Admin abused a player for ahelping and steals their heretic roll

[EmpressMaia]

Bottom post of the previous page:

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=33471

Can't wait to see the actual ahelp messages

Also sorry for taking up like 2 or 3 peanut threads. Working on my titles

[Fatal]

Your adminhelp being rejected means your trade is denied

It's not that hard to understand is it?

If you want proper responses to every little thing we get asked for (we get adminhelps and prayers like this most rounds) then that's just tough, we're not a call centre

[Archie700]

General rule about communicating with people in customer service and admining:

Not everyone is going to be the ideal customer/player who responds the way you want them to respond

[TheLoLSwat]

You are absolutely right my friend, I could have just said "no" before rejecting the ticket, and perhaps in a situation in which I wasn't handling other ahelps as well (one other of which was a antag trade request was a similarly incoherent request to be revived as an antag, rejected in the same fashion), as well as completing a ban from a previous round, I would have given the ticket more of my attention.

I could have, or I could have ignored it and he probably would have just went on with his round. But instead I did an equally valid action, which is press the reject button on the ahelp.

When he ahelps AGAIN, he clearly didn't get the message, and similarly babbles about wanting of be a traitor. We can see now pretty clearly, that this individual has no interest in playing heretic, and yet has it enabled and is trying to use it as a bartering token with me to get an antag he wants. Rejecting the ticket didn't work the first time, so I zap him a bit (a cool ~60 points of damage if I recall) he is right outside of medbay, this has not significantly impacted his round and was meant to be a humorous way of telling him: No, and don't ask again.

you were being overwhelmed with adminwork so instead of
- saying "no" and muting from ahelps
- saying "no, dont ask again" and then crit smiting if he asks again
- i dunno probably a bunch of other ways to effectively communicate with the player and also saving your time
you put the player through one of the most confusing experiences out of sheer pettiness (because lets be real, you werent doing this to be efficient or save time). With all that being said, I still understand and can follow you as the player shouldnt have ahelped to trade again. The part where you lose me for good is where you smite him for having an actual legit ahelp (even if its due to his own mistakes getting him smited). The player lost his heretic hud for a bit and probably thought he caught a win for once. Was it really too much to mute him from ahelps at this point (if you didnt believe it was legit) or say something like "No tc trades" and then mute from ahelps?

oh and we didnt even get to leaving a note on the PLAYER for just going "damn admin aboosd me" before dying lol it just gets pettier

[ekaterina]

Also ekat every time i see you you're so angry; Is everything alright? (This is unironic) If you need to talk to someone my DMs are open my friend

I'm not angry, I just look that way because I am being direct and honest - like oranges, but less mean.

Because this is in reference to my admin complaint, the note was placed after the player had ic occed and disconnected from the game. I had no option to talk to him about his behavior before applying the note. If the player had appealed the note before or instead of making a complaint, I would have been happy to edit it to better reflect his interpretation of events, but I was never given that option.

Before that moment, the player had not breaking any rules, was not at risk for a note, and did not require a conversation. I accept the fact that my actions led to the complaint, and if I had taken the situation in a more couth method I would have avoided the complaint, regardless, I think the complaint is still invalid and unlikely to be upheld.

Rectification's post here gives us more insight into his thought process. He issued the note for OOC in IC, yet 75% of the note talks about the player ahelping. The first impression we get from this is that the note is because he ahelped about the trade repeatedly (which he was in the right to do because he didn't even get a simple "no" in reply).

[Itseasytosee2me]

you were being overwhelmed with adminwork so instead of
- saying "no" and muting from ahelps
- saying "no, dont ask again" and then crit smiting if he asks again
- i dunno probably a bunch of other ways to effectively communicate with the player and also saving your time
you put the player through one of the most confusing experiences out of sheer pettiness (because lets be real, you werent doing this to be efficient or save time). With all that being said, I still understand and can follow you as the player shouldnt have ahelped to trade again. The part where you lose me for good is where you smite him for having an actual legit ahelp (even if its due to his own mistakes getting him smited). The player lost his heretic hud for a bit and probably thought he caught a win for once. Was it really too much to mute him from ahelps at this point (if you didnt believe it was legit) or say something like "No tc trades" and then mute from ahelps?

oh and we didnt even get to leaving a note on the PLAYER for just going "damn admin aboosd me" before dying lol it just gets pettier

You aren't wrong, and don't think I'm not taking this lesson to heart. However, my actions were not motivated by pettiness, I did the first smite because I thought It would be a funny and explicit way of saying "No." The second one was really meant to drive home the message of "No," along with the Ahelp mute, and I was content to leave it at that. I felt obligated to leave a note on the players record after they complained in IC to let other admins know that they have already fucked around and found out in ahelps, and then subsequently complained about it, in case it is relevant in the future for any issues. I don't hold any personal vendetta, but this player has gotten into quite a bit of trouble before.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

I think the second smite was a little mean, its not like he continued to demand free shit but I understand that sometimes you're busy and just gotta get them to bog off.

