RDT Ban Appeal

User avatar
Ruby Flamewing
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:04 pm

RE: RDT Ban Appeal

Post by Ruby Flamewing »

Okay, so from what I heard, you had your IC wife tag along to do miner stuff. You know, mine, fix your mech (why even use mechs anyways, they're slow - that's just my opinion on 'em, though), and help you fight megafauna. With the amount of points you guys should've drummed up, I too wonder why they were all spent on survival pens and stuff and there somehow not be enough for a mining hardsuit. Heck, just asking for an EVA suit would've worked. If the only Lavaland loot you gave was the drake armor, I can understand the purpose of it...but that's some pretty strong armor, too. One of the better options in the game, really. But I'm not here to discuss your allowance of who you give loot to - it's more what happened at Genetics.

See, what you said you did seems...good to me, in a way. You were both gonna go space exploring, and because somehow you spent all your points and couldn't mine more to get a hardsuit, went to Genetics to share the powers you had. CMO walks in, tells you to GTFO, you say "no u", and CMO gets pissed and whacks you.
FIRST ISSUE IS RIIIIIGHT HERE.
You see, Genetics is a very, VERY weird part of the station, in that it's under the control of TWO departments: Medbay and Science. As such, you have two department heads to contend with when it comes to using it beyond cloning: the CMO and the RD. If you're going to do the powers thing and hand them out to people, you're supposed to clear it with both - the act of getting powers technically falls to the RD's side of things, the handing out of powers falls under the CMO's side of things (because who do you scream at to do the fixin'?), so when the CMO said 'no' and to get out, they were in the right. You were essentially telling a department head that you weren't going to listen to them telling you to get our and stop doing something in their department, so their response was to get you to leave the area. Yes, your friend had access, but the CMO was against the notion and refusing their order was kind of a bad call.

Now, you apparently manage to get up, disarm the CMO, and slap them with their own baton. Security rolls in, likely having been called in at this point by the CMO over it all, and decide that yeah, refusing a department head's orders in their own department then proceeding to slap 'em with their own stick, as a miner, armed with all sorts of deadly shit, is better apprehended on a "sooner" scale, because of how fast shit can escalate and how out-powered Sec is compared to a miner with plenty of Lavaland loot. Now, CMO probably wasn't aware of you having your powers, let alone gave the OK for you to have them anyways (and correct me if I'm wrong with this assumption, but I would wager either your friend/IC wife or someone else gave them to you), so their goal was to cure you of them. They were in the right here. Your friend, however, decided that the best response to this was to use a gravity gun on a department head for doing their job, because they disagreed with the CMO just doing their job. That's when they got slated for arrest by Security.

So, you wait your five minutes, and when it's up, because Security's doing its job, you decide that rather than just patiently wait for them to wrap whatever mess they were in to let you out, to just leave yourself - and chances are, if none of them were aware that you left AFTER your sentence, then most likely (and not wrong for thinking so, if you look at it from their standing point) believed you to have left DURING your sentence, because you weren't going to deal with that shit. So congrats, you're still on Security's shit list, you attacked a head of staff, your friend attacked Security and the same head of staff for doing their jobs IN YOUR NAME, and this is all because you somehow mined the entirety of Lavaland and had no points left for a mining suit, or just asked for an EVA suit in general.

And because this clearly isn't the first instance of it happening, that's why you both got slapped with the ban - your pal getting hit harder because they were the more violent/aggressive of the two of you. IC relationships are not grounds for metagaming - you can be friends, be family, but you're all on a research station and should operate as such. You can an old geezer, with your significant other and children all working on the station for all we care, but you're all employees and should act as such - if one of them gets arrested for doing something they shouldn't have been doing, you don't go breaking them out because they're family - you only go breaking them out if you're certain they're innocent, no one else believes you, and you want to live your life running from the law...which isn't exactly something anyone wants here, I'm sure. So while the metabuddying rule is missing, we all know what the term means - including you - which makes me wonder why one would think it shouldn't apply when we know what it means, what it involves, and why it's bad to do.


Oh, and as for you two getting the temp bans, it was a 5-0 vote in favor for, with two headmins voting as well. So please don't scream people are biased against you - we try to do things on a democratic form. Hell, I'm not even supposed to be revealing that, but y'know, it helps cut the idea that "this admin's out to get me" when they actually brought it up with the rest of the staff and the staff discussed it all together before the ban was even passed. Assuming makes an ass out of "u" and "me", after all. Don't do it unless you're absolutely sure you won't make yourself look like an ass.
...Even though that's what I did earlier, and make an assumption based off an educated guess and accepted I could be wrong about it. /shrug
It is only waffer thin.

Cameron Lancaster
Junior Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 3:18 pm
Contact:

RE: RDT Ban Appeal

Post by Cameron Lancaster »

This is a much better response. Thank you for taking the time to talk through the situation and the logic used.

However, just to clear up a point: my understanding is that Chayse's powers came from Lavaland. Knowing he had cold resist, they went to Genetics to clone that ability for Syl's use.

My main concern is that what happened with Security seems like a purely in-character conflict. Someone with powers resisted getting mutadoned, and Syl (who, while Chayse's friend, was with him the entire time and was in a unique position to understand and dissent to what was happening to them) intervened nonlethally to the administration of drugs, for which they were then rightfully arrested.

At no point were security officers met with undue force for pursuing arrest, and as far as I can tell, no lethal force was ever used against security or the chief medical officer. Insubordination is not an OOC rule, and the situation seemed well in-hand by the security team.

