[Main] "Administraitor" | "Cat" in dchat.

Locked
superHB
Junior Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2019 5:37 pm
Contact:

[Main] "Administraitor" | "Cat" in dchat.

Post by superHB »

BYOND Name of complaint against: No idea

Your BYOND name: Super Hotshot Bowser (also on behalf on LooneyLynx since they didn't want to make the complaint post.)

Date of issue and round ID: 10/05/21-10/06/21 (date changed after round start for me) 28602

Reason for complaint:

On LooneyLynx's side:

She asked for a TC trade for a simplemob (Raw Prophet). It was denied. However another traitor, ROFL, was given a TC trade into a Gremlin. But not only a Gremlin, but a gremlin with spells, one of which being a spell from a RAW PROPHET. After being denied, she asked to have antag status removed and to go cryo. To which the admin responded:

Image

On my side:

I'm just observing, just seeing how the dynamic round is going to play out. Someone bombed the vault, nothing too spectacular. The bomb was big enough to breach the sauna where a couple of people were ERPing, in which I said "OH MY GOD COOMERS GOT BOMBED!" They died and then "Cat" immediately posts my message to them "OH MY GOD COOMERS GOT BOMBED" like if they were trying to shame me or something for just messing around.

Image

And then later on, dead chat was complaining that dynamic wasn't really rolling too much other than traitorlings and for being black orbit (max threat), not much was going on other than a couple of bombs and the TC trade. Which they sarcastically replied "Two people critted in medbay, totally tame." While yes this is much of nothing in terms of things to complain about, they're being needlessly hostile to people in dchat and also denying someone a TC trade (and mocking them for cryoing) and THEN turning around and giving it to someone else.

Image

Blubelle
Junior Member
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:28 pm
Contact:

Re: [Main] "Administraitor" | "Cat" in dchat.

Post by Blubelle »

It was me involved as the stealthmin.
She asked for a TC trade for a simplemob (Raw Prophet). It was denied. However another traitor, ROFL, was given a TC trade into a Gremlin. But not only a Gremlin, but a gremlin with spells, one of which being a spell from a RAW PROPHET. After being denied, she asked to have antag status removed and to go cryo.
I will admit that the raw prophet thing was because I didn't have much knowledge of what the simple mob did. The gremlin simplemob on the other hand, I was aware of, though I wasn't aware that the spell I handed them would knock people over. It was a matter of lack of knowledge and risks in not knowing a mob did. I have done some later research though, and maybe I'd pass that out to people at some later time in terms of TC trades. It really wasn't a matter of bias in that case, I just didn't know what a simple mob did. Perhaps I could have taken the time to do the research, but I wasn't prepared to take my eyes away for a moment at that time, not knowing how a dynamic black orbit round, that I was the only admin on for, was going to turn out at first.
To which the admin responded:
Every time I've seen Reagen play they just set off a research bomb and cryo, which is exactly what Reagen did that round after I denied them the raw prophet. That was what the admittedly, off-kilter comment was about. Maybe they've done other things at times, but it's something I haven't seen, and truth be told this unconventional way of their choice of playing has hardly gone unnoticed by the playerbase, and it really hasn't been unnoticed by me either. That's pretty much what I ended up commenting on. I'll admit it did come off as a bit rude and insulting.
I'm just observing, just seeing how the dynamic round is going to play out. Someone bombed the vault, nothing too spectacular. The bomb was big enough to breach the sauna where a couple of people were ERPing, in which I said "OH MY GOD COOMERS GOT BOMBED!" They died and then "Cat" immediately posts my message to them "OH MY GOD COOMERS GOT BOMBED" like if they were trying to shame me or something for just messing around.
This is probably where some context would have been appreciated really. ERP-shaming has been pretty commonplace on this server where ERP is welcomed, and a common trend I've seen in deadchat is people making fun of certain ERP players usually behind their backs. Like, "coomers" as far as I've known has never been not been used for negative connotations in terms of internet words. I've seen people use it on themselves as a self-depreciative term, but otherwise when it comes to the internet, it's been used to dismiss people's arguments, it's been used to define people as a loser, it's been used as a general insult for literally anyone who enjoys any sort of porn or just jacks off a lot. When it comes to Citadel it's generally been used more often to define people who don't involve themselves in, or do the minimums of jobs and just goes to ERP afterwards, or people who just ERP a lot even if they do do their jobs or are just being useful around the station.

You realized how bad that would sound out of context because you probably knew that as well, so you had to defend yourself there when I reposted it. In essence I was trying to discourage the common, constant toxic peanutposting I keep seeing with spectating ghostchat not with just one player, but several. I've been wanting to crack down on that for a while, as that sort of OOC toxicity has a tendency to make players believe that they are not welcome here, but I'm considering other methods of how to discourage it otherwise.
And then later on, dead chat was complaining that dynamic wasn't really rolling too much other than traitorlings and for being black orbit (max threat), not much was going on other than a couple of bombs and the TC trade. Which they sarcastically replied "Two people critted in medbay, totally tame." While yes this is much of nothing in terms of things to complain about, they're being needlessly hostile to people in dchat and also denying someone a TC trade (and mocking them for cryoing) and THEN turning around and giving it to someone else.
Earlier someone in deadchat commented that the round did have some chaos because a bomb just got set off right after someone mentioned that the first time. I was just reflecting on what they said after I was watching some traitors kill there. I don't believe my statement was wrong, considering there was chaos, though yes, you did clarify that it was low chaos for black orbit. It was sarcastic, but I didn't mean it as hostile.



I'm sorry if you've interpreted my actions as passive-aggressive, as I didn't mean it as such. I did not intend bias when it came to the heretic simplemob request, and I'll work on picking a better choice of words from hereon out. Much like the coomer statement you mentioned, most of my phrasing was in humor more than passive-aggressive.

Also, for the record, for anyone curious, I've been stealthminning a good bit to bait the griefers out so they can be dealed with while I'm online. Recently I've seen a hack (some dumb SS13 aimbot/xray/etc) got passed around on the SS13 subreddit, that had been around for a full day before the admins of that subreddit deleted that thread, which is why I've been cautious of that sort of thing because I'm currently under the impression that someone might come on to use that aimbot on a furry/ERP welcomed server like Citadel. They usually come around the later hours where less admins would likely be online, which this round was at the time.

superHB
Junior Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2019 5:37 pm
Contact:

Re: [Main] "Administraitor" | "Cat" in dchat.

Post by superHB »

Blubelle wrote:
Tue Oct 05, 2021 7:09 pm
I will admit that the raw prophet thing was because I didn't have much knowledge of what the simple mob did. The gremlin simplemob on the other hand, I was aware of, though I wasn't aware that the spell I handed them would knock people over. It was a matter of lack of knowledge and risks in not knowing a mob did. I have done some later research though, and maybe I'd pass that out to people at some later time in terms of TC trades. It really wasn't a matter of bias in that case, I just didn't know what a simple mob did. Perhaps I could have taken the time to do the research, but I wasn't prepared to take my eyes away for a moment at that time, not knowing how a dynamic black orbit round, that I was the only admin on for, was going to turn out at first.
That's fair - not knowing what the requested simplemob (Raw Prophet) was. Not every admin knows every aspect of the game. What I would have done is just ask "Hey can you explain what that is and what it can do" since you already had an ahelp open about it. Ultimately it is up to the admin to who gets a tc trade and who doesn't, but at the very least the player should get a fair shake at explaining what they want to get traded into if the admin doesn't know what it is.
Every time I've seen Reagen play they just set off a research bomb and cryo, which is exactly what Reagen did that round after I denied them the raw prophet. That was what the admittedly, off-kilter comment was about. Maybe they've done other things at times, but it's something I haven't seen, and truth be told this unconventional way of their choice of playing has hardly gone unnoticed by the playerbase, and it really hasn't been unnoticed by me either. That's pretty much what I ended up commenting on. I'll admit it did come off as a bit rude and insulting.
I get it, a lot of people have some repeat behavior on the server that can get annoying or grating. If Raegen wants to make an account to talk about this then they can.

Overall though - I CAN understand doing a job and then going to cryo. Most other people just pick assistant and AFK or observe first anyway. Or they AFK then cryo later anyway when nothing is going on. Which that's mostly a server issue because nothing is going on and an entirely different topic.
This is probably where some context would have been appreciated really. ERP-shaming has been pretty commonplace on this server where ERP is welcomed, and a common trend I've seen in deadchat is people making fun of certain ERP players usually behind their backs. Like, "coomers" as far as I've known has never been not been used for negative connotations in terms of internet words. I've seen people use it on themselves as a self-depreciative term, but otherwise when it comes to the internet, it's been used to dismiss people's arguments, it's been used to define people as a loser, it's been used as a general insult for literally anyone who enjoys any sort of porn or just jacks off a lot. When it comes to Citadel it's generally been used more often to define people who don't involve themselves in, or do the minimums of jobs and just goes to ERP afterwards, or people who just ERP a lot even if they do do their jobs or are just being useful around the station.

You realized how bad that would sound out of context because you probably knew that as well, so you had to defend yourself there when I reposted it. In essence I was trying to discourage the common, constant toxic peanutposting I keep seeing with spectating ghostchat not with just one player, but several. I've been wanting to crack down on that for a while, as that sort of OOC toxicity has a tendency to make players believe that they are not welcome here, but I'm considering other methods of how to discourage it otherwise.
About the coomer thing - We literally have an AI vox sound with it in and people call each other coomers on the server left and right in terms of a light jab. I doubt anyone is taking the word coomer seriously like someone would take other insults.

