Moderators: In-Game Admin, In-Game Game Master, In-Game Head Admins, Game Server Operators, TGMC Game Server Operators
KittenHugz wrote:I do not believe that I broke any of the rules listed on the wiki. I played with my friends for the sole purpose of learning the game, not for gamebreaking or trolling.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
Saegrimr wrote: "[18:39:38]SAY: Mateo Skywalker/Chindasvint : Borg, please open door" with no response on your end. To which he was then arrested.
So we've talked it out, explained we're not malicious, and none of us have a long history of shitty playing. This is at worst a simple, honest mistake. Where do we go from here?Bans are either to teach a lesson, punish malicious behavior, or remove shitty players from the community. Banning for mistakes doesn't really serve any of these purposes (an honest mistake can be explained and in the future avoided without having the players experience ruined with a ban). Of course a jobban might be warranted if a mistake is repeated multiple times.
Quey wrote:Yeah, netspeak in IC, generally poor form and whatnot, not evidence of metacomms and deserving of instapermaban.
Quey wrote:Your assumption that two new players would defer to me is no reason to start throwing out permabans.
Quey wrote:I made sure to adminhelp that we were going to be playing before we started, and I explained the importance of not metagaming. If you won't take my word for it, fine, we can work out something else, but I refuse to accept a ban based on "mostly just assuming".
Quey wrote:As for communicating out of game for an advantage, what advantage? Getting new players able to move and dress themselves is an advantage now? People often talk about general game mechanics ("How do I climb on tables?") in OOC, is that not allowed either?
So we've talked it out, explained we're not malicious, and none of us have a long history of shitty playing. This is at worst a simple, honest mistake. Where do we go from here?[/quote]Bans are either to teach a lesson, punish malicious behavior, or remove shitty players from the community. Banning for mistakes doesn't really serve any of these purposes (an honest mistake can be explained and in the future avoided without having the players experience ruined with a ban). Of course a jobban might be warranted if a mistake is repeated multiple times.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
I don't know, you brought it up. Let's drop it then.i'm not sure why that was brought up in the first place.
We all want to play. If it's any help, future games would be on different IP addresses. What is this discrepancy between, exactly? If that's not the reason, why am I banned again?Actually that was my reason for not permabanning you as well, again, if theres some discrepancy about who wants to play I can fix that.
I don't know what I could've done about you not receiving it. As for extremely obvious metacomms, I don't know what you're talking about. I don't even know what the story is on the original report. And yes, we were playing for a long time before that. I think the round before I was AI and Chindasvint was a borg. We communicated in game, no fouls there. KittenHugz was mime I think? I think he was off doing his whole thing that round. But we were playing just fine before that, and nothing really changed.While that's great you informed us of this, it apparently didn't carry over as we were getting more adminhelps about extremely obvious metacomms between the group of you, leading me to investigate further.
Honestly, I don't know what happened after the last time I saw them in the armory. As far as I know, they were just hanging out together since they were both lawyers. And communicating locations is hardly effective, as they could hardly navigate the station and don't really know where everything is. Yeah, maybe raiding the armory is bad, but that's an IC thing. They were hanging out in the brig together, as lawyers are wont to do, and saw me wander by. It's not like they roped me into this big heist and the three of us converged on the armory. I'm not saying what you bring up isn't a bad thing, just that's not what happened.Wordlessly following eachother around for things like raiding the armory is just plain out. If you can't understand why this would present an advantage over other players to inform eachother about their locations and what they're doing without others knowing, then i'm not sure what more I can say to this.
Now *I* don't know what more I can say to this. The question of whether or not it was deliberate skips over the question of if it happened at all. Further, if I hadn't been here to tell them the rules and they WERE metacommunicating, you'd ban them? Ignorance is no defense, but is that deserving of a permaban? Again, I insist no malicious behavior. If it was so obvious, could we have their statement? Because I have no idea what they said. If they reported two people breaking into the armory, that's IC. If they saw them wordlessly taking different paths through maint to get to the same locations, that'd be something else.And this is the lesson, follow the rules. A mistake would be a scientist blowing himself up after getting his mix wrong.
This was deliberate enough to be extremely obvious to another player who didn't have the luxury of following you around to watch.
Quey wrote:Further, if I hadn't been here to tell them the rules and they WERE metacommunicating, you'd ban them? Ignorance is no defense, but is that deserving of a permaban?
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
Don’t metagame. Do not ever use information, acquired out of character or through patterns or events your character would not be able to know, in game.
Two out of the three of you were banned for what we called metacomms or metacommunication. That is, not using THE IN-GAME CHAT FOR COMMUNICATING IN-CHARACTER and instead talking directly to eachother about the current round through external means. Whether this is being in the same room, over skype, or over some other form of voip or instant messenger, it doesn't matter.
I messed up. What I meant to say was if you had two newbs, first time playing, maybe they hadn't read the rules, they metacommunicated, would that be deserving of an immediate permaban?This is probably one of the worst things you can do in this game, and one of the things that break the balance of the game the hardest.
This is a roleplaying game, and with that, you are expected to act on knowledge only your character would have and not through external means. It's straight up cheating.
Wow, be nice. I perfectly comprehend the rule and value it. I just don't think that's what happened.If this is too much to comprehend i'd suggest finding a different game to play entirely.
When?You used information (where you guys were, what you were doing) acquired out of character (via talking to directly to eachother) to affect what you were doing in the game.
There's nothing to really nickel-and-dime or rules-lawyer about it. You metacommunicated, you get permabanned. Straightfoward and simple as that.
Quey wrote:The argument is
1. You metacommunicated.
2. Metacommunication deserves a permaban.
Therefore bans are to be meted out.
I don't dispute (2). I dispute (1).
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
Users browsing this forum: Bdudy