The only thing that gives me pause is that you mentioned that "this clearly isn't the first instance of this happening." Does Chayse have notes for previous instances of this behavior? Has he been warned about this in the past? I'm perfectly willing to accept that this is the latest in a line of suspect behaviors, but neither Trojan nor the banning admin mentioned this.

I believe that Trojan's original description of the events, which has changed at least twice over the course of the investigation, gave the voting administrators the wrong idea of what actually transpired when they voted. Trojan's original ban reason was fairly damning, but most of the details have been disproven since then.
Last edited by Cameron Lancaster on Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Knightfall5
Junior Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 3:10 pm

RE: RDT Ban Appeal

Post by Knightfall5 »

Yeah, this seems pretty unfair. I was a miner that shift and helped fit out their mech with Goliath hides, and saw the fight in medbay later. The genetic powers came from lavaland for sure, not genetics, as he had them very early on before coming back up to the station, I'm guessing from the Wishgranter. I don't get why the combination of events here turned into a ban at all, let alone a week and a half ban, over a purely IC situation.

Also, as a miner I pretty regularly hand out stuff I don't want like extra drake armor or spare hardsuits like the Inquisitor, syndicate, ect. to random people. There's not exactly a shortage of loot down there, saying it's metabuddy behavior is pure BS. You get two from a single drake kill, after all. Why keep the second?
Last edited by Knightfall5 on Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Nik707
Member
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2018 6:12 am

RE: RDT Ban Appeal

Post by Nik707 »

I'm still trying to figure out where this stops being an IC issue and starts being an OOC issue, especially one worth this kind of ban length.

User avatar
Ruby Flamewing
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:04 pm

RE: RDT Ban Appeal

Post by Ruby Flamewing »

From my understanding, it's largely seeming to have been an IC thing. But given the fact that the act was an OOC issue (the metabuddying bit, at least) is what really seemed to set this off - followed by the stuff that happened involving the CMO and then Security afterward. That's how I understand it, at least. So it was an IC issue up until RDT's friend decided to use the gravity gun to keep the CMO from doing their job in the brig - again, this is in my view. Though at the same time, that's why I'm understanding yet also confused about the ban lengths: RDT's friend got a longer sentence for the more hostile-seeming act of using a gravity gun (which you carry one around without letting Security know and see how long you get to keep it), but RDT's history in general would've made it seem more logical for the longer sentence (and the general *lack* of a history of notes with the friend, too). But the length is being discussed among staff, so we'll see how that goes.

As for the handing out of stuff you don't want? On one hand, that's okay, as long as it's nothing like weapons and shit. On the other hand, the things you've listed are strictly hardsuits and armor, which are some good things that Security's things either equal or fall short in comparison with...because reasons, I guess. So while you're not giving bone axes and shit to people, you're still giving them free shit that they likely shouldn't be going around in. By no means am I saying you're in the wrong for doing so, Johnny, but I *am* saying to perhaps either rephrase that to say "you don't give it to just the first person who comes by and says 'sure' when you offer" or consider who would probably be more responsible with the armor/hardsuits. Last thing you'd want is giving a hardsuit to someone, then next thing you know you have Security tasing and cuffing you, because the person who got the hardsuit decided to go be a complete bloody dunce with it, and said hardsuit was obtained by you.
Hope for the best, expect the worst. That's how I tend to look at SS13, because I learned early on that dying's generally one's fate on the game.
It is only waffer thin.

User avatar
Ragolution
Member
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:39 am
Contact:

RE: RDT Ban Appeal

Post by Ragolution »

This ban has been reduced to two days after some consideration. If you still wish to maintain your appeal, you are fully within your right to do so.

Cameron Lancaster
Junior Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 3:18 pm
Contact:

RE: RDT Ban Appeal

Post by Cameron Lancaster »

In what way are Gray's actions considered metabuddying? If they interfered with security based on nothing but seeing their metafriend getting taken to Security, absolutely; but Gray was a part of the evolving situation from the very beginning. Aiding and abetting is part of space law *because* there are situations in which non-antagonists may knowingly or unknowingly aid or abet someone who is wanted by security without running afoul of server rules. This is absolutely one of those times.

Based on what has been said in this thread, Chayse has been banned through no actual fault of his own, and Gray is being banned for using a gravity gun to interfere in the (wrongful) administration of mutadone by someone who (understandably and in-character) believed the mutations were wrongfully obtained in Genetics.

Administrators who were not fully aware of the context of their actions voted unanimously to ban someone, and more information has come to light since then that counters every allegation placed against Chayse.

Anyone who frequents #development-discussion knows that Chayse and I aren't best friends by any stretch, but this ban is absolutely a mistake and should be reversed entirely.

User avatar
Ruby Flamewing
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:04 pm

RE: RDT Ban Appeal

Post by Ruby Flamewing »

Even though I'm certain this matter is considered resolved, at this point, as the ban length would've expired by now...the reason this even got brought up is because the *only* reason provided for Gray's actions was their IC relationship of being married. That's where the whole metabuddying thing comes from - they acted out of a method that they shouldn't have, and turned an issue that was being handled normally to one that screamed "okay, that's a red flag".

Again, everything I say is based off what I, myself, understand from the information provided that I was both able to remember and saw presented. So my answers, and my judgement on all of this, can and will be flawed; that being said, though, I was asleep when that all happened, so I wasn't one of the folks that voted for the bans.
Also, at the time of typing this out, my eyes *still* are revolting against me for the whole "hey, staying up for over 24 hours for no fucking reason's a great idea", so I apologize if my words come across as snappy or my answers are more lacking than they usually are. I'm stuck in a perpetual state of "awake, but wish I wasn't" and it fucking suuuuuuucks.
It is only waffer thin.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests