Is 'It's revs' really noteworthy when you have a high stress role

[Uncle Bourbon]

If for example you are playing HoS, and are currently fighting for your life. Is it fair to get noted/eat a ban for trying to multitask between typing to alert your sec team and fending off said antag.
Especially since many weapons like a taser or ebow for example can easily stunlock you till they take off your headset or crit you.

Context matters of course, if some schmuck is sitting in bar with a drink telling everyone who walks by saying its revs, its wizard, ETC then yes give them a note/ban
I feel though in a life or death fight it should be a bit lenient if its a important role to the round.

[BeeSting12]

No.

[Shadowflame909]

(Oh shit cazz is a chicken I didn't know this) I was the one who suggested this title when Cazz brought up about how taking 15-minute bans for accidentally making meta-gamey errors like saying "its revs" instead of "we have revs" when playing HoS and fighting in a high-stress role. I personally think admins should be more lienient to head of staff members. When making an error. These are my reasons for this

1.They use the shortened version because they don't have time to speak and could be attacked at any moment.

2. This is a low-rp server so banning people for making a tiny grammar mistake is really silly.

3. They aren't the virologist sitting inside a cozy two door bolted room. Who don't interact with people, give them a break.

[kevinz000]

the precedent last I remembered is yes and I believe it should stay yes. just say "revs" if you want.
edit: what i remember: viewtopic.php?f=33&t=12077#p316576

[Uncle Bourbon]

yes that is a valid point which i obviously do, or at least try to do cause i havent gotten ahelped about anything like that in a long time. but people make mistakes in intense situations. Being one hit from crit and another hit is coming right at you, you don't really have time to properly think what you are going to say and you might slip up trying to be a help to your crewmates/make sure your body will be found.

[Ispiria]

I'd have to say that in most cases, with most admins dealing with most players, context will be considered and leniency will be offered in a situation where stress is high and the consideration of one's phrasing takes a back seat to immediate game situations.

However, leniency and context stop mattering as much on repeated offenses, and even head of staff during active revolution status doesn't immunize one from consequence should this not be the first, second, third, or even fifth time they've broken the rule. The like has to be drawn somewhere, context or no.

That all being said, "it's revs" is still an inherently OOC thing to say, since the "it" being referred to could only possibly be "the roundtype", which is an OOC concept. It takes less effort and less time to simply shout "REVS", which is something a person under fire might feasibly say to alert others to the situation.

One additional note I'd like to add, for reasons already known to the OP, is that the number of people who hypothetically care about enforcement of a given rule is never a good reason to claim the rule irrelevant.

edit because autocorrect made me say some nonsense

[kevinz000]

tbh i'd honestly take to just pming them and not noting them unless i see the same guy doing it time after time at this point if anything because this is to me one of the less ""severe"" ooc in ic things.

edit: it's late and i'm sleepy but basically: this is one of the easier things to legitimately slip up about and i'd support not noting them if you think it was an accident unless you see them do it more than a once/afew times.

[Nilons]

there is literally a shorter way to convey the information that isn't ocky icky as kevinz said, just say revs

even if it was literally the fastest way to say it winning shouldn't take precedent over not putting meta shit in ic

[ShadowDimentio]

This is a really stupid line to take. You can dig into the theory of it all you want, but at the end of the day you're literally fighting over the semantics of saying it's revs. It's a waste of time for everyone involved to squabble over something so supremely insignificant. I can guarantee you the admins have, or should have, more important things to do than pester players about something as stupid as this.

[BeeSting12]

even if it was literally the fastest way to say it winning shouldn't take precedent over not putting meta shit in ic

[ShadowDimentio]

"There's revs" being ok and "its revs" not is a stupid distinction to make.

[CitrusGender]

Spoiler:

I'd have to say that in most cases, with most admins dealing with most players, context will be considered and leniency will be offered in a situation where stress is high and the consideration of one's phrasing takes a back seat to immediate game situations.

However, leniency and context stop mattering as much on repeated offenses, and even head of staff during active revolution status doesn't immunize one from consequence should this not be the first, second, third, or even fifth time they've broken the rule. The like has to be drawn somewhere, context or no.

