/tg/Station 13

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=33983

what the hell is going on man

AwkwardStereo wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2023 11:25 pm viewtopic.php?f=7&t=33983

what the hell is going on man

Sooooo true bestie

?

What's a good headmin term without a mysterious blacklist or two?

im sure there was a decent reason, but i suppose the seemingly random nature of a user just being obliterated tends to pique curiosity in people

this is the one kind of ban where it’s not our place to dig further

((still looked at the scrubby logs from their last round tho out of curiousity when i first saw the blacklist on pub bans))

The reason is unlikely to be revealed unless MSO chooses to do so, and the matter is such that I doubt he would then furnish all that much more information than I have.

An important consideration when picking your headmin votes every 6 months is recognising that they will, over the course of their term, be privy to a grand array of information as server leadership that no other people on the server have.
Unfortunately much that happens headmin-side is a black box process. Over any 6 month term we're trusted with a lot of information in confidence, assuming that we're responsible adults that can handle it.

I feel that everyone should have the right to know what they are accused of at the very least. Even if its in private he is owed a single explanation and then can remain on the blacklist.

what justice said

additionally, when was the last time MSO entertained the idea of an unblacklisting? not asking out of any otherwise intent, just curious

JusticeGoat wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 12:40 am I feel that everyone should have the right to know what they are accused of at the very least. Even if its in private he is owed a single explanation and then can remain on the blacklist.

It is entirely possible that Saren was told why he was blacklisted and thinks appealing the ban while lying about it will drum up enough support to cause a problem.

This should be handled entirely privately. It's an exceptionally personal matter and shouldn't be publicized

This is not the type of thread for a nut. Let's go allergy-free and lock this one.

Amen

Can anyone even confirm that Seren has been told what the reasoning was?

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 12:52 am

JusticeGoat wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 12:40 am I feel that everyone should have the right to know what they are accused of at the very least. Even if its in private he is owed a single explanation and then can remain on the blacklist.

It is entirely possible that Saren was told why he was blacklisted and thinks appealing the ban while lying about it will drum up enough support to cause a problem.

bro what the hell

Bawhoppennn wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 1:06 am This is not the type of thread for a nut. Let's go allergy-free and lock this one.

I'm going to let the thread run for a day or two, but I don't expect much to happen in that time at all as far as this is concerned.

Fikou wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 1:41 am

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 12:52 am

JusticeGoat wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 12:40 am I feel that everyone should have the right to know what they are accused of at the very least. Even if its in private he is owed a single explanation and then can remain on the blacklist.

It is entirely possible that Saren was told why he was blacklisted and thinks appealing the ban while lying about it will drum up enough support to cause a problem.

bro what the hell

I'm not sure what you even mean by this? He brings up a point, that maybe the person was talked to?

JusticeGoat wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 1:51 am

Fikou wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 1:41 am
bro what the hell

I'm not sure what you even mean by this? He brings up a point, that maybe the person was talked to?

He doesn't know either way but assumes maliciousness. Unless someone in the knows confirms Seren already knows what happened, why even presume this is some attempt to garner sympathy?

kinnebian wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 12:46 am what justice said

additionally, when was the last time MSO entertained the idea of an unblacklisting? not asking out of any otherwise intent, just curious

2018 - viewtopic.php?f=7&t=18094#p417012

Beardbeard was blacklisted and it was lifted because the type of stuff he did just doesn't fit in with a blacklisting, although it was deservant of a server ban. So in terms of actually forgiving someone from the black list that would be the most recent. There's more recent ones where the appealer proved they didn't do whatever they did to deserve a blacklist such as goofball

How do these threads always come back to 2beard somehow

Bawhoppennn wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 1:06 am This is not the type of thread for a nut. Let's go allergy-free and lock this one.

I agree

NecromancerAnne wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 2:00 am

JusticeGoat wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 1:51 am

Fikou wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 1:41 am
bro what the hell

I'm not sure what you even mean by this? He brings up a point, that maybe the person was talked to?

