DoctorDrugs
-
Posts
459 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
Posts posted by DoctorDrugs
-
-
We're going to be adding some examples of what is considered self-defense and what is not considered self-defense within the rules at a future date, sooner the better in this case, specifically to help people understand the difference between self-defense and vigilantism. Especially where self-defense ends and where vigilantism begins. Now saying that I quoted directly from space law, and that quote is in the notes section of Space Law directly adjacent to what you're attempting to reference. Self defense ends the moment you have the upper hand and/or giving chase after an antag long after the antag has fled from the area they were in. Matt's ruling will be upheld that is not going to be changing.
-
I am going to quote directly from Space Law this one time, "Persons intentionally getting involved in fights which occur in a department that isn't theirs is an act of vigilantism, not self-defence." however this isn't also the end all be all as the Rules will always trump SoP or Space Law and are what admins are directly referenceing when handing out warnings/bans. The end result here is that you shouldn't have attacked him with a cleaver and I'd argue you shouldn't have been running to a department when he was spotted in cargo nor having followed him onto the bridge, Matt gave you a warning to not do so again and that's all it is at this time. Again the judgement stands as Matt made the correct and valid call of warning you.
-
you've been banned multiple times already this year, including job bans. The amount of notes you've also gained in a 9 month period don't show us that you're going to follow the rules if we unban you, you will need to get a vouch from a MRP server or higher with a similar or stricter set of rules in order to play on paradise again.
-
Hello there, Nerfection is not allowed to respond to admin complaints directly as they are typically reserved for only Head Admins to respond to bearing special circumstances. Regarding your request for clarification, while fulp doesn't give vouches there are still plenty of MRP or higher servers that do give vouches for behavior such as TG station's MRP server and Beestation. Other servers decide if they give vouches or not and you'd have to check with their staff as their policy on giving/accepting vouches based on behavior is completely up to them, as well as their policy on such a thing may change over time.
-
Sorry for the lack of response till the end of the week, US holiday had me a little busy. The main thing is you witnessed the antag rush onto the bridge and decided to follow them, you earlier said in game in that round you wanted to get your hands on them/kill them and had a weapon, it's not without reason to believe your reasons for following the antag was either to get revenge for earlier in the round or have justification to get involved with the antag. You could've just as easily have called for security and said what they were doing instead of getting involved yourself directly but I'm not directly saying you were in the wrong for following, the problem lies with having gotten a weapon earlier, attempted to run into the contractor at cargo when they were called out, make statements about how you wanted to get your hands on them in game and follow that up by following the antag onto the bridge and striking them with a cleaver. All of that is reasonable for an admin to believe you were less interested in self defense and more so interested in getting revenge. Matt's initial call of a warning is correct and he was justified by everything he would've had access to via logs and other means in game when the warning was issued.
-
I wish to apologize on how long this took to getting around to, we as heads have been incredibly busy as of late so much so that sirryan had to step down and focus on real life because of this we've let this and a few other appeals sit for far far longer than they should've. Sirryan was originally handling this but as he's stepped down I'm gonna do my best here to answer your questions and resolve this complaint.
So getting into it, Matt's warning about the situation is valid in context with the entire situation that happened during that round. I'll apologize if things aren't 100% right as logs can only show so much here as I was not on the server observing everything happening and have to take the general context the logs show me with a grain of salt. I don't want to open this up from the beginning again but I want to state a few things so we're on the same page on everything, the contractor that attacked the Captain was the same one that kidnapped you earlier in the shift and sent you to be "interrogated" via the contractor extraction as a target. After that you got a cleaver, later on you were in the bar while the contractor was spotted in cargo and called out which you rushed towards cargo only to find the antag no longer there. The final part I want to mention when the contractor was attacking the captain they were on the bridge while you were out to the east outside of the bridge.
