so when admins get mad when players do it but the admin doesnt ever clarify when they abuse bugs themselves where that line is drawn, or if they do it's in channels specifically obscured to everyone but other admins.

This isn't just dumb, it's fucking infuriating.

[saprasam]

why is it that mralphonzo is always the admin that makes shit bans

[Jonathan Gupta]

Pretty sure the ATF would get ticked off if you went on America's got talent and showed everyone step by step how to make pipebombs and Luty SMGs from the comfort of their home

For reasons not before shown, I cannot say whether or whether I do NOT NOT NOT NOT I DO NOT KNOW HOW TO MAKE THESE DO NOT I DO NOT.

[Armhulen]

why is it that mralphonzo is always the admin that makes shit bans

I thought alphonzo got deadminned ages ago

must... resist... replying...

[Rohen_Tahir]

Is #60463 an exploit?

[Armhulen]

Is #60463 an exploit?

NO

but don't think that means i won't punish u for doin that to a cow

[Pandarsenic]

Will I get banned for using https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/issues/59951 to carry extra sheets of metal and glass

[Armhulen]

Will I get banned for using https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/issues/59951 to carry extra sheets of metal and glass

no for the same reason nobody would ban you for using the PDA with insulated gloves on

[chesse20]

damn athath got unbanned agian its too bad i can't use a picture of my second life avatar to express how disapointing that is

[Farquaar]

damn athath got unbanned agian its too bad i can't use a picture of my second life avatar to express how disapointing that is

Good. SL is cringe.

[Tlaltecuhtli]

Pretty sure the ATF would get ticked off if you went on America's got talent and showed everyone step by step how to make pipebombs and Luty SMGs from the comfort of their home

sometimes you need pipe bombs to dig a basement under your house, just cause someone wants to be eco friendly and anti corporation by not buying at walmart doesnt mean you are a criminal

[Fishimun]

Pretty sure the ATF would get ticked off if you went on America's got talent and showed everyone step by step how to make pipebombs and Luty SMGs from the comfort of their home

sometimes you need pipe bombs to dig a basement under your house, just cause someone wants to be eco friendly and anti corporation by not buying at walmart doesnt mean you are a criminal

wait they sell pipe bombs at walmart? which aisle?

[Jonathan Gupta]

Pretty sure the ATF would get ticked off if you went on America's got talent and showed everyone step by step how to make pipebombs and Luty SMGs from the comfort of their home

sometimes you need pipe bombs to dig a basement under your house, just cause someone wants to be eco friendly and anti corporation by not buying at walmart doesnt mean you are a criminal

wait they sell pipe bombs at walmart? which aisle?

the parking lot

[oranges]

as tgstation continues to grow in operational size, miscommunication within growing depts like admins and coders will continue to increase.

More structured processes will eventually become necessary.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

as tgstation continues to grow in operational size, miscommunication within growing depts like admins and coders will continue to increase.

More structured processes will eventually become necessary.

you aint wrong but just looking back at the history of the server and seeing what happened last time admin team got growing pains isnt exactly an insight oldtimer.

[oranges]

>acknowledge im correct
>in same comment deny the insight

ok

[Omega_DarkPotato]

I think it's more of a "you're right, but that's like saying water is wet"
don't worry oranges he's still spiting you clearly the world is out to get you :koishipat:
get well soon orange man

[Flatulent]

saying oranges is right is actively detrimental to mental wellbeing of anyone

[Not-Dorsidarf]

So looking at the associated admincomplaint to this affair and I'm wondering if the peanut rules changed again and totally unrelated people are allowed to show up in the complaint to give their 2 bits on whether a complaint is valid because there are theoretical hypothetical scenarios where the complained actions might potentially have been right.

[Agux909]

So looking at the associated admincomplaint to this affair and I'm wondering if the peanut rules changed again and totally unrelated people are allowed to show up in the complaint to give their 2 bits on whether a complaint is valid because there are theoretical hypothetical scenarios where the complained actions might potentially have been right.

Spit a name or bust.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

So looking at the associated admincomplaint to this affair and I'm wondering if the peanut rules changed again and totally unrelated people are allowed to show up in the complaint to give their 2 bits on whether a complaint is valid because there are theoretical hypothetical scenarios where the complained actions might potentially have been right.

Spit a name or bust.

nah i looked twice and cobby is actually related to the incident which makes it ok