[Proposed Change to Silicon Policy: The AI and Borgs are NOT Security]

What exactly else is the AI supposed to do? Their entire job is designed around watching crew members, specifically crew members who are causing issues on station, antag or not. Borgs can very easily just go do a task like mopping floors or repairing the station but the AI is locked in its observer role the entire round. So the most common way to solve this is by involving themselves most actively in whatever exciting thing is going on in the round, which is usually antagonists.

I don't disagree that AIs round-ending antags can be exhausting and make for poor gameplay, but additional rules are not going to fix this. The reason being that it would be a bad rule as it works directly against human nature in attempt to correct what is a game design issue at its foundation. AI, like most things in this game, needs to be overhauled.

Furthermore, this is a nightmare to enforce, I am not log-diving to see if Security Officer X gave the AI specific permission to intervene; nor am I going to check if the HoS just gave a ultimatum for the entire round for the AI to intervene whenever they feel. This is one of those situations where the effort needed to properly investigate rule breaks of this sort far outweighs the actual value of enforcement. This is not going to change the current AI -> Antag gameplay culture in the long-term as it will need to be applied to each and every AI player since it's not going to be a rule one just easily understands at first.

I actually think this will have the opposite effect of making AI players more toxic as they begin to target security players for not giving them the go ahead to intervene and "ruining" their AI round by neutering them of everything fun. If players are as you describe, this is exactly what is going to happen.

[General lack of care for RP in admin events/ Punishing station for events outside the control of the station]

Will try and get a response out for you in the next couple days :)

[I was banned from the discord I don know why, also my entire pc just shut itsself on and is refusing to turn back on while I'm hos I have pics for proof]

 

I'm resolving this admin complaint, you were banned for breaking our discord rule "4) Don't discuss bans, warnings or other punishments from the admins in Discord... Complaining about your ban/warning in Discord will result in a ban from Discord, and reduces your chances of a successful ban appeal. This applies to inactive/expired bans/warnings/etc as well as currently active ones."

You continued to discuss your ban in the discord after several warnings from Game Admins, please appeal this ban in the proper forum section https://www.paradisestation.org/forum/55-unban-requests/

[Name Review - Bob]

Name Review Resolved

[Admins suddenly demand I change my name after using it for over 100 hours.]

If you could please use the name review template next time I would appreciate it.

Please format your name using the Nian standard scheme in the future. As much as I want to let people use whatever name they want with a character (given a good justification), at the moment we are not approving significant deviations from species naming, we have been looking into our naming rules to potentially change how they work but at this time please modify it to be within the rules.

I will leave this name review open for 2 weeks for reply, otherwise it will be resolved.

[Admin Complaint, Norwest, LforLouise]

Hello and thank you for writing this admin complaint, apologies for not getting to it sooner, I have been rather busy and this is an extensive complaint. The complaint in questions deals with Misapplication of rules so I will be directly addressing that in my reply in regards to "Rule 6: Play Antagonists Responsibly"

We don't normally just antag ban players for a single incident unless it's extraordinarily bad, in this case it was a pattern of issues surrounding your gameplay as an antagonist. I have had multiple admins and other players come forward about you overstepping the bounds for acceptable antagonist behavior, particularly in unnecessarily killing of crew members and going far beyond your objectives. This ban was justified and needs to be handled in the ban appeal section of the forums, not here.

 As for the 6 month cap, I do not believe that it is constructive to your improving your behavior due to its extensive length in time, therefor I am removing that aspect of your ban. Appeal it whenever you feel comfortable. However, this doesn't mean it will be accepted automatically and you still need to play for a period of time without racking up notes for server rule break (Such as the 14th of March). I recommend at least a month minimum without any additional notes.

As for this complaint, the rules were not misapplied. Before I resolve this complaint I will leave it open for 2 weeks if you'd like to respond.

[Name Review - Bob]

Thank you for submitting this name-review.

Unfortunately I'm gonna have to say no on this one. This is against our rules for non-serious character names, while I could see the merit in permitting a non-traditional vox name, even though bob is technically a "standard" name its most often used with a very silly connotation or purpose. Furthermore, the actual backstory reasoning for the name needs a lot more development before it became a viable justification to break the naming rules. Regardless, I don't think my mind could be changed about naming a vox character "Bob" unfortunately. I appreciate you bringing this to the forums so it could be discussed, this is exactly how it should be gone about.

