I swear I not told ai to plasmaflood - rule lawyer

[CursedBirb]

viewtopic.php?p=653665#p653665

I don't think they deserve perma but they should learn how tell ai what exactly what they want instead of vague mentioning

[CMDR_Gungnir]

I think they're a Hero tbh. A three hour round? Let the man get the shuttle called, one way or another. Especially if half the station was rubble by that point (which would also severely mitigate the damage of a plasmaflood)

That policy thread about Stationwide/Dangerous Sabotage being allowed needs to finish being approved, ASAP.

[Pandarsenic]

I think plasma flooding is always good and Manuel needs more of it but as long as the new sabotage/murder rules aren't in place don't lie/bend the truth about what you did. I don't really see any way to get "only flood the bridge" out of this.

[iwishforducks]

ridiculous ban with ridiculous rules. after the 2 hour mark antags should be able to do whatever it takes to end the round asap

[Cobby]

the player should get unbanned because he can read the posting log rules whereas the admins cannot.

[Kendrickorium]

chestify is giving this slobbering dolt every fucking chance in the world to simply say

IM SORRY
I DIDNT MEAN TO PLASMAFLOOD OR NEGATIVELY IMPACT OTHER PLAYERS' ROUNDS
THINGS HAPPENED I DIDNT MEAN FOR THEM TO HAPPEN
I WILL BE MORE CAREFUL IN THE FUTURE

ffs just copy paste what i just wrote into your god damn appeal and watch yourself magically get unpermad

this ISNT FUCKING HARD

[TheSmallBlue]

This isn't deserving of a ban at all, it ticks me off that the admin is still going on about how they "lied on their ticket" when the guy already explained that he meant that he didn't flood the station himself, and that his intention wasn't for the station to be flooded.

It was an honest mistake on his part, he's said this already, he missed the ai asking them how big of a flood to make because he was in a fight in a chapel, which is completely reasonable. It, at most and least, deserves a note, as per policy. I hope they request a headmin review, because the admin seems to be unable or unwilling to back down.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

This is at MOST, a light hearted note reminding them to be more clear and specific when giving bound entities like a subverted AI or a golem instructions.

A ban though? Absolutely ridiculous, they clearly had no intent to plasmaflood the entire station.

A PERMA ban? Literally insane.

[toemas]

chestify is giving this slobbering dolt every fucking chance in the world to simply say

IM SORRY
I DIDNT MEAN TO PLASMAFLOOD OR NEGATIVELY IMPACT OTHER PLAYERS' ROUNDS
THINGS HAPPENED I DIDNT MEAN FOR THEM TO HAPPEN
I WILL BE MORE CAREFUL IN THE FUTURE

ffs just copy paste what i just wrote into your god damn appeal and watch yourself magically get unpermad

this ISNT FUCKING HARD

why should he apologize for doing nothing wrong

[Timonk]

Not his fault that the AI can't read minds

[sinfulbliss]

[...]as long as the new sabotage/murder rules aren't in place don't lie/bend the truth about what you did. I don't really see any way to get "only flood the bridge" out of this.

You might've just read it incorrectly then. He asked where his victim was by saying "In bridge?", then after the AI confirmed this he asked if it could plasmaflood. The AI said yes and away it went. A good-faith interpretation of this is that he intended the AI to only plasmaflood the bridge, where his victim was. Unless the player has history with this I see no reason one shouldn't assume he's being honest here. Especially since he avoided needless murder elsewhere.

Ordering a Plasmaflood, regardless of how localized it is, will cause massive amounts of damage

This is also a perplexing take. Causing structural damage isn't against any rules, first of all - but also it's completely inaccurate to say plasmaflooding a single room will cause massive amounts of damage. It's pretty simple to bolt the doors to the bridge, close the shutters, and then flood it with no damage or deaths whatsoever.

It looks to me like the admin painted him as a griefing liar from the outset and the whole appeal is trying to justify this charge despite good evidence to the contrary. They went from accusing him of lying in ahelps and plasmaflooding the whole station to admitting okay well maybe you only intended the bridge and well okay maybe you didn't technically lie - but you should have done something to stop it anyway so the ban is still justified.

[Pandarsenic]

[...]as long as the new sabotage/murder rules aren't in place don't lie/bend the truth about what you did. I don't really see any way to get "only flood the bridge" out of this.