He doesn't know either way but assumes maliciousness. Unless someone in the knows confirms Seren already knows what happened, why even presume this is some attempt to garner sympathy?

I'm not presuming anything. I'm saying it's a possibility. I don't know Saren enough to say either way is possible.

I assume it's the usual discord kitten turns out to be a minor resulting in a complete and total ratio for user moment.

ps this is why I don't respond to dm's seriously

also ten dollars says it's manuel server or discord related drama.

Talking to each other instead of playing the game was a mistake, as were metacords.
Return to IRC. Do it, u won't.

Also yeah lock this

rejecting the buttery salty popcorn this thread will create is cowardice POTATOE

oranges wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 2:20 am also ten dollars says it's manuel server or discord related drama.

They have been long banned from both mannycord and tgcord.

but yes, they were a manuel player.

Anyone who wants this thread locked is an empty poster and a coward. 'Reported incident' + existing -cord bans give you a good outline of what happened anyways.
Though my bet is the manuelcord ban was firstly for being a meanie to someone's static

Capsandi wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 4:44 am Anyone who wants this thread locked is an empty poster and a coward. 'Reported incident' + existing -cord bans give you a good outline of what happened anyways.
Though my bet is the manuelcord ban was firstly for being a meanie to someone's static

He insulted Stargate SG-1 - Instant death in the many eyes of the Stoned One.

Can the admins confirm Saren has been spoken to directly about this matter?

I'm lookin' at the pfps in this thread and I'm thinking we might be back.

We are so back.

Also this dude definitely knows what he did no doubt about that. Can tell just by his prose.

Timberpoes wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 12:14 am The reason is unlikely to be revealed unless MSO chooses to do so, and the matter is such that I doubt he would then furnish all that much more information than I have.

An important consideration when picking your headmin votes every 6 months is recognising that they will, over the course of their term, be privy to a grand array of information as server leadership that no other people on the server have.
Unfortunately much that happens headmin-side is a black box process. Over any 6 month term we're trusted with a lot of information in confidence, assuming that we're responsible adults that can handle it.

Well I hope my byond password is still safe at least. It's my SSN.

In exchange for not telling us every detail of this, MSO should tell us something completely unrelated but interesting

How's that deal sound, @MSO?

There's... there's nothing here to peanut about.
Help.
This hurts my brain.
All we have is 'i am banned' and 'tough shit'.

datorangebottle wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:51 am All we have is 'i am banned' and 'tough shit'.

Which in itself is disturbing. That any one of us could be randomly blacklisted and not even know why, does that not bother you?

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 8:48 am

datorangebottle wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:51 am All we have is 'i am banned' and 'tough shit'.

Which in itself is disturbing. That any one of us could be randomly blacklisted and not even know why, does that not bother you?

I hope the banned individual was made aware of why they're shitcanned in the course of this appeal, but if the reason isn't for us to know, it isn't for us to know.

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 8:48 am

datorangebottle wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:51 am All we have is 'i am banned' and 'tough shit'.

Which in itself is disturbing. That any one of us could be randomly blacklisted and not even know why, does that not bother you?

You're not owed access to the server.
I mean shit, the gubment / corporations blacklist people from banking services, visas, and airplanes all the time without explanation.
This is the smallest thing to be concerned about in the world today.

dirk_mcblade wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:00 am

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 8:48 am

datorangebottle wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:51 am All we have is 'i am banned' and 'tough shit'.

Which in itself is disturbing. That any one of us could be randomly blacklisted and not even know why, does that not bother you?

You're not owed access to the server.
I mean shit, the gubment / corporations blacklist people from banking services, visas, and airplanes all the time without explanation.
This is the smallest thing to be concerned about in the world today.

There's no whitelist. When you open up something to the public, it is wrong to single out specific people for no reason.
I'm not saying that's what happened here, I'm presenting a rebuttal to your general assertion.

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:25 am

dirk_mcblade wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:00 am

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 8:48 am

datorangebottle wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:51 am All we have is 'i am banned' and 'tough shit'.