Naming Request Declined, I will leave this open for an additional week if you feel a response is necessary, otherwise I will file this a week from now.

[The future of the Wizard Gamemode (Unoffical Poll)]

I have expressed my issues with Wizard in the past, especially during my office hours where I've talked about the design of the game mode extensively. The biggest key issues with Wizard are as follows:

• The game is currently designed for players to begin investing heavily in their roundstart job from the get go to start working towards mid-game to end-game tier progression, almost all wizards don't show up for the first 10 minutes and some even take 20-35 minutes before going to the station. This leads to frustration as it completely round-ends any progression people have with non-antag related mechanics basically.
• Any wizard that is not immediately killed will remove people from the round permanently either directly or indirectly through polymorph or transformation spells which means a meaningful portion of active players now have to observe for the rest of the round or play in a role that is something which they do not want to play whatsoever (think polymorphed into a slime or a difference species)
• (as to choice 1) Wizard is not balanced to be a major round and the only way to balance it would be to significantly nerf wizard and completely rework most spells 
• Wizards can be incredibly anti-climatic especially if they're not great at wizarding, rounds should not end anti-climatically
• Wizard is still great content for the game, it should not just be removed

So how to solve these issues when you cannot just remove the gamemode? Wizard will need to undergo significant changes pending dynamic gamemodes if we successfully integrate that system into our codebase. Here is what I propose as the "other" option:

1. Wizard can no longer permanently remove any player from the round instantly, brains must be preserved upon death; Furthermore, the wizards spells should aim to injure and disable as opposed to kill (atleast with ease)
2. Polymorph spells are purely temporary
3. Entire round altering spells are completely removed (ghosts, guns, etc)
4. The end goal of the wizard is not just to sow chaos but to complete a few select objectives and then finish their run by completing a "ritual" which will in someway permanently alter the rules of the round. I.e. if the wizard succeeds with the ritual, for the rest of the round portals will randomly appear occasionally which spawn random simple mobs (almost like netherworld portal but slightly less lethal).

This not only prevents rounds by being completely derailed by a wizard but also punishes players for failing to contain the wizard in an interesting way that could actually be fun.

[Make all development channels visible on the discord]

https://discord.com/channels/145533722026967040/499000353312735233/1088431380842684476

[[Ven's] Idea to add vaccum upgrade to Janitor pumpkin ride]

Would like to see this as a midround-ish upgrade available through R&D if added. My only requests would be:

• It be restricted to only tiny or very-small items
• It having ambient sounds (i.e. a vacuuming noise) + a sound for sucking up an object
• it requires power in the room its operating in to properly work
• It should be togglable when you're on the vehicle itself and when activated it should slow down the vehicle slightly much like a buffer would
• You can either put the buffer or vacuum upgrade on but not both at the same time

[Make all development channels visible on the discord]

@Bmon

I'll try and address what I perceive to be the presented concerns:

• Lack of Transparency / Communication on the Git
• Hidden Dev Channels
• Slipping back into past bad practicies

I'll give my 2 cents on this as someone who has served in most roles on the Dev team (excluding -headcoder & -balance team) as well as general staff leadership. This has little to do with the development team's commitment to being open and honest and everything to do with time and energy.

Lack of Transparency / Communication

Back in January/December, contributors were opening PRs at around 10-15 PRs A DAY, we had 2 active headcoders, 2 review team members, and 2 commit access members all with varying availability (some with almost none), it was impossible to keep up with the rate of these PRs and also provide the kind of communication you want, this rate of PRs decreased into the second semester of schooling for most of us but did not largely stop until late February; Furthermore, most people on the design team (such as myself) also serve in other roles and have to balance responsibilities. It is exhausting to keep up with it and I'm not always going to sacrifice 15 minutes of my day sometimes to leave reasoning behind a PR objection every time I have one (especially if I'm leaving 3-4 a week). It's not because I don't want to be transparent it's because I'm doing other important things like a) talking to my girlfriend b) doing my homework c) dealing with a dumpster fire in staffcoord as a HOS or d) simply doing code reviews / merges to get our PR count down.

