regular borging procedure peanut

[BlueMemesauce]

Bottom post of the previous page:

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=32663

[Archie700]

How the fuck did lulufren completely ignore logs before throwing the banhammer not once but twice

[Cobby]

Stop requesting headmin reviews it should be implicit everytime the banning admin denies the appeal

[Cobby]

Also I’m still irked about vekter giving his two cents about how trans ppl he knows not liking the word “trannie” and that not being peanut despite me reporting it, lives comfortably in the corner of my brain and needed to whine abt it since we’re on the topic of silly peanut posts.

[EmpressMaia]

Tranny/trannie is a slur

[Cobby]

i wouldnt say it was used as a slur in the context used but even then thats not what he said, just that he FEELS like the trans people he knew wouldnt like to be called "Trannie" (im sure they wouldnt by someone specifically referring to them as such when they dont know the person), capitalizing FEELS as its specifically called out as what constitutes a peanut post.

[Epicgamer545]

Honestly if I was tabled slammed and violently shoved, and a borg came in and watched me get harmed then I would assume that both them and the borg are suspicious. I think the borg broke silicon policy for ignoring a plea of “HELP HUMAN HARM” even if they were asked to be borged, because duh law 2 and law 1

[sinfulbliss]

Also I’m still irked about vekter giving his two cents about how trans ppl he knows not liking the word “trannie” and that not being peanut despite me reporting it, lives comfortably in the corner of my brain and needed to whine abt it since we’re on the topic of silly peanut posts.

Very simple explanation: posts that support the admin and/or were written by admins are much less likely to be deleted for peanutposting than posts that are written by players or support the player.

[Pandarsenic]

Also I’m still irked about vekter giving his two cents about how trans ppl he knows not liking the word “trannie” and that not being peanut despite me reporting it, lives comfortably in the corner of my brain and needed to whine abt it since we’re on the topic of silly peanut posts.

Very simple explanation: posts that support the admin and/or were written by admins are much less likely to be deleted for peanutposting than posts that are written by players or support the player.

Remember that there are several forms of selection bias at hand here:

- Typically, admins are expected to know the lines of what constitutes relevant rule/log contributions and when is appropriate to butt in directly
- Admins especially have a standing expectation that you do not step on the toes of someone else's ban, so concerns about it or log questions are more typically brought up directly in the 'bus through a ping. Same for anything that would make conversation rather than a one-and-done post
- If an admin is posting in someone else's appeal directly, then, it is (or should be) a reasonably well-thought-out addition or clarification for the benefit of the appellant and/or the posters watching the appeal.

[Timberpoes]

Also I delete peanuts and tell players to repost their thoughts in the peanut all the time. I kept my commentary here and made sure any posting in the appeal was limited to policy clarifications and logs without commentary.

I no longer have the burden of headmin so I'm more free to cause chaos here.

[Archie700]

Guy got his round fucked because roboticist and borg were idiots and ends up being only one punished because he took it into his own hands instead of ahelping.
This is honestly a masterclass in "how not to handle a ban appeal by yourself"
This already happened with the "hulk succumbs to banbait chef" and is now happening here and it's the same admin

[sinfulbliss]

Guy got his round fucked because roboticist and borg were idiots and ends up being only one punished because he took it into his own hands instead of ahelping.
This is honestly a masterclass in "how not to handle a ban appeal by yourself"
This already happened with the "hulk succumbs to banbait chef" and is now happening here and it's the same admin

You know it’s bad when we are actually agreeing about something.

The irritating thing is it’s clear the admin is making no attempt to understanding the guy’s point of view or perspective, is ignoring most of the logs being posted, and just defaulting back to their initial opinions they formed during the ticket itself.

The entire point of an appeal is to re-evaluate the ban in light of the info the player posts, along with all the logs and arguments being posted - not to retrospectively try to justify your ban like you’re trying to win an argument. It’s not debate team.

[iamgoofball]

the banning admin here needs busted down to trial for claiming that the act of putting someone in disposals counts as round removal because of 4 levels of hypothetical scenarios (with no evidence any of those hypotheticals were active)

[BlueMemesauce]

(with no evidence any of those hypotheticals were active)

but what if they were

[TheSmallBlue]

The idea that hiding the cyborg in maint is round removal is stupid in so many ways, as an AI you can check your status panel and immediately see the location of each of your cyborgs, even when destroyed or locked down. They can't be completely hidden because of this.

[Cobby]

round removal is a nothingburger considering he thought (rightfully so) the individual was an antagonist.

You dont have an ooc responsibility to deconvert/revive an antagonist, although it would be nice.

[sinfulbliss]

round removal is a nothingburger considering he thought (rightfully so) the individual was an antagonist.

You dont have an ooc responsibility to deconvert/revive an antagonist, although it would be nice.

*activating robotic adminappeal response protocol*
A cyborg should not be required to intervene in every fight or else be labeled an antagonist. If you’re not sure someone’s an antagonist, round removing them is a step too far.

You are free to request headmin review.