You might've just read it incorrectly then. He asked where his victim was by saying "In bridge?", then after the AI confirmed this he asked if it could plasmaflood. The AI said yes and away it went. A good-faith interpretation of this is that he intended the AI to only plasmaflood the bridge, where his victim was. Unless the player has history with this I see no reason one shouldn't assume he's being honest here. Especially since he avoided needless murder elsewhere.

Y'know, fair. - most moderately experienced players know that there is no such thing as a localized plasma flood, unless you're doing some incredibly advanced atmospherics fuckery, but I figured it's easy enough to check hours and they weren't kidding about the low time in game. I suppose, then, that while the only obvious reading is "Flood plasma to make the station uninhabitable so people stop recalling" to experienced players, someone that new might not understand what they were asking for when requesting a plasma flood enough to constrain the AI properly or to explain themselves to the admin contacting them.

(Though I stand by PLEASE ALLOW MASS SABOTAGE IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ON MANUEL. LET ANTAGS ANTAGONIZE. I BEG YOU.)

[EmpressMaia]

chesify is special. and should be given his own special server. away from here

[Tearling]

I hope they request a headmin review, because the admin seems to be unable or unwilling to back down.

My bet is the headmins respond but reject the appeal. Rave is a MRP headmin and MRP admins are known for their unwillingness to budge on mass destruction issues. So it's a 50/50 on the other two headmins, but given the decision on Dreary Doom, it's more probable they'll side with the admin.

I am interested in seeing how snarky they get like Rave did in his post on Dreary.

[Misdoubtful]

I hope they request a headmin review, because the admin seems to be unable or unwilling to back down.

My bet is the headmins respond but reject the appeal. Rave is a MRP headmin and MRP admins are known for their unwillingness to budge on mass destruction issues. So it's a 50/50 on the other two headmins, but given the decision on Dreary Doom, it's more probable they'll side with the admin.

I am interested in seeing how snarky they get like Rave did in his post on Dreary.

I'm wounded. I like when things fall apart.

[CMDR_Gungnir]

I hope they request a headmin review, because the admin seems to be unable or unwilling to back down.

My bet is the headmins respond but reject the appeal. Rave is a MRP headmin and MRP admins are known for their unwillingness to budge on mass destruction issues. So it's a 50/50 on the other two headmins, but given the decision on Dreary Doom, it's more probable they'll side with the admin.

I am interested in seeing how snarky they get like Rave did in his post on Dreary.

You do realize that Spookuni is also an MRP admin and was the one who started the discussion about trying to actively allow this stuff on Manuel, yeah?

'course. That's still 1 of 3, so we'll see where it goes.

[Tearling]

I hope they request a headmin review, because the admin seems to be unable or unwilling to back down.

My bet is the headmins respond but reject the appeal. Rave is a MRP headmin and MRP admins are known for their unwillingness to budge on mass destruction issues. So it's a 50/50 on the other two headmins, but given the decision on Dreary Doom, it's more probable they'll side with the admin.

I am interested in seeing how snarky they get like Rave did in his post on Dreary.

You do realize that Spookuni is also an MRP admin and was the one who started the discussion about trying to actively allow this stuff on Manuel, yeah?

'course. That's still 1 of 3, so we'll see where it goes.

I didn't realize that! I guess that leaves Sans. Is Sans for or against traitor sabotage?

[sinfulbliss]

I didn't realize that! I guess that leaves Sans. Is Sans for or against traitor sabotage?

Why are we talking about mass sabotage?? He didn’t order mass sabotage, he ordered a single room to be flooded to prevent a recall (a traitor preventing recall, and not forcing recall to bone? Woah!!).

That’s not mass sabotage. Mass sabotage is ordering a plasmaflood of the whole station, which is against the MRP rules as they currently stand. This was an extremely simple miscommunication between the player and the AI, arguably if anyone is at fault it’s the AI since you can’t follow an order that breaks the rules (i.e. AI law 2 start calling people slurs).

[CMDR_Gungnir]

Also, the note says "Combatitive in tickets" but he actually looked pretty polite in the ticket? Whether you agree or not that there's a difference between plasmaflooding and ordering one, he wasn't rude. He just defended himself.

Chesh has a bit of a bad habit of coming at you with a false accusation and pre-conceived notion of events and just getting harsher if you try and explain yourself. I don't think he's inherently a bad admin, he just needs to work on his ticket handling a little. He's generally pretty good other than that.

