Detective gets noted for killing subverted borgs peanut

[ekaterina]

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=34015

Non-antagonists can do whatever they want to antagonists as per lone antagonists

Make rule 4 matter again!

[BlueMemesauce]

technically subverted borgs arent antangists

[ekaterina]

Cyborgs are conversion antags.

[datorangebottle]

If the borgs are actively delaminating the SME, leading you to think that the AI is malf, why wouldn't you kill the second cyborg? Especially when borg combat is a game of rocket tag, where whoever hits the stun button first wins?
This didn't deserve a note.

technically subverted borgs arent antangists

They were acting like antags by delamming the engine, though.

[SkeletalElite]

Whether someone is technically an antagonist is completely irrelevant. The rules clearly state that someone acting like an antag gets treated like one. Borgs delamming the SM is acting like an antag, and it's not an unreasonable assumption that they are all subverted or malf and considering an engi borg can kill you with a single click, it's absolutely a justifiable reaction to flash and kill.

[Indie-ana Jones]

Bad note. Remove it.

[datorangebottle]

kieth.PNG (7.33 KiB) Viewed 10503 times

Forum mods. Law one. Move the thread immediately.

[kinnebian]

kieth.PNG
Forum mods. Law one. Move the thread immediately.

[oranges]

>a detective inspected a borg holding a multi-tool and killed them after mistaking it for a stun arm (mixed up sprites).

skill issue lol

[TheRex9001]

Local detective mistakes sprites and kills borg over it, lol

[Vekter]

This is a weird one. On one hand, I don't think we should be punishing players for falling subject to the inherent paranoia SS13 causes because, y'know. That's the fucking point of the game. You can't trust anyone but yourself.

On the other, as I've said many times before, notes aren't a punishment. They're just a record of discussion. This really boils down to whether or not that discussion needed to happen to begin with and whether or not it's worth keeping record of it.

[Archie700]

This is a weird one. On one hand, I don't think we should be punishing players for falling subject to the inherent paranoia SS13 causes because, y'know. That's the fucking point of the game. You can't trust anyone but yourself.

On the other, as I've said many times before, notes aren't a punishment. They're just a record of discussion. This really boils down to whether or not that discussion needed to happen to begin with and whether or not it's worth keeping record of it.

This is a note of medium severity, it's going to be taken into account when further issues happen.
Notes of medium severity at the least are a record of warning. The appeal is whether the warning was valid given what happened.

[Vekter]

This is a weird one. On one hand, I don't think we should be punishing players for falling subject to the inherent paranoia SS13 causes because, y'know. That's the fucking point of the game. You can't trust anyone but yourself.

On the other, as I've said many times before, notes aren't a punishment. They're just a record of discussion. This really boils down to whether or not that discussion needed to happen to begin with and whether or not it's worth keeping record of it.

This is a note of medium severity, it's going to be taken into account when further issues happen.
Notes of medium severity at the least are a record of warning. The appeal is whether the warning was valid given what happened.

It would only ever be taken into consideration in another situation where the player killed someone for little to no valid reason. I'm not going to post their note history, but if it matters, this is the only note they've ever gotten of this kind of issue, so I doubt it'd lead to anything significant.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

Notes arent a punishment but there is a decade-long history of notes being used again and again as ammunition to prove that a player is a Bad Player who Doesnt Deserve More Chances and is On Their Way Out, implicitly or explicitly, so you can see why people are aggressive about contesting notes they believe to be misleading, incorrect, or unfair.

[Cobby]

Severity is wild west the notes should stand on their own merit vs. "well its low severity so I can put whatever".

If you kill someone by mistake your first prio should be getting them back even if it means you might miss out on catching a criminal or something. Doubly true in the scenario that he wasnt sure if they were subverted/emagged/etc. and uses the information retroactively to justify that kill.

The real metric for notes would be would I want someone to be harsher on the person if they were caught doing something of that same nature. For killing a borg simply because he oocly hallucinated a stun arm and there was another borg that was bad, then proceeded to put that person on low priority when they took them out of the game mistakenly? Absolutely makes sense to put into a note (maybe differently worded but big picture yes). Personally the focus should be on the fact he knew he made a mistake then didnt prioritize fixing it vs. making the mistake (perfectly fine to do in a game where things can happen in a moment notice).

edit: by fix i mean just taking him to robotics (maybe searching robro if he thought foul play via emag or something)

[vect0r]

“Over the past 3 months, you have gotten a note per week. Denied.”

[datorangebottle]

On the other, as I've said many times before, notes aren't a punishment. They're just a record of discussion. This really boils down to whether or not that discussion needed to happen to begin with and whether or not it's worth keeping record of it.

Notes arent a punishment but there is a decade-long history of notes being used again and again as ammunition to prove that a player is a Bad Player who Doesnt Deserve More Chances and is On Their Way Out, implicitly or explicitly, so you can see why people are aggressive about contesting notes they believe to be misleading, incorrect, or unfair.

Notes are objectively treated like a punishment and constantly used to justify them. I see no reason to continue the 'notes are not a punishment' narrative for as long as this continues to be the case. Notes are a punishment.

[Cobby]

It’s a stupid semantics argument in either case unless you are going to argue notes shouldn’t be given out unless you would believe they did something worthy of a punishment aka kick/ban in the first place, which ACTUALLY defeats the point of manual inputting of notes which is to track repeated behavior that explicitly WOULD NOT warrant a kick/ban on its own (aka line towing). Admins can’t be online 24/7 so notes are a way for other admins to know what kind of behavior the person has been involved with in the past without having to ask around to see if you’re a repeated shitler or not every instance with an admin you Previously did not interact with.

The alternative would be hidden logs of your behavior admins would have in like private notepad which wouldn’t be visible to you so I personally am quite glad people can see how their behavior is being reflected and can push back on unfair viewing of situations.

was getting deja vu glad i could bring up a blast from the epast

[Vekter]

On the other, as I've said many times before, notes aren't a punishment. They're just a record of discussion. This really boils down to whether or not that discussion needed to happen to begin with and whether or not it's worth keeping record of it.

Notes arent a punishment but there is a decade-long history of notes being used again and again as ammunition to prove that a player is a Bad Player who Doesnt Deserve More Chances and is On Their Way Out, implicitly or explicitly, so you can see why people are aggressive about contesting notes they believe to be misleading, incorrect, or unfair.

Notes are objectively treated like a punishment and constantly used to justify them. I see no reason to continue the 'notes are not a punishment' narrative for as long as this continues to be the case. Notes are a punishment.

This is objectively not the case, they are often conflated as such because doing something bad can get you a note. We often give people neutral or positive notes for any number of reasons but the primary use of notes is to record that we've talked to somebody about something so that if they do it again we have record of it.

[Kendrickorium]

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=34015

Non-antagonists can do whatever they want to antagonists as per lone antagonists

Make rule 4 matter again!

>Detective gets noted for killing subverted borgs peanut

incredibly deceptive, unfunny, low effort bait thread title

did you start playing here after you got fired from Buzzfeed?

[WineAllWine]

I'm gonna start rating peanut titles.
2/10

[ekaterina]

incredibly deceptive, unfunny, low effort bait thread title

Deceptive? It is 300% factually accurate. A detective killed a subverted borg and got noted for killing the subverted borg.

[Kendrickorium]

incredibly deceptive, unfunny, low effort bait thread title

Deceptive? It is 300% factually accurate. A detective killed a subverted borg and got noted for killing the subverted borg.

yes yes, absolute shame about buzzfeed

[datorangebottle]

Notes are objectively treated like a punishment and constantly used to justify them. I see no reason to continue the 'notes are not a punishment' narrative for as long as this continues to be the case. Notes are a punishment.

This is objectively not the case, they are often conflated as such because doing something bad can get you a note. We often give people neutral or positive notes for any number of reasons but the primary use of notes is to record that we've talked to somebody about something so that if they do it again we have record of it.

Positive notes are extremely rare, and are the exception to the rule. Neutral notes just tracking information are also rare- I technically have one of these that marks receipt of an antag token, so they do exist. Far more often, they're used as neutral or worse notes that track that a player was talked to or additionally punished for something, which can and will be used against you when you make a mistake later.

From an admin's perspective, they might be notes. From a player-facing perspective, they're part of whatever punishment you receive, a black stain on your record that WILL be brought up at some point. Something that an admin can point at to tell you that you've made this mistake in the past, so you're getting more shit for it this time(even if it's greyed out).

They're commonly used to justify an appeal denial or upholding otherwise excessive punishment. Even you do this, on occasion, so it bothers me that you push this false narrative that notes are not punishments.

Admin guidelines are not what defines a note as a punishment; it's how notes are used.

