Supernutter Ruined by Singulor Vote

[DrAmazing343]

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=35927

I got to witness this one live, it was genuinely fucking peak. We had over half the crew sitting in front of the damn thing eating rads to watch it delam with popcorn— Even if the rules say one thing, sometimes, the heart should 100% say another.

[Sightld2]

Deja vu, I've just been in this place before, higher on the beat-

viewtopic.php?p=706914#p706914

[Featherfield]

Fun is not allowed on ss13 people should know this by now

[Tegun]

Letting this slip would be very much a rule 0 thing. Other than that, it's hard to conduct an in-game vote which really prompts everyone involved in the round. From IC point getting the entire crew on it should be enough, but aiming to end the round like that would be dickish to people who aren't in the crew like certain antagonists or ghost roles, people whose existence you can't even be sure about. Practically impossible for a player to say everyone was fine with it. The appeal does not seem to give any new information, argument is still that plenty of people enjoyed it but it was resolved based on the existence of a person who did not enjoy it. The risk taken was calculated but maths is hard.

[DaBoss]

Direct consequence of making accidental singuloose borderline impossible. People thirst for singularity carnage and they simply ain't getting their fix.

[Higgin]

this is an amazing thread title btw

Letting this slip would be very much a rule 0 thing. Other than that, it's hard to conduct an in-game vote which really prompts everyone involved in the round. From IC point getting the entire crew on it should be enough, but aiming to end the round like that would be dickish to people who aren't in the crew like certain antagonists or ghost roles, people whose existence you can't even be sure about. Practically impossible for a player to say everyone was fine with it. The appeal does not seem to give any new information, argument is still that plenty of people enjoyed it but it was resolved based on the existence of a person who did not enjoy it. The risk taken was calculated but maths is hard.

boils it down beautifully.

as a nerd for ethics and political theory, this jumps to my mind:

1. running the vote to begin with on Bmon's part was charitable and gave the fair opportunity for everyone who saw it and thought to answer to say "this was cool and I don't mind it" - Bmon didn't just assume nobody would have an issue with changing and ignoring the rules for the round
2. when that concrete person said no, they didn't want it, Bmon protected them and took action that vect0r even acknowledged in the ticket.

everyone's got a claim to the same game laid out under the rules. nobody wants to be told that their rulebreaking loss (of time, effort, antag roll)* is justified because everyone else had a good time. that means you can't justify doing something bad to someone else just because everyone else gets a kick out of it - sometimes the rules mean protecting the minority from the majority.

the ends (getting to do a funny singulo on a dead shift that most of the crew was vibing with and wanted to see happen) don't justify the means (fucking over somebody else who didn't expect to get their round cut short by deliberate grand sabotage by a non-antag in command)

if everyone agreed, whatever, but somebody didn't. nobody wants to be that 1:20 vote. you want somebody with the backbone to stay by the rules and give you their equal consideration if you end up in that position on anything;

or, if you think nonantags should be able to do this in whatever round as long as they pass a certain margin in a vote, you want to change the rules.

the poll results should not make you feel worse about the ban, imo - I don't understand vect0r doubling back on it here after their ticket with bmon. I hope anyone reading back into this (maybe with a bit of help from these posts in this thread, like Pink's referring to the last similar ban [which was dropped to 2 weeks after appeal from a perma. not 3 days before like vect0r's almost done with at this point?*]) gets the sense of two things:

1. this was not an easy call to make. bmon didn't do the easier things here. and
2. say what you will about the best methods or time for the crime (if any) here, but it was the right call to make.

i respect vect0r having a playlist and singularity pfp ready for this, but I come away with even more for bmon in how they've handled this so far. will watch the appeal

[vaporwhisp]

Punishing vect0r for this goes against Democracy, which means Bmon is a bug sympathizer. Deplorable.

[Timberpoes]

The way this usually goes is the player goes in knowing they'll be banned and being banned is worth it.

In my years here I've seen this same incident handled a few classic ways.

Route 1 is the player reaching out to admins to try and get the thing approved - or at least to limit the ban length when they inevitably do it. In days long past I've watched a clown barter with the admin in ahelps for how long they'd be banned if they threw themselves into a singulo and it broke containment. They accepted the banning terms and then did it.

Route 2 is the admin. I myself have just said SS13 moment where people were RPing it out or seemed to enjoy the spectacle. I don't really care if you're an antag or a non-antag, all I want is more classic and memorable SS13 shifts. If you make a classic or memorable SS13 shift then I don't give a rat's ass about the rules cuz the rules are there to maximise the chances of classic and memorable SS13 shifts.