That all being said, "it's revs" is still an inherently OOC thing to say, since the "it" being referred to could only possibly be "the roundtype", which is an OOC concept. It takes less effort and less time to simply shout "REVS", which is something a person under fire might feasibly say to alert others to the situation.

One additional note I'd like to add, for reasons already known to the OP, is that the number of people who hypothetically care about enforcement of a given rule is never a good reason to claim the rule irrelevant.

edit because autocorrect made me say some nonsense

Ispi is right per ussual.

Additionally, quoting from precedent

Is it really so hard to say "There's a revolution" instead of "It's revs", or "shift" instead of "round"

Smack my head

I'm not trying to be lazy here, there is outlined precedent for this. There is leeway for high-stress situations, but I'm going to put my foot down here to retain some semblance of roleplay.

[Arianya]

Roleplay is based on a lot of little things, so while it may seem minor to make distinctions regarding phrasing, the point of the issue is tha-

Pranked Ispi, I'm not seriousposting in this thread :^)

[Uncle Bourbon]

the entirety of tg is a prank set up by MSO to see a bunch of weebs cause drama
be sure to like favorite and subscribe for more epic pranks

[PKPenguin321]

"There's revs" being ok and "its revs" not is a stupid distinction to make.

If it's so miniscule that it makes no difference to you, why not go with the one that keeps players who care about immersion immersed?

[oranges]

it really is stupid and I still disagree with it

it's litigation over a fukken comma and it doesn't even matter it barely affects the game because people understand and do the same thing either way.

I can't remember who went all policy superhero over it but they did it to make themself feel better about the falling roleplay standard instead of actually trying to tackle that problem.

Should be thrown in the trash heap

[Grazyn]

This is a really stupid line to take. You can dig into the theory of it all you want, but at the end of the day you're literally fighting over the semantics of saying it's revs. It's a waste of time for everyone involved to squabble over something so supremely insignificant. I can guarantee you the admins have, or should have, more important things to do than pester players about something as stupid as this.

It's a matter of zero tolerance. It's necessary to educate players that no OOC reference, no matter how small, should be said IC.

[Aloraydrel]

"We have a revolution"

[Shadowflame909]

Time to play debils advocate and say this. Real bias coming out of here. "It's revs" wouldn't be so common of a statement if everyone and there great grandfather didn't say it like once.

Making an accident and getting a 15 minute ban for it is really silly.

[iamgoofball]

this is a stupid ban reason

[iamgoofball]

the admins pretending to defend it because it makes them look weak otherwise because they can't grow balls and accept that they make bad calls sometimes disappoints me

[ShadowDimentio]

"There's revs" being ok and "its revs" not is a stupid distinction to make.

If it's so miniscule that it makes no difference to you, why not go with the one that keeps players who care about immersion immersed?

The issue itself makes no difference to me, but the admins fucking with players over something so stupid and small pisses me off.

[Nilons]

Time to play debils advocate and say this. Real bias coming out of here. "It's revs" wouldn't be so common of a statement if everyone and there great grandfather didn't say it like once.

Making an accident and getting a 15 minute ban for it is really silly.

it is silly, which is why it very rarely happens if it was an accident and it was only once

[Grazyn]

I doubt you'd get banned for saying "it's revs". It would be a bwoink or a note at most. Bwaah bwaah cry me a river

[ShadowDimentio]

One bwoink too many. And any notes you get will inevitably be stacked against you if you ever get banned, regardless of how fucking stupid the note is.

[Stickymayhem]

I bwoink for this every time. It's low effort and doesn't respect the bare minimum of roleplay we require.

When people say "it's revs" that is short hand for "The roundtype is revolution". Which is shorthand for "The roundtype is not X, because there are revs."

The logic of "There can't be a wizard/traitor/nuke op because we know the roundtype" is undoubtedly meta, and it's easy to fall into that trap with the phrase "its revs".

It's so simple to avoid confusion in this are that you should have no problem not doing it. Act like an antag and people will think you're an antag. Act like a metagamer and people will think you're a metagamer.

[MollyKristoph]

Trust me, there is a legitimate IC reason to say "It's revs"
Granted, it's not proper grammar, but to get on the case of metagaming knowledge in IC is utterly ridiculous. Is it metagaming knowledge to say "There's a wizard"? How about "There's xenos"? What about Nuke Ops war declaration?
What naturally comes to mind when you're dealing with revs is to say "It's revs" as in, "It's charlie," as a vietnam vet might say in regards to explaining why something bad happened, or who the culprit is.
Frankly, I disagree with this policy. Context matters. Vernacular matters.

[Nilons]

Trust me, there is a legitimate IC reason to say "It's revs"
Granted, it's not proper grammar, but to get on the case of metagaming knowledge in IC is utterly ridiculous. Is it metagaming knowledge to say "There's a wizard"? How about "There's xenos"? What about Nuke Ops war declaration?
What naturally comes to mind when you're dealing with revs is to say "It's revs" as in, "It's charlie," as a vietnam vet might say in regards to explaining why something bad happened, or who the culprit is.
Frankly, I disagree with this policy. Context matters. Vernacular matters.

When someone says "it's revs" what do you think the 'it' is referring to

[Doritos]

what an insanely idiotic excuse to use to ban/note someone holy shit

[kevinz000]

Why would we get rid of something considered part of the bare minimum of rp standards?

[Grazyn]

Trust me, there is a legitimate IC reason to say "It's revs"
Granted, it's not proper grammar, but to get on the case of metagaming knowledge in IC is utterly ridiculous. Is it metagaming knowledge to say "There's a wizard"? How about "There's xenos"? What about Nuke Ops war declaration?
What naturally comes to mind when you're dealing with revs is to say "It's revs" as in, "It's charlie," as a vietnam vet might say in regards to explaining why something bad happened, or who the culprit is.
Frankly, I disagree with this policy. Context matters. Vernacular matters.

it's actually a legacy of the old low-RP times, back when people used to utter the game mode out loud so that everyone knew what to do ("it's traitor" "it's changeling" "it's extended" and so on"). This is proved by the fact that even now, "IT'S REVS" and "REVS", albeit similar, have 2 completely different meanings:
"IT'S REVS": "the mode is confirmed to be revolution, start implanting people, order implants and follow the usual procedure for revolution"
"REVS": "there are people acting like revs in my immediate surroundings, they might just be assistants fucking around with flashes"

So yes, you are right in the fact that's it's a coded sentence, but a code that has its roots in OOC

[subject217]

Who the fuck has ever banned someone for this? You are crying about a made up situation because someone told you to stop referencing the game mode in IC. Obviously context is relevant in any ahelp, and if you can speak to an admin without acting like a sperglord it's not a problem.

[Shadowflame909]

So saying "its revs" is wrong because it outs the revs instantly instead of making sec think they probably have a revenant.

Yeah, I hope sec thanks you for that logic when they get stun prodded and murdered in maint

Also Subject, cazz got banned for it because he said "Its revs" 7 times in a eight month period. Which is why he made this thread

[subject217]

He is not banned for it, and he has not had a note or a ban for quite a while now.

[Grazyn]

if you, as sec, think about a revenant when someone shouts "REVS" then maybe you shouldn't play sec

[Shadowflame909]

He is not banned for it, and he has not had a note or a ban for quite a while now.

He got temp banned for it

[subject217]

He got temp banned for it

Yeah, like a year ago. So is this a year old ban appeal for a 20 minute ban? Not to mention completely stripped of any context.

[Nilons]

if you can speak to an admin without acting like a sperglord it's not a problem.

consider that this is an ss13 forum

[Shadowflame909]

He got temp banned for it

Yeah, like a year ago. So is this a year old ban appeal for a 20 minute ban? Not to mention completely stripped of any context.

Probably. I'm not the one who made this thread. But, yeah people have gotten banned for saying "its revs" as HoS

[Grazyn]

Getting tempbanned as hos during revs is a blessing

[CitrusGender]

Bans only happen when someone has messed up like 5 or more times, and even then it's often very lenient (ussually like 15 minutes to an hour.)

Additionally, this scenario is made up. I don't see the problem here. I am reaffirming PKP's precedent.