Edit: (Okay maybe he also needs to work on the not lying/talking-up in ban reasons, too, honestly)

[Cobby]

Nopony says plasmaflood to mean a local area, which should be obvious considering people say "plasma in X" vs. "PLASMAFLOOD/PLASMA IN DISTRO"

He was definitely in the wrong in the sense that he didnt communicate his desired actions well, but in other contexts like "do whatever" commands the onus is on the AI to clarify what "do whatever" means instead of ban the idiot who gave the command especially when players know the rules, it should have prompted ai to go "hmmm I wonder why I am mass sabotaging!".

If AIs are suppose to read "do whatever" as the exact opposite of what those two words mean when together, AIs should also be at the very least F1ing prior to their flood so the admin can catch it before everyone dies and the admin feels obligated to smack someone w a ban.

(personally im of the opinion those commands would be under the onus of the individual giving the commands so id say without context of how other admin rulings operate Id tell him to order better)

[Timonk]

Everyone talking about order this ordered that but how about you bring me the sandwich i ordered instead

[Tearling]

Nopony says plasmaflood to mean a local area, which should be obvious considering people say "plasma in X" vs. "PLASMAFLOOD/PLASMA IN DISTRO"

I have seen people say "plasmaflood in kitchen" when they hallucinate plasma flooding in a single room. I just said it just there too. It's pretty normal for people to say plasmaflood to mean a local area.

[Cobby]

maybe my mechanics need to be brushed up on but seeing the plasma hallucination makes sense to say plasmaflood especially when youre normally in a place that doesnt have a localized canister port and you see it coming from distro vents.

[EmpressMaia]

I really really wish we had departmental pipe nets and power grids so we could do specific departmental plasma floods

[Timonk]

She had them Apple Bottom Jeans [Jeans]
Boots with the fur [With the fur]
The whole club lookin at her
She hit the floor [She hit the floor]
Next thing you know
Shawty got low low low low low low low low
Them baggy sweat pants
And the Reeboks with the straps [With the straps]
She turned around and gave that big booty a smack [Ayy]
She hit the floor [She hit the floor]
Next thing you know
Shawty got low low low low low low low low
I ain't never seen nuthin that'll make me go,
This crazy all night spendin my dough
Had a million dollar vibe and a bottle to go
Dem birthday cakes, they stole the show
So sexual, she was flexible
Professional, drinkin X and ooo
Hold up wait a minute, do i see what I think I
Whoa
Did I think I seen shorty get low
Ain't the same when it's up that close
Make it rain, I'm makin it snow
Work the pole, I got the bank roll
Imma say that I prefer them no clothes
I'm into that, I love women exposed
She threw it back at me, I gave her more
Cash ain't a problem, I know where it goes
She had them
Apple Bottom Jeans [Jeans]
Boots with the fur [With the fur]
Got the whole club lookin at her
She hit the floor [She hit the floor]
Next thing you know
Shawty got low low low low low low low low
Them baggy sweat pants
And the Reeboks with the straps [With the straps]
She turned around and gave that big booty a smack [Ayy]
She hit the floor [She hit the floor]
Next thing you know
Shawty got low low low low low low low low
Hey
Shawty what I gotta do to get you home
My jeans full of gwap
And they ready for Shones
Cadillacs Maybachs for the sexy grown
Patrone on the rocks that'll make you moan
One stack (come on)
Two stacks (come on)
Three stacks (come on, now that's three grand)
What you think I'm playin baby girl
I'm the man, I'll bend the rubber bands
That's what I told her, her legs on my shoulder
I knew it was ova, that Henny and Cola
Got me like a Soldier
She ready for Rover, I couldn't control her
So lucky oo me, I was just like a clover
Shorty was hot like a toaster
Sorry but I had to fold her,
Like a pornography poster
She showed her
Apple Bottom Jeans [Jeans]
Boots with the fur [With the fur]
The whole club lookin at her
She hit the floor [She hit the floor]
Next thing you know
Shawty got low low low low low low low low
Them baggy sweat pants
And the Reeboks with the straps [With the straps]
She turned around and gave that big booty a smack [Ayy]
She hit the floor [She hit the floor]
Next thing you know
Shawty got low low low low low low low low
Whoa
Shawty
Yea she was worth the money
Lil mama took my cash,
And I ain't want it back,
The way she bit that rag,
Got her them paper stacks,
Tattoo Above her crack,
I had to handle that,
I was on it, sexy woman, let me shownin
They be want it two in the mornin
I'm zonin in them rosay bottles foamin
She wouldn't stop, made it drop
Shorty did that pop and lock,
Had to break her off that gwap
Gah it was fly just like my glock
Apple Bottom Jeans [Jeans]
Boots with the fur [With the fur]
Got the whole club lookin at her
She hit the floor [She hit the floor]
Next thing you know
Shawty got low low low low low low low low
Them baggy sweat pants
And the Reeboks with the straps [With the straps]
She turned around and gave that big booty a smack [Ayy]
She hit the floor [She hit the floor]
Next thing you know
Shawty got low low low low low low low low
Come on!