Route 3 is when everything fails. The player does the bannable thing and doesn't accept their ban. The admin sees the bannable thing and doesn't exercise their discretion.

Sometimes you have to accept that a ban can be the consequence and awho before you do something dumb to see which admin type you have online - Joker admin or Batman admin.

[AsbestosSniffer]

The appeal does not seem to give any new information, argument is still that plenty of people enjoyed it but it was resolved based on the existence of a person who did not enjoy it.

That player's byond username? WetBlanket.

[iwishforducks]

this is clearly a

rule 10 issue

10. Losing is part of the game.
Your character will frequently die, sometimes without even a possibility of avoiding it. Events will often be out of your control. No matter how good or prepared you are, sometimes you just lose.

[TheRex9001]

If it was funny why appeal it

[warbluke]

They can remove the Particle Accelerator, they can replace the engine, but they can't kill the idea.

[dendydoom]

sorry but i personally don't really care for a vote unless it's 100% of the server. roleplay is king and a vote is not IC. i know that's me being a fussy killjoy but to me running a vote is not enough to do something that ends the round on its own.

i would like to see more of the rp surrounding this event. was there build up? IC reason for doing it? did it create a good story?

these are the things i'm looking for when i'm thumbing for the rule 0 or secret rule card.

of course, like others have said, eating the ban for this kind of thing after doing it anyway because you felt so strongly about it earns you the respect of players and admins alike.

[conrad]

roleplay is king and a vote is not IC.

It honestly boils down to this.

"I wanna do a vote to do something that will destroy the station, who's with me!"
"Won't we die?"
"Uh, yeah, what of it?"

Bruthur even if you're an antag in Manuel (unless you're an unrestricted antag I know get out of my head) you can't do that.

[dragomagol]

sorry but i personally don't really care for a vote unless it's 100% of the server. roleplay is king and a vote is not IC. i know that's me being a fussy killjoy but to me running a vote is not enough to do something that ends the round on its own.

i would like to see more of the rp surrounding this event. was there build up? IC reason for doing it? did it create a good story?

these are the things i'm looking for when i'm thumbing for the rule 0 or secret rule card.

of course, like others have said, eating the ban for this kind of thing after doing it anyway because you felt so strongly about it earns you the respect of players and admins alike.

Fully agree. You got 3 days for causing a massive round-ending event. If you feel justified in it, take this slap on the wrist with grace. And if you don't want to get banned for destroying the entire station as a non-antag, don't do it.

[TypicalRig]

anyone competent enough to make a singulo is competent enough to make it on another z-level with a beacon attached so everyone can consensually watch it at their own risk. players purposely doing dangerous gimmicks in public areas and then acting shocked when the hammer comes swinging.. classic

[iwishforducks]

"I wanna do a vote to do something that will destroy the station, who's with me!"
"Won't we die?"
"Uh, yeah, what of it?"

(this didn't happen)

[iwishforducks]

sorry but i personally don't really care for a vote unless it's 100% of the server. roleplay is king and a vote is not IC. i know that's me being a fussy killjoy but to me running a vote is not enough to do something that ends the round on its own.

if you truly believe this, then pretty much every admin event would be null at this point. 100% of the server will never agree to an admin's event. i don't think you seriously believe that a highlander event shouldn't happen because 10% of the server said no. (maybe you think it shouldn't happen because highlander events are dumb but i digress- you get my point)

i would like to see more of the rp surrounding this event. was there build up? IC reason for doing it? did it create a good story?

these are the things i'm looking for when i'm thumbing for the rule 0 or secret rule card.

you can find out for yourself in the appeal:

While I wouldn't want to see it every shift, a rare fun event that is from the crew (as in not admin started) is not a bad thing, and a fun and memorable shift for everyone involved. I spent time making this a memorable event- with a viewing chamber and the chef giving out ice cream and food to people observing the singularity. If I had to count, there were 6+ people around watching the supermatter and actively enjoying the shift.

of course, like others have said, eating the ban for this kind of thing after doing it anyway because you felt so strongly about it earns you the respect of players and admins alike.

im inclined to agree but im pretty pissed that 93.3% of the server voted "yeah i was cool with that", but one person voting "Nope" is enough to nullify rule 0. seems to me that everyone enjoyed the event, except for the one Space Station 13 guaranteed malder in dchat. we just recently told someone that their antag round killed by an admin event to take a hike. why can't we do the same for the one person that said no? in-fact, to quote what you said:

we have no desire to change overarching policy on events from a single or handful of bad experiences.

it is sad when players don't have fun, but events are as much a part of the game as anything else. admins are encouraged to run events on both large and small scales to bring the world to life and create personalized and unique experiences for players.

they will not all be award winning masterpieces, but adding lots of red tape around events just scares admins off from experimenting with what is possible with the game, or even from doing events at all. as long as the event does not break admin conduct, then the admin is advised to use their best discretion when deciding to run events.

i understand that you're talking in relation to admin events, but i think player-driven events such as these are just as powerful- if not MORE powerful because they're driven ICly- as admin-driven events.

