[Cheshify] 13thSky - in consideration of new information

[PanoplyOfTenAndThree]

BYOND account: 13thSky
Character name: Skye Zymara
Ban type: Server
Ban length: Permanent, reduced to 30 days.
Ban reason:
Time ban was placed: See Above
Server you were playing on when banned: Manuel
Round ID in which ban was placed: See Above
Your side of the story:
To start with the previous reference: viewtopic.php?f=34&t=34876

So why am I making another thread? Because new information has come to light, thanks to another appeal thread currently open (cross reference: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=34908 ) that is part of the group of bans and is relevant to my case.

One of the bigger things that's bothered me is why I was hit with a permanent ban with no history, no warning, not even being told why beyond the server-connect message, over something that's barely been worth a response when others do it. Well, now things seem a little clearer...

I want to take a look at some of the things said there. One of the bigger points appears pretty early:

more of a 'lie with dogs, wake up with fleas' type of warning for you.

So, it's flat out "You're guilty by association" for them? And that's probably an underlying reason for how I've been treated too..?

that said, i think suggests is a key word in this part of the note, as it only implies the extreme likelihood that you engaged in these things

That's another way of saying "We think you're guilty and that's good enough for us."

which, i feel in conjunction with the fact this group was already lying to the team about these things happening in the first place over the course of almost a year

Who was lying exactly? The whole group? I think that's very unlikely. Certain disagreeable individuals, maybe, I don't know their cases. The group was lying to admins for the better part of a year? I really doubt it.

But I want this emphasis on the group to be noted for my next section.

Why you think you should be unbanned:

So obviously I'm not deadeagle and, fine, I actually did mess up and had some poor self control last year, though over time I did get better and feel reasonable sure that every screenshot share in recent times was properly timed after round end. If not then I apologize but moving back to the core point: as pointed out in the previous thread, it was not things that could actually be used - not things that could potentially hurt someone's round, or give someone an advantage. And that sort of thing, from what I've seen, doesn't normally instant-escalate into a no-warning no-discussion permanent ban, and wouldn't typically get anything close to a month ban either.

It seems evident to me then that I haven't been handled fairly because I'm bearing the weight of others' actions, akin to the above references. Because I shared a community with the "wrong" people. Because it's likely assumed that I (and others) did worse things but "This is the evidence we have so this is what we're going to get them with." Because "They lied to us for a long time," when I think it's very unlikely more than a fraction of anyone part of that community did any such thing.

Now I'd like to raise a point: Group punishment is, very literally, a war crime. Now TG is obviously not a sovereign nation at war so obviously no one's going to Hague over a tiny internet community dispute, but it may be worth considering: Why is it a war crime? Why would anyone consider it to be such a severe misdeed to warrant this status?

Considering the principles it's based on, then. Things like fairness, and justice, and similar virtues. And those principles can very much be applied to any aspect of our lives we care to, including silly internet spacemen communities.

I don't think this is a good, fair way to run a community. There's a reason most of humanity has decided to forego such techniques, even in much smaller circumstances than the dramatic illustration above, and even if such techniques might be effective.

I don't think it is fair to punish me (nor anyone else) bearing the weight of others' actions, nor by proximity to others. I am my own person, and they are theirs and I can't control them, nor can I even monitor but a tiny fraction of what they might do.


Anything else we should know:

If there's meaningful discussion to be had then I'll answer as best I can.

If it's basically just "We're doing this anyways and be glad you got it down to a month," then, fine. It's your community and you can run it how you like, not really anything I can do other than lodge my protest, quod erat demonstratum. So in that case I'll accept it and let it lie once more, then.

[TheBibleMelts]

you were perma'd for confirmed sharing of active round information and it was lowered because of reasons already shared in the last thread. if you want to nitpick things said in other appeals, take it over to the peanut thread. otherwise condense down what you want from your ban here.

[TheBibleMelts]

also

Now I'd like to raise a point: Group punishment is, very literally, a war crime. Now TG is obviously not a sovereign nation at war so obviously no one's going to Hague over a tiny internet community dispute, but it may be worth considering: Why is it a war crime? Why would anyone consider it to be such a severe misdeed to warrant this status?

please don't compare getting banned in 2d spessmen for a rule violation to war crimes, my dude.

[Timberpoes]

I've been quietly observing the incoming Headmins Elect handling this incident with delegated authority of the current Headmin team.

But I'm going to step in as a current headmin here, for what little time my term has left, and shut this secondary appeal down. Whatever ruling your previous appeal had, your permanent ban is now temporary and that decision was full and final. The current headmin term would have reduced your ban to 3 months, but we were satisfied for the Headmins Elect to handle it however they saw fit.

I am going to emphasise something here.

You had instances of genuine and confirmed metacomms. Sharing IC information from a shift you were currently participating in, with players outside of that shift.

When any admin confirms metacomms in any form, the starting point we all take is "okay, perma". It doesn't matter if it was minor, and it doesn't matter if you intended to do a lesser form of metacomming. It undermines the fundamentals of the social deduction murder mystery game we have going here to release any IC information at all into OOC channels in secret or in private with any intent to share that IC information.

Let's take the example of the image you shared of you with the purring cat.


Here's what information it had:
Your IC location.
That you were currently alive.
That your character is you, and by logical deduction - that any other "you" characters where you aren't, may not be you. For example, any lings that may be impersonating you.

"I didn't intend to metacom that information, just some other lesser information" is not an acceptable defense. Infact, about the only two defenses we accept are "I was new, I didn't know any better" which can net a reduction from perma to non-perma, and "sorry I was trying to teach the game" which generally has a reduction from perma to a note when the admin believe this is an honest reason.

Your appeal was handled on an individual basis. You were given the "fairly new, didn't know any better" pass and your ban length was dropped from a perma to a month.

I'm not going to allow a second appeal on this ban. This appeal is closed.