Considering all of the logs from the interaction it heavily leans towards looking like valid hunting or wanting to get yourself involved with the contractor, considering the things you said and did in game also line up with the interpretation matt had of the situation. Looking at these logs and considering it all, Matt did the correct thing. It appeared less like you were defending yourself and more like you were attempting to get into a fight with the contractor. You made comments in game regarding how you'd kill them if you got your hands on them, at which responding to the call out of bridge attack from the AI assumes you were intending to do just that. The point of the self defense clause in the rules is being able to defend yourself and others nearby with a reasonable level of force, attacking a contractor with a cleaver you got earlier in the round is not needed considering it was you, the QM and the most likely soon to be arriving security considering it was called out by the AI. I don't know if this answers all your questions with this, if not I'd be happy to continue the dialogue from here. -
been a couple weeks since my last post with no replies since then, will be marking and moving this as resolved
-
been a couple weeks since my last post with no replies, going to assume this is considered resolved and will be filing it as such
-
since there's been no response to my last post for over 2 weeks, going to assume this was considered resolved and will be marking it as such.
-
Hello there, I will be handling this AC. While you may have intended the comment to be aimed in an IC manner the point of your last unban was on the condition of improving your mentality and interactions with other players as you've been noted/banned before in regards to aggressive or hostile manners. Being IC angry seems to bleed heavily into OOC angry for you on a number of other occasions and that makes in hard for people to know if it's IC or OOC anger bleeding into one or the other but regardless people shouldn't be telling each other to kill themselves IC or otherwise. There's other words that can be used to express dissatisfaction with an IC interaction that doesn't come off so aggressive or toxic.
Marm made a decision based on leniency but the nature of your last ban being removed would be to "remain bwoink free for the next couple months", it was lifted earlier in September for context, Marm should have placed a ban on you for having failed to uphold the condition of you being unbanned earlier. What meow did is perfectly reasonable for him to do since he was the one who lifted the previous ban and set the stipulation and expectation of not causing further issues. -
Hello there, I want to apologize for how long this has taken for you to get a response. Many things have transpired over the last month and a little change and that caused things to get pushed to back burners in terms of attention. Now onto our AC here and a little back ground on the situation itself, the round itself was an extended round with an admin wanting to run an event revolving around the destroyed player created HONK mech that was authorized by the captain but destroyed by the HoS. At the end of the round the admin, in this case zedahktur, spawned a single very tiny spider that dealt about 1 damage a bite and spawned the 8 Honk mechs as part of the end of the HONK mech incident from before. Chaos resulting from them being spawned in wasn't the intended affect it seems till after the shuttle had docked at CC.
-
Going to consider this as resolved and filling it as such.
-
No reply for a few weeks closing and marking this as complaint without merit.
-
There is no OOC protections for Heads of Departments, if you saw issues with them being consistently unresponsive you should've brought it up in a manner that could've gotten results, Admins can easily do one of many things both IC wise and OOC wise to incentivize heads of departments to do the things they should. Be that IC methods such as subtle messages, headset messages, sending someone to directly talk to them IC from CC, making a CC announcement or a fax to name most of the methods admins can use to take IC action, failing those or if needed we have OOC methods such as directly messaging the player(s) in question or forcing open a chat window to get their attention and response.
There's ways to go about solving problematic heads of departments but that requires a competent Captain/NTR to remove the problematic heads, when you have a problematic captain and head of department then it's a recipe for disaster as there's no IC solution for removal outside of convincing the problematic heads/captain to step down/cryo. When it comes to it being that bad then it's usually a good idea to Ahelp the problematic players so that admins can prevent the round from devolving into complete chaos or a painful experience for people due to incompetency.
The whole point that Samman was making was that there was much better ways to solve issues with the round or with the problematic heads that were causing the round to devolve into chaos for security/command/station, instead you acted hostile and aggressive to people only escalating issues even further. If that player had self antaged you in a previous round that should've been ahelped and handled appropriately, if it was and that player continued to do so in the round you were job banned then it would've been handled and resolved appropriately. While I may be repeating myself here once more but the whole jobban and issues could've been avoided here by simply addressing the issues you saw with the heads of departments/captain with an ahelp and an explanation of the issues. Admins are people as well, logs come in mass and are quickly drowned in say logs, me emotes, attack logs/other warnings. It makes it hard and difficult for staff to find things that aren't ahelp'd or mentioned to admins with how fast chat can fly by especially when the round becomes hectic and chaotic. If you see a problem say something to the admins or ahelp it so that the admins can become aware of situations that transpire that need addressing, even if you think it's already been ahelp'd by someone else (worse case scenario you get a message we're already handling it/looking into it).
