akesson - ausops - rule 0

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 5:22 pm #322057

Byond account and character name: akessin/dynamic
Banning admin: ausops
Ban type (What are you banned from?): rule 0
Ban reason and length: perm
Time ban was placed (including time zone): Detriment to the server.
Server you were playing when banned (Sybil or Bagil): the forums
Your side of the story:
I successfully appealed Owegno's ban that was taken over and enforced by ausops, which resulted in ausops immediately applying a rule 0 ban immmediately after accepting my appeal to his enforced ban.

Why you think you should be unbanned:

Extremely poor taste to ban out of (assumed) frustration and emotion because I appealed a ban that was enforced by you.

Your reasoning being I was impatient.
I'm impatient because Owegno admitted that the ban occured when it was already resolved and he applied it because of a misunderstanding and blown out of proportion insults and banter delivered to him.

I'm impatient because I patiently waited for Owegno, Kevinz, and DGL to work it out with me, and for them to ask PKP who was already handling it.
PKP had to leave due to real life issues. I waited for him to give him my side of things, but you immediately overrode everything to ban me.

You took over a ban that was being handled by another headmin, and other admins had testified that they were fine with unbanning and it wasn't as bad as it was.
You then enforced that ban with admittedly no briefing what so ever on the ban itself, ignored all of the admins that were involved and their evidence and testimony, and enforce it simply to ensure I'm banned.

-

I do take things quite far in tg. I do enjoy my game. And I've used my dominant personality to make friends, alienate people, and influence people.
I have tried to change how people play the game. Sometimes too far, sometimes in bizarre ways.

There isn't anything wrong with challenging a ban. If someone believes a ban was applied wrongly, it doesn't matter if the ban was 1 minute. That ban should be appealable.
And bans set precedents on how rules are applied. It becomes a standard to reference later.

Many of my bans are controversial, such as Danno, qbopper, and atlantaned's bans.
Those bans were challenged because I felt I was banned wrongly. Sometimes I succeed, sometimes I fail.

But these bans spark policy discussions and questions on how rules are enforced. This builds integrity to the rules.
For some bans, others made policy discussions, not always because people are angry at the ban, but because people want to discuss the ban.

And whilst I have a history of challenging bans, and how it frustrates admins, I'm also not the type to bend over and take what I feel I didn't deserve.
Most bans I challenged had a hung jury; some admins were fine with it, other admins aren't. Hence why I challenge them.

But to the players rounds I inadvertantly affected, such as Desucake, I believe I've made peace with them and came to an understanding.

And that's why I should be unbanned.

danno · Post by **danno** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 5:29 pm #322061

J_Madison wrote: Many of my bans are controversial, such as Danno, qbopper, and atlantaned's bans.

if by controversial you mean that you didn't agree with it, then sure.
because my ban was universally accepted amongst the administration.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 5:30 pm #322063

danno wrote:
J_Madison wrote: Many of my bans are controversial, such as Danno, qbopper, and atlantaned's bans.
if by controversial you mean that you didn't agree with it, then sure.
because my ban was universally accepted amongst the administration.

I understand, we worked it out, and there was a lot of jabs and jokes poked at it including a policy discussion.

I think it was reduced early, but I disgress. Many people disagreed with that.

But we've made our peace, and it really our only admin-player interaction.

Qbopper · Post by **Qbopper** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 5:49 pm #322074

I don't have a strong opinion re: the rule 0 ban, but when you get banned multiple times, even if the bans are appealed successfully, I think that's a good time to reconsider what you're doing and why these bans are happening

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 6:55 pm #322093

Qbopper wrote:I don't have a strong opinion re: the rule 0 ban, but when you get banned multiple times, even if the bans are appealed successfully, I think that's a good time to reconsider what you're doing and why these bans are happening

My playstyle definitely conflicts with a lot of admins and I'm outspoken and honest with what and why I do.

My crackdown on metafriends, metagroups, and general IC benefits attracted the anger of a lot of admins because an admin quoted "9 out of 10 admins metafriend and static name".

A lot of bans were due to misunderstanding and a heavily stressed out occasion and someone ahelping and making a ruckus; a common occurance among high level sec players.

Bluespace · Post by **Bluespace** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 7:11 pm #322095

looks like you're taking a few months vacation chief
this is all a bit silly now, relax and have a cool beer
space mans will be here still come Christmas time

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 7:26 pm #322098

Who muted me on discord?

They didn't even enter the channel.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 10:55 pm #322129

Bluespace wrote:looks like you're taking a few months vacation chief
this is all a bit silly now, relax and have a cool beer
space mans will be here still come Christmas time

I don't think taking a vacation over a Friday night and an upset admin is reasonable. The ban was done when everything had already been resolved, and ausops' enforcement was in my opinion because it was an opportunity for him to ban me.

As shown by the fact he ignored every bit of evidence and the other admins that were already resolving the ban appeal, and the other headmins too.

Post by **Cobby** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:01 pm #322130

Perhaps there's some other reason beside the most recent event that made him rule 0 you, especially considering that he didn't reapply that ban and made it a separate one.

iamgoofball · Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:04 pm

Stop playing word games and state what you mean.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:14 pm #322135

ExcessiveCobblestone wrote:Perhaps there's some other reason beside the most recent event that made him rule 0 you, especially considering that he didn't reapply that ban and made it a separate one.

There was the desucake incident which pushed a boundary into "creepy" area of roleplay due to the whole pistol sucking thing.
But, desucake and I have made peace. She doesn't hold hard feelings, and nor do I.

Or DGL and I fighting over the recent ban over the CMO.
But, this one was worked out with DGL - it was incredibly frustating for me and DGL to throw back and forth PMs when I was stressed. He acknowledged that I was concerned with releasing someone who had so many stunning poisons, and I acknowledged that I had already taken a fairly hardline stance against him over it.

Not to mention it was a hung jury on both sides - admins disagreed with the ban too.

Me and DGL later worked it out to prevent this from happening in the future, and to ensure both the victim ahelper and the subject feel satisfied with their results; ahelper is given an appropriate response, subject of ahelp feels that they are protected by the admins should anything happen later.

It was mistakes by both sides that caused a hung jury of admins that led to a policy discussion for others to discuss without Niknakflak deleting their posts.

The whole ban he enforced for metacomms doesn't seem valid, simply because it was already being handled by 4 admins that knew the situation and every piece of evidence yet Ausops had came in and immediately locked and enforced the ban in the middle of deciding.
Everything had been cleared up.
I get he doesn't like me, but rule 0 banning someone out of spite because your enforced ban was appealed?

Emotion has no place in administration.

Post by **Owegno** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:26 pm #322136

If Ausops and Joan decided the ban should stay that's fine with me. It was such a bizarre situation that I really didn't know how to handle it and I honestly wanted input from the headmins. I was going to lift the ban (On you, the others should make their own appeals) if no headmin told me to leave it after a certain time.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:34 pm #322138

Owegno wrote:If Ausops and Joan decided the ban should stay that's fine with me. It was such a bizarre situation that I really didn't know how to handle it and I honestly wanted input from the headmins. I was going to lift the ban (On you, the others should make their own appeals) if no headmin told me to leave it after a certain time.

That ban was actually successfully appealed as shown by ausops' final post.

This is a completely different ban appeal.

Qbopper · Post by **Qbopper** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:35 pm #322139

J_Madison wrote:My crackdown on metafriends, metagroups, and general IC benefits attracted the anger of a lot of admins because an admin quoted "9 out of 10 admins metafriend and static name".

no offense but this is a solid way to make people not take you seriously

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:45 pm #322140

Qbopper wrote:
J_Madison wrote:My crackdown on metafriends, metagroups, and general IC benefits attracted the anger of a lot of admins because an admin quoted "9 out of 10 admins metafriend and static name".
no offense but this is a solid way to make people not take you seriously

That's what caused a lot of bans, notes, and anger recently. That's the truth.

A lot of admins have extensive meta relationships. That's a fact.

And it would be awfully convenient to get rid of me or hate me, especially if those same admins apprecipate or have that.

Post by **Owegno** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:46 pm #322141

J_Madison wrote:That ban was actually successfully appealed as shown by ausops' final post.

This is a completely different ban appeal.

I wouldn't consider it successfully appealed. I'm honestly a bit confused where that notion came from. I guess I should of made it clearer I wanted headmin input, and I got it.

danno · Post by **danno** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:47 pm #322142

I think it's probably fair to say that some of them do indeed, and it might have an impact on the goings on in the game.
The opposite is also true, some admins have deep seated resentment towards certain players and that also affects the game

D&B · Post by **D&B** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:50 pm #322143

Qbopper wrote:
J_Madison wrote:My crackdown on metafriends, metagroups, and general IC benefits attracted the anger of a lot of admins because an admin quoted "9 out of 10 admins metafriend and static name".
no offense but this is a solid way to make people not take you seriously

No offense but it's true, and you're incredibly naive if you think it's not.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Sun Jul 30, 2017 11:53 pm #322145

Owegno wrote:
J_Madison wrote:That ban was actually successfully appealed as shown by ausops' final post.

