Bottom post of the previous page:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29477Raise your hand if you think the sec officer just wanted all-access for himself!
Bottom post of the previous page:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29477Does the thing about lying in ban appeals getting you dunked apply to the banning admin or what?Shaps-cloud wrote:Alright I checked in with a few of my fellow admins on this in adminbus because I wanted to be fair and see if I was being unfair and jumping to conclusions that didn't fit the situation, and was backed up by the others that your actions were overkill. Let me walk you through the events from outside your perspective
1. Captain gives you the spare ID, not mentioning to the security team that he authorized you to have it
2. Sec officer sees the clown with the spare ID, that's a massive liability no matter how you look at it, and he very reasonably assumes you aren't supposed to have it (and let's not pretend "the captain totally gave it to me, honest!" is a very believable story without proof)
3. Sec officer confiscates the ID in a totally (as far as he knows) prudent and legal move on his part
4. You complain on the radio for a while and tell the captain about it. The captain, crucially, declines to just simply contact the officer and order him to return the ID, and tells you to just stun him and take it back by force. If you were smart, you would realize that the captain was (intentionally or not) totally hanging you out to dry, and he is very pointedly not taking a very simple action that would resolve the situation in your favor. This should be your key takeaway from this situation: Why would the captain tell you to try attacking a sec officer who, as you yourself point out, has vastly superior weaponry and armor as well as backup, when he could just tell the officer to give the ID back?
5. You ambush and murder the sec officer, likely damaging his gear and hearing in the explosion
Really. I think the Captain was just having a laugh at your expense when he told you to stun the officer and take the ID back by force, thinking you'd fuck it up and get your ass kicked. Instead, you went and just outright murdered the officer, who had absolutely no indication that the Captain actually did approve you having all access, and was just doing his job.
That's why you got banned for overescalation.
kieth4 wrote: infrequently shitting yourself is fine imo
There is a lot of very bizarre nonsense being talked on this forum. I shall now remain silent and logoff until my points are vindicated.
Player who complainted over being killed for looting cap office wrote: ↑Sun Jul 30, 2023 1:33 am Hey there, I'm Virescent, the super evil person who made the stupid appeal and didn't think it through enough. Just came here to say: screech, retards. Screech and writhe like the worms you are. Your pathetic little cries will keep echoing around for a while before quietting down. There is one great outcome from this: I rised up the blood pressure of some of you shitheads and lowered your lifespan. I'm honestly tempted to do this more often just to see you screech and writhe more, but that wouldn't be cool of me. So come on haters, show me some more of your high blood pressure please.
[img]https://i.postimg.cc/Vs3pSJKX/screenshot-23.png[/img]Malkraz wrote:fred come back to the game
This is worth a complaintNot-Dorsidarf wrote:Does the thing about lying in ban appeals getting you dunked apply to the banning admin or what?Shaps-cloud wrote:Alright I checked in with a few of my fellow admins on this in adminbus because I wanted to be fair and see if I was being unfair and jumping to conclusions that didn't fit the situation, and was backed up by the others that your actions were overkill. Let me walk you through the events from outside your perspective
1. Captain gives you the spare ID, not mentioning to the security team that he authorized you to have it
2. Sec officer sees the clown with the spare ID, that's a massive liability no matter how you look at it, and he very reasonably assumes you aren't supposed to have it (and let's not pretend "the captain totally gave it to me, honest!" is a very believable story without proof)
3. Sec officer confiscates the ID in a totally (as far as he knows) prudent and legal move on his part
4. You complain on the radio for a while and tell the captain about it. The captain, crucially, declines to just simply contact the officer and order him to return the ID, and tells you to just stun him and take it back by force. If you were smart, you would realize that the captain was (intentionally or not) totally hanging you out to dry, and he is very pointedly not taking a very simple action that would resolve the situation in your favor. This should be your key takeaway from this situation: Why would the captain tell you to try attacking a sec officer who, as you yourself point out, has vastly superior weaponry and armor as well as backup, when he could just tell the officer to give the ID back?
5. You ambush and murder the sec officer, likely damaging his gear and hearing in the explosion
Really. I think the Captain was just having a laugh at your expense when he told you to stun the officer and take the ID back by force, thinking you'd fuck it up and get your ass kicked. Instead, you went and just outright murdered the officer, who had absolutely no indication that the Captain actually did approve you having all access, and was just doing his job.
That's why you got banned for overescalation.
Remeber when in this thread 3 comments and all thier context where deleted because the first comment had a mean word in it? Even though all replies where not about the mean word and 99% of the first comment was on topic and not mean?MooCow12 wrote:I know this is alittle bit off topic but please bear with metechnokek wrote:
This is not a peanut and on topic
someone should not post relevant quotes and log data and feel the need to say that something is on-topic and then copy their post and archive it in the peanut thread in fear of it being deleted.