By trying to "discourage the common, constant toxic peanutposting" you MADE a toxic environment by not only singling me out, but also telling the two people directly about it (who had no idea about the comment otherwise). Come on, as an admin you shouldn't be doing this shit. It's petty. You already have other tools (BWOINK) to take care of a situation (if it's actually toxic).

I had only felt the need to defend myself and explain myself because I understood that, out of context, it could seem discouraging. But even so, typing everything in caps (which was also precedent by a "ROFL" and "OH MY GOD") is probably already enough to tell that someone isn't being seriously insulting.
Earlier someone in deadchat commented that the round did have some chaos because a bomb just got set off right after someone mentioned that the first time. I was just reflecting on what they said after I was watching some traitors kill there. I don't believe my statement was wrong, considering there was chaos, though yes, you did clarify that it was low chaos for black orbit. It was sarcastic, but I didn't mean it as hostile.
Considering you had just tried to "publicly shame" me to the people that died, it was easily understandable to take it as hostile. Even some of the other people in dchat were wondering what was up with your behavior.

I'm sorry if you've interpreted my actions as passive-aggressive, as I didn't mean it as such. I did not intend bias when it came to the heretic simplemob request, and I'll work on picking a better choice of words from hereon out. Much like the coomer statement you mentioned, most of my phrasing was in humor more than passive-aggressive.
It happens, -but also considering the maint bar incident too, it's also hard for me to initially believe that they weren't intentionally passive-aggressive from the start. I understand people can grow, change, etc, and I try not to hold people to past actions too much (they are in the past after-all), but it is difficult to accept when a similar situation with aggression happened not too long ago.

zI-H482
Member
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 7:36 pm
Contact:

Re: [Main] "Administraitor" | "Cat" in dchat.

Post by zI-H482 »

TC trades are entirely up to admin discretion. They can deny it for any reason they see fit which includes but is not limited to: unfamiliarity with what’s being asked for, concerns about misuse, or concerns about the level of chaos it might introduce into the round. Furthermore, they don’t need to go into any detail about why. Admins have this broad latitude because they’re ultimately responsible for whatever they add to the round.

However, the snide remark that was added afterwards fell below the standard of professionalism we expect of our team when handling a ticket. They’ve been informed of such and reprimanded over it.

From what I’ve read here, what happened afterwards really seems like a non-issue to me. Dchat is not a formal channel, and most conversation in it is not in a formal capacity. While I still hold staff to certain standards in such situations, (and I do yell at them when they fail to meet it), you had a single message quoted back at you. Later, they also expressed sarcastic disagreement with a prevailing view. Is there anything else to this, like further messages or additional context?

superHB
Junior Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2019 5:37 pm
Contact:

Re: [Main] "Administraitor" | "Cat" in dchat.

Post by superHB »

zI-H482 wrote:
Wed Oct 06, 2021 11:31 am
TC trades are entirely up to admin discretion. They can deny it for any reason they see fit which includes but is not limited to: unfamiliarity with what’s being asked for, concerns about misuse, or concerns about the level of chaos it might introduce into the round. Furthermore, they don’t need to go into any detail about why. Admins have this broad latitude because they’re ultimately responsible for whatever they add to the round.

However, the snide remark that was added afterwards fell below the standard of professionalism we expect of our team when handling a ticket. They’ve been informed of such and reprimanded over it.

From what I’ve read here, what happened afterwards really seems like a non-issue to me. Dchat is not a formal channel, and most conversation in it is not in a formal capacity. While I still hold staff to certain standards in such situations, (and I do yell at them when they fail to meet it), you had a single message quoted back at you. Later, they also expressed sarcastic disagreement with a prevailing view. Is there anything else to this, like further messages or additional context?
No that's just about it. Again yeah the second half is mostly non issue but just the way they went about quoting that message was just a little weird. Like you said it's dchat, it's for laughs (or salt mines), so quoting that message back to "discourage behavior" specifically after the people died is just not what I would expect for an admin. Especially when it was just harmless commentary.
trying to discourage the common, constant toxic peanutposting I keep seeing with spectating ghostchat not with just one player, but several. I've been wanting to crack down on that for a while, as that sort of OOC toxicity has a tendency to make players believe that they are not welcome here, but I'm considering other methods of how to discourage it otherwise.

zI-H482
Member
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 7:36 pm
Contact:

Re: [Main] "Administraitor" | "Cat" in dchat.

Post by zI-H482 »

Right, considering the age of the complaint, action already taken over part of it and the nature of the remaining situation, moving this to resolved.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests