[GlitchyCore] Von Carstein - Note Appeal

[Von Carstein]

BYOND account: Von Carstein
Noting admin: GlitchyCore
Noting type/duration: Mid-severity

After handling three traitors as a captain went on a spending spree with their confiscated uplinks and TC and purchased a bunch of soap (which i'm fine with) and a revolver (which is the issue) because, and I quote, "Oh it was the discount for 3TC, couldn't help myself."

-------

The note lacks context of that shift, yes I did buy it because 'well man its a 3 TC revolver I have to do it' but I think I was well within my right to abuse contraban at that point of time. At the start of the shift Charles Sauerkraut (Traitor Virologist) had been running around with a sketchin and firebombed his own laboratory with plasma in an attempt to kill his target earlier. It was just myself and the Warden and despite my capcurity self catching and or disarming a majority of the traitors going around, Sauerkraut was still running around free and unarrested with his gun and presumably whatever he used to burn virology to the ground with.

I bought myself 30 TC worth of soap with all of the confiscated uplinks and 3 TC discount revolver because it was cheap and we still had one guy running around with his own sketchin and using plasma fires on amber alert at the time I purchased it from the uplink, I don't think the note was applied fairly due to that.

tldr I wanted to shoot the traitor with a traitor gun because I thought it'd be cool, I can understand getting noted for it but it wasn't just me buying guns for the sake of buying guns if it had been I would have got far more stuff then 30 TC worth of soap.

[Nethaufer]

Noting admin will post on it later. As it stands, per our note appeals, if the note is correct it likely won't be overturned and at the very least will be edited.
Further, I think it has the context it needs, with that being your honestly poor reasoning for getting the revolver in the first place.

[Von Carstein]

What can I say I like 2 click instant crit gun ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But still, traitors running around with their own guns to kill people is surely an okay reason to use said guns against them, this wasn't purchased before he did anything just because but after while he was running around armed and dangerous.

[Nethaufer]

I'll admit, I did a generous bit of skimming (at work semi busy) but going through it again, adding the information that an armed traitor still going around when the purchase happened does add a bit of a better light to the situation. I still think it was a poor thing to do when you have options available as Captain, but it wasn't as poor as I initially came to believe when it was being discussed via admin channels.

However, final decision is up to Glitchy. I'd be game for an edit to the current note with that additional info being added.

[GlitchyCore]

To clarify, checking through the logs and searching for keywords 'primed', 'ignited', and 'plasma', 'primed' only returns some smoke and cleaning grenades, 'ignited' shows 0 results, and 'plasma' is 8 hits in say logs and 1 hit from someone throwing a beaker of plasma, which as far as I can tell is what caused the fire in virology early on in the round. I'm not going to blame you for not knowing, but I just wanted to show that as far as I can tell it was just the one fire. When I questioned you about what all you had from dealing with all the traitors in the round, you responded with the following:

This, followed up by

Code: Select all

[2019-12-28 16:56:51.662] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Von Carstein/(Von Carstein)->GlitchyCore/(GlitchyCore): And again no security earlier so I was basically running around dealing with everything myself so I thought 'eh what the hell'

lead me to believe you had bought it purely out of want, and not in retaliation to any threats running around. That's the main reason why I left the note.

After further discussing it in achat, there was a point brought up that if you're fulfilling the same role that sec normally would if they were present, we should hold you to the same standards that we would sec, so I'm questioning why you weren't intending to go on to capture the traitor you mentioned in your appeal in the same fashion you did to at least one other since I understand the first traitor traded their uplink for their theft objectives, and you got the second one with a stunbaton, and then the third one as well after they emagged into engineering.

[Von Carstein]

So I'm questioning why you weren't intending to go on to capture the traitor you mentioned in your appeal in the same fashion you did to at least one other.

Well that's easy, I wasn't able to catch him unlike the others, and eventually more security showed up so I didn't have enough of an excuse to fill in for their job so I sat on the bridge with all my soap after that. None of the ones I caught were confirmed to be armed or dangerous so there was no reason to walk up and use lethal means on them, no point in shooting them with the revolver solely for emagging stuff, where as Charles was known to have a gun so shooting him would have been the correct course of action instead of running up and trying to stunbaton him.

[GlitchyCore]

I'm gonna lead off by apologizing for letting this sit so long, I honestly thought I got back to this sooner but I must've not hit the submit button at the time.

After looking for a second opinion on this it was agreed upon that the appeal could be denied based off of the situation, security (and people acting as them, similar to the earlier circumstances of the round this note was placed on) should be going for arrests before killing unless it's something that cannot be detained (such as lings, wizards, ops, etc) with exceptions of situations like being cornered and only having lethals on you at the time, or your taser/batons/flash grenades being out.
There's also the third point under the 'additional information' for rule 6, which states "It is acceptable to use contraband to protect your life, but looting and using contraband as a regular crewmember or security is considered powergaming; do so at your own risk." I'm fine with letting the soap go because it's...soap, not a big deal, but the revolver I feel fits nicely for why this was applied in the first place.
I'm still for the note staying given the situation it was applied in but as always if you still disagree you can seek headmin word on if it should stay or not.

[HazelBailey]

Gonna move this to denied based on Glitchy's post and lack of response.