Right, continuing with my long winded now DOUBLE post response, sheesh. I wish I had more file space :L
Anyway, copypasta'ing what I put from before:
-Given that also ICly Sajiid had just completed an expedition with Harris with the aforementioned complete and utter success, I had made the decision he was to be pulled onto the security team to assist in keeping the station secure and sane. Even explicitly I had said that Harris was to be given gear, but he was to stay with an officer at all times.
See attachment of radio proof:
Harris point.PNG (2.81 KiB) Viewed 4232 times
With that explicit order it was clear that Mike not only was a pseudo officer, but that he was to stick with an actual officer until the situation blew over. It was also said, and verbally responded that non-lethals were to be and only be used by the security team as I did not want the station to be turned into a blood bath over what was a misunderstanding and a lack of communication. :
only non-lethals.PNG (38.31 KiB) Viewed 4232 times
The security team respected my order and understood that we were to keep the station calm and alive. No one was to be harmed aside from the use of non-lethals which included e-guns (set to stun and only to stun), taser weapons, flash-bangs and pepper-spray. And again I had made it very clear that my members of security which now included: Faux, Michael Daudson, Jim Sanders, (emergency officer now) Mike Harris, and myself. We were to be a secure and close team. Mistakes would not and will not be allowed:
stay as pairs.PNG (15.65 KiB) Viewed 4232 times
(also total big off on me using the first person :c)
I accept the fault that the resorting to dismantling of Cerberus as well. However there are inconsistencies I will point out that my quotes were taken extremely out of context, this one in particular:
taken out of context.PNG (14.62 KiB) Viewed 4232 times
what is disappointing about this quote is that it was poorly timed and ARS failed to include to whom I was actually talking to.:
the actual context.PNG (8.09 KiB) Viewed 4232 times
Given that we had a telecomms error, I was responding to Daudson, not harris on the "not good" part, as Sajiid at the moment was in the command meeting speaking to cerberus still, I was in no way talking about the pharmacist.
Given with all that out of the way, I do admit I had made mistakes, particularly in how Cerberus was handled. However, given the station was devolving into madness it was in the best interest for the safety of everyone that a code blue was ordered and my team was to be readied for a riot or something outlandish. I did not know who was my ally and who was not. I had taken the necessary precautions and taken the correct steps to not only keep the crew safe with the use of non-lethals, but for the sake of the NanoTrasen facility.
I cannot believe that worked. I wish I knew what I was doing.
Characters: Arrogant Cat Dad, General Grievous Rip-off HoP, mildly incestual cat doctor
I hope 8 hours is enough for everyone to cool their heads.
I will make this clear, I have no meta-grudge against anyone in this thread, or on station. I did not even know what character Kred plays aside from Cerberus until I read the complaint. To make such a serious accusation without proof -equivalent of being McCarthy or Christine Blasey Ford- of which bears no concrete evidence, except so far as "What I perceived" is no better than a lynch mob and blatant witch hunt. If we want to go down this slope, I could argue that Stellar, amethyst, Mcfall, are all meta-friends and meta-grudging me. But I will not because that is an accusation that is without merit on my end. Outside of Samdup, no other character I play has IC issues with Cerberus.
As for the crewmembers reaction to Cerberus being dismantled that almost caused a mutiny, I would argue such an action would rather be "meta-grudging". Why? Because Lawed Silicon are property of NT, and thus are not crew, they are property of NT and their existent is a privilege which may be revoked at the sole discretion of the RD and CD. If neither is present, then a concurring vote of all other heads of staff. As such, were the crew to revolt against the dismantling of a single borg is irrational. Why would the crew risk their livelihoods and jobs for a borg slaved to the station? The world wonders.
As a background record, I was a majority CE/lawed synthetic player on Baystation with emphasis on AI. This does set me a bit distinct from the silicon play style of others, and I can live with that as a writer and player. The original crew Asimov lawset in baystation was written with explicitly reference to the priority of laws being in decreasing numeric order. I am fully aware of the laws on this specific station not being in order as well as the self harm clause. However, the major change to these laws in my opinion completely throws out the cornerstone they are based upon. This however is another discussion entirely but I would like this to be noted.
I will now move on to discussing Samdup as a character, first off, she is rather urbane so long as you do not affect the efficiency of medical or question her orders as a superior. To this end, we can see that McFall with his lack of medical knowledge, has been repeated demoted as nurse because the level of knowledge they posses is simply not adequate for the role. Were they to play a medical intern, Samdup would gladly teach medical to them.