This is a completely different ban appeal.
I wouldn't consider it successfully appealed. I'm honestly a bit confused where that notion came from. I guess I should of made it clearer I wanted headmin input, and I got it.

ausops wrote:This particular ban was lifted since jmad is not a patient person nor do I feel like contesting a ban I would have lifted after some time had passed.

danno wrote:I think it's probably fair to say that some of them do indeed, and it might have an impact on the goings on in the game.
The opposite is also true, some admins have deep seated resentment towards certain players and that also affects the game

I'm aware it could also affect players the other end of banning.

It's no myth that some admins have friends they support or players they hate and despise, but I don't feel it's necessary to start pointing names and inciting a witchhunt. I appreciate that relationships exist and I've indulged in some at the request of admins to see if I myself get grudged (i.e. a taste of my own medicine).

onleavedontatme · Mon Jul 31, 2017 12:09 am

J_Madison wrote:Who muted me on discord?

They didn't even enter the channel.

Qbopper · Post by **Qbopper** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 12:46 am #322158

J_Madison wrote:
Qbopper wrote:
J_Madison wrote:My crackdown on metafriends, metagroups, and general IC benefits attracted the anger of a lot of admins because an admin quoted "9 out of 10 admins metafriend and static name".
no offense but this is a solid way to make people not take you seriously
That's what caused a lot of bans, notes, and anger recently. That's the truth.

A lot of admins have extensive meta relationships. That's a fact.

And it would be awfully convenient to get rid of me or hate me, especially if those same admins apprecipate or have that.

regardless if you're dead wrong and no admins have ever let meta relationships affect them in game or if you're spot on and every admin instantly dingdongs people for fucking with their metafriends I'm still of the opinion that your arrogant attitude about how you're factually correct at all times and can't be wrong is seriously hurting your credibility

you post like this everywhere, actually

EDIT: again, I just want it to be clear that I don't have a strong opinion for or against the rule 0, but I think you'd have a much easier time if you avoided posting like this - I'm sure even other admins disagree with me on this, but it gets abrasive quickly

feem · Post by **feem** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 12:46 am #322160

Ways to avoid a rule 0 ban:

Don't break rules.

Don't take actions and make statements that make it harder for administrators to do their jobs.

Don't be disgusting to other players or administrators.

Don't consistently respond to administrators and administrator rulings with derision and dismissal in public.

Don't represent yourself as an arbiter of the rules or as being above the rules.

Don't go out of your way to piss off administrators, especially headmins.

If you make a habit of violating the above suggestions, don't be surprised if you get banned.

Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:02 am

I'm guessing based off of ausops posts in the previous ban appeal that this will be rejected if anything for being way too soon. Going to watch this thread for pointless bickering and will lock until ausops himself can appear for comment if it gets out of hand.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:03 am #322165

Qbopper wrote: I'm still of the opinion that your arrogant attitude about how you're factually correct at all times and can't be wrong is seriously hurting your credibility

I understand the problem with my attitude. And I'll try to rectify this to change it in the future.

PKPenguin321 wrote:I'm guessing based off of ausops posts in the previous ban appeal that this will be rejected if anything for being way too soon. Going to watch this thread for pointless bickering and will lock until ausops himself can appear for comment if it gets out of hand.

I think there was a policy discussion thread and precedent that there is "no such thing as a ban appeal being too early".

It shouldn't matter if the ban appeal was for a 5 minute ban 7 days later, or a perm ban 10 seconds later.

I just didn't like the ban. It was all going the way I and everyone else expected it. I wanted to keep it that way.

imblyings · Post by **imblyings** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:13 am #322169

>Not to mention it was a hung jury on both sides - admins disagreed with the ban too.

Which admins? Or players for that matter, disagreed with how you were banned for permaing the CMO? A hung jury suggests an equal split of admins advocating for you being allowed to perma the CMO, when and where did that happen? Where is the half of adminbus thinking it's ok to perma a CMO because they have sleep chems in their hypospray and toxins in their bag?

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:30 am #322175

imblyings wrote:>Not to mention it was a hung jury on both sides - admins disagreed with the ban too.

Which admins? Or players for that matter, disagreed with how you were banned for permaing the CMO? A hung jury suggests an equal split of admins advocating for you being allowed to perma the CMO, when and where did that happen? Where is the half of adminbus thinking it's ok to perma a CMO because they have sleep chems in their hypospray and toxins in their bag?

Hung jury is 10-2. Obviously you decided the sentence as judge.

It was on discord when I received disagreements on the ban. Unfortunately I no longer have access to that.

It was Sulfonal and Chloral hydrate. Lethal combination. But disgressing from that. You're right. I don't have a leg to stand on given that I'm banned from the Slig discord that had the proof of admins agreeing that the punishment was fine.
And I'll concede on that. Even if I disagree with it, even with players disagree with it.

Qbmax32, bman, Beesting12 all posted on the threads and stated they believe this was reasonable grounds for permabrigging.