[NoxVS]

he ahelped about the trade repeatedly (which he was in the right to do because he didn't even get a simple "no" in reply).

Not only is a massive REJECTED message usually considered "no" (which seems to have even been received as such considering the player immediately started asking for something else instead), but a TC trade doesn't inherently deserve any kind of response. If you have an actual issue that is silently rejected then that's an issue, but a TC trade is asking an admin to do something that they have no obligation to do. They especially have no obligation to humor you if your TC trade sums up to "WIZWIZWIZWIZWI". We even have an issue with players rolling heretic solely to trade it away for something else because they don't want to play heretic.

You can't complain about admins failing to communicate in their response to you when you fail to communicate in your request.

[CPTANT]

Why is everybody still discussing if rejecting it means no (it obviously does)

Its just instantly smiting the second ahelp that was a dick move.

[toemas]

itseasy didnt do anything wrong.

[saprasam]

i dont see the issue, person spamming ahelps for antag trades gets bent for it

[AwkwardStereo]

However, my actions were not motivated by pettiness, I did the first smite because I thought It would be a funny and explicit way of saying "No." The second one was really meant to drive home the message of "No," along with the Ahelp mute, and I was content to leave it at that.

I tried this and came to the conclusion that it universally just did not work, even in conjunction with the Reject button. In my experience, if you want to get them to take the message, literally just telling them No is what works. If they asked why I always told them I have other tickets and this is just not where my effort is needed right now (even if it is a lie).

[CMDR_Gungnir]

As much as I hate to go against the grain, I kinda have to agree with Eka here. Some people just Don't Do Well With Cues, it's not because they're under 18, but things like autism, hell even social anxiety can fuck with it, because there's that layer of "Did they say no?" and if you combine the two it can get really bad with that uncertainty, and the closure's nice. A simple "I don't plan to do any trades" would've been enough, and probably have taken less time than reject + smite + mute from ahelps. ("But Gung, Rejected Ahelp basically means No!" Yeah, but they did then ask something else. Is that a 'No I don't plan to do any trades at all' or just a 'No, asking for Wizard is dumb', and I can understand why someone might feel somewhat hurt and ask for clarification after the smite, especially if they get smote a second time for expressing that.)

I can, however, also understand Easy's side, too. If he's got a lot on his plate (which it sounds like he did), I can understand why he'd just slap the Reject button and hope he can move on to the next one. Especially when the first ahelp about it being "WIZWIZWIZWIZWIZ CAN I HAVE WIZ" makes it seem either like a troll, or low-effort, and having that followed immediately by "ok what about traitor" makes it seem like it's someone who only has Heretic on to make those trades.

I think both sides can learn from this one. The Player should definitely learn to uhhh. Word things better. And maybe not hope to somehow trade Heretic for Wizard, (a "Hey, I've actually got a neat idea I could do as a Traitor, I want to (XYZ), could I trade this Heretic roll for it?" will probably get you better results) and Easy could benefit from talking more, even if it's just something short, which he's admitted and agreed that he can learn from this, which is good.

[Kendrickorium]

I think the main issue here is that the appealer is 12 years of age

[MrStonedOne]

back in my day tc trades were exclusively handled via pray and thus were less annoying and also more forgiven when you got smited because thats what gods who you annoy do.

anywho i think either or of the smites were valid, but both are sus. if they had smited on ticket 2 they should at least talk to them on ticket 3 and if they had rejected ticket 2 without a smite, then a WIDE range of smites would be valid on ticket 3.

[dirk_mcblade]

I demand more professionalism from unpaid staff

[Qbmax32]

I think the main issue here is that the appealer is 12 years of age

the real answer

[Hoxha]

reminder that magic is inherently evil and satanic unless you have been personally sanctioned by God to utilize it so if you ask me i think he got off lucky only receiving a lightning bolt to the face

[Armhulen]

I think the main issue here is that the appealer is 12 years of age

it's so blatant it's a bit sad we allow it. if he can't fill out an appeal any better than he fills out his english homework how the fuck can anyone expect to roleplay with him

[Kendrickorium]

I think the main issue here is that the appealer is 12 years of age

it's so blatant it's a bit sad we allow it. if he can't fill out an appeal any better than he fills out his english homework how the fuck can anyone expect to roleplay with him

"mins later got shocked, i asked ahelp "can i have a reason for the antg trade? also shock is uncool, "

i mean, come on man