[CMDR_Gungnir]

maybe my mechanics need to be brushed up on but seeing the plasma hallucination makes sense to say plasmaflood especially when youre normally in a place that doesnt have a localized canister port and you see it coming from distro vents.

It depends on player knowledge. I'm not an atmos player, so it's always made sense to me to say "Plasmaflood in (Location)". If a bunch of other people then also shout out it's happening in their locations too, you know it's a global flood, if not it's localized.

But that's because I thought you could do localized ones. It's only reading this here that I'm learning that's apparently not possible, and I've been playing since early 2020. Not the longest, sure, but not an insignificant length, either. I assume that's the same, here.

I kinda hope the ticket handling is brought up in the headmin overview, though. This should have been, imo, just a note, but if it had to be a ban, it should've been just the standard 1 day for each unacceptable kill.

This dude had every possible thing stacked on him, even though they're not true. "Blatantly lied in ahelps" He was confused by terminology. In his eyes he only ordered a flood of the bridge. "Combative in tickets" He wasn't combative, he was confused.

Not to mention the extension from the former; "Blatantly lied in ahelps about "not plasmaflooding" when they hacked the AI and got them to plasmaflood." That wording makes it sound like they hacked the AI solely TO plasmaflood.

Feels like the perma was decided before the ticket was even had.

[Cobby]

yeah the plasmaflood thing seems like miscommunication instead of malice, I cant see how you can come to the conclusion of lying unless theres some previous interactions or something.

needs to stop larping as vekter with the "what the fuck are you doing" esque style of adminning, its actually a really bad approach lol.

[Drag]

I keep reading a lot of these replies and I am sorrily disappointed in the bandwagoning hate that is occurring here, can we please have a discussion that doesn't devolve into gross levels of toxicity every time? If you think Chesh made a mistake you can express so in a way that isn't being a toxic fuckhead.

[Epicgamer545]

The ahelps could have been handled more professionally and calmer, in my opinion. No offense to Chesh. I hope this is resolved fairly soon.

[sinfulbliss]

Very nice to see two more parties stepping in to dogpile on the player. With all due respect to Drag their post didn’t really add any new information other than “I agree with Cheshify’s take on it.” Seems to just be placed there to back up Cheshify since they’re receiving a lot of blowback, which I guess I understand.

Either way, I completely disagree with the opinion that you are liable for what the AI does if it misinterprets your order. First, AIs shouldn’t be breaking Manuel rules regardless of who orders it. So if they get an order to do so, they should probably stop and be absolutely sure that’s what the order is saying to do, and even then they should ahelp after.

The ticket was also incredibly hostile, despite the player being calm throughout the whole thing. Yet they got a “combative in ahelps” added to their ban, which is totally unfair.

(FWIW: I also was under the impression AIs could plasmaflood a single room, since I’ve since malfs do it before to me)

[Capsandi]

I keep reading a lot of these replies and I am sorrily disappointed in the bandwagoning hate that is occurring here, can we please have a discussion that doesn't devolve into gross levels of toxicity every time? If you think Chesh made a mistake you can express so in a way that isn't being a toxic fuckhead.

Where? I see maybe 2 snarky posters here. Not much of a hate bandwagon unless your definition of hate includes people disagreeing with the ban.

Also, the idea of plasma flooding a single room has been a misnomer ever since it was decided that the mainsail mechanic of the game(atmos) should be as frustrating to control as possible. If you plasma flood a single room it will get the shuttle called on lrp servers, not sure about Manuel but I'd assume it's not as common a tactic.
Either way it's an mrp ban so idc about the outcome.