Which in itself is disturbing. That any one of us could be randomly blacklisted and not even know why, does that not bother you?

You're not owed access to the server.
I mean shit, the gubment / corporations blacklist people from banking services, visas, and airplanes all the time without explanation.
This is the smallest thing to be concerned about in the world today.

There's no whitelist. When you open up something to the public, it is wrong to single out specific people for no reason.
I'm not saying that's what happened here, I'm presenting a rebuttal to your general assertion.

The server is someone's property and by definition of it being property they have the right to restrict access to it. It's nice to have transparency but not a requirement.
Same principle behind you being able to invite some people into your home doesn't require you to provide a reason to keep some people out.

dirk_mcblade wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:33 am

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:25 am

dirk_mcblade wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:00 am

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 8:48 am

datorangebottle wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:51 am All we have is 'i am banned' and 'tough shit'.

Which in itself is disturbing. That any one of us could be randomly blacklisted and not even know why, does that not bother you?

You're not owed access to the server.
I mean shit, the gubment / corporations blacklist people from banking services, visas, and airplanes all the time without explanation.
This is the smallest thing to be concerned about in the world today.

There's no whitelist. When you open up something to the public, it is wrong to single out specific people for no reason.
I'm not saying that's what happened here, I'm presenting a rebuttal to your general assertion.

The server is someone's property and by definition of it being property they have the right to restrict access to it. It's nice to have transparency but not a requirement.
Same principle behind you being able to invite some people into your home doesn't require you to provide a reason to keep some people out.

If I invite a specific group of people to my home, I expect that group and only that group. That's a whitelist.
If I have an event in my home open to the public, it would be wrong of me to go around excluding specific people arbitrarily.

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:34 am

dirk_mcblade wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:33 am
The server is someone's property and by definition of it being property they have the right to restrict access to it. It's nice to have transparency but not a requirement.
Same principle behind you being able to invite some people into your home doesn't require you to provide a reason to keep some people out.

If I invite a specific group of people to my home, I expect that group and only that group. That's a whitelist.
If I have an event in my home open to the public, it would be wrong of me to go around excluding specific people arbitrarily.

That's your personal belief of right and wrong, but that's not a required set of beliefs for everyone.

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:34 am

dirk_mcblade wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:33 am

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:25 am

dirk_mcblade wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:00 am

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 8:48 am

datorangebottle wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:51 am All we have is 'i am banned' and 'tough shit'.

Which in itself is disturbing. That any one of us could be randomly blacklisted and not even know why, does that not bother you?

You're not owed access to the server.
I mean shit, the gubment / corporations blacklist people from banking services, visas, and airplanes all the time without explanation.
This is the smallest thing to be concerned about in the world today.

There's no whitelist. When you open up something to the public, it is wrong to single out specific people for no reason.
I'm not saying that's what happened here, I'm presenting a rebuttal to your general assertion.

The server is someone's property and by definition of it being property they have the right to restrict access to it. It's nice to have transparency but not a requirement.
Same principle behind you being able to invite some people into your home doesn't require you to provide a reason to keep some people out.

If I invite a specific group of people to my home, I expect that group and only that group. That's a whitelist.
If I have an event in my home open to the public, it would be wrong of me to go around excluding specific people arbitrarily.

blud what are you saying lol its your home you can kick someone out just because you dont like their haircut

Cum

dirk_mcblade wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:33 am

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:25 am

dirk_mcblade wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 11:00 am

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 8:48 am

datorangebottle wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:51 am All we have is 'i am banned' and 'tough shit'.

Which in itself is disturbing. That any one of us could be randomly blacklisted and not even know why, does that not bother you?

You're not owed access to the server.
I mean shit, the gubment / corporations blacklist people from banking services, visas, and airplanes all the time without explanation.
This is the smallest thing to be concerned about in the world today.

There's no whitelist. When you open up something to the public, it is wrong to single out specific people for no reason.
I'm not saying that's what happened here, I'm presenting a rebuttal to your general assertion.

The server is someone's property and by definition of it being property they have the right to restrict access to it. It's nice to have transparency but not a requirement.
Same principle behind you being able to invite some people into your home doesn't require you to provide a reason to keep some people out.

This is simultaneously completely true and unavoidable while also being an attitude we generally try to shy away from. MSO could run the place like your average darkrp server - he's paying the bills after all, even if the money for that comes from community donations. But the fact that we've always tried to be open and fair in all possible cases means that's not how we do things, so a "We're not even publically stating why you're irrevocably permanently unappealably banned from here" carries some hefty weight when it does in fact happen. The trust built up from years of even-handed transparency is cashed in for us believing in the team for situations like this seems to be, where saying why the banned person is banned could put another community member at risk (That's the only thing I can think of for why the team very occasionally does this)

i dont give two shits about knowing the juicy drama (as much as my curiosity is piqued) but at the very least the banned person should know why they were banned. ekat is right on principle i think. the argument of “this is MSO’s house he can do whatever he want blah blah” is not remotely interesting. yes, technically MSO can do whatever he wants, but the players of the community can generally just… choose not to play. and what’s the point if players don’t wanna play? not to make a mountain of a mole hill, obviously.

and also it really wasn’t a decision made by MSO alone, it was vetted by the headmin team. or maybe they disagree but don’t wanna play politics. but from the looks of it, it seems like timber is in favor? /shrug i don’t like the opaqueness of it all

ekaterina wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 8:48 am

datorangebottle wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 7:51 am All we have is 'i am banned' and 'tough shit'.

Which in itself is disturbing. That any one of us could be randomly blacklisted and not even know why, does that not bother you?

As long as you don't do anything borderline illegal or extremely creepy, I imagine you're fine.

E: Also, the people involved are people in the admin team that I trust implicitly, so even if you don't trust them, at least trust me when I say this is being handled properly.

We don't practice a democracy here, we have the only form of superior governance - a (sometimes) benevolent dictatorship.

It doesn't take a genius to hazard a guess at the reasoning behind witholding blacklisting details.

If it's in the interests of natural justice for an accused to know of what they are being accused of and to see the evidence against them, then the only reason why that wouldn't happen is that it's not in the interersts of some other 3rd party for that information to be revealed and the rights of the others were prioritised over the rights of the accused.

We tend to see this at play in certain evasion appeals. Because evasion is tricky to catch and the admin team has a variety of ways to find evaders that work best when players are ignorant to their existence, precise details of how we catch players evading tend not to revealed in denied evasion appeals. Almost always the interests of the admin team in not having novel or special evasion tracking techniques publicised will outweigh the banned player's right to know what the evidence is against them.

In any given 6 month term the headmin team as a whole can be privy to dox-level information and evidence, private DMs and conversations, information of a private and truly personal nature that serves no purpose being in the public domain. I know far more about the private and personal lives of certain people within our community, including outside of SS13 and tgstation as a whole, than any internet stranger has any right to. That's unfortunately a consequence of my time at the helm as a headmin last year and this year.

Blacklisting tends to fall well into that category of protected, private and personal information. The kind of behaviours and actions that can lead to a player being blacklisted tend to have stakes that are a little higher than spiting the admin team through petty ban evasion attempts. The competing interests are real and all too often can have have real-world consequences depending on which decision paths are chosen.

If there was any even remote prospect of impropriety, I think the community can trust that I would speak up about it. I leak tickets; note and ban histories; and (where necessary) asay/Discord logs in the public interest. I am a battle hardened critic of MSO, especially when it comes to arbitrary and capricious use of his position to punish or silence others. I've often publicly challenged him on his decisions and the reasonings behind his decisions including while being a headmin.

This is not one of those MSO moments. And there is more interest in withholding the full and frank details of precisely why the blacklist was placed over revealing any more than already has been.

tl;dr The only reason Saren might not have been told is if it would've harmed another player in a significant manner, so if he wasn't told, that would be why.