DGL and later came to the conclusion that this entire ban was made in less than ideal conditions both for the CMO and I, and that we both should have acted differently in how I responded and how he bwoinked.

Code: Select all

<DGL> it was yesterday, Jmad
<DGL> while we were talking about the CMO and perma
<J_Madis> oh ahelps! I remember!
<DGL> it might have gotten drowned out due to that continuing for another 25~ minutes
<J_Madis> I asked if you could voice chat so I could give you a commentary whilst I hunted cult. I recall now
<J_Madis> yeah that was drowned out. I was kind of depressed about the whole ban and had the whole banter going to drown out my poor mood at the time.
<J_Madis> not to mention how long it dragged out. If I could control SS13 by voice, I would have typed all the help stuff to you
<J_Madis> but I couldn't balance playing stressed sec and ahelp replying at the same time DGL 
<DGL> I mostly tried to wait, but the reason I tried to get it resolved was because he was literally stuck there the entire time
<DGL> And in my opinion it wasn't a reason to have in there in the first place, so to resolve it was to get him out and back into the round
<DGL> So while I did try to wait, I felt it was more than a little unfair for one side.
<J_Madis> my point of view of your bwoinks are they're very intrusive and one by one I had to reply to each one
<PKPenguin321> I've pointed ausops to the post
<PKPenguin321> He's in aussie hours so he likely wont see it for a while
<J_Madis> and I was frustrated that what I thought was a valid arrest and brigging was causing me to have my brain torn in two answering ahelps and playing the game, whilst having a subtle message telling me "you should release that cmo and let him escalate".
<J_Madis> I think DGL, despite the uproar it caused with danno and icepax incident
<J_Madis> if you feel someone was wrongly brigged after they give their reasoning
<J_Madis> just flat out say "unbrig them and reset things" as a flat order to do it.
<DGL> probably a good idea
<DGL> but also Jmad
<DGL> if they escalate after it has been OOC resolved
<J_Madis> it might be really blunt, but that gives me an order and takes it out of my hands. I can say no, or I can say yes.
<DGL> it is no longer you in trouble
<DGL> it is them
<J_Madis> Yep. That's why I think it's a good idea.
<J_Madis> I opened a thread 2 months back on this. If an admin steps in, all escalation has to be dropped. 
<DGL> literally the instant they ahelp
<DGL> if they attempt to escalate further after being told 'we are dealing with it'
<J_Madis> Hindsight is 20/20. I would have had 2 options if you demanded I release them; say no and argue further, say yes release them and let the "OOC deescalation rule" fall in.
<J_Madis> what would I have picked? well knowing i could have dodged a ban, I'd say yes. 
<J_Madis> but I was incredibly frustrated at the 20+ minutes of back and forth ahelps when I was playing in a round DGL. I think making a demand in the future is good for the sec player (not our problem now) and the victim/ahelper (early release and reset of the situation as early as possible)
<DGL> In the future that's probably the best situation. Release --> Wait for whatever situation --> Then we move the chat, as long as logs were not required.

-

Why did you walk into my ban that was being attended to and admittedly ignored all of the information present and admins already attending and handling to enforce my ban?

Why did you apply an immediate ban after letting the ban appeal become accepted?

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:36 am #322179

kevinz000 wrote:as someone who was spectating the thing i can say this is a joke gone horribly wrong, take it as such.

Owegno wrote:Feel I should just add I was planning on unbanning the group tomorrow after more admins weighed in but if you feel the ban should stick PKP it will stick. I mainly placed this ban since people didn't seem to be taking my message of "Don't raid another server" seriously.

Kor wrote:It was stupid and deserved a ban but I don't think "social" crimes (stupid metacomming for the purposes of screwing around and having a laugh, not blatant cheating) should be a no tolerance permaban when we tolerate completely anti-social behavior that makes people miserable (the average security player, silent antagonists)

Owegno wrote:Pretty much my opinion on it Kor. My big concern was the raid on citadel that I have been assured was not what I thought it was going to be. I'm perfectly fine with lifting the bans because of this.

danno · Post by **danno** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:37 am #322182

the opinions of people such as "qbmax2" and bman and beesting etc. are of little value in matters like this. player's don't have some sort of say over bans and ban appeals.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:38 am #322183

danno wrote:the opinions of people such as "qbmax2" and bman and beesting etc. are of little value in matters like this. player's don't have some sort of say over bans and ban appeals.

ausops asked for player names that disagreed with DGL.

EDIT: would also like to address this too later:

imblyings wrote:Plenty of people are social and they are completely capable of not entering in a discord and talking about things ingame. Some people even have the capability to go ahead and tell admins not only are they playing with friends, they'd like admins to relax since they know about metacomms rules and definitely won't be metacomming. Plenty of people are social, Kor, but they also happen to be functional enough to discuss things about ss13 separately from the game.