[Drag]

I don't agree with keeping this as a ban. At the moment I agreed it should have been a ban, due to the reasons I already posted. However, I was kinda slide blinded by the fact Chesh made it a perma. I even offered to do the ban, planning on making it a day. At the time I only read about half of the ticket, and then focused my attention on something else. I 100% would have tried stepping in.

Either way, I completely disagree with the opinion that you are liable for what the AI does if it misinterprets your order. First, AIs shouldn’t be breaking Manuel rules regardless of who orders it. So if they get an order to do so, they should probably stop and be absolutely sure that’s what the order is saying to do, and even then they should ahelp after.

Funny you should mention this, remember how I said more than one person was spoken to? That's essentially what I told the ai. While they should be ahelping its really not their fault someone essentially forced antag status on them, which is why Im the opinion of the person who uploads a law is (mostly)liable for its consequences. I didn't mean to give the impression that the uploader is 100% at fault.

I keep reading a lot of these replies and I am sorrily disappointed in the bandwagoning hate that is occurring here, can we please have a discussion that doesn't devolve into gross levels of toxicity every time? If you think Chesh made a mistake you can express so in a way that isn't being a toxic fuckhead.

Where? I see maybe 2 snarky posters here. Not much of a hate bandwagon unless your definition of hate includes people disagreeing with the ban.

Its a couple people here, and a lot of behavior I've been noticing from the forums in general

[Pandarsenic]

You've always been responsible for the laws you upload. The rules are "(Ahelp if it seems really sketchy, but) obey your laws/orders as written" because otherwise AIs can delay unnecessarily in legitimate cases.

[sinfulbliss]

You've always been responsible for the laws you upload. The rules are "(Ahelp if it seems really sketchy, but) obey your laws/orders as written" because otherwise AIs can delay unnecessarily in legitimate cases.

While they should be ahelping its really not their fault someone essentially forced antag status on them, which is why Im the opinion of the person who uploads a law is (mostly)liable for its consequences. I didn't mean to give the impression that the uploader is 100% at fault

If the captain says “AI law 2 erp the HOP,” and the AI then proceeds to send extremely sexually explicit rule 8-breaking dialogue to the HoP, who is more at fault?

“I was just following my laws” stops working when the thing you’re doing is 100% rulebreaking. Plasmaflooding the whole station on Manuel is 100% rulebreaking, and so is breaking rule 8. The AI was the one that did the plasmaflood, and in doing so broke a Manuel rule. Law 2 isn’t above the server rules and the AI, as the person that actually caused the grief, is more at fault IMO.

As sec sometimes the captain will order us to execute someone. If he’s mistaken and the person was innocent, yet I executed them anyway, who is more at fault? Obviously I am, as the person that actually pulled the trigger. And that’s just something that’s potentially rulebreaking - a plasmaflood is 100% always rulebreaking on MRP IIRC.

[iwishforducks]

the issue here is not this drudgery of trying to decide who is to blame but rather that the rules in place are ridiculous

[Pandarsenic]

If you genuinely can't tell the difference between being destructive IC vs the things that are banned under Rule 8 for being weird OOC you should probably study the relevant rules to understand the substantive differences

There are situations where plasma flooding on Manuel is allowed or in a gray area. Furthermore, depending on cleanliness of record vs. time played, I would generally take "didn't the mass sabotage rules change?" as an excuse, and I have taken "I got the go postal, kill everyone and hijack flavortext, why wouldn't I delaminate and plasma flood" as an excuse, because if someone is confused about the game text lying to them or about the headmins all going "Yeah this policy seems good" then it somehow not becoming official, it doesn't seem fair to clap them when a warning/explanation would be adequate.

A sec officer doesn't have laws requiring them to perform the execution or risk punishment OOC, but without further context, the Captain is the one who's most at fault. If you were removed from the situation the Captain would have theoretically done the execution personally, whereas you would not have spontaneously executed an innocent without an order to. Captaincy carries certain metagame protections that come, in turn, with a responsibility to actually act like you deserve them.

The goal of administrative action is to be as harsh or lenient as necessary to prevent repetition of rulebreaking behavior which means addressing the root cause of why the rulebreak happened rather than slapping banned-aids on a symptom unthinkingly. Ignoring the AI here, because their conduct and the administrative handling of the AI isn't the topic here...

