/tg/Station 13

BONERMASTER wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 8:54 pm Alternative title: New admin meta motivates players to tell their side of the story by waiting until they disconnect and then banning them.


With lagging regards
-BONERMASTER

ban reason: I made a combat mech and killed a borg and disconnected mid ticket

As a non antagonist built a combat mech named "child murderer" and killed a borg for the justified reason of "they were bored" and "it was lowpop".

yes i did make a combat mech with an lmg and drill but i didnt really used it on anyone besides that borg who was i presume malf since i think it was malf because we were handling a malfed ai at that time and...

man im bored its low pop and theres nothing to do and ive yet to kill someone besides that one borg shell

Manuel

Thaumic wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 9:25 pm brevity is the soul of wit

BlueMemesauce wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 10:32 pm What rule says you can't make a combat mech, even on Manuel? Is Robo really just sit and wait until a borg wants upgrades simulator?

CPTANT wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 10:17 pm Seems to be a communication error where he is responding to why he build the mech but the admin interpreted as the reason for why he killed the borg.

MooCow12 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 10:54 pm He said there was a malf ai, roboticists tend to pay a lot of attention to signs of it.

Also he didnt roam the halls with it to look for antags (otherwise it would say on the ban), it seemed like he just went to upload cuz malf ai

MooCow12 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 10:54 pm , then went to fight blob.

conrad wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 12:34 am A reminder that we're talking about MRP.

MooCow12 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 10:54 pm He said there was a malf ai, roboticists tend to pay a lot of attention to signs of it.

Also he didnt roam the halls with it to look for antags (otherwise it would say on the ban), it seemed like he just went to upload cuz malf ai

Going after upload 'cos of malf/subverted ai is, again, not the Roboticist's job. RD's job is to lock down borgs for law desyncing, and the Roboticist's job is to desync the laws (I don't remember if RD can do that through the computer in their office). Sec goes after the core/upload.

MooCow12 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 10:54 pm , then went to fight blob.

See THAT I can understand, because of the message saying "All crew must contain the outbreak" Rule 4 covering confirmed global threats... althought, even then, I would defer the piloting of the combat mech to sec.

Sec's job is to go after antags, not the rest of station staff. You can defend yourself, sure, but leaving mech bay and killing borgs 'cos "you heard AI is malf" is not what you should do, and saying "I got bored and I've yet to kill someone besides that borg" is just tiding.

EDIT: I read Rule 4

Ryusenshu wrote: ↑Sun Jan 29, 2023 10:39 pm you can make a combat mech
but if you try to just validhunt with it, or try to create valids, thats another issue

that round the robo was piloting the mech to break upload doors because of rumors that the ai is "malf", ai noticed the intrusion late and announced into binary
one borg went there to check, got flashed by sec, and shot to death by the robo who then said "its a shell" (borg was revived WAY later into the round, might have been dc'd at that point)

Only after they reset the ai they actually found out it was subverted, there was no hostilities from ai side at all before that

As a non antagonist built a combat mech named "child murderer" and killed a borg for the justified reason of "they were bored" and "it was lowpop" in tickets. You being bored is not valid justification for breaking the rules. You have been warned already for doing things for no reason. Later appealed and changed their reasoning to them responding to a malf/subverted ai threat. Please make sure you inform admins of what you are doing and why are you doing it when they ask.

Super Aggro Crag wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 12:36 am i have never once seen a roboticist give a fucking combat mech to sec on manuel. even the most generous of roboticists make combat mechs and then put posibrains in them and tell them to kill things instead of giving them to sec. combat mechs only purpose is for a roboticist to sit in on the shuttle in prep for EORG

CMDR_Gungnir wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:58 am I actually remember this round distinctly. The AI wasn't Malf, but it WAS subverted. Security was two dudes (including a Detective), and I'd figured out pretty quickly that the AI was subverted. I told Sec that I had a very strong suspicion that it was Subverted, which would be why they went after it. I can't fault the Roboticist for helping out in a mech given the circumstances.

General Ahelp Procedure
- Most situations require the admin to gain a full and unbiased understanding of a situation as possible. Only then can an admin apply the rules and their own accumulated sense of right and wrong from past experiences to a situation.
...

Admins initiating a conversation should do so with the following points in mind,
- Be neutral in tone and avoid being accusatory. While it is not necessary to build a rapport with the individual being talked to, it is essential to maintain at least a neutral relationship between you and the player. This is so the conversation is less likely to become hostile and the player is less likely to become defensive or evasive. Players that are not defensive or evasive may provide more information. If the player is expected to be evasive, remaining non-accusatory also makes it less likely for what you say to tip off the player on what they want to be evasive/deceptive about.
...

CPTANT wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:02 am

As a non antagonist built a combat mech named "child murderer" and killed a borg for the justified reason of "they were bored" and "it was lowpop" in tickets. You being bored is not valid justification for breaking the rules. You have been warned already for doing things for no reason. Later appealed and changed their reasoning to them responding to a malf/subverted ai threat. Please make sure you inform admins of what you are doing and why are you doing it when they ask.

This is a pure bullshit response when it is the admin who is being the one who doesn't respond to the ticket.

chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:30 pm

CPTANT wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:02 am

As a non antagonist built a combat mech named "child murderer" and killed a borg for the justified reason of "they were bored" and "it was lowpop" in tickets. You being bored is not valid justification for breaking the rules. You have been warned already for doing things for no reason. Later appealed and changed their reasoning to them responding to a malf/subverted ai threat. Please make sure you inform admins of what you are doing and why are you doing it when they ask.

This is a pure bullshit response when it is the admin who is being the one who doesn't respond to the ticket.

Everytime I have asked an admin if I can do anything non-standard the responce has been one word;

No

BeeSting12 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:37 pm

chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 5:30 pm

CPTANT wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:02 am

As a non antagonist built a combat mech named "child murderer" and killed a borg for the justified reason of "they were bored" and "it was lowpop" in tickets. You being bored is not valid justification for breaking the rules. You have been warned already for doing things for no reason. Later appealed and changed their reasoning to them responding to a malf/subverted ai threat. Please make sure you inform admins of what you are doing and why are you doing it when they ask.

This is a pure bullshit response when it is the admin who is being the one who doesn't respond to the ticket.

Everytime I have asked an admin if I can do anything non-standard the responce has been one word;

No

Ask for forgiveness later. If it's something within the rules, you can appeal it and take it all the way up to the headmins. If it's not, then they were saying no for a reason. Most likely though, they just don't want to make your actions admin-sanctioned which might cause you to go further with it than you normally would or should, or they don't want the blame for your actions.

iwishforducks wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 7:54 pm i dont get why people are so adamant about sticking absolutely bloody useless notes after essentially going through the riff raffs of conceding in removing the ban- even if it's passed its prime. like really, what use is there to the note that was left? leaving a note on a player does not mean you walk away with a win. it only makes bureaucracy harder when someone gets banned for "having too many notes" and then we pull up their notes and one of the notes is "Was asked to say please and thanks in tickets." like it's just embarrassing bro

Drag wrote:My question was not confusing, there was no hidden meaning behind any of what I opened the ticket with. I asked two questions, why the mech was made and why the mech was used.

Drag wrote:I feel like this is setting a standard if you claim in an appeal you just didn't read the ahelp ticket properly and you just misunderstood this puts admins more on the line then they already are.

Drag wrote:Additionally this appeal is frankly hard to read and interpret.

bastardblaster wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 8:55 pm

iwishforducks wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 7:54 pm i dont get why people are so adamant about sticking absolutely bloody useless notes after essentially going through the riff raffs of conceding in removing the ban- even if it's passed its prime. like really, what use is there to the note that was left? leaving a note on a player does not mean you walk away with a win. it only makes bureaucracy harder when someone gets banned for "having too many notes" and then we pull up their notes and one of the notes is "Was asked to say please and thanks in tickets." like it's just embarrassing bro

are you British if so please stop

Ryusenshu wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 9:40 pm I wish i would record my rounds, because i saw the entire thing happening

CPTANT wrote: ↑Tue Jan 31, 2023 8:35 am This is 100% Drag failing at communicating. The player answered both parts of his question. "Why did you make the mech" -> I was bored, "Why did you go around killing people" -> I didn't I only killed 1 borg.

Noting people for your own failure at basic communication is just sad.

CPTANT wrote: ↑Wed Feb 01, 2023 8:28 am This is really the end? Drag just gets away with it and nobody thinks hmmmmmmm?

Sightld2 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 2:35 am Only tangentially related, but it'd be neat if we had indicators that someone was typing in an ahelp.

Bawhoppennn wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 3:43 am

Sightld2 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 2:35 am Only tangentially related, but it'd be neat if we had indicators that someone was typing in an ahelp.

Yeah I mean since it already does that for admins, why don't we have it do it on the player side as well?

Sightld2 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 4:45 am

Bawhoppennn wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 3:43 am

Sightld2 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 2:35 am Only tangentially related, but it'd be neat if we had indicators that someone was typing in an ahelp.

Yeah I mean since it already does that for admins, why don't we have it do it on the player side as well?

It doesn't. But yeah that'd make sense too

Bawhoppennn wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 4:47 am

Sightld2 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 4:45 am

Bawhoppennn wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 3:43 am

Sightld2 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 2:35 am Only tangentially related, but it'd be neat if we had indicators that someone was typing in an ahelp.

Yeah I mean since it already does that for admins, why don't we have it do it on the player side as well?

It doesn't. But yeah that'd make sense too

The last time I remember responding to ahelps on the live server (never tested on local cause why), I recall it saying "Other_Admin_X has started replying to ahelp" "Other_Admin_X has stopped replying"