<J_Madis>I understand. Sorry about this joan, there's no excuse, but from our side it was a group of guys some of them drunk on a friday night
<J_Madis> peer pressure, groupthink, and football hooligan psychology overtook us.

You're the most uptight person about metacomms and metafriends but the moment you collect some people in discord willing to metafriend you, it's 'peer pressure' and 'groupthink' and other trash excuses, and you're meant to be forgiven. Why is this so? Either way I made it clear in IRC, and perhaps not so clear in my first post, that this ban could be appealed after some time had passed. In sum it wasn't too serious a metacomms incident and I have seen or unbanned others in similar cases.

Nilons · Post by **Nilons** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:44 am #322186

You didnt successfully appeal that ban, headmin majority voted to deny

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 2:17 am #322193

Nilons wrote:You didnt successfully appeal that ban, headmin majority voted to deny

Yes. I did.

ausops wrote:This particular ban was lifted since jmad is not a patient person nor do I feel like contesting a ban I would have lifted after some time had passed.

My current ban is (MANUAL BAN) Rule 0. Detriment to the server.. The previous ban was removed.

imblyings · Post by **imblyings** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 2:36 am #322197

>Why did you walk into my ban that was being attended to and admittedly ignored all of the information present and admins already attending and handling to enforce my ban?

The only argument you have for this ban is if you weren't in the discord. But you were.

Pkp can talk to me or change the result of the ban as is his right, and it is my right to slap on a ban and make it stick for metacomms no matter how slight. When I say 'I don't care' on IRC, it means I've had enough of arguing in circles. I had all the information I needed after reading through the clusterfuck and a temporary ban for metacomms to be appealed later was something you had coming. You should know this but you were the guy who organized it all to top it off.

Your insistence that somehow the rules shouldn't apply to you or that a ban shouldn't stick in that case, your tendency to dress everything you do from some moral high point, as your inability to accept any wrong ingame, in an appeal, then in the policy threads you make, and your conduct here in the forums and ingame has landed yourself this rule 0.

imblyings · Post by **imblyings** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 2:40 am #322198

It's not a successful appeal when an admin removes it because a rule 0 is going on.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 3:02 am #322200

imblyings wrote:I had all the information I needed after reading through the clusterfuck and a temporary ban for metacomms to be appealed later was something you had coming. You should know this but you were the guy who organized it all to top it off.

Your insistence that somehow the rules shouldn't apply to you or that a ban shouldn't stick in that case, your tendency to dress everything you do from some moral high point, as your inability to accept any wrong ingame, in an appeal, then in the policy threads you make, and your conduct here in the forums and ingame has landed yourself this rule 0.

Let's begin with the fact that Bman quoted https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5546 this thread on NTR shed and the people involved admitted metagaming and metacomming. And ckeys being linked to metacomming.

https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 07#p315507 - NTRhut deleted. requesting an archive.

Or ckeys:
Phoal/cyrii/phoal/ect ect that have extensive notes for ERP, metacomms, metagaming with Wjohnson and was known to be with the above mentioned ban request.
digdugxx, jarektheraptor, stalcloudy - all ckeys linked to metacomms, metafriending, greytiding together, assisting as antag, giving eachother all access
vincvsvincent, fofofo21, pascal123 - all ckeys with extreme metafriending.
Or now, uncle bourbon, danarth, and obscolene (banned) riding eachother every round, helping with greentext/giving uplink, ect?

You were the headmin in several of these, but it's a mere coincidence that groups that metagamed hard for weeks and months at a time get conveniently ignored?

I sure as hell admitted my wrongdoing, we apologised to Kevinz and Owegno, and we knew that we fucked up and knocked it off. The entire ban was made because of Owegno being berated and was to be resolved by PKP.

The entire incident had been resolved. You accuse me of not accepting blame for what I've already accepted blame for.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 3:34 am #322202

It was my fault to organise a drunken safari trip onto Citadel station to explore their codebase, vape semen, jerk off into cryo beakers.

It was my fault to let a group of 6+ people spontaneously jump on sybil for latejoin assistant incident which resulted in minor greytiding, lasting four minutes.

It was my fault for challenging your bans and bans you enforce.

But do I ask for double standards?
No.

Was I not clear on my intentions for the safari trip/raid on citadel?
No griefing, no greytiding, no killing fnr, follow their rules, enjoy their content, when on citadel do as they do, no metagaming, let admins know if needed.

Did I thoroughly plan and metagame, affect and ruin a whole round on sybil?
No, it was spontaneous. One person used and said meta information. The incident lasted 4 minutes. Nobody was hurt or killed. No windows were destroyed.

I'm getting grey hairs from arguing in circles about metagaming.

And it's petty to start namedropping people of the past. Every one of these ckeys I've ahelped and reported. There are no standards for metagaming and metafriending because they're still on the server.

Post by **MrStonedOne** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:20 am #322237

It's easy to get somebody acting in bad faith to understand why they got banned, the person knew they were breaking a rule and crossing a line, and decided to.

Somebody attempting to act in good faith (to some degree) didn't knowingly cross the line, and won't necessarily understand the necessity of the ban. It is the banning admin's job to make them understand that.

Bans are to either: Teach a lesson, Protect the round and/or the community, or Remove garbage people.

People can't learn a lesson if they don't understand the reasoning behind the ban.

Jmad: That's a two way road. You are/were/are/don'tknow/maybe/i4got the host of 8chan's ss13 server. I'd expect you to understand that bans for mistakes or fuckups are sometimes needed. The road to hell is paved with good intentions my friend.

Minimizing your fuckup doesn't help: I just spent the past two weeks in a revert war and fork threat with the maintainers of the repo because I felt a maintainer was being dismissive over a criticism I had of their prs. And I know you saw some of that. It tells us you aren't learning anything, and that we have to press harder to drill the lesson in.

also we plan on getting drunk and going on citadel on saturday.

<J_Madis> I understand. Sorry about this joan, there's no excuse, but from our side it was a group of guys some of them drunk on a friday night

What's not clear here is if you yourself were drunk at the time jmad, and if you are trying to use that as an excuse. You seemed to avoid directly stating one way or another. Could you clear that up for me?

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:32 am #322238

I was not drunk.
The person who was drunk was not me.

I understand the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I was the host, and was too in a bitter code war. I fully understand that bans are used as a three pronged spear; to teach lessons, protect server, and to remove garbage people because I've used it myself.

I had been distracted from coderbus due to the discord and making new friends to play games with. I know you were furious at a few maintainers, but I didn't know you were on the verge of a revert war with a plan to fork.

imblyings · Post by **imblyings** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:55 am #322280

Yes it's a coincidence a head admin wishes to spend time on the servers just adminning when they have free time come up and are in the mood for ss13 rather than other vidya.

I placed a ban on two people metacomming a day ago or so because I noticed it while adminning ingame. Just because you are not privy to or do not notice or do not see the ckeys you've meticulously investigated banned, does not mean there are no standards and you get to go free.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:05 pm #322307

Perception and reality.

It's easy to perceive things because of what we know and don't know what goes on.

Likewise it's easy to perceive what I've done as so bad and me as a terrible person and detriment until the reality of it all is revealed.

My perception of this whole ordeal is different from yours. And you mentioned you took little time to examine the evidence before applying that ban, which meant you were as far seperated from the reality of the whole incident as I am about enforcement of rules.

Forgive me, but I'm a little bitter over it all and I only see what I perceive are metagroups I've outed that are still on the server. More so than ever since I spent some time metafriending.

I see the reality that is currently going on with MSO, but I can only perceive your reasons for banning me as an opportunity to get rid of me. I don't know how you perceive me.

But the incident was (in many admins and mine opinions) a minor one, with minimal damage dealt to the server round and players.
The incident was stopped early, but was instigated further on accident when Owegno was berated.
The incident was a mistake, and a group of players on a Friday night spontaneously succumbing to groupthink and football hooliganism.

And that incident is my mistake. I'm sorry for letting it go out of hand as the person who was on the forefront of antimetagaming.

And I understand my mistakes. I'm sorry to those that inadvertently got involved due to the strongarming and misuse of the solidarity to cause the incident.

And that's why I'd like to be unbanned. It started and ended as a spontaneous and sudden incident on Friday that quickly started and ended with minimal consequences on the players and server and should be forgiven.

imblyings · Post by **imblyings** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 2:22 pm #322315

You keep posting this but you don't post where I say it's a ban that can be appealed after a while, and you continue to ignore where I say not only do I completely understand what's going on without any need whatsoever to read what transpired on discord, that in sum I viewed it as a minor metacomms incident, the sort that I had no problem with seeing lifted after a while. What you did not do, was do what I told you to do.

But that's about the metacomms ban, which is already done and closed.

The rule 0 ban is everything else you've done, ingame, on the forums, and in discord.

Docprofsmith · Mon Jul 31, 2017 2:36 pm

J_Madison wrote:Perception and reality.

It's easy to perceive things because of what we know and don't know what goes on.

Likewise it's easy to perceive what I've done as so bad and me as a terrible person and detriment until the reality of it all is revealed.

This is the best thing ever said in a ban appeal.

On topic slightly though, surely the amount of people and admins who think you are a detriment to the community should at least make you consider maybe that you're wrong?

This ban has nothing to do with the other one, it's a rule 0 for your history and attitude, which makes you a detriment to the community. Stop arguing that the other ban was appealed successfully when this is a completely separate ban.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 3:25 pm #322332

I don't have that part from the chat because I was on the phone. I acknowledge that this can be appealed later.

Since we're on the subject of the rule 0 ban.

The rule 0 ban relating to raiding servers is questionable because there were clear guidelines on what we were going to do.
Kevinz - an admin at citadel was well aware and was invited to the channel itself, as was later Owegno should want to keep an eye on my promises.

The minor metacomms was viewed as an incident that was going to be removed. Several admins involved were fine with being lifted. There was no need to enforce the ban and force a wait/stall for appeals. It was a done thing.

There was no intention to grief.
It's a thoughtcrime to organise a jump on the server and play?

---

My ingame play has varied. It's damn easy to pick up bad notes, but nearly impossible to pick up good ones. Everyone sees that I'm some evil sadist player that takes enjoyment in torturing others when the truth is far from it.
Was it the Desucake incident? We've made peace and amended that, Desucake and I.

I noticed you grilled me heavily on this incident but not others. I don't mean to make any accusations but I'd be naive to ignore that admins jump to the aid of their friends. Was Desucake a friend or someone you care for and didn't appreciate what I did?

Was it how I play sec and how I disagreed with your rulings? I'm playing a job whose job is to enforce IC rules and incidents. Talking with DGL we came to an understanding that how he bwoinked and dealt with me was flawed and caused distrust and a lack of assurance for me, and no IC result for the ahelper. It was flaws on both sides that caused a frustrating ban that was disputed.

Yes. I've openly stated my intention to treat others differently, including negatively if they cause me grief in rounds, or persistently cause issues.
But this has been clarified over and over again. There's a big difference between what I do and what you perceive me to do; reality vs perception.
In reality, there's more than 30-40 people that irk me in some way. Absolutely impossible to grudge every last one and the truth is I don't grudge them.

That "grudging" perception is in reality human learning;
all good sec players know that Robustin always has adrenals and will deal with it by never ever cuffing him
if Lizzy Ari is chemist immediately wear a firesuit/chemsuit and carry bolas because they've got instakill syringes and meth
DGL/Lane Stewart can't be reasoned with, can't be released, and won't roleplay. If they're caught as antag, do the sybil procedure and valid them.

In fact there's a list of names that several admins want me to give to them because they usually die/suicide by 20 minutes if they're not antag.

None of the above things are against the rules. They can be solved by CHANGING NAME. This is like the whole stream sniping debate currently going on at PUBG. The treatment of the whole thing is flawed; https://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/3932904642

It is the player's choice to play with a disadvantage.

Is it my gameplay? My grudging?
But I've clarified this over and over again. My "grudging" isn't anything to do with what most tg admins see as grudging;
I rarely have antag turned on.
I've never ever arrested someone FNR as a grudge.
I have a no first use policy - I only ever react - Never random stunned, never random searched.
I've never killed or started anyone on anyone FNR. Never ever.

That's the ideal standard for any player.
I play every job to the fullest extent possible - Rarely go braindead, never ghost, never suicide, play to fullest effort regardless of antag or roundtype.
I do my job. I don't do others jobs. If I'm medbay, I'm medbay. I don't powergame three roles.
Two guides - Warden and Detective are some of the most respected guides to their jobs. A testament to how I really play.

I don't see how my gameplay is rule0 worthy when players that do nothing but greytide and welderbomb (icepax) become admins, or players that caused away missions and two departments and three jobs worth of content to be culled because they feel the need to validhunt (kevinz000). I think the fact that nothing has been changed from my gameplay shows testament that I keep to myself and conserve the content that exists.

Was it my HOS diaries, my promotion of them, and my dramatisation of the stories?
None of the stories resulted in my bans. None of them. They had bwoinks that lead nowhere maybe, but those stories are 1 in 20 rounds or more.
And they are mere stories.

What I do on the forums?
My policy discussions when I dislike my bans?

What exactly have I posted, really?
Have I made threads about the legal ages of consent of other tg members and made inappropriate suggestions?
Did I accuse anyone of homosexuality and having fetishes?
Am I spamming "add poo" every thread?
Have you seen me make a post belittling and trash talking members? What crag and bman call me for being good friends with RemieRichards?

No really. What did I do on the forums that was so bad.

TheColdTurtle · Mon Jul 31, 2017 3:49 pm

You heard it hear folks you are not playing the game correctly if you don't random name all the time. Fuck rp, it has no place on TG station

D&B · Post by **D&B** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 3:56 pm #322348

TheColdTurtle wrote:You heard it hear folks you are not playing the game correctly if you don't random name all the time. Fuck rp, it has no place on TG station

I think they meant more as in, if you're getting metagrudged you'll be told to random name or deal with it.

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:00 pm #322351

if it's for no reason (roundstart assault, random shove stun fnr, tabling kevinz fnr) yeah ahelp that shit.

but I see pax with a welder and a welding fuel tank, I'm shooting that tank even if it gibs/dismembers his body

same goes with the other metagroups, if I arrest one and he screams for help, I'm locking down the brig and sitting in a closet with a shotgun waiting for them to arrive.

It's human nature to learn and adapt.

Qbopper · Post by **Qbopper** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:30 pm #322357

J_Madison wrote:but I see pax with a welder and a welding fuel tank, I'm shooting that tank even if it gibs/dismembers his body

i don't think i've ever seen anyone dig their own grave as aggressively as this

like, seriously, I don't think it matters if you're right or wrong, outright admitting to this sort of thing in a ban appeal is a horrifically bad idea

Jacough · Post by **Jacough** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:41 pm #322359

Just have J_Mad play on some different servers and then come back and appeal in a few months if he can get a few admins to vouch for him as a decent individual. If he can get a few admins on other servers to feel that he's a cool guy and fun to play with then yeah, it's probably a good sign he's changed and should be given another chance. If not, well that just confirms he's just a toxic individual that just doesn't belong on the server.

kevinz000 · Post by **kevinz000** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:42 pm #322360

Kevinz - an admin at citadel was well aware and was invited to the channel itself, as was later Owegno should want to keep an eye on my promises.

Uh what are you talking about
I'm on the channel but there's no fucking way I'd approve of a server raid. Doesn't matter what restrictions you would place on it (I wasn't even aware of this ..? I just heard oh hey let's go raid citadel tomorrow evening)

Also for the "ruined 3/4 of the game to validhunt" you'd think I stopped otherwise I would have run into issues by now hmm?

J_Madison · Post by **J_Madison** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:45 pm #322362

Qbopper wrote:
J_Madison wrote:but I see pax with a welder and a welding fuel tank, I'm shooting that tank even if it gibs/dismembers his body
I don't think it matters if you're right or wrong, outright admitting to this sort of thing in a ban appeal is a horrifically bad idea

Do you want to continue playing your round?

Are you going to lie to yourself about what is right or wrong, and what you're going to do?
There's nothing wrong with admitting you'll let someone walk over your round without consequence if that's what you like.

I want to play my round with as little disruption as possible.
It's me or you.

If I don't shoot, I might go into crit, may lose a leg, could die, maybe someone pickpockets me when I'm down.
And what're they gonna do? Take my stuff, mark it down as an IC issue, continue to greytide or welderbomb?

kevinz000 wrote:
Kevinz - an admin at citadel was well aware and was invited to the channel itself, as was later Owegno should want to keep an eye on my promises.
Uh what are you talking about
I'm on the channel but there's no fucking way I'd approve of a server raid. Doesn't matter what restrictions you would place on it (I wasn't even aware of this ..? I just heard oh hey let's go raid citadel tomorrow evening)

Also for the "ruined 3/4 of the game to validhunt" you'd think I stopped otherwise I would have run into issues by now hmm?

Never said you approved. I just said you were aware and in the channel and you knew it.

Yeah I know you stopped, sort of, beam rifles, flight suits, adrenals implants in RND. I just found it infuriating that my gameplay is being marked down when there's a million times worse.

feem · Post by **feem** » Mon Jul 31, 2017 4:45 pm #322363

Here are some suggestions:

Read the rules and the precedents. Don't assume you understand them, and don't read them with the intent of finding ways out of whatever you think you did or didn't do. Just read them fresh, and think about the motivations behind the rules and why they might be there.

Think about how your actions and opinions and behavior might be viewed by someone who's enforcing those rules, but who doesn't have the knowledge of your intent or motivation. Don't do this from the perspective of explaining it to someone or vindicating yourself, just think about why people might react to you the way they do.

Try not to approach this ban as something improper that you have to correct, as something someone is accusing you of, or as anything else which results in you dismissing or explaining away any possible reasons for banning you.

Give the administration the benefit of the doubt here, at least a little: from our perspective, there are outstanding issues with your play style and behavior which have not been resolved. Read the posts that have already been made which explain those problems, and think about why we might feel that way about them rather than just dismissing or explaining why we're wrong.

Think about this: the vast majority of our regular players go hundreds or thousands of connections with very few notes, positive or negative.

Take some time to chill and let others chill. This is a spectacle at this point and the more annoying and troubling the ban appeal becomes for the administration to deal with, the less likely a rule zero ban is to be lifted, as that administrative overhead is usually a factor in the ban being placed in the first place.

I know you care about this game, but you weren't banned in a vacuum.