Making our dev-channel public will not fix this and will make it worse, it wont make me be more transparent, I will be less transparent and here's why:

Hidden Dev Channels

Players and contributors will likely never truly understand the perspective/experience/needs of the development team or staff team until they serve on them or a similar team. This isn't a jab at our contributors' empathy or behavior, it's just a simply a matter of having that collection of micro-experiences that changes the lens in which you look at things. The single hidden dev channel we have on the public discord is the only channel that is exclusive to development team members (it even excludes most GA's) minus a single headcoder-leadership channel we have on the staff discord.

Why is this important?

The obvious points have been covered, exploit discussion and GitHub disciplinary action discussion. Here's what's not necessarily been talked about

• I need a space where I can talk freely and privately with dev people I trust 100%
• It shields certain dev/staff politics from public view, all of us do not agree on everything and it can get to the point where we have fights behind closed doors. I do not want contributors or any player for that matter to be privy to what is said or to take it as an opportunity to butt in on a conversation they do not have a share in. Sometimes things that are said that are not necessarily true in the heat of the moment and has to be approached very cautiously and tenderly. This may even be the reason why certain controversial objections are not written out thoroughly, its a difficult choice for multiple dev team members to be openly in contradiction with each other on a PR because it reflects poorly on our collective vision and its invites all of us to participate in a potentially energy-draining drawn-out discussion, so we often work it out in this channel.
• Privacy is important to everyone, it's hard enough to find people who will invest the amount of time they do in our development team + are nearly completely in-line with leadership + we're able to work with them.

I realize that we can look as if we're slipping back into bad past practices and its certainly always a concern that is on the back of my mind, I'm glad you bring this up because its always an important topic to revisit. I certainly don't think you have any bad intentions in mind either. More communication could always be better and our dev team needs to work on coming together to establish a central design vision. At this moment, most of our dev team is in the busiest moments of their year (school, works, life, etc) and have to balance it all with their responsibilites in a volunteer organization (i.g. paradise). We're going to be committed to being better about justifying objections in the future, however.

[rule clarification and questions]

Thank you for writing this admin complaint.

Banana grenades are not constituted as bombs under rule 7, that refers more generally to explosives. Healing and non-harmful chem grenades do not fall under the bomb category either. Banana grenades are not harmless by any means, when the acid peels produced by the grenade are stacked enough it can easily put crew into crit. This would fall under self-antagging technically because of this part of Rule 7

Quote

it will be considered Self-Antagging if it negatively affects a significant portion of the crew, or is done without any reasonable IC justification and/or provocation;

If you have no reason to pepper the security lobby with acid peels then its technically self-antagging.

I'll leave this open for one more week before closing it for replies, otherwise this complaint can be considered resolved.

[PURGATORIO Casting Call]

1. Quartermaster

2. 

Spoiler

{"type":"/mob/living/carbon/human","dir":1,"icon":null,"name":"Edgar Cook","limbs":{"chest":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/chest","dir":4,"icon":""},"groin":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/groin","dir":4,"icon":""},"head":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/head"},"l_arm":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/arm","dir":4,"icon":""},"r_arm":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/arm/right","dir":4,"icon":""},"l_leg":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/leg","dir":4,"icon":""},"r_leg":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/leg/right","dir":4,"icon":""},"l_hand":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/hand","dir":4,"icon":""},"r_hand":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/hand/right","dir":4,"icon":""},"l_foot":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/foot","dir":4,"icon":""},"r_foot":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/foot/right","dir":4,"icon":""}},"iorgans":{"heart":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/heart"},"lungs":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/lungs"},"cybernetic liver":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/liver","icon_state":"liver-c","name":"cybernetic liver","status":2},"kidneys":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/kidneys"},"brain":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/brain"},"appendix":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/appendix"},"eyeballs":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/eyes"},"ears":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/ears"}},"equip":[{"type":"/obj/item/storage/backpack/satchel","content":[{"type":"/obj/item/storage/box/survival","content":[{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/mask/breath"},{"type":"/obj/item/tank/internals/emergency_oxygen"},{"type":"/obj/item/reagent_containers/hypospray/autoinjector"},{"type":"/obj/item/flashlight/flare/glowstick/emergency","color":"#6496fa"}],"slots":7,"max_w_class":2,"max_c_w_class":14},{"type":"/obj/item/reagent_containers/food/drinks/mug/novelty","icon_state":"mug_rad","name":"radioactive mug","pixel_x":-1,"pixel_y":3}],"slots":21,"max_w_class":3,"max_c_w_class":21},null,null,null,null,null,{"type":"/obj/item/card/id/quartermaster","name":"Edgar Cook's ID Card (Quartermaster)","sex":"Male","age":32,"btype":"B+","dna_hash":"d93e640d5884ed37fe83e4a4b93aac35","fprint_hash":"dd2476489bdc6f88e698f94623aea191","access":[12,50,31,34,41,51,48,54,76],"job":"Quartermaster","account":0,"owner":"Edgar Cook","mining":0},{"type":"/obj/item/radio/headset/headset_cargo"},{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/glasses/sunglasses_fake"},{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/gloves/ring/gold"},null,{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/shoes/laceup"},{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/suit/storage/lawyer/purpjacket","pockets":{"type":"/obj/item/storage/internal","name":"purple suit jacket","content":[],"slots":2,"max_w_class":2,"max_c_w_class":4}},{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/under/rank/cargo/quartermaster","accessories":[{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/accessory/blue"}]},null,null,null,null,null,null,{"type":"/obj/item/pda/quartermaster","name":"PDA-Edgar Cook (Quartermaster)"},null,null],"implant_list":[],"dna":{"UE":"d93e640d5884ed37fe83e4a4b93aac35","SE":[1000,494,16,280,440,488,426,360,1003,412,512,25,309,187,422,892,883,438,229,755,856,40,710,296,147,729,969,630,154,129,781,375,928,811,260,655,882,666,1012,808,38,2,322,880,613,168,81,983,1017,328,89,105,213,142,212],"UI":[1059,529,16,16,16,16,16,176,16,16,16,16,744,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,128,16,16,16,2424,2810,851,1726,67,1440,4095,157,2843,2654,2843,3556],"species":"/datum/species/human","blood_type":"B+","real_name":"Edgar Cook"},"age":32,"ushirt":"Nude","socks":"Normal Black","uwear":"Mens Black"}

3. 2/24/23

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Make Destroyed Objective Items Respawn]

In support of this, otherwise people cannot complete their objectives out of no fault of their own.

All unique objective items should be reorderable through the cargo console or something, it would not be a terribly difficult thing to code.

[Reach the highest number without an admin posting]

zero

[Mute CE ruling]

IAA roles are almost entirely communicating with other players, if PDA servers go down you're smoked. I will talk about this policy on Sunday with the heads of staff as I'm meeting with them then, at that point we'll make a decision on how to handle this policy going forward but it will likely look much like what I mentioned above.

Consider this complaint resolved.

[Official Staff List]

A bit late but...

January 29th

@ItsMarmite Has been promoted to Game Admin

[Mute CE ruling]

Hello there and thanks for writing this admin complaint,

I agree that a head of staff ruling on disabilities has not been made abundantly available or clear to players, that is our fault. Thank you for deciding to continue this conversation through this section of the forums instead of extending the discussion in-game, it's the best way to go about addressing stuff like this. Here's what I'm sure of in this situation:

• I am sure that you are great a roleplaying, as indicated by your character choice, you are definitely very involved with the story of your character and how you interact with the world
• You are likely very good at engineering related skills.

And while this is all true, there is still the communication aspect. The radio still remains the most important form of communication for command/security members and we believe that having the downside of having the mute disability cannot be made up through alternative accommodations you make for other people in-game in order to circumvent this issue. At the moment, our leadership team has agreed that this is how we are going to handle command/security related disability choices for characters as per our Rule 5. 

So unfortunately I will not be reversing the current ruling. The admin was properly enforcing server policy in this case and provided a fine justification for it in the conversation y'all had with each other. In terms of the warning about the actual disability, I will make sure this is clarified and not necessarily held against you in the future. Also to make sure this is much more clear in the future, I will be revising our advanced rules precedents for rule 5 so that this graphic is made available once this complaint is resolved.

I will leave this admin complaint open for another week if you would like to reply / counter-point what I've said, otherwise it will be closed once that period elapses. This is not the place to necessarily ask for this policy to be changed/altered if you do not think it is good for the server, but you are welcome to make a suggestion on other parts of the forums about changing it.

[Admin Complaint.]

Thank you for taking the time to write this admin complaint.

I'll cut to the chase, I personally don't have all the time in the world to put up with petty attitudes; I don't expect my game admins to either. Take this as a life lesson in interpersonal skills, if somebody asks you something and you give the most low effort response possible, that's a direct indication that you do not care and don't respect the other person in the conversation (whether that was your intention or not :)).

The admin in question was doing their job by reaching out to you when you broke a rule and you were rude to them. The evidence provided doesn't suggest this was an abuse of power, this was a reasonable Rule 6 rule break which turned into a Rule 0 ban. Consider this admin complaint resolved.

[Complaint]

Hello and thank you for writing this admin complaint.

The rule broken in this incident as you've identified is Rule 1. This is what you were banned for and the evidence in PMs is immensely clear that an admin asked to to provide a name to change to because they believed you were breaking a rule; You refused and were banned for it.

Quote

ADMIN: PM: Miraviel/(Jin Xiaofei)->Ibui/(Maximus Robustius): Hey, hilarious name, but please a different one. We aren't allowing meme names on Paradise as we are an MRP server

ADMIN: PM: Ibui/(Maximus Robustius)->Miraviel/(Jin Xiaofei): It is not a meme name? It is my character and i see nothing wrong with it as it has a first and last name.

ADMIN: PM: Miraviel/(Jin Xiaofei)->Ibui/(Maximus Robustius): But we do. Pick a different one, please.

ADMIN: PM: Ibui/(Maximus Robustius)->Miraviel/(Jin Xiaofei): What do you see wrong with it? I do not see it breaking the naming rules.

ADMIN: PM: Miraviel/(Jin Xiaofei)->Ibui/(Maximus Robustius): It is a meme name, maximum robustness. Slightly latinised. Please stop arguing and give me a new name.

ADMIN: PM: Ibui/(Maximus Robustius)->Miraviel/(Jin Xiaofei): I am not arguing i am simply asking what is wrong with my name, I seen people on here named Maximus before also it's Robustis not robutness, It is my character and who i am roleplaying as it does not break the rules i see no issue.

ADMIN: PM: Miraviel/(Jin Xiaofei)->Ibui/(Maximus Robustius): Right. I explained it to you and I am tired arguing. Either give me a new name or we'll do this a different way. It's not that difficult.

ADMIN: PM: Ibui/(Maximus Robustius)->Miraviel/(Jin Xiaofei): There is no issue with it, If you wish to have me make a ban appeal about some false rule or that you don't like it then sure.

ADMIN: PM: Miraviel/(Jin Xiaofei)->Ibui/(Maximus Robustius): Alright.

ADMIN: PM: Ibui/(Maximus Robustius)->Miraviel/(Jin Xiaofei): Alright see you in fourms, There is no rule breaking.

As for the actual name rule break, "Maximus Robustius" is a very clearly a reference to meta SS13 stuff considering you yourself say that its just a version of "Maximum Robustness" which certainly falls under the IRL reference for this part of the advanced rules: "Especially “memey” names, or IRL references, can very much break immersion." If your name is based of a meme or meta joke/term yet modified to not be exactly yet, if the original source of that name is still very discernable and identifiable to players its still a meme. Yes Maximus is an actual name, but used in this context, the name as a whole is a rule break. The correct course of action in this situation would have been to provide a new name and take it to this forum to request that you can use that name since an admin told you not to. In that case we could have had the conversation about whether or not it was against our name standards instead of you being banned for rule 1.

The evidence provided in this admin complaint does not suggest that the rules were misapplied here, quite the opposite. If you wish to be unbanned, your best course of action would be rereading our rules keeping in mind what I said (this is an official ruling on the name manner) and you can reappeal your ban for breaking Rule 1. Consider this admin complaint resolved.

