/tg/Station 13

If someone slips people and spaces their weapons or does other acts which are a large net negative against the crew for the reason of "lol i wanted to", does that not entail a violation of rule 1 and does that not rule them as valid for antagonistic behavior under rule 4?

I would argue that during regular game modes it wouldn't but under warops you're directly antagonizing the crew and indirectly helping warops by lessening the amount of weapons/incapacitating/hindering and thus resistance on the station.

Even if they're not considered to be acting like an antag, this behaviour seems to negative and intended to get a reaction. It seems banbait-y to ahelp after you get killed while say slipping and actively spacing weapons by throwing them out of airlocks and what not.

I would argue that escalation is more relaxed during warops on people who actively hinder the crew's effort but some argue it's not. What's the right course of action?

This is extremely specific, wouldn't it be more beneficial to change it to like "escalation during war-ops?" You can put the specific instance that spurred this in the OP, but I would say this is very specific in terms of policy.

Ahelp it and move on, let the admins figure out if its rule breaking for you.

If someone is blatantly griefing you for no reason* during a crisis just throw them out an airlock. Admins should ban such people if they ahelp

*Stealing a weapon because they want to use it isnt no reason, spacing your weapons is obviously just trying to get a rise out of you

I will speak a little about the incident that this thread arose from as I feel it gives some context.

Dax Dupont wrote:
Even if they're not considered to be acting like an antag, this behaviour seems to negative and intended to get a reaction. It seems banbait-y to ahelp after you get killed while slipping and actively spacing weapons by throwing them out of airlocks and what not.

I agree fully with this assessment and I noted as such on the person in question. However at the same time I believe there was overescalation. If the other party had ahelped and stated that rule 4 was being broken then the other person would've been punished for that rule breakage and perhaps they would have got their weapon back via myself. I also would have had no issue if they had beaten the person into crit for what is a bit of a hectic situation. But beating them to death, for myself, just smacks of overescalation that was not required. If the situation was hectic then I find it strange they had the time to purposefully beat the person to death for spacing what was a flashbang lance against Ops.

Both parties were noted, one for banbait-y behaviour and antagonist behaviour for no reason and the other was noted for overescalation, the former is worse than the latter personally. If either feels like I have treated them wrongly they can additionally post an appeal thread or a headmin may overrule me in this thread itself.

This is why I suggested to the person who was aggrieved of my decision to make this policy thread, but thank you for making it Dupont on their behalf. As always I am happy to learn, adapt and change to policy required.

did someone seriously get noted for kicking the shit out of a guy for spacing their weapon on war ops? please remove that note

I think it is absolutely silly to make a policy thread when referring to a specific situation as opposed to an actual general scenario as it doesn't tend to include the specific context or information regarding it.

I would find that it is dumb to kill another player during an "us versus them" gamemode type because in reality you're only killing parts of your own team, but the same could easily be applied to the very case of stealing weapons from your team-but its important for us to know the reason and the scenario. As mentioned above, if they're intending to use it, then they do have a valid reason to take it from you-but you likewise have a valid reason to take it back, forcefully if required.

Ideally, if the player did take it for whatever reason, it'd be easier to just adminhelp it and leave yourself in the clear but unfortunately most people would rather react with aggression. While it is perfectly fine and encouraged to deal with situations in an in character manner, sometimes behavioural matters are best left up to the administration team. It might be hard to say exactly what the other player's reason in referral to the actual situation this is based around was, and responding to them with aggression could very well result in them spacing it-but in a perfect scenario, none of this should've happened in the first place. Still, I would personally suggest the "victim" individual would crit them instead, but the aforementioned stands.

I think the best overall and general ruling in regards to the situation was already mentioned by Kor,

Kor wrote:If someone is blatantly griefing you for no reason* during a crisis just throw them out an airlock. Admins should ban such people if they ahelp

*Stealing a weapon because they want to use it isnt no reason, spacing your weapons is obviously just trying to get a rise out of you

its also kind of hard to make a general ruling when something is geared towards a specific situation when full context isn't provided though.

Player 1 doing x to get a reaction out of player 2 then ahelping the reaction they had directly caused in hope player 2 gets banned is pretty close to if not the definition of banbaiting

After having talked it over with with a headmin myself I have removed the note regarding overescalation in the case which spawned this discussion. I can understand and see the reasoning why. In such an escalated situation such as War Ops or confirmed Revolution escalation in some situations is going to be more relaxed due to the nature of the rounds. Perhaps I let my own personal playstyle and code affect my decision making as an admin slightly as I believed it was overescalated in this case, though I am in full agreement that the ban-baity behaviour is far worse than the possibility of overescalation as I have already stated previously.

As I have said to the person themselves I apologise for getting this wrong this time, I will learn, move on from this and treat future similar rulings with what I have learned from others.