Would the player amend his future AI subversions based on the information he's getting here? I don't know. It's hard to say. He's pushing back hard that he didn't do anything wrong because he still claims he successfully communicated something that nobody else seems to agree he successfully did communicate, though I think the logs reasonably support the interpretation that he meant what he's claiming and just didn't know it was impossible. The thing is, that continued "I did nothing wrong here" doesn't look to me like it has any "I see how it went wrong but I understand how to avoid it next time," which is what I personally tend to look for.

[sinfulbliss]

If you genuinely can't tell the difference between being destructive IC vs the things that are banned under Rule 8 for being weird OOC you should probably study the relevant rules to understand the substantive differences

I think you know, but this is what we call an analogy.

A sec officer doesn't have laws requiring them to perform the execution or risk punishment OOC, but without further context, the Captain is the one who's most at fault. If you were removed from the situation the Captain would have theoretically done the execution personally, whereas you would not have spontaneously executed an innocent without an order to. Captaincy carries certain metagame protections that come, in turn, with a responsibility to actually act like you deserve them.

I completely disagree, and in fact the theoretical assumption you're making is often wrong. The last time this happened, the captain ordered someone to be executed, but since I didn't have any context I instead brigged them and informed the cap they were all his. Instead of executing them, what does he do? He begins asking questions on comms to make more certain of the initial allegations. It's way easier to tell others to do something than to do it yourself, because everyone understands doing the action makes you primarily responsible for the action.

Heads of staff do have some responsibility they should be held accountable for, but it's pretty ridiculous to suggest the people receiving the orders are mostly freed of the responsibility of the actions they themselves choose to take. The party that does the action is to be held primarily accountable for the action, just because someone told them to doesn't mean their brain shrivels up into a pebble and their NPC protocols take over or something.

Would the player amend his future AI subversions based on the information he's getting here? I don't know. It's hard to say.

From personal experience, writing hundreds of words defending your actions in a ban appeal, and being banned as a result of your actions, is in itself obviously enough to cause a change in behavior, even if you win the appeal. There is some reasonable expectation that regardless of what is said, they will never again ask an AI to arbitrarily plasmaflood.

Perhaps the reason they're not willing to budge is because multiple parties are accusing them of lying about their initial intentions, lying/obfuscating the truth to admins, and murderboning when they in fact did none of this. If someone accused me of all that when all I'd done wrong is cause a miscommunication, I'd be pretty damn defensive too.

[Drag]

You've always been responsible for the laws you upload. The rules are "(Ahelp if it seems really sketchy, but) obey your laws/orders as written" because otherwise AIs can delay unnecessarily in legitimate cases.

While they should be ahelping its really not their fault someone essentially forced antag status on them, which is why Im the opinion of the person who uploads a law is (mostly)liable for its consequences. I didn't mean to give the impression that the uploader is 100% at fault

If the captain says “AI law 2 erp the HOP,” and the AI then proceeds to send extremely sexually explicit rule 8-breaking dialogue to the HoP, who is more at fault?

“I was just following my laws” stops working when the thing you’re doing is 100% rulebreaking. Plasmaflooding the whole station on Manuel is 100% rulebreaking, and so is breaking rule 8. The AI was the one that did the plasmaflood, and in doing so broke a Manuel rule. Law 2 isn’t above the server rules and the AI, as the person that actually caused the grief, is more at fault IMO.

As sec sometimes the captain will order us to execute someone. If he’s mistaken and the person was innocent, yet I executed them anyway, who is more at fault? Obviously I am, as the person that actually pulled the trigger. And that’s just something that’s potentially rulebreaking - a plasmaflood is 100% always rulebreaking on MRP IIRC.

Generally I try to give people the benefit of the doubt for things of this nature. The game can get pretty intense and it's very easy to get caught up in the moment. So I'll give warnings and "please be more mindful in the futures"'s if it's apparently to me this is a first time case. If there is repeated behavior where it's documented that these players were already warned then that's when the gloves come off, depending on the issues severely it could result in varying levels of punishment. It's really a by case basis and there's too many factors for me to include or this would be an actual wall of text.

