Thedragmeme's warning for Powergaming and Self-Antagging as an Antagonist on Manuel

[SpacePlayer]

BYOND account: Archinist
Character name: Amira Linton
Ban type: Note
Ban length: Note
Ban reason: Note left by Thedragmeme on 2023-08-11 11:11:00
Round ID: 212265 (MRP) Self antagging/powergaming- As the RD built an armed mech(durand), then asked for the hypospray and captains medal. Afterwards had the stations Ai bolt and depower their office. This is a combination of powergaming and self antaging, do not do this again.



Time ban was placed: 2023-08-11 11:11:00
Round ID 212265, Manuel

Ok, so this HAS to be a mistake, but some further context below,

I initaited the ahelps by ahelping whether a fellow Roboticist's behaviour (I was a syndie RD) was was okay, as they'd been:

I was an actual antagonist during this round. I'd ahelped the robo's behaviour because of a former warning I received on Manuel/Campbell for similair behaviour - about 10 + months ago I'd hunted a loud, murderous antagonist down with a Gygax and killed them (They had a elite MODsuit, had murdered people, and had a desword.) I thought it was OK as the Captain had made an announcement and even encouraged vigilante action on this traitor - I was wrong.

Thus, I thought if doing the above was NOT okay on MRP, then - surely - a non-antag, non-sec Roboticist that I didn't directly threaten, or assault, or threaten their property/job even, going out of their way to use a code oversight to slap 5 tracking beacons on my mech, clearly doing it for combat purposes which is odd behavour for a civilian technician, then ignoring the evacuation shuttle in favor of making a mech EMP console in roboltics to destroy my mech when I was making my way to evacuation? I hadn't threatened anyone at this point, I'd asked the Captain to hand over the Hypospray and Captain of Medalcy with the reasoning of "There's a recall request on the Hypospray" and "A Nanotraysen Officer would like to see the Medal" which isn't super well-thought out, but then again Hyposprays in real life have run into hygiene/maintenance issues so it's not too out of the ordinary.

Thedragmeme's response was that it was totally valid for the roboticist to engage me, as I'd used content from their department (Mecha >> Robotics >> Roboticist) and therefore - perfectly valid - even though my mech was far away from Robotics at that point and I hadn't loudly acted as a destructive antagonist. (I had, however, suggested over comms that they were "constructing a harmful singulo generator in maintenance" and that the AI should "depower the maintenance APCs" to prevent them from using it (I'd assumed they'd made the EMP console in maints, not Robotics.)

At this point? Ok, sure. Valid, I guess. Rules change, or w/e. It's not incredibly realistic for your average technician to go out and hunt down terrorists in their spare time but it's a vidya game sooo... okay... I get over it.
I played another round where I was a secoff, no ahelps were shared in this round. At the end of the round, when my client had restarted I noticed Thedragmeme had left a warning for me for the reasons of "power gaming and self-antagging"... um, okay. Right.

Screenshot of admin warning:

Anything else we should know: If anyone noticed, this is a second account I've made for the forums since I wasn't able to access my original account.

[TheRex9001]

Hey there, please make sure to follow this format when posting appeals! Further rules can be found at viewtopic.php?f=7&t=44
BYOND account: BYOND account
Character name: Character name at time of ban
Ban type: Server/Role(s)/OOC/etc
Ban length: Permanent, 5 days, etc
Ban reason: Copy this from the server. If this is a server ban, attempt to connect. If it is not a server ban, view your notes with "View Admin Remarks" button under OOC tab in-game. An image is suitable, but do **not** paraphrase or otherwise modify the reason.
Time ban was placed: Try to get this from the server when you get the ban reason. If it was a note, the note has a timestamp. If it was a server ban, it will also have a timestamp. Both of these times are in UTC.
Server you were playing on when banned: Server name, eg, Bagil/Sybil/Terry/Event Hall
Round ID in which ban was placed: Round ID, should be present in ban reason from server. Can be excluded if it cannot be found. Example: 101235
Your side of the story: Explain what happened in your own words.
Why you think you should be unbanned: Why should you get this opportunity to return, what value do you bring back to the community? Was your ban unfair? Justify it.
References of good conduct: If serverbanned and **especially** if permabanned, have you played on other servers during the time you were banned? Name them here, in many cases good references of conduct and character can be crucial to a successful appeal. Otherwise, feel free to remove this portion.
Anything else we should know: If you have anything else you feel is relevant to your appeal, include it here. For example, if you have recently been banned from another server, or have had issues in other communities, it may be a preferable to be transparent and address that here, rather than them being brought up during the appeal process. If this section does not apply to you, feel free to remove it.

[Drag]

I'll handle this right now while I have a second.

I'd like to start this by saying, yeah I'll be removing the note. The conversation we had was very confusing, and I ended up misinterpreting some given information. This event took place the round before(round 212265), so I didn't have access to the traitor panel. I was working off the assumption you were both non-antagonists and just got into a scuffle. That's my bad, so I would like to apologize for that confusion.

Before I close this I'd like to touch on the policy I was trying to convey, since there's still a lot of confusion about the situation.

For additional context this happened on MRP, MRP rule four says the following:

► Show Spoiler

You should not act like a vigilante if a security force is present unless you have a good in-character roleplay reason to believe a global or round-ending threat exists. Restricted antags that are not automatically global or round-ending threats may still become so through their actions in the shift, the stronger your reasoning the more action you can take against them.

You can always defend yourself and others from violent antagonists.

Players that choose to act as security will be held to the same standards as security.

The rule four precedents say the following:

► Show Spoiler

1. Actively hunting a threat involves seeking out or pursuing that threat outside the bounds of your normal reasonable play area. Players are not expected to ignore antagonists during the normal course of play and may engage with antagonists who are active within their sphere. (Examples: A medical doctor knowing the identity of an active traitor could attack that traitor if that traitor came armed into medbay, likewise an engineer could attack a traitor they spotted breaking into the engine room). Players choosing this route should not attempt to chase down or finish antagonists who retreat from these engagements (unless they have reason to believe that the antagonist constitutes a global or round-ending threat or have a personal reason to do so under other precedents)
2. The dead dog litmus test: Players may hunt specific threats or antagonists who have identifiably done something to wrong that particular player, the Ur-example being that players may seek revenge against those who harm their departmental pets. Players who choose this path are empowered to act as security in regard to that specific threat, but as per the main rule must also follow related restrictions on security play. This can also be applied to an assault of a character you've had significant interactions with, in the current round, and it does not apply to cross-round or OOC friendships.

I'm only citing the first two precedents since those are the only relevant ones.

On MRP if a non antag goes after an antagonist they need to satisfy a few things: For one they can't validhunt if the antagonist chooses to disengage, unless it's a confirmed global threat such as a blood halo cultist, known head rev, or a nukie. Going out of your way to attack an antagonist insinuates the player left their expected play area, in this case it was the roboticist. So their play area would be Robotics/R&D etc. Secondly, has the antagonist slighted the player in some form? This isn't exclusive to being violently attacked, stealing things, or encroaching on a workspace as a known antagonist satisfies this as well. And third, while this isnt a written rule, how likely is security going to respond and arrive. This is something else I also use when gaging issues as IC or policy breach related. Shit happens, low pop games occur, if security cant or won't help you it's up to you to help yourself. From what I know of the round in question security was occupied with a known traitor who wasnt you and a heretic. There was two officers total, so that condition in my eyes was also satisfied. Theres also the matter of your own behavior we need to take into account. Your first initial encounter with the roboticist you revealed you were an antagonist of some form:

[2023-08-11 09:43:31.760] GAME-SAY: Archinist/(Amira Linton) "Hi, roboticist." (Robotics Lab (126,113,2))
[2023-08-11 09:43:55.079] GAME-SAY: Archinist/(Amira Linton) "I don't even work fully for NT, so it's fine." (Robotics Lab (122,114,2))
[2023-08-11 09:44:32.142] GAME-SAY: Archinist/(Amira Linton) "I have my reasons." (Robotics Lab (122,115,2))

You are now a known antagonist to this person. Shortly after you build an armed durand, and say this over coms:

[2023-08-11 09:45:04.487] GAME-SAY: Archinist/(Amira Linton) "Captain, I require your medal of captaincy, and your hypospray." (Robotics Lab (122,115,2))

Now you've confirmed you're an antagonist to the entire station. Good job.