The players in this community should not be afraid of something like that, I know you guys are volunteers and I respect you for doing this but something is clearly wrong here. And i know you cant make everyone happy and you cant be perfectly thorough (especially on rounds with lots of tickets) and even when you go back on what you say people are gonna make fun of you and talk negatively about you.
But something is wrong here.
Being an asshole is more damaging and harder to fix.technokek wrote:Is there an actual difference between "the admin is incompetent" and "the admin is malicious"? In the end comments and threads get nuked, people get banned because they got ban baited.Malkraz wrote:techno im pretty sure thats just morto being sensitive and bad at moderating
It does not matter if they do it on purpose or not, the thing that matters it that they shouldn't do it
Stickymayhem wrote:Imagine the sheer narcisssim required to genuinely believe you are this intelligent.
I award myself zero points for discoveringPandarsenic wrote: Raise your hand if you think the sec officer just wanted all-access for himself!
more or less. The call on this one hinges on whether you think the security officer was aware the clown was authorized for AA or not. If he thought the clown got the spare illegally to his knowledge the confiscation was legal and he has meta-protection from retaliation. The problem with cases like this is that a whole load of it comes down to intent and both parties will provide their side of the situation often slanted to suit their personal narrative, it certainly doesn't look good for the security player who is coming off like a grade A shitter.Screemonster wrote:officer instigated conflict
clown responded with violence
if officer stickyfingers thinks it's unfair or excessive that he got critted for taking an ID, he should consider not stealing next round
I dunno about anyone but if the cap slid into my pda dms to ask where the clown's missing AA is, it would take an insane leap in logic to assume the captain did not give or sanction the clown's AAGigapuddi420 wrote:The call on this one hinges on whether you think the security officer was aware the clown was authorized for AA or not.
Later on in the rules page.You may instigate conflict with another player within reason (you can't completely destroy their department, kill them unprovoked, or otherwise take them out of the round for long periods of time) but they are entitled to respond with violence. If you think it's unfair or excessive they killed you for taking their ID, consider not stealing next round.
Let's say the banned player in question here decided to be cautious and ahelp about the security officer stealing the ID that they acquired legitimately, to what extent would the banning admin actually punish the security officer or give the clown recourse for the stolen item? It seems to me that if the clown ahelped that a security officer stole the spare from them they would just get a big ol' IC issue button right in their face because the admin seems to believe the officer had no way to know. Which essentially means that the poor behaviour of security would have been tolerated and the clown has no help through administrative means.Make sure players deserve it when you treat them as an antag, when in doubt, err on the side of caution as poor behaviour on the part of security will not be tolerated.
Maybe blowing the shit out of the security officer is poor escalation but all things considered 1) The seccie was brought to medbay 2) He stole the legitimate ID of the clown 3) Trying to deal with security more passively/non-lethally leads to you getting beat to death by crewmates 4) You do not have metaprotection under the rules to do things that are not in the legitimate scope of your job and especially more so if it is done in bad faith[2021-07-15 00:06:45.053] TCOMMS: Laughingxp/(Seth Hawker) [Security] (spans: ) "Clown mustve lost it, sad, I wish I knew where it was" (language: Galactic Common) (Fore Primary Hallway (152,178,2))
[2021-07-15 00:06:53.161] TCOMMS: Laughingxp/(Seth Hawker) [Security] (spans: ) "Its as if, it was wrong to give it to them in the first place!" (language: Galactic Common) (Fore Primary Hallway (152,171,2))
What's the functional difference between starting out with the intent to steal someone's ID and confiscating an ID only to later decide to keep it for personal use?Gigapuddi420 wrote:I mean for the initial confiscation. Finding out it was permitted after the fact is slightly different from doing it with the intent to steal. Basically a "oops, oh well fuck clowns", still a cunt thing to do but you didn't instigate the whole thing maliciously, you just refused to fix it.
nooo dont admincomplaint me super agro creg cragSuper Aggro Crag wrote:This is worth a complaintNot-Dorsidarf wrote: Does the thing about lying in ban appeals getting you dunked apply to the banning admin or what?
kieth4 wrote: infrequently shitting yourself is fine imo
There is a lot of very bizarre nonsense being talked on this forum. I shall now remain silent and logoff until my points are vindicated.
Player who complainted over being killed for looting cap office wrote: ↑Sun Jul 30, 2023 1:33 am Hey there, I'm Virescent, the super evil person who made the stupid appeal and didn't think it through enough. Just came here to say: screech, retards. Screech and writhe like the worms you are. Your pathetic little cries will keep echoing around for a while before quietting down. There is one great outcome from this: I rised up the blood pressure of some of you shitheads and lowered your lifespan. I'm honestly tempted to do this more often just to see you screech and writhe more, but that wouldn't be cool of me. So come on haters, show me some more of your high blood pressure please.
What a horrible take. By that logic, sec should let people run around with stunbatons, shotgun, disablers, and whatever other shit they have because "you steal someone's shit, you're valid."Screemonster wrote: bull fucking shit.
You steal someone's shit, you're valid.
Being security doesn't change that.
This changes things, then. An officer lying to the cap to keep AA for himself, despite the cap trying to get the officer to give it back, makes the situation look much better for you. All your valid avenues to getting the ID back, which was rightfully yours, were blocked. Stuns wouldn't have worked and sec wasn't complying even with the captain's support. I'm curious what other resolutions Shaps had in mind to be honest, apart from an ahelp.MooCow12 wrote: FUJI WAS THE ONE THAT GAVE ME AA. I Think? I think hes the captain?
Eronymun/(Fujiwara Mokou) [Security] ------> (spans: command_headset ) <----
Security doesn't know who the antagonists are... That's kind of the entire thing about security. A legitimate security threat is a potential antagonist having access he wouldn't ordinarily. In this case that would include all of bridge, armory, etc., basically giving him the power to hand out HoS IDs to all his friends with no consequences. So yeah, it's a security threat. Nevertheless the captain approved it so it shouldn't have been taken.Fishimun wrote:Clown isn't a "legitimate security threat", an antagonist would be.
Now ,if there was 100% evidence that clown was an antagonist who needed to get their cap approved spare stolen then sure i'd agree but based on the info we see right now all clown did wrong was take the spare from captain.
What other recourse does the clown have if the Captain when sec makes it clear that they don't intend to comply, literally refuses to talk about it, runs off when confronted, etc.?sinfulbliss wrote: If so, does disobeying the cap/HOS's strict orders to return the spare make the sec officer valid to the person who was afflicted?
sinfulbliss wrote: I'm curious what other resolutions Shaps had in mind to be honest, apart from an ahelp.
Here's what it comes down to at the end of the day. Security is there to make sure the station stays secure. That's their primary goal, and their primary objective. If the captain makes a call that goes directly against the security of the station (like giving the spare to a clown, distributing the armory to randoms, giving away his belongings, etc.), then we're faced with a problem. The captain ranks above HoS and all of sec on the chain of command, so on the one hand, sec simply has to follow the cap's orders. On the other hand, when the cap makes very bad calls, it is normal and even expected for sec to disobey the captain to preserve station security. This is extremely rare in my experience, but it does happen.Pandarsenic wrote:What other recourse does the clown have if the Captain when sec makes it clear that they don't intend to comply, literally refuses to talk about it, runs off when confronted, etc.?sinfulbliss wrote: If so, does disobeying the cap/HOS's strict orders to return the spare make the sec officer valid to the person who was afflicted?
"Do not steal people's IDs" is the very definition of "Shit that makes you valid to that person"
The captain gave the spare to the clown. Comms indicate Seth knew this was done willingly. Seth stole the ID, then kept it because he wanted it for himself, just as he kept the emag in the video for himself.
Any other role doing this shit would have made this a perfectly valid kill. Anyone but the clown having that done to them would have made this a perfectly valid kill. Why should this case be different?
Yeah I agree, it's a timehonored tradition.Agux909 wrote:Giving the spare to the clown is funne.
Never take away aa from a clown, I loves me a clown.sinfulbliss wrote:Yeah I agree, it's a timehonored tradition.Agux909 wrote:Giving the spare to the clown is funne.
No i mean this is grounds for clown to complain about shapsNot-Dorsidarf wrote:nooo dont admincomplaint me super agro creg cragSuper Aggro Crag wrote:This is worth a complaintNot-Dorsidarf wrote: Does the thing about lying in ban appeals getting you dunked apply to the banning admin or what?
did you see what you did??Super Aggro Crag wrote:No i mean this is grounds for clown to complain about shapsNot-Dorsidarf wrote:nooo dont admincomplaint me super agro creg cragSuper Aggro Crag wrote:This is worth a complaintNot-Dorsidarf wrote: Does the thing about lying in ban appeals getting you dunked apply to the banning admin or what?
Not-Dorsidarf wrote:Does the thing about lying in ban appeals getting you dunked apply to the banning admin or what?
This is what we call "the night of the long knives".Jimmius wrote:Dorsidwarf has retired.
play opus: echo of starsongSuper Aggro Crag wrote:This is what u get when u let people into your community
lolBONERMASTER wrote:Not-Dorsidarf wrote:Does the thing about lying in ban appeals getting you dunked apply to the banning admin or what?This is what we call "the night of the long knives".Jimmius wrote:Dorsidwarf has retired.
With warm regards
-BONERMASTER
goddamnit moocow I specifically warned you to keep this to a note appeal to keep this from getting out of hand.Malkraz wrote:chill out with this stuff stupid ur gonna undermine your argument (that I'm making for you)You might as well perma me right now because as time goes on and I discover more about the round it only reinforces my belief that what I did was right, at the very least it brought this administration to light.
Timberpoes wrote: Lepi was right all along.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Imitates-The-Lizards, Jacquerel, vaporwhisp