Moderators: In-Game Game Master, In-Game Head Admins
Screemonster wrote:People getting valided for going into dorms/bathrooms because "the only possible reason anyone could ever be in there is to spawn their traitor gear therefore they're inherently suspicious"
Screemonster wrote:Even if he found someone behind the bolted door, if that person wasn't in there with the warden then it's kinda poor to go full valids and search and execute the guy instead of continuing your search for the missing warden.
People getting valided for going into dorms/bathrooms because "the only possible reason anyone could ever be in there is to spawn their traitor gear therefore they're inherently suspicious" is a pretty clear break of the rule about non-antags not being allowed to pre-emptively search for antags.
Skillywatt wrote:Well I thought so too but we had an admin saying it doesn't matter if someone is searching for a dead warden
Skillywatt wrote:I'm not sure why you even say this forum isn't a second ban appeal.
Gigapuddi420 wrote:snip
I just wanted some clarification on just how strong of an ooc shields those doors are and a general discussion on when probable cause isn't that probable.
Gigapuddi420 wrote:Skillywatt wrote:I'm not sure why you even say this forum isn't a second ban appeal.
Doesn't seem like it would be hard to see why I would say that, you've taken issue with one note appeal you didn't like and you're using it entirely as the basis for the thread instead of talking about the general issue at hand. I even told you cases where you could search someone coming out of a bolted door. The purpose here isn't to discuss one specific admin's actions but rather discuss policy as a whole related to the issue. You completely ignored the rest of my post describing what I expect from players in a search just to harp on more about it.
Asking for clarification on existing policy
You saw a bad ban that waded through some grey area rules, or just aren't sure you're fully clear on a rule in the Rules page. Perhaps a rule is just worded too poorly. Your post should clearly state your question: We shouldn't have to figure out what you're asking through vague implications.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users