Regarding and her interaction with Cerberus, it is more complex than the "I don't trust synthetics". Samdup as person is only willing to tolerate lawed synthetics with the exception of Cerberus and Sammie due to her IC interactions with them. She remains on nominal relations with other lawed synthetics so long as they do not hinder her job. Cerberus has at least two previous times (three if my memories serve right) conflicted severely with Samdup. First as a surgeon where it argued against every, single, step while she was trying to attach someone's hand, and then called Samdup out for being "a slave to NT". The second when she ordered the firing of McFall and Popsy (the latter albeit in error on her part I did deliberately), where Cerberus came into the medical bay to specifically check the refrigerator, refute Samdup's claim of them being incompetent, and continue to rant after a direct order was given to stop the comms chatter. The final time when Cerberus was blatantly arguing against command staff and Sammie (As AI) threatened to kill any command staff that entered it's upload because it did not wish to be carded. I am not sure if the last two occurred in the same round, but that is not within the scope of the argument.
Given that to Samdup, the stationbound synthetics are built to serve the crew and protect them (Law three), it therefore begs the IC question, "Does the blatant actions against her serve as cause for concern and motivation to decommission Cerberus?", for her that answer is YES. Now, consider that Samdup is not consciously aware of the no self harm rule and she did not know the laws were not in any priority (She is not an RD), the action of serving someone 200 units of deathbell, of which they later stated to be 150 (and thus in Samdup's view, such an discrepancy is being deliberately economical of the truth), and Cerberus claiming that "I was deconstructed without reason" and thus provoking a crew reaction of “lynch the CMO,†what would you have done? The vote on Cerberus was as follows to my memory: Samdup and Sid for permanent dismantlement, CD against , RD against, HOP concurrence with for disassembly temporarily, and the HOS abstained. I must note it is extremely hard, if not outright impossible, for Samdup and Sid to agree on anything due to the belligerent nature of the IC interaction with them, and as such, any agreement was only temporary to suit both their goals. Both Sid and Samdup have been slighted by Cerberus in the past, (Ask Neinbox for his story on how, or why).
It was agreed upon to compromise by temporarily dissemble Cerberus to question them on the logic for their actions and then decide on a course of action, with the RD specifically stating that deconstruction is not permanent and can be restored (nobody knew code was borked). It is this point where Cerberus continues to provoke the staff with communication messages as well as personally attack Samdup for being biased (for which she is). Given the situation, the HOS left the meeting and the code raised to blue given the attitude of the staff. If Stellar wishes to complain against the HOS, please make a separate complaint. Given that the Central Command officer came aboard and ordered us to reinstate Cerberus, Samdup still noted her objections, but would not hinder such an action before we OOM'd.
Regarding the attitude of Samdup to the chemist Stalk-the-lockboxes, Samdup was notified by the HOP of a bottle of mindbreaker toxin left outside chemistry in public areas. She confronted him about it and they stated "I know someone who can use that well" before being issued a warning (rather than outright demoting them as she usually would have done), to which Stalk's replied, "You are no fun. " Later on Daudson's drinking of poison, which contained mindbreaker, amotoxin (?), space drugs, and space lube (?) makes Samdup very suspicious of chemist. During the code blue, Samdup ordered Mike via PDA to prevent Stalks from entering chemistry for any reason, stating that she would take responsibility. The reason for this is simple, mindbreaker is a controlled substance, and leaving it outside the chemistry lab are applicable to charges of Failure to obey safety protocol and major contraband. Couple this with the behavior of Stalks makes Samdup suspicious of him.
Edit: I forgot to mention, the AI decided it would be in their best interest to send an expensive emergency relay message to central and notify the CD after they had done such an action without the copy of the text. This is, in my opinion, unacceptable.
"If we want to go down this slope, I could argue that Stellar, amethyst, Mcfall, are all meta-friends and meta-grudging me." -
Arguing that Stellar, Amethyst, and Mcfall (the first two of which are the same player) are metagrudging is counter to your argument. You included that for a reason.
"Because Lawed Silicon are property of NT, and thus are not crew, they are property of NT and their existent is a privilege which may be revoked at the sole discretion of the RD and CD." -
The existence of cyborgs is mandated by NT, it is not a privelage you can feel free to rip away at any time, you fail to understand that this game is composed of players and that such behaviour would be brutally punished by any actual megacorporation protecting their incredibly expensive assets. All crew are also property of NT. Furthermore, no command staff can choose to destroy a cyborg at their leisure.
Your direct reference to IC interactions that you then state are "not within the scope of the argument" as a method to exterminate me is metagrudging, regardless of your justification for it. You can absolutely hate Cerberus as much as you like from round to round, you cannot use such hate to attempt to destroy them at any opportunity.
