Terry security at its finest. A gulagnut

[EmpressMaia]

Bottom post of the previous page:

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=33463

This is why I don't play terry

[TypicalRig]

Adrenaline sacs is noob bait and anyone that used it as an argument clearly hasn't used it or only used it years ago when it wasn't nerfed. There's a reason flashmend is the preferred meta and nobody goes with adrenaline sacs. The reason is that stun batons and disablers still hard counter it. The haste is alright, but lings can get that for cheaper without sacs. Hell, they can get it essentially for free if they do some chemistry.

Also disobeying your head isn't a noteworthy offense (except on Manuel perhaps?) The same way mutinies are allowed if incompetence is proven, people can disregard head orders for good/bad/no reason. You'll see this happen often on Terry and Sybil with engineers and the CE, RD asking his scientists and roboticist to do projects they don't care about, or the CMO with chemists. Ignoring orders is a reason for demotion, not administrative action. Acting without head permission is an IC issue, an admin PM for such isn't even remotely justifiable. Even if it were, I don't really get why I'm meant to reasonably expect the HoS to discuss a punishment for one of his buddies for tiding the armory when he himself did this roundstart to "shotgunmax". It's a bad faith administrative decision to go through logs like that, see the HoS's actions, see my prior attempt at asking them to leave and explain their emergency and seeing how well that went, and then have the cheek to ask why I didn't try to talk with that same HoS about it. From what prior interactions do I have grounds to believe he's capable of a civil conversation and fair decision making? There were none.

[Tearling]

The same way mutinies are allowed if incompetence is proven

And in this case the incompetence wasn't proven. You alone decided that the HoS was incompetent, so you decided to disobey his orders, and much worst, lied to him about letting the secoff go.
Have some empathy and imagine how shitty it feels to know that a warden is lying to the HoS about letting you go so he can ensure the HoS doesn't help you. It's disgusting behavior. Regardless of what happens with this note, I encourage you to learn from this and never repeat it.

[TypicalRig]

The same way mutinies are allowed if incompetence is proven

And in this case the incompetence wasn't proven. You alone decided that the HoS was incompetent, so you decided to disobey his orders, and much worst, lied to him about letting the secoff go.
Have some empathy and imagine how shitty it feels to know that a warden is lying to the HoS about letting you go so he can ensure the HoS doesn't help you. It's disgusting behavior. Regardless of what happens with this note, I encourage you to learn from this and never repeat it.

Still ignoring the part about it being fine to disobey head orders on LRP, I see. A department can act independently of their head and doesn't have to report everything to them. You are genuinely deranged if you think this is anything other than an IC issue. The man threw a fit over being politely denied a gun, disabler spammed me, and then proceeded to break into the armory. If he wanted empathy, don't you think he shouldn't have immediately resorted to petty attacks when given an explanation as to why his current gear is fine. Why not also argue that he should've brought it up with the HoS instead of forcing his way into the armory, if you expect the same standard of me? He had the option to talk it out, as I was doing with him, but decided a heist was the better option. This is, by the book, fuck around and find out. My "empathy" was giving him the equivalent of a five minute gulag sentence for what was an executable offense. If you think attacking someone over being denied weapons you aren't entitled to is acceptable behaviour and doesn't warrant punishment, I encourage you to take this time to reflect on that faulty logic and learn from this.

[Tearling]

If he wanted empathy, don't you think he shouldn't have immediately resorted to petty attacks when given an explanation as to why his current gear is fine.

If you think someone should be denied empathy for something as petty as "he shouldn't have immediately resorted to petty attacks when given an explanation as to why his current gear is fine" then I am quite happy knowing that the peanut club will likely be seeing you in the ban appeals again.

With loving regards, Tearling.

[ekaterina]

Still ignoring the part about it being fine to disobey head orders on LRP, I see.

I'd argue security is a special case, especially when it comes to sentencing. Are you arguing that security officers can just overrule the warden's sentences? Because that's the logical follow-up to you arguing that the warden can lie to the HoS and give sentences he explicitly forbade. By your own logic, the officer was also fine to disobey you when you said no to him having lasers.

[TypicalRig]

Still ignoring the part about it being fine to disobey head orders on LRP, I see.

I'd argue security is a special case, especially when it comes to sentencing. Are you arguing that security officers can just overrule the warden's sentences? Because that's the logical follow-up to you arguing that the warden can lie to the HoS and give sentences he explicitly forbade. By your own logic, the officer was also fine to disobey you when you said no to him having lasers.

The only difference between an officer and warden is that one is meant to be an all around field agent, while the warden specializes in brig/armory defense and manangement. One isn't inherently higher on the pecking order than the other, they just have different priorities and access. Usually security officers are arresting people who they have personally dealt with much more, and have a better grasp of the scenario than the warden, who is normally in the brig, operating on secondhand information. In this scenario, I'd actually encourage the officer to decide the brig sentence theirself. Since unless I'm watching cams, I am only going off what was told to me, which leads to potential poor interpretations or misunderstandings. I only interfere with brig sentences if someone leaves a person without a timer or if I think the punishment is uncalled for, such as when someone is kept cuffed in interrogation for a long time only to be given an equally long brig sentence when they finally make it to a cell. So, I don't really think this is a good comparison as I've never run into an issue with "an officer overruling my sentence". Also, even without this, I already said explicitly that I hade no issues from an OOC perspective about the officer breaking in, albeit I do find it the equivalent of throwing a hissyfit. The admin and I both agreed that this is a valid IC issue and a result of escalation. The only different page we have is if the punishment is IC or not, so we are already beyond the point of discussion of "the officer was also fine to disobey you".

[Kendrickorium]

Adrenaline sacs is noob bait and anyone that used it as an argument clearly hasn't used it or only used it years ago when it wasn't nerfed. There's a reason flashmend is the preferred meta and nobody goes with adrenaline sacs. The reason is that stun batons and disablers still hard counter it. The haste is alright, but lings can get that for cheaper without sacs. Hell, they can get it essentially for free if they do some chemistry.

Also disobeying your head isn't a noteworthy offense (except on Manuel perhaps?) The same way mutinies are allowed if incompetence is proven, people can disregard head orders for good/bad/no reason. You'll see this happen often on Terry and Sybil with engineers and the CE, RD asking his scientists and roboticist to do projects they don't care about, or the CMO with chemists. Ignoring orders is a reason for demotion, not administrative action. Acting without head permission is an IC issue, an admin PM for such isn't even remotely justifiable. Even if it were, I don't really get why I'm meant to reasonably expect the HoS to discuss a punishment for one of his buddies for tiding the armory when he himself did this roundstart to "shotgunmax". It's a bad faith administrative decision to go through logs like that, see the HoS's actions, see my prior attempt at asking them to leave and explain their emergency and seeing how well that went, and then have the cheek to ask why I didn't try to talk with that same HoS about it. From what prior interactions do I have grounds to believe he's capable of a civil conversation and fair decision making? There were none.