[Sightld2]

-im inclined to agree but im pretty pissed that 93.3% of the server voted "yeah i was cool with that", but one person voting "Nope" is enough to nullify rule 0-

That one guy's round matters just as much as any one elses. He doesn't nullify rule 0 though, because Bmon would still be choosing to exercise rule 0 even if there were zero votes, which I don't think an Admin should ever be required to do.

That said, I was playing at the time and organized an end of the world viewing party outside the engine, it was pretty fun for a one off type deal.

[Donglesplonge]

sometimes you just gotta let the funny happen, if you gotta eat a ban to make the funny happen then you should make the funny happen, of course within the theoretical restriction of "fun" pertaining to everyones involvement, but i don't read rules and i don't intend to start now either

you may have a cake, you may get a slice, but to want to eat the whole thing, especially when you have a horde of smelly unwashed disgusting awful evil vile cave dwellers (admins i love you) watching your every move trying to PERMANENTLY BAN YOU FOREVER AND POSSIBLY MAKE IT A BLACKLIST FOR FUN is a bit silly especially when the cake is actually a black hole that kills people

also peak opportunity here for someone to use the did you ask everyone consent picture literal twin souls appeal for the images existence

[kieth4]

Had a vote to not get banned, lost it. L bozo. It's like when you welderbomb in halls because no balls and hope the admins don't see. Calculated risk almost, just don't get caught next time

[TheBibleMelts]

don't roll the dice on rule 0 if you won't accept the results.

[dendydoom]

snip

sorry to say, but players aren't admins. admins aren't always admins, either. if someone was de-adminned and did this while participating as a player, then i would ban them if i saw it.

admins unfortunately don't get to do whatever they want. a short while prior to the ruling you quoted, a complaint was upheld for an event that was found to breach conduct.

they are trained and entrusted with a vast number of tools to manage and maintain a detailed overview of everything that's happening in a round, and are expected to make informed choices about how they will run a round in keeping with conduct. even if it's within conduct, they can still be held accountable by the community for bad events. this might not be as vindicating as seeing the badmin thrown out and banned, but it does feel very bad and works more often than not. i've seen people need to take a break entirely because of it. players do not have this level of oversight nor, sadly, this level of trust. these roles are held to different standards.

if i end up looking into this then part of that will be going through the round logs and seeing how it panned out, how much rp was done, etc. but it would be nice to get this as part of the appeal. i am very lazy.

[conrad]

"I wanna do a vote to do something that will destroy the station, who's with me!"
"Won't we die?"
"Uh, yeah, what of it?"

(this didn't happen)

I know it didn't happen. This is to illustrate the failrp.

[ekaterina]

Lame ban. Lameness aside, it was 1 singular non-consensual kill and as such it should be 1 singular day, not 3. Retroactively commute this man's sentence, give him a 2 day "get out of ban free" card.

[iwishforducks]

Lame ban. Lameness aside, it was 1 singular non-consensual kill and as such it should be 1 singular day, not 3. Retroactively commute this man's sentence, give him a 2 day "get out of ban free" card.

that means he gets to release 2 free singularities if the math adds up........................................

[DrAmazing343]

I'm in agreement with the sentiment of having a slice of the cake, but not expecting to eat the rest, too.

Funny one-off, definitely against the rules, I still quite enjoyed witnessing it in the round, probably for the best if they don't do it again.

still loved it...

[Not-Dorsidarf]

The note should be amended to clarify that there was a 93% vote for "I was fine with being singuloed that was base", with only 1 upset player while the rest of the crew made a viewing stand and set up concessions like it was a ballgame tbh instead of a vaguely worded "oh ya this guys a griefing asshole" note.

[Higgin]

I can't believe nobody has remarked on Timber giving us the two genders of admin: Batman or Joker.

his pfp is literally batman just look on the fucking discord you can even see the hood and mask and-

this begs the question of where everyone goes on the batman-joker spectrum. i wanna see that graph

if you truly believe this, then pretty much every admin event would be null at this point. 100% of the server will never agree to an admin's event. i don't think you seriously believe that a highlander event shouldn't happen because 10% of the server said no. (maybe you think it shouldn't happen because highlander events are dumb but i digress- you get my point)

part of the difference here is that admins are accountable to both the 10% and the 90%, and the terms of that accountability are the rules.

the rules don't stop working during an admin event; but they have to in order for a player to decide to release a singulo or cascade for the funny as a nonantag in command (hell, even potentially as a restricted antag on MRP.)

if an event goes bad or is run unfairly, admins have the responsibility and tools to try to make it better in the moment and going forward - players deciding off an arbitrary vote to suspend the rules don't even know who felt wronged by it enough to vote against it in the final offing where bmon polled the whole server that was on at the time.

you probably wouldn't even want them to know, because people can be awfully shitty and toxic to those that don't conform. still, the minority has a claim under the rules as much as the majority would if everyone voted against the delam and the cap did it anyway.

► Show Spoiler

If you make a classic or memorable SS13 shift then I don't give a rat's ass about the rules cuz the rules are there to maximise the chances of classic and memorable SS13 shifts.

separate but this really doesn't sit right with me. I'm not sure it might not be getting lost in translation here, but I think the point of the rules are to maximize everyone's fair chances of making and enjoying classic and memorable SS13 shifts.

one of the ways that's done is by passing the spotlight (antag status) around. we use it to give the people who have it the privilege to be prime movers in the story. another way is by limiting player freedom in certain roles so that they don't short-circuit others' ability to play and enjoy the game.

I don't buy the line that antag rounds are sacred, and I think this would have been fun to participate in personally (I love watching SM savants at work) - I think detaching yourself from a fixed, structured expectation for the round is a much healthier and more fun approach to the sandbox.

however, some expectations are upheld in the rules, and the rules should be applied fairly. you wouldn't want to play somewhere that just tells you "it's funny and i'll never forget it so go kick sand, damn the rules." it would be no more justified to have done it with a singulo people thought was cool than to pick one random person off the manifest, kill them, and dump them in a locker.

in both cases, that person's just expectations were foiled, and the rules were broken by another player. you've gotta run a table where people feel that they can be a part of making the classic and memorable moments rather than one where you're just fodder for fiat or the group's will at any given moment.

if you can't tell, I fucking hate consequentialism.

[Archie700]

After seeing how shitty people can be to the people that don't actually want an sm delam I'm fully against any "vote for delam" gimmicks unless the player actually ahelps

[Constellado]

After seeing how shitty people can be to the people that don't actually want an sm delam.

People can get very pushy.
Luckily most of the time they are an antag that wants chaos and is doing anything they can to get it. Which includes arguing at whoever to try and change their mind.

Sadly, that almost never works.

[Archie700]

After seeing how shitty people can be to the people that don't actually want an sm delam.

People can get very pushy.
Luckily most of the time they are an antag that wants chaos and is doing anything they can to get it. Which includes arguing at whoever to try and change their mind.

Sadly, that almost never works.

If it was an antag I would understand Icly because you're the BAD GUY.

Being mad at them OOC is a different case.

[Drag]

I fucking love gambling, the house always wins!

[WineAllWine]

I can't believe nobody has remarked on Timber giving us the two genders of admin: Batman or Joker.

his pfp is literally batman just look on the fucking discord you can even see the hood and mask and-

this begs the question of where everyone goes on the batman-joker spectrum. i wanna see that graph

I am pure joker. I am chaos incarnate. Anything is allowed as long as its funny.

The moral of this story is that permission is easier than forgiveness. You'd be surprised how often a "can I do x it'll be funny I promise" ahelp works.

It's a bit weird that Bmon allowed a vote but then didn't respect the majority imo. Making a vote but then going against a landslide is lame. Just don't do the vote.

edit - I think I misunderstood what happened. ignore me

[Kendrickorium]

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=35927

I got to witness this one live, it was genuinely fucking peak. We had over half the crew sitting in front of the damn thing eating rads to watch it delam with popcorn— Even if the rules say one thing, sometimes, the heart should 100% say another.

8/10 thread title

[DrAmazing343]

I was pretty proud of this one yeah

[MooCow12]

Whats the difference between a player causing a singulo and an admin randomly spamming immovable rods to the point where two actually collide and make one during a round.

[Jacquerel]

Admin is an antagonist role and as such has a license to grief and cause mass devastation

[RedBaronFlyer]

I still remember one round where the admin sent two looping rods at the station. The destruction they caused...