Here's some recent times notes were used for the purposes I mentioned above; emphasis mine.

► Show Spoiler

Honestly going in to this, if you had a clean enough history and stuff I was considering giving you a nice soft cap of a week for your actions if it seemed like it was just gross stupidity and not really thinking about things. But then I read these additional log segments in more detail, particularly the round start OOC. You know exactly what the risks are. In fact by the sounds of it you got away with something in the previous round that you should have been bwoinked for. Unless you can offer some explanation?

As such, my feeling has shifted, I have no intention of reducing the two week ban, I suspect you may have gotten away with something more here, but for certain you had direct experience of the consequences and knew exactly what could happen, and it did.

Used to justify further punishment. Guy got slapped harder because he had a note history vs not having one.

Nope, denied.

You have an incredibly similar note from rageguy (that also ended in an appeal and was also upheld, so I'm pretty confident in this one):

Used to justify appeal denial. I've already commented extensively on this ban and how/why I disagree, so I'm not getting into it again here.

Ban reason: Banned from the server permanently - Due to past notes and actions (involving mostly wordless attacking, even as a non-antag, proceeded by server switches when things go bad), I've decided that a permanent server ban is needed. Go to the forums when you're ready to look over the rules again and ask for an unban

Used to justify a permanent ban.

Named the Bagil station a series of racial slurs. Used the cross-station announcements to attack vekter once again. You've been talked to about this. Your note history is a mile long, and after your probation you've racked up 9 notes in 29 days. Please appeal when you're mature enough to play here.

Used to justify further punishment. This guy absolutely sucks, but the sheer number of notes being used against the player as opposed to their severity makes me raise an eyebrow.

I'm not saying these people don't suck and didn't deserve to be banned at some point. I'm saying that notes are punishments, and I'm tired of people saying that they aren't.

[WineAllWine]

Snip .

I agree completely, notes are (with the positive and neutral ones excluded) definitely a punishment. I don't understand how an admin could argue otherwise, especially such a senior and well-regarded admin as vekter

[Vekter]

Snip .

I agree completely, notes are (with the positive and neutral ones excluded) definitely a punishment. I don't understand how an admin could argue otherwise, especially such a senior and well-regarded admin as vekter

Because I don't know about you, but I don't ban someone just strictly off the sheer number of notes they have, only if there's specifically a series of notes pointing to a pattern of behavior.

[Cobby]

if we are REALLY going to have the notes are a punishment meme argument again...

They aren’t a punishment in and of itself but they certainly affect the point at which you do receive punishments. You can still play every role in the game uninterrupted with a note unlike a ban/kick, so it’s either not a punishment at all or a very shitty one.

Ive also said this before but there is no "do not give notes out at all" alternative, you either live with the fact that notes will be used for logging grey behavior or you accept the reality that there will be AT BEST a mental "notes" page that you have no way to contest for future admins to view and make good judgement calls on. Extensive noting is the best case because you can at least see what is being said about you, less noting just means you get discussions in admin channels you cant defend yourself from. Notes are far from a punishment in that regard, they keep the admin thoughts on you transparent and give YOU oversight as to whether they should be contested.

[ekaterina]

[thing that makes future punishments harsher] is not a punishment

The nerve to call datorangebottle's argument a meme and then proceed to say something like this...
The only meme argument here is yours.

It's a negative condition imposed upon you by an admin as the result of a perceived rule break. It is a textbook example of a punishment.

[WineAllWine]

Snip .

I agree completely, notes are (with the positive and neutral ones excluded) definitely a punishment. I don't understand how an admin could argue otherwise, especially such a senior and well-regarded admin as vekter

Because I don't know about you, but I don't ban someone just strictly off the sheer number of notes they have, only if there's specifically a series of notes pointing to a pattern of behavior.

Obviously I don't and as far as I can tell we have similar levels for banning. But they do influence future punishment and so they are themselves a punishment. Someone tiding too much who has 10 notes about tiding will probably eat a ban and someone tiding too much with no notes will probably get a note. That difference in treatment is the punishment. I don't understand how you have this cognitive dissonance of them not being puniahments

[iain0]

Honestly going in to this, if you had a clean enough history and stuff I was considering giving you a nice soft cap of a week for your actions if it seemed like it was just gross stupidity and not really thinking about things. But then I read these additional log segments in more detail, particularly the round start OOC. You know exactly what the risks are. In fact by the sounds of it you got away with something in the previous round that you should have been bwoinked for. Unless you can offer some explanation?

As such, my feeling has shifted, I have no intention of reducing the two week ban, I suspect you may have gotten away with something more here, but for certain you had direct experience of the consequences and knew exactly what could happen, and it did.

Used to justify further punishment. Guy got slapped harder because he had a note history vs not having one.

Factually untrue, they got "slapped harder" because of the OOC chat that indicated they'd done roughly similar things the previous round also resulting in a massive blowout. I didn't really look at the notes I don't think, the point of the notes comment is if it seemed like gross stupidty / not really thinking about things then, notes would be used to see if there was a history of unintended bombings. However that never really came to matter because the OOC chat really sunk the appeal for me.

( I almost certainly looked at the notes at some point, I just dont have much memory of it, I ballparked the 14 day ban as the 'if the explanation sucks' appeal contingency and the OOC log made me leave it as is since there's no real 'oopsie' the 2nd event round )

[toemas]

Chimpston, after seeing an Engineering Cyborg dragging a beepsky sabotage the supermatter, and making the observation that telecomms were disabled, was suddenly approached by an Engineering Cyborg dragging a beepsky. Anyone sane in this situation would have immediately killed the cyborg. If they didnt, then the cyborg would have immediately killed them. What a terrible note

[Cobby]

[thing that makes future punishments harsher] is not a punishment

The nerve to call datorangebottle's argument a meme and then proceed to say something like this...
The only meme argument here is yours.

It's a negative condition imposed upon you by an admin as the result of a perceived rule break. It is a textbook example of a punishment.

its a meme argument because the argument is just a semantics game and gets away from the real point of whether youre actually going to suggest warning-esque notes shouldnt exist (well at least to the player, theyre going to exist in some form regardless of how that argument goes).

I am not above not arguing though just to cause mischief, so ill say its not a negative condition, as you can play the game unimpeded and do everything you could do before you received the note barring the rules that have not changed because you received said note. You dont lose anything unless you want to argue you lose the ability to get the "well this is your first time" get out of jail card, in which case ok fine you win smilingimp. If it is a punishment, it is the worst one ive seen.

[RedBaronFlyer]

Notes aren't a punishment, they just cause you to get more severe punishments later on if you have a history of notes, even if the incident isn't related to your note.

[Timberpoes]

Lol.

Non-positive notes are a punishment.

If you want an example of a not-punishment, that would be a verbal warning instead of a note. If your note wasn't intended to be a punishment and instead a """record of behaviour""" or """record of an incident that happened""", make it expire so at some future point of time it drops off the player's visible record. If you can't justify an expiring note, it's a genuine punishment.

Admins hate it when players try to weasel their way around or out of the rules. Players hate it when admins do the same thing. Don't be pedants.

[conrad]

Notes are punishments.

They can range from very, very minor, lame-o punishments that invariably do very little in the long run to damning records that result in a very, very severe ban if whatever happened happens a second time. But they're punishments nonetheless.

HOWEVER

If you get noted, nothing happens. You got reminded that you broke a rule, or acted like a dick (which is breaking a rule), and a future admin now knows about this if you do it again. You're not banned. If you disagree, appeal. If you appeal gets denied (assuming you asked to talk to the managers), that means four people trained to spot this sort of behaviour unanimously agree you fucked up.

When I talk about entitlement in people, this is what I mean.

[sinfulbliss]

Notes are punishments.

They can range from very, very minor, lame-o punishments that invariably do very little in the long run to damning records that result in a very, very severe ban if whatever happened happens a second time. But they're punishments nonetheless.

HOWEVER

If you get noted, nothing happens. You got reminded that you broke a rule, or acted like a dick (which is breaking a rule), and a future admin now knows about this if you do it again. You're not banned. If you disagree, appeal. If you appeal gets denied (assuming you asked to talk to the managers), that means four people trained to spot this sort of behaviour unanimously agree you fucked up.

When I talk about entitlement in people, this is what I mean.

this would be what you'd get if you asked ChatGPT what it thought about notes and gave it a slightly edgy flavored input

[conrad]

Notes are punishments.

They can range from very, very minor, lame-o punishments that invariably do very little in the long run to damning records that result in a very, very severe ban if whatever happened happens a second time. But they're punishments nonetheless.

HOWEVER

If you get noted, nothing happens. You got reminded that you broke a rule, or acted like a dick (which is breaking a rule), and a future admin now knows about this if you do it again. You're not banned. If you disagree, appeal. If you appeal gets denied (assuming you asked to talk to the managers), that means four people trained to spot this sort of behaviour unanimously agree you fucked up.

When I talk about entitlement in people, this is what I mean.

this would be what you'd get if you asked ChatGPT what it thought about notes and gave it a slightly edgy flavored input

I appreciate your attempt to contribute to the discussion, but it seems your comment reflects a profound misunderstanding of the topic at hand. Your analogy to ChatGPT's input is amusing, albeit misguided. It's quite intriguing how you manage to convey a sense of edginess while simultaneously lacking any substantial insight or coherent argument. Perhaps next time you could invest more effort in formulating a thoughtful response that contributes meaningfully to the conversation. Best of luck in refining your communication skills!

[NecromancerAnne]

On the other, as I've said many times before, notes aren't a punishment. They're just a record of discussion. This really boils down to whether or not that discussion needed to happen to begin with and whether or not it's worth keeping record of it.

Notes that upon reflection should not have been placed in the first place should not be retained. I do think it can create a bias in interpretation of someones character. Patterned behavior that isn't necessarily rules breaking, but is done excessively or particularly disruptive, can be something someone is punished for, and a note is one of the first ways to establish patterns. If a note is placed, an admin felt it was significant enough that future admins should judge similar incidents with a greater degree of scrutiny. You and I both know that, as we've both been in the system.

As a result, players will view it as something they've now got to tread glass over least this get called into question again, even if they believe they were not in the wrong at the time. A simple mistake that isn't inherently rules breaking costing them the opportunity to make future mistakes is going to make anyone anxious. We're not robots, people fuck up, and notes remain relevant for 6 months. That's a long time for some of our most frequent players.

I don't like the trend currently of not removing notes, only editing them for succinctness. I think it is leaving a lot of mess for future admins to sift through, and seems mostly as a convenience for quickly closing appeals.

They're not weightless, and I think any admin should be careful when placing them and willing to retract them when pressed.

[WineAllWine]

and notes remain relevant for 6 months.

I don't think thats true? notes are notes, and except for expiring ones they're here forever.

[NecromancerAnne]

You shouldn't be looking at notes beyond six months on principle of the fact that it ism't enough time between incidents to not be able to establish a pattern from. If someone is only making a similar mistake every six months, that is a good thing usually. Imagine looking back into someones note history and digging something out from two years ago.

Imagine if an admin told me 'hey, you have a note from 2018 where you used ooc information as a revenant in a new life, so in this instance where [you did the thing as revenant], you can't be trusted to be a revenant so I'll be ghostrole banning you'. That'd be fucking ludicrous. There has been so much administrative churn since then that understanding the context of how and why that happened is beyond the admins comprehension unless that exact same admin had been sitting on that note for 5 years and has come back for a round two. Some notes can even be placed due to policy that no longer exists anymore in the modern era. You really wade into a minefield going too far back.

You may notice in the interface while looking at someones notes that some of them are greyed out or faded based on how old it is. That's why. Only admins see that, since it is a helpful visual guide for what to focus on.

You certainly could try and use older notes, but you somewhat undermine your integrity doing so and I think you'll need a very good reason for why you are arguing on that basis.

[WineAllWine]

You shouldn't be looking at notes beyond six months on principle of the fact that it ism't enough time between incidents to not be able to establish a pattern from. If someone is only making a similar mistake every six months, that is a good thing usually. Imagine looking back into someones note history and digging something out from two years ago.

Imagine if an admin told me 'hey, you have a note from 2018 where you used ooc information as a revenant in a new life, so in this instance where [you did the thing as revenant], you can't be trusted to be a revenant so I'll be ghostrole banning you'. That'd be fucking ludicrous. There has been so much administrative churn since then that understanding the context of how and why that happened is beyond the admins comprehension unless that exact same admin had been sitting on that note for 5 years and has come back for a round two. Some notes can even be placed due to policy that no longer exists anymore in the modern era. You really wade into a minefield going too far back.

You may notice in the interface while looking at someones notes that some of them are greyed out or faded based on how old it is. That's why. Only admins see that, since it is a helpful visual guide for what to focus on.

You certainly could try and use older notes, but you somewhat undermine your integrity doing so and I think you'll need a very good reason for why you are arguing on that basis.

This isn't how it works. Every decision is on a case-by-case basis. Maybe a note from 18 months ago is relevant. It probably isn't but I'll look at them. I agree with your example that would be ludicrous. But a note like "was creepy towards another player and asked them about their feet". If that happened again I would take the old note into account

[NecromancerAnne]

This isn't how it works. Every decision is on a case-by-case basis. Maybe a note from 18 months ago is relevant. It probably isn't but I'll look at them. I agree with your example that would be ludicrous. But a note like "was creepy towards another player and asked them about their feet". If that happened again I would take the old note into account

I can agree with particular notes being worth valuing even down the line IF they are relevant to the rules where we have zero tolerance approaches. Rule 8 and such. I definitely should have clarified that myself. Those are zero tolerance for a good reason.

And even then, I'll clarify further and say that it isn't so much as a 'shouldn't', but 'do so with caution'. Because, as you say, all in context. And as I said, it should be very carefully deliberated as to why you're choosing to draw from an older note. You should be able to reason all actions you take as an admin, and using older notes is definitely one where you need to argue with for why you feel it relevant due to the aforementioned establishment of patterns. Admin work with regards to historical behaviors from a player is establishing patterns and addressing the behaviors to course correct for the betterment of the server and probably that player as well. That is why notes are placed at all.

[conrad]

A lot of this arguing would not exist if we didn't assume the other person had a dented skull and/or if we didn't use so many extremes all the time. But that's just me.

kermit_sip.png

[WineAllWine]

This isn't how it works. Every decision is on a case-by-case basis. Maybe a note from 18 months ago is relevant. It probably isn't but I'll look at them. I agree with your example that would be ludicrous. But a note like "was creepy towards another player and asked them about their feet". If that happened again I would take the old note into account

I can agree with particular notes being worth valuing even down the line IF they are relevant to the rules where we have zero tolerance approaches. Rule 8 and such. I definitely should have clarified that myself. Those are zero tolerance for a good reason.

And even then, I'll clarify further and say that it isn't so much as a 'shouldn't', but 'do so with caution'. Because, as you say, all in context. And as I said, it should be very carefully deliberated as to why you're choosing to draw from an older note. You should be able to reason all actions you take as an admin, and using older notes is definitely one where you need to argue with for why you feel it relevant due to the aforementioned establishment of patterns. Admin work with regards to historical behaviors from a player is establishing patterns and addressing the behaviors to course correct for the betterment of the server and probably that player as well. That is why notes are placed at all.

yeah agree with that, thanks for adding the nuance

[Archie700]

While talking with someone about the appeal, I realized I was missing a critical piece of the puzzle, the fight logs between Chimpston and the borgs.
I looked through them and...well...

Code: Select all

09:25:56	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) transferred reagents (/datum/reagent/medicine/c2/multiver (5u, 0.75 purity) and /datum/reagent/medicine/granibitaluri (5u, 1 purity)) from the multiver pill (10u) to [biological battery]	(157, 100, 2)	Medbay Lobby
09:25:59	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) transferred reagents (/datum/reagent/medicine/c2/multiver (5u, 0.75 purity) and /datum/reagent/medicine/granibitaluri (5u, 1 purity)) from the multiver pill (10u) to [biological battery]	(157, 100, 2)	Medbay Lobby
09:27:02	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) transferred reagents (/datum/reagent/medicine/c2/multiver (5u, 0.75 purity) and /datum/reagent/medicine/granibitaluri (5u, 1 purity)) from the multiver pill (10u) to [biological battery]	(97, 117, 2)	Engineering
09:27:28	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) transferred reagents (/datum/reagent/medicine/sal_acid (10u, 0.845365 purity) and /datum/reagent/medicine/oxandrolone (10u, 0.940458 purity)) from Brute/Burn (two max) patch to Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) (NEWHP: 34.1)	(76, 115, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:43	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) flashed idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with the flash (NEWHP: 100)	(77, 114, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:49	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) flashed idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with the flash (NEWHP: 100)	(77, 114, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:54	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) fired at [reinforced wall] with .38 bullet from Supermatter Engine Room	(76, 114, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:54	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) shot idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet (NEWHP: 75)	(76, 114, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:55	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) fired at [status display] with .38 bullet from Supermatter Engine Room	(76, 114, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:55	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) shot idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet (NEWHP: 50)	(76, 114, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:56	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) fired at [status display] with .38 bullet from Supermatter Engine Room	(76, 114, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:56	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) shot idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet (NEWHP: 25)	(76, 114, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:58	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) flashed idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with the flash (NEWHP: 25)	(77, 113, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:59	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) fired at [floor] with .38 bullet from Supermatter Engine Room	(78, 112, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:59	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) shot idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet (NEWHP: 0)	(78, 112, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:59	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) fired at idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet from Supermatter Engine Room (NEWHP: 0)	(78, 112, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:28:00	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) shot idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet (NEWHP: -25)	(78, 112, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:28:00	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) fired at idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet from Supermatter Engine Room (NEWHP: -25)	(78, 112, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:28:00	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) shot idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet (NEWHP: -50)	(78, 112, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:28:06	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) fired at [floor] with .38 bullet from Supermatter Engine Room	(78, 113, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:28:06	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) shot idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet (NEWHP: -75)	(78, 113, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:28:07	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) fired at [floor] with .38 bullet from Supermatter Engine Room	(78, 113, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:28:07	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) shot idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet (NEWHP: -100)	(78, 113, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:28:07	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) fired at [floor] with .38 bullet from Supermatter Engine Room	(78, 113, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:28:07	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) shot idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet (NEWHP: -100)	(78, 113, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room
09:29:03	ATTACK	Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) grabbed *no key*/(Nano Transcend) passive grab (NEWHP: -100)	(77, 114, 2)	Supermatter Engine Room

Draw your conclusions.

[Vekter]

Can we give Archie like a pseudo-admin role or something? Fucking incredibly based, grabbing logs and helping us like this.

[ekaterina]

If your note wasn't intended to be a punishment and instead a """record of behaviour""" or """record of an incident that happened""", make it expire so at some future point of time it drops off the player's visible record. If you can't justify an expiring note, it's a genuine punishment.

Is chad headmin Timberpoes about to issue a ruling mandating that all notes should have expiration dates?
Wubli BTFO.

I looked through them and...well... Draw your conclusions.

How is this critical? The appellant won the fight, old news. Borg fights are won or lost in one click, also old news.

[Archie700]

If your note wasn't intended to be a punishment and instead a """record of behaviour""" or """record of an incident that happened""", make it expire so at some future point of time it drops off the player's visible record. If you can't justify an expiring note, it's a genuine punishment.

Is chad headmin Timberpoes about to issue a ruling mandating that all notes should have expiration dates?
Wubli BTFO.

I looked through them and...well... Draw your conclusions.

How is this critical? The appellant won the fight, old news. Borg fights are won or lost in one click, also old news.

Chimpston had stunned the borg beforehand and had time to check what the borg was holding. A 10 second window.

09:27:43 ATTACK Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) flashed idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with the flash (NEWHP: 100) (77, 114, 2) Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:49 ATTACK Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) flashed idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with the flash (NEWHP: 100) (77, 114, 2) Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:54 ATTACK Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) fired at [reinforced wall] with .38 bullet from Supermatter Engine Room (76, 114, 2) Supermatter Engine Room
09:27:54 ATTACK Chimpston/(Krakaahsje Vitche II) shot idontcarear/(Nano Transcend) with .38 bullet (NEWHP: 75) (76, 114, 2) Supermatter Engine Room

[Vekter]

If you want an example of a not-punishment, that would be a verbal warning instead of a note. If your note wasn't intended to be a punishment and instead a """record of behaviour""" or """record of an incident that happened""", make it expire so at some future point of time it drops off the player's visible record. If you can't justify an expiring note, it's a genuine punishment.

Timber, it already does that. They stay there for record keeping purposes but they're hidden and (as far as I know) we've always told people to either not take into account or completely ignore those notes unless they're hyper relevant/serious (like rule 8 breaks or potential blacklist material).

E: For non-admins, this is what it looks like:

[WineAllWine]

If you want an example of a not-punishment, that would be a verbal warning instead of a note. If your note wasn't intended to be a punishment and instead a """record of behaviour""" or """record of an incident that happened""", make it expire so at some future point of time it drops off the player's visible record. If you can't justify an expiring note, it's a genuine punishment.

Timber, it already does that. They stay there for record keeping purposes but they're hidden and (as far as I know) we've always told people to either not take into account or completely ignore those notes unless they're hyper relevant/serious (like rule 8 breaks or potential blacklist material).

E: For non-admins, this is what it looks like:

Is this just an excuse to show off you're one of the twelve prettiest girls?