I personally believe that Chesh hit the acceleration really hard, but at the same time I understand and acknowledge the impression they were under. Lying to staff is a pretty hefty problem, and it nets Perma bans pretty fast. Chesh and I both were under the impression they were withholding information which is a form of lying on top of first offences all around. I still think Chesh is hitting the acceleration too hard in this ban appeal, but they have already passed this off to the head admins. Should I have taken over? Probably. However I became occupied and didn't see that I should have stepped in for a more amiable conclusion. So now we are here.

I understand that Chesh made a mistake, my entire issue with all of this started with the hate. Just because admins should expect it dosent make it okay

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

Well, headmins over-ruled chesh on this case. Good call in my opinion, Chesh went too hard with the hammer on this one.

[CMDR_Gungnir]

I understand that Chesh made a mistake, my entire issue with all of this started with the hate. Just because admins should expect it dosent make it okay

The problem, at least to me, is that this is not an isolated incident in how Chesh handles these things. And as much as it may seem otherwise, what I want more than anything is an improvement, and them getting spoken to about how they handle their tickets is a step toward that.

Chesh started out as a fantastic admin, who was willing to make the hard calls about the long-term shitters. But I worry that they're reaching the point of 'When all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail'. I don't know if they should step away for a couple of months to lose some burn-out, or what. But something has to change, and people who make the occasional slip here and there shouldn't be being treated like the long-term rule-toer's with 600 notes in 6 months.

[sinfulbliss]

Good enough I guess, except this entire part of the note is superfluous: "Was permanently banned from the server for presumed lying in ahelps about the situation, when it was later found to be an apparent mistake. This ban was originally made as a permanent ban, but this was found to be too aggressive in response to a non-malicious action. The duration served on this ban is proportional to the level of murder committed."

I don't really see how that's relevant to note. The first part alone "As an antagonist on lowpop manuel, ordered the AI to plasmaflood the bridge, which eventually spread throughout the station" covers the whole situation. But that's also not great because it implies ordering the AI to plasmaflood the bridge is a rulebreak. Maybe "warned to be more careful when ordering selective plasmafloods to ensure no miscommunications happen" would've been better, but then it's just getting obsessive. Probably would've made the most sense to just scrap the note.

Another question is why an admittedly non-malicious action should be worthy of a six-day ban and a note to begin with.

[Epicgamer545]

Seeing the situation is resolved, I’m going to leave my (pretty bad) honest opinions here.

I’m going to agree with Sin with his above post. While the resolution didn’t actually lead to a permanent ban, I still disagree with the 6 day ban and I question the purpose of it. If there is no reason for a 6 day ban, shouldn’t he should just get unbanned with a note only? Even a day ban is more preferable. I know it’s not a big deal at all, but it does not feel warranted.

As I said before, the Ahelps were hostile and I disliked how it was handled. While I fully understand that there was miscommunication and things taken to account, I expected some more questions in that ahelp rather than accusations leading up to a unexpected perma ban. But I’m not a admin, so I’m not sure how ahelps SHOULD be handled and I can also understand the tension with the admins and the player, so not much I could put in defense. After all, I don’t involve myself in appeals that much anyway.

I can see Chesh had good intentions, and I understand why they would be quick to accuse them, however it should be important to always keep your cool and try not to escalate bans to a perma for a slight misunderstanding. Again, no offense to Chesh (I know I’m saying it a lot, but I just want to make it clear).

a plasmaflood is 100% always rulebreaking on MRP IIRC.

I should comment on this. When IS a plasmaflood okay as antag, really? I think when it’s 3 hours in the round, and people are recalling, and nothing is happening, I really feel like a antag should have a right to attempt to end the round, for conflict. Of course it’s not okay when everyone is having fun and doing something and then you decided to plasma flood “for the funnies.” But it was still HOURs in the round. Where do we draw the line for mass-conflict exactly?

[Cobby]

When you're going delta or when ordered to, a subverted AI is not owed the right to murderbone just because an antag got access to a lawboard change. For general antags, you can also F1 if you think the round is going on for "too long" to see if its ok for you to start otherwise rulebreaking mischief.

you can plasmaflood for numerous cases, it just has to have some backing beyond "im antag" (well if you can murderbone you can also mass sabotage). I would argue its ok to do anytime so long as you arent intentionally using it to kill people, it can be a great way to get people to atmos or to be distracted while you do something else.

If youre defining plasmaflood as a specific room, thats certainly ok to do. It seems like the definition for the word is still up in the air :^)