At the end of the day, what Samman did was warranted and completely within his power as an admin to do, If you want to continue this discussion we can or if you have more questions/comments otherwise I will mark this as resolved and finalize it. I also want to note that I apologize if my grammar was less than stellar here in this reply or if words are misspelled badly as I have been feeling quite sick all day before posting this but a quick response is warranted rather than waiting till I felt better. -
Hello there I will be handling this, to start off there's no reason a security officer let alone the HoS should be giving their friend or anyone else a free judo belt. This is not only unrealistic but also a major issue if that person was to turn out to be an antag that caused a chaos in that round. The fact that it was your friend that you gave the judo belt to makes it even worse considering you've been warned in the recent past regarding metafriending. The only times a member of security should be handing out weapons or equipment from security should be in cases of extreme emergency, aka nuke ops or the risk the station is going to be overrun by an extreme threat. Without getting into each and every note/ban you've gotten recently, in the last three and a half months you've racked up slightly more than 20 notes for various rule breaks. We have on average players play hundreds of hours without getting more than a handful of notes spread across that same period, it's a lot of warnings and bans in such a short period that it starts to edge into the problematic player range.
As it stands I see no issues with the actions taken by marginalorb, he's within his power and authority to request that you get a vouch to be able to play on paradise again and I see no reason to lift the permaban and change it out for a jobban due to the amount of notes you've acquired in such a short period of time. We need to have some way to know that you're able to play and follow the rules without repeating the same rule breaks or causing more issues. The only way to properly prove that you can follow the rules is to do what marginalorb has said and acquire a vouch from another server that is MRP or higher with a similar set of rules. -
Hello there I will be addressing the 1st part of this complaint while neca addresses your 2nd part of this complaint, I feel his write up is well worded enough that I don't have much more to add from my own end that he hasn't touched on or addressed. I intend to address this complaint broken up into parts in order to make this easier to read and address them in individual parts as needed.
Now onto the complaint here, This round after talking to admins and looking through the logs for a few hours to build a timeline of the general flow of the round seemed to be a very hectic round that all can be summed up as leadership issues in game. Everything seems to have stemmed from a lack of communication between parts of security and command where people were either very new to the roles and unsure or were just general uncaring about the on going round. This caused issues throughout the round that make the round feel a lot more chaotic than it needed or should've really been. As I can find from the logs of that round the antags weren't all heavily teaming up but instead there was periods where high activity from one antag bled into another antag being just as active and aggressive with security/station going after their objectives. There was groups of antags working together in small groups of 2-3 at points but also points where antags were fighting each other to near death at points. That round was incredibly hectic looking even after the fact with hindsight from being able to track everything that happened throughout the round via game logs.
On to the Cargo/HoP portion here, You requested cargo access from the HoP who you felt was going very slow and expressed such feelings to them directly. After the initial request your frustration with the round starts to become rather apparent as this is when things start to spiral downwards in terms of how things are handled. Typing in all caps in security chat to remind people to respond to calls for help after earlier dieing and losing your weapons prompting the need for more/replacements. In cargo itself when a Cargo Tech didn't leave the shuttle you screamed for them to get off, below starts with you attempting to order guns/sending the shuttle:
[2023-09-23T02:23:06] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (88,119,2): 'fucking cargo man'
[2023-09-23T02:23:15] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (67,116,2): 'GET OFF'
[2023-09-23T02:23:17] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (67,116,2): 'THE SHUTTLE'
[2023-09-23T02:23:19] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (66,116,2): 'NOW'
[2023-09-23T02:23:25] ATTACK: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess)(65,114,2) against x/(Cwm)(64,113,2): Knocked down with the telescopic baton
I wouldn't consider screaming at someone to get off the shuttle and then batoning them in a few seconds as asking them to get off the shuttle. This then devolved into shoving, disarming and the occasional punch at first before eventually turning into melee weapons being used. Devolving further from that point onward as the cargo situation blew up with the escalation.
[2023-09-23T02:26:09] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (130,131,2): (headset) 'cargo is aiding and abetting all eoc'
[2023-09-23T02:26:15] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (153,128,2): (headset) 'i advise a gamme alert and ert'
[2023-09-23T02:26:21] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (175,128,2): (headset) 'im done helping'
[2023-09-23T02:26:32] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (195,112,2): (Security) 'dont care'
[2023-09-23T02:26:41] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (197,98,2): (Security) 'all of cargo needs to be killed for mutiny'
Now I want to quickly talk about the ERT involvement,
[2023-09-23T02:57:10] ATTACK: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess)(88,106,2) against y/(Sergeant Pavlov)(ANTAG)(87,105,2): stunned
[2023-09-23T02:57:13] SAY: y(Sergeant Pavlov) (87,105,2): 'Can you not?'
[2023-09-23T02:57:14] ATTACK: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess)(88,106,2) against y/(Sergeant Pavlov)(ANTAG)(87,105,2): stunned
[2023-09-23T02:57:17] SAY: y/(Sergeant Pavlov) (87,105,2): 'We're not here to be your enemy.'
[2023-09-23T02:57:21] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (83,105,2): 'you are'
[2023-09-23T02:57:22] EMOTE: y/(Sergeant Pavlov) (87,105,2): sighs.
[2023-09-23T02:57:22] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (83,105,2): 'im done'
[2023-09-23T02:57:23] SAY: TheBadPerson/(Ekss Laess) (83,105,2): 'bye'
[2023-09-23T02:57:23] SAY: y/(Sergeant Pavlov) (87,105,2): 'very well.'
After this point it turns into them disablering you and then shooting you quite a lot with lethals till you died and then were later revived before exchanging PMs with Samman166. Personally I don't agree with what the ERT member did with killing you with lethals but it was set to gamma alert at roughly [2023-09-23T02:34:26] so 20 minutes before this point, originally it looks like the ERT was sent specifically to handle the issues with the current round and help try to fix the issues going on at the time.
Honestly this whole situation could've been avoided by doing one of three things; Ahelping regarding the cargo incident that round, ahelping the issues with command members or by removing yourself from the round and taking a step back to relax. Majority of the issue here was made worse by getting angrier and angrier as time went on and things progressed through that round. Some of these could've been handled much better on your end, especially the interactions with command and cargo itself. This seems to boil down into a if you're getting frustrated playing a role or the game then it's a good idea to take a step back, relax and try to handle things with a clear head rather then letting yourself get more and more upset and frustrated. That and/or ahelping command would've probably gone a long way into improving the outcome of the round. As it stands I see no misconduct from Samman's actions here or misapplication of the server's rules, you were banned specifically for the attitude and escalation of the cargo incident that could've been easily handled via ahelping rather than stunning and attacking cargo to try and take things into your own hand. -
If there's no other questions or concerns regarding this AC in the next few days I'm going to mark and move it as resolved. I'll leave this open till it hits two weeks since my last message which will be October 3rd.
-
First I would like to apologize for how long this has taken to be handled or even addressed, myself and the other heads have had some very busy lives lately and sadly this along with a few other admin complaints had taken a backseat in comparison to other responsibilities and real life issues. We attempt to solve these as soon as we can but sometimes it takes far longer to handle/address than we'd like to in a optimal world.
Now onto the complaint here and I will break it into some points that we can go back and forth on or elaborate more down the line if needed but in a more structured and directed way than in a paragraph lumping points together. So starting off I will not be airing out everything that's happened in every situation as there's no reason for me to air someone's dirty laundry out for everyone to see since complaints are public for accountability sake but I will point some things out in vague sense. Majority of your notes/bans are from admins other than itsmarmite and it's typical that every time an admin talks to you regarding the rules and following them we leave a note regarding what exactly happened to the best of the admin's ability and are noted once for that incident/ban. Each additional time something happens there's a new one placed, we don't note people who ask questions via ahelp or other means as long as the questions are actual questions and someone not just spamming ahelps to mess with the admin team.
Talking briefly about the cable tieing nukies issue you bring up here, while the prompt might not have popped up when you attempted to cable tie a SSD character in that situation that is most likely an oversight somewhere in the code. Generally unless you have an admin's approval to interact with a SSD character you shouldn't be interacting with them unless you are doing one of three things; moving the SSD player from a dangerous environment (examples being unsafe atmosphere, plasma fire, anything that can kill or severely wound a SSD if left in that area), taking a SSD player to cryodorms for being disconnected for a long while, or in the cases of being an antag/security who were about to handcuff a target/wanted player before they lost connection and dropped SSD. When it comes to this situation and others you're the one responsible for your own actions, if someone tells you to do something that you're not sure you can do or are unsure about doing ahelp it before doing so to get an admin to either tell you directly it's alright to do so or to not do so.
Now onto the shuttle section which from what you've listed so far here and from your note history is the only one I can attribute to itsmarmite handling directly or indirectly as the rest were handled by other admins. If the other listed parts were for information on how you felt you were treated based on past incidents I can assure you that you were treated the same way as most other people should be treated in regards to the shuttle temp ban for shuttle grief.
ATTACK: Blozzom/(Ula Witmore)(224,135,2) against INVALID/(Officer Beepsky)(224,136,2): Shot with a /obj/item/projectile/beam/laser/ik
ATTACK: Blozzom/(Ula Witmore)(225,135,2) against INVALID/(Officer Beepsky)(224,136,2): Shot with a /obj/item/projectile/beam/laser/ik
ATTACK: Blozzom/(Ula Witmore)(225,135,2) against x/(Unknown Unit.)(224,136,2): Shot with a /obj/item/projectile/beam/laser/ik 3.85% blocked
ATTACK: Blozzom/(Ula Witmore)(225,135,2) against x/(Unknown Unit.)(224,136,2): Shot with a /obj/item/projectile/beam/laser/ik 3.85% blocked
ATTACK: Blozzom/(Ula Witmore)(224,135,2) against x/(Splattered-With-Paint)(222,135,2): Shot with a /obj/item/projectile/beam/laser/ik
ATTACK: Blozzom/(Ula Witmore)(224,135,2) against x/(Hijaan Karkinouw)(ANTAG)(221,135,2): Shot with a /obj/item/projectile/beam/laser/ik
SAY: Blozzom/(Ula Witmore) (226,135,2): 'beer!!'
ATTACK: x/(Sakikisyayaka)(225,135,2) against Blozzom/(Ula Witmore)(226,135,2): Attacked with stunbaton (HARM) (BRUTE)
ATTACK: Blozzom/(Ula Witmore)(226,135,2) against : Fallen unconscious
GAME: Blozzom/(Ula Witmore) fell unconscious at The Emergency Shuttle (226,135,2) (/area/shuttle/escape)
ADMIN: ItsMarmite/(Szymon Green) froze Blozzom/(Ula Witmore)
This all started over an incident regarding not getting a beer after being promised one by a member of security before being loaded onto the escape shuttle by security. Non-antag's shouldn't be attacking other people or causing a mess on the emergency escape shuttle before or during it's transit as well as doing anything to hinder people's ability to get onto the escape shuttle. Anyone who attacks others or causes a massive headache for other players on the shuttle is subject to getting a temp ban for shuttle grief, players shouldn't be attacking others on the shuttle, tossing grenades on the shuttle, detonating water/welding tanks, etc. It's a standard thing paradise has been doing for a long time and it applies to everyone equally, the escape shuttle is hectic enough as it is already with so many people so close together. While the shuttle is in transit it's difficult for security to keep tabs on things and even more difficult if an admin has to do any last minute investigations with the amount of log spam that can fly by in game when people go nuts on the escape shuttle. While the note/ban message isn't completely 100% accurate which I cannot heavily fault itsmarmite for due to the nature of having to deal with issues close to round end his application of the rules and policies we have in place is completely within his ability to do so. -
No reply to my previous message for almost two weeks assuming there's no follow up questions or comments and moving this to resolved.
-
Hey there, name reviews require more than a simple reason like this but regardless the name "silly" by itself as a non-clown name isn't gonna be ok. You'd need either a convincing reason to have "Silly" as a first name with a last name as a human or you'd need to use a more normal sounding first and last name.
-
So you might see this as dogpilling or whatever but Sirryan is at work during these hours while I am off work today so I'll be responding as well. I'm going to start at the very beginning with your first post and go through your comments but before that I will establish what we as headmins do for admin applications and what we can do. We take everything into account; your note/ban history even past the bare minimum amount of time of 6 months of clean history, your past behavior and current behavior on the discord, server and forums and we take into account how much the staff team talks about potential candidates. We weigh each decision we make for applications as letting in admins that bring issues or start issues with the rest of the staff team or the community makes our jobs as headmins much harder than it ever needs to be. We expect people to be able to conduct themselves with a bare minimum of respect for the players and fellow staff. Staff positions are volunteer positions, there's little to no compensation for the time, sweat and tears that goes into creating and maintaining a decent community and for that reason we hold admin applications as very important to us. We can break trust with the community far more easily than we can build it, especially in a niche gaming community that is SS13. We can deny applications on good grounds that it would be a waste of the staff's time to have to review an application if it would be out right denied.
Now onto your comments here in your first post. You made a public post on the forums for the sole reason of making it as public as possible, if you weren't trying to make it as public as possible you would've messaged myself (the one who placed the declined message on your admin application) or one of the other headadmins at the time of your denial (being Sirryan or Denthamos). All three of us can be reached at any time on discord or on the forums via DMs. You practically forced us to have to respond to you here, if we didn't we'd look like scummy assholes which we are not as again any of us can be contacted to chat in a civilized manner.
Now we warn people who are directly breaking the rules or are toeing the line to much or too often to where we have to step in for the betterment of the community. Sometimes this means we don't address people directly on certain topics such as metagaming, multikeying or other things we suspect people of doing till we are sure they are doing those things then we bring it up to them and warn them directly for. In your case it's your conduct and attitude while it might not warrant a direct admin message regarding it every time, it is certainly not something we'd like our admins to be doing let alone a potential admin candidate. When your name pops up in from multiple staff talking about your conduct and seeing a lot of agreements from the majority of staff then I don't see the reason why I'd let my admins waste their free time reviewing an application that is certainly going to fail. Especially after you've gone and deleted every message after 2018 within the paradise discord in response to your application being denied over conduct, you claim to have experience and training regarding how to conduct yourself but your current actions prove much otherwise with how you've conducted yourself so far.
Now I will respond to your comments responding to Sirryan's post.
If you wanted a public response to be transparent then it could've and should've been handled much better than fashion, we even have a place for that within these forums under the admin complaint section as anyone can read things that are posted there. Using the suggestion section as a means to paint the process in a bad light is not how you win over the staff or even the head admins or even paint yourself in a better light. While asking a community how they feel or think is fine in some places but allowing everyone not involved to comment on something they do not have the whole picture about is how drama starts over stupid shit. You have notes regarding some behavior and there are no notes regarding other behavior because it doesn't directly break the server rules but it's again not something we want admins to be doing to other staff or even the player base.
("Hello there, thank you for you interest in join the administration team on paradise. However myself and the other two heads have some concerns about your behavior in the public discord in more than occasion as well as concerns in game with behavior. For those reasons we're going to say no to your application at this time, while this application is going to be rejected it doesn't prevent you from applying in the future when admin applications open up again. ") This is my direct quote from your denied application it clearly spells out your issues being behavioral, if you were confused exactly what I or the other heads meant a simple DM is a moment away from getting you an answer directly in terms of what we're referring to. There's never been holding us to explain in depth anything regarding notes or denial reasons on admin applications in the past, I've been making sure that denial applications have been clearly given a reason in a direction without going into detail exactly what it is. Those who care to know the exact reasons have messaged me regarding their denial be it behavioral rejections like your own or for simple note rejections and wanting to get more information regarding it or see their own notes.
Now as to the reason our unban appeals and admin complaints are public to everyone and why doing this here is a shot at the staff directly. Our unban appeals are public for a record and accountability as well as our admin complaints as they can go hand in hand, as well as our community deserves to know that we do not let staff get away with valid admin complaints and hold staff to a minimum level of conduct and professionalism. This also means potential staff members are held to that exact standard upon review of their application. You have taken one rejection as the status quo of how things are handled in staff via assumption, all this has done in my eyes and in many of the staff's eyes has been that the head admins actions with your rejection were completely justified and reasonable. We as staff pour countless hours into moderating the community to the best that we can, this includes warning people before banning them and having the appropriate conversation. To me your responses read as you not only don't understand why we permanent ban players in the first place but also that you have little to no understanding of the commitment the staff makes to engaging with the player base in general be it in an administrative capacity or otherwise. These posts has done nothing but toss unneeded shade at the staff in general over what could've been handled in a few DMs between yourself and me or one of the other two headmins to explain and get more info.-
1
-
-
It has been a little over 2 weeks since the last response to this complaint, unless there's something else you'd like to add, discuss or have addressed I will be considering this complaint resolved in a week from today.
-
Deathsquads are the primary way to force the round to end during terror spiders/xeno infestations that have passed a critical point and have snowballed out of control for ERT or the station to have a chance to recover, considering the deadchat comments and in game chatter between people I'm inclined to believe it had passed the point of no return so a Deathsquad was justified. Typically we might send an ERT that ends up with a Deathsquad after the fact in order to push the round into a conclusion and start the next round rather than leave a lot of ghost players and a station full of threats with not much else going on.
As for multiple midround rolls, admins can either set up multiple ones on purpose to roll of which it can still select nothing as an option when the event triggers, they can set none to happen for the shift, or can let it happen naturally. The admin here let it happen naturally which isn't always the case but it's a thing some people either forget or don't mind letting it roll to see how it affects the round going on. Normally right before the end of the round without an extensions about 10 minutes or so there is usually another midround event roll that happens, sometimes nothing spawns from it and sometimes you get last second blobs, spiders, etc.
Last thing I want to touch on is that admins/headmins/maintainers/etc are not omnipresent beings, if we don't know what's going on from seeing it ourselves there's a chance we most likely will miss it. The best thing to do when having issues with admin events or admin interactions is to bring it to the appropriate parties attention in appropriate and easily seen places like the forums, directly to the admins attention or other easily accessed and a place that isn't drowned out by other chatter. -
Sorry this has taken so long to get around to, We've had a bit of a busy couple of weeks since Sirryan's last message. We do try to get to these as quickly as we can and we dropped the ball on this one more than a little bit. Before I get into the Admin complaint in it's content I do want to comment and make clear what counts as feedback and what doesn't really work well as feedback. The generally accepted forms of feedback will revolve around the forms here themselves more than anything due to the nature of being able to read and respond versus the Paradise discord as that generally ends up being flooded with messages between rounds or during rounds depending on what's going on for that day. It can make it difficult to hold conversations on specific subjects like that and/or leaving valuable feedback. Leaving an Ahelp during or the round after is also fine to try and give direct feedback to the admin about say an event or actions as well as I'd believe most of the admins would be open to being DM'd to discuss events of past rounds as long as the conversation is civil. There's other avenues as well for talking to admins just naming some of the more reliable ways to get a conversation going and staying on topic.
Now in terms of the complaint regarding the admin's actions and consequences. I've taken a little bit to look through game logs, far longer than I should've to try and fully understand the situation at hand during the round including issues with what happened, what led to them, etc. The admin's intentions weren't to be malicious but rather tie the previous portions of the round before the midround roll into what was going on. It seems they were intending to create an enjoyable/memorable experience for players that tied the general population into the situation and not just the command staff, this however backfired in that regard causing people headache rather than enjoyment. None of these actions regarding the ERT and deathsquad were done specifically to ruin things for the rest of the players, the deathsquad after the ERT were sent due the quickly snowballing nature the station had become (this is what I understand from the combat logs and chat logs, including admin chat pointing out the snowballing nature at that point and pointing out the amount of friendly firing that was going on as well).
The admin in question acknowledges there was problem to how things were done in regards to the little "event" they were running at the start of the round that ended up not working out so well in regards to the ERT request/mid round issue. They'll be a little more open minded in the future in regards to mid round interaction with ongoing things they were running before terror spiders popped up from the mid round roll in this instance and how to handle ERT requests/considering sending their own of their own accord unprompted for situations like these. With all that said I do want to take a moment to also point out that running events in any scale sometimes don't work out the way someone intends or wanted to from the beginning, sometimes that works out well and other times it ends up backfiring on the person who's been running the event. That seems to be what happened here, if you have issues again with an admin's event feel free to leave them feedback on the forums, file an admin complaint, contact them directly in DMs over discord, create an ahelp in game or in the case of being a mentor reach out to them via msay in game.-
1
-
WestFaller: Name Review Request
in Resolved
Posted
This name request is denied, no sane parent would name their kid this and there is no way that a proper company would ever hire someone with such a ridiculous name. Gray species names are able to be quite diverse and interesting, you will have to use a more normal sounding name that a company would consider employing.