So yeah. You're valid, people can act against you if they're not going out of their way to do so.

A little after you request your stations Ai to bolt down your office. It's not meta-knowledge to know there's a mech console in there. You were fully known to be running around in a Durand.

The question that was asked, in essence, was the roboticist okay with emping your mech. The short answer is yes. I applied the note because I was under the assumption you were not an antag, but were doing antagonistic things. Which we don't allow. However, that's not the case, as I mentioned before I will be removing the note.

[SpacePlayer]

Sure! Thank you for removing the note, I'd assumed it was a mistake but it's sometimes hard to gauge someone's intent on the internet.

In the case of it being valid, where exactly is the line drawn as to "It's [departmental] content, so it's fine for a player from that department to go after it"? If a CMO announces over medical comms they're an antagonist, then they grab the medical syringe rifle and move it to the hallway on their person would it be fine for a MD to manufacture sleepypens and go after them? That's the closest "mech beacon EMP" analogue I can think of rn.

Are mechs special in that regard? There seems to be a "REE FUCK MECHS" culture in almost every SS13 server I've played on in which people almost always favor the non-mech combatant unless they're a loud antag (space dragon, very murderous tot, nukies, etc). The sight of a mech fighting someone usually has a crowd start chanting "MECH ROGUE" even if the mech was defending itself from a random assault, and the procedure seems to usually be "break the mech, stun/cuff both, question them". It feels like sometimes mechs, mainly combat mechs, are automatically seen as semi-valid, fully valid, or "potential bad characters"? Is this a thing?

[Drag]

Sure! Thank you for removing the note, I'd assumed it was a mistake but it's sometimes hard to gauge someone's intent on the internet.

In the case of it being valid, where exactly is the line drawn as to "It's [departmental] content, so it's fine for a player from that department to go after it"? If a CMO announces over medical comms they're an antagonist, then they grab the medical syringe rifle and move it to the hallway on their person would it be fine for a MD to manufacture sleepypens and go after them? That's the closest "mech beacon EMP" analogue I can think of rn.

Are mechs special in that regard? There seems to be a "REE FUCK MECHS" culture in almost every SS13 server I've played on in which people almost always favor the non-mech combatant unless they're a loud antag (space dragon, very murderous tot, nukies, etc). The sight of a mech fighting someone usually has a crowd start chanting "MECH ROGUE" even if the mech was defending itself from a random assault, and the procedure seems to usually be "break the mech, stun/cuff both, question them". It feels like sometimes mechs, mainly combat mechs, are automatically seen as semi-valid, fully valid, or "potential bad characters"? Is this a thing?

A lot of escalation and line drawing is dependent on context, as rule 4 encompasses people do not have to ignore a confirmed antagonist.

In the syringe gun example, assuming all of the factors are the same, I'd say yeah if they're a confirmed antagonist. The hall outside of the medical bay is still a realistic play area for medical doctors. The syringe gun is a dangerous weapon, especially in a competent hand. I've gotten fucked over numerous times on rev rounds as the CMO because I forgot about the syringe gun.

Mechs are classified as weapons, in this case, a roboticist making a console and emping the shit out of it since you're a confirmed antagonist and told them is well within their right. Mechs are commonly seen as semi-valid because they're strictly weapons. There are of course edge cases with the medical and cargo mechs. There are a lot of factors all the time, a good way I look at it is seeing if you've slighted this player or trying to see if you've been exposed as evil.

Edit: On the other side of the coin, if you had just made a mech that was armed and say stored it in your office thats another thing. If they had destroyed it then, for no actual reason, not only would you have the power to demote their ass but I would have seen it as a violation of "dont be a dick". It's good to remember that the people you play with don't have the information you do, what you know about your antagonist status dosent occur to them until you inform them via your words or actions.