"the action of serving someone 200 units of deathbell, of which they later stated to be 150 (and thus in Samdup's view, such an discrepancy is being deliberately economical of the truth)" -
One glass was half deathbell, and I said around 200, including one hundred and fifty as a more accurate estimate after further considering it.
"It is this point where Cerberus continues to provoke the staff with communication messages as well as personally attack Samdup for being biased (for which she is)." -
I was unlawed as a brain and could do whatever I like in regards to informing the crew of the truth. Your admittance to bias and your complaint about the attack makes no sense.
As a few final notes:
Command was clearly acting against synthetics when I was silently destroyed for serving a drink, they were protecting their slaved cyborg, the crew, and the station. Cyborgs do not care about money, so sending messages to protect the station, crew, and themselves is logical.
Calling in unrelated events or previous arguments as justification for destroying a cyborg worsens your case, and your admittance to making the experience of other players intentionally miserable is, in my opinion, further argument for this to escalate. Your problems with synthetics are a matter for the player representatives, not for something you can take out on myself or SAMMIE.
"Arguing that Stellar, Amethyst, and Mcfall (the first two of which are the same player) are metagrudging is counter to your argument. You included that for a reason."
No, it is not. I did not argue that they are meta-grudging. I simply drew an analogy applicable to Stellar to highlight the point I wished to make. Do not accuse people of serious accusations without proof beyond a clear and reasonable doubt.
"The existence of cyborgs is mandated by NT, it is not a privelage you can feel free to rip away at any time, you fail to understand that this game is composed of players and that such behaviour would be brutally punished by any actual megacorporation protecting their incredibly expensive assets. All crew are also property of NT. Furthermore, no command staff can choose to destroy a cyborg at their leisure."
I am fully aware of the fact that players are playing lawed synthetics. Samdup did not "rip away such a right". Rather if it is to be anyone, that would be the person committing the act (the research director) and the person superior to them implicitly/explicitly authorizing the act (the CD). If at anything, Samdup was only strongly recommending the CD/RD to do so, and such an action is the extent of a her authority as the Chief Medical Officer. In regards to decommissioning synthetics, I have had several characters decommissioned for far lesser reasons than you allege this to be, so what? PK the character, suck it up, move on.
"Your direct reference to IC interactions that you then state are "not within the scope of the argument" as a method to exterminate me is metagrudging, regardless of your justification for it. You can absolutely hate Cerberus as much as you like from round to round, you cannot use such hate to attempt to destroy them at any opportunity."
Perhaps then clarification is needed, "Not within the scope of the argument" is to whether or not the last two conflicts occurred at the same time. It does not matter when, just that they did. To say that I as a player want to "exterminate" you icly as Samdup is not a meta-grudge. It is the response of cannon events on station. Samdup has notified Cerberus at least once about its ability to follow orders. If you have seen interactions with Samdup, she is not going to tolerate bullshit, most people get one warning from her (in Mcfall's case none because he did something that would warrant a negligence and almost a manslaughter charge). She has not sought to destroy Cerberus at every round she deals with him, she chose to only act that round because in her opinion, Cerberus did something so blatantly radical that it warranted decommissioning.
"Command was clearly acting against synthetics when I was silently destroyed for serving a drink, they were protecting their slaved cyborg, the crew, and the station. Cyborgs do not care about money, so sending messages to protect the station, crew, and themselves is logical."
Do not make generalizations about command. Like I said, command was very split on the course of action to take. Your choice of words here implies that command was to deliberately PK you. This was clearly not the case as the Research director and the CD had mentioned. You cannot accuse someone of being "meta-grudging" for actions on a single character that is not consistent across the entire set of characters they play. The issue between Cerberus and Samdup is an IC one that should have never spiraled into the this complaint. From an OOC standpoint, the action of Cerberus deliberately inflaming the general communications with its tone of voice runs directly in contrast to law 1,2 (Cerberus was asked to cease), and 3 by implication and by direct evidence. As such, what is the point of laws if Cerberus decides to directly override three laws only because of one?
"Calling in unrelated events or previous arguments as justification for destroying a cyborg worsens your case, and your admittance to making the experience of other players intentionally miserable is, in my opinion, further argument for this to escalate. Your problems with synthetics are a matter for the player representatives, not for something you can take out on myself or SAMMIE.. "
No, my problem is not with synthetics, it is Samdup's issue with synthetics, particularly Cerberus and Sammie. She does not go out of the way to make life miserable for Cerberus, but only acted in response to an action Cerberus committed that she believed was blatantly over the line. In addition, she has not taken action against SAMMIE, because she is incapable of as a CMO, and has not yet had sufficient REASON to ask for SAMMIE to be decommissioned.
I politely suggest you Kered, to strongly distance yourself from the emotions and actions of your character(s). It is evident that you are unable to separate the player from the character. Samdup's actions are not my feeling towards synthetics. Neither are her actions representative what I think about you as a player. The act of throwing "meta-grudging" around as a term to imply that I am the character is clearly slanderous in intent and execution. You have deliberately used a term defined in the rules as a political weapon to use against people you simply dislike because of the IC actions you perceived to be unjust and attempt to destroy the person you disagree with.
I came in to this complaint expecting a reasonable argument with a person who is capable of discriminating the difference between what a character believes and acts, compared to what they as a person believes and acts. Unfortunately, I do not believe that reconciliation between the two of us is not possible at this time due to the divide between us to great for reproach, and for that, I apologize.
Regarding the giving someone sec gear, if they have a record like that. You could have avoided the whole issue of breaking SOP and space law, Simply by asking the HoP to switch their department. I will advise you do that from now on as just handing it out, no matter how good of a record,just panicked the entire crew. That or a gun permit for the round so there is no issue.
what is disappointing about this quote is that it was poorly timed and ARS failed to include to whom I was actually talking to.
I am going to make a proper response and detailed account of what happened as well as previous issues I have had with your command characters later, I need sleep right now. But uh, that's not my screenshot nor did I post that I am not sure why you are blaming me as it is clearly not me as I was the AI and there is a clear lack of follow links.
And just for a note so this doesn't get closed before I respond, he has ordered the destruction of silicons as other command characters for trashy reasons in the past.
Oh boy, I thought you were better than that. I don't meta-grudge on my characters, they think the stuff you do are ridiculous and without reason. The time I argued with you as amethyst? You had fired popsy because medbay wasn't setup (Which I had snooped around and found out it was perfectly set up, so you ruined her round experience for nothing.), the reason you stated in dead chat was just to make an example of them, it wasn't even about Jermaine. How you are even remotely explaining deconning cerby (Which I just found out was done before) is beyond me. It could even be argued by me that it is metagrudging in itself you being a part of two separate incidents. So please, keep this civil without making an accusation that you can't go back from.
Right, had to do something and didn't have time to write a complete response to Snow's argument. One particular thing did stand out before I had to go:
That seems like an argument to throw the blame onto cerberus when you over-did your boundaries as a CMO when the RD is over it and screamed for decon when a CMO has the power to tell a silicon to never do a specific thing (overturned by the RD and CD, see silicon rules and laws). Instead of that, you went far beyond and pressed for deconstruction instead of thinking with any sort of logic. At this point, you have done nothing but scare players away from medical due to your overuse of power and how you either do these things or scream for demotion at the most tiniest thing (See my post earlier when I said I could easily argue metagrudging).
Now comes the problem with this:
They only play one character, same with Popsy (for the most part, I don't count her meme characters) and Jermaine (He really only plays that one even though he has another). Cerberus only has one character. Using that argument is just...sad.
So cerberus is a problem and has to PK his most iconic character when their is no legitimate reason to? You know deconstructing isn't a player kill unless the admins say that, right? Correct me if I'm wrong (any admins) but I thought as long as the player is on good terms and not inciting a panic, then they are fine to stay. You can't tell someone to just kill off a character. With saying that, you are basically wanting them to PK, and seriously makes me think of your true intentions.
I think I covered all the parts you said that made me uneasy.
And just for a note so this doesn't get closed before I respond, he has ordered the destruction of silicons as other command characters for trashy reasons in the past.
If you are speaking of the two times I've asked for the AI to be carded not destroyed... yes. You certainly know why. As you had an ion law and had completely drained the station's funds into a single account as well as opening over 15 empty accounts. I will admit my reaction was more OOC than IC as it was incredibly annoying you opened over a dozen accounts over an ion law. I will give you that, but it does not put aside the reason it was still very annoying.
The other time I had asked the AI to be carded was when Sammie was going bonkers, I never asked for them to be destroyed. To say such is false. I do not like players being killed or destroyed unless there is very very good reason.
To say I order silicons to be destroyed as 'other command characters for trashy reasons' again is an over simplification. I only play two command members and I actually get along very well with them. I will admit sometimes I have bad days and I allow that to influence my decisions. I apologize for my behavior.
I cannot believe that worked. I wish I knew what I was doing.
Characters: Arrogant Cat Dad, General Grievous Rip-off HoP, mildly incestual cat doctor