[Character Name Request - Arachus, Pastor of The Gilded Crags]

Apologies for taking a bit to get to this.

In this case, I am going to say no on using this name for a human character. Feel free to use it in other contexts, such as when signing things, introducing yourself, communicating etc. But for you "legal" Nanotrasen name, i.e. the one in the loadout screen, please use a human name that is in-line with human naming standards (first & last name). The reason being is not that I disagree with the backstory or think this would be unrealistic in our server universe but rather because doing so would be me giving you permission to directly break our name rules. At the moment admins would definitely PM you and players would make ahelps about your name because it violates naming standards. We should probably look at how we enforce/handle naming schemes (our current system could certainly be improve) but at the moment I will deny this request.

Thank you, please consider this character name request resolved.

[Admin Warning system Complaint Requesting Clarification]

Thank you for writing this admin complaint. Apologies for not getting to this sooner.  

I'll point you to this place in our rules:

Quote

Murder is not acceptable for non-antags. Killing should only be done in extreme self-defense, during an authorized execution, or in any situation Security can employ lethal force. If you wish to murder, or at least seriously injure, someone, Administrator permission is required;

Violence capable of inflicting serious damage to someone, especially anything that places them into a critical state, is reserved for Antagonists. Outside Self-Defense, this kind of violence is not permitted;

Self-defense is allowed to the extent of saving your own life. Putting someone into Critical Condition is considered self-defense only if they attempted to severely hurt/kill you. Preemptively disabling someone, responding with disproportionate force, or hitting someone while they are already down, is not self-defense;

Self-antagging tends to be one of the more gray area sections of our server rules, sometimes the policy is not immediately clear. However, in the case of the clown I think the rules here are immediately clear. If you are not an antag or sec officer, violence is limited to only what is necessary for your own self-defense. Beating somebody for stealing something is over-escalation and considered self-antagging. If you're being kidnapped/attacked/killed, feel free to to harm the person back to the extent that you can get away to safety, but do not continue attacking them if its possible for you to successfully get away.

In the first situation, the player you were beating was likely a victim of abductor glands and they were not purposefully shocking people (its something out of their control). You could have instead walked out of the shock radius or tried to non-lethally subdue the player. You only had 50 hours at that point so it was definitely an honest misunderstanding and the admin at the time pointed you to the rules (particularly rule 8) so you could read and understand them in that context. That note will likely not be held terribly against you for that reason, but after the fact we do expect that you know the rules better but as indicated above you seriously broke the same rule again.

The way our note system works, is to note times when we see players break rules and generally also when we warn people. Notes are permanent but tend to lose influence on whether or not you will be banned as the note becomes older and less relevant. Will they influence rulings in the future? Yes. However they're not going to be unfairly held against you if you're honestly trying to understand our rules and actively work against breaking them.

If you need more clarification, you can reply and ask, however, do understand that I have limited free time and its players' responsibilities to understand the rules themselves. Otherwise I will close this in a week.

[Admin complain: Miraviel]

Hello and thank you for writing this admin complaint. I appreciate that you brought this incident here for rules clarification as opposed to continuing this in-game in admin PMs.

This is certainly a grey area ruling so I can see perhaps why this isn't clear. As part of our rule 8 clarifications/precedents, we do allow some form of "rescues" for kidnapped coworkers to a small extent which was likely your justification behind shooting the vampire with a stechkin. However, in this scenario you escalated combat more than the vampire did in this case by immediately shooting them 2-3 times. While rescuing kidnapped coworkers is fine, involving yourself in security vs. antag combat generally is not and in this case I would agree that you went overboard to the point of it being validhunting. The reason why I say this is 1) because of your own escalation and 2) you immediately went with a highly lethal takedown. In this case its not just a rescue anymore and you are actively hunting/taking-down an antagonist.

The rules were applied appropriately in this situation and I hope this clarified the ruling for you; There is not enough evidence in this case for rules misapplication so this admin complain is resolved.

[Wrongly banned from discord [cornmycob]]

Hello and thank you for writing up this admin complaint.

I have reviewed the available logs during this incident at the time you specified in the discord. While the argument could be made that the discord ban was on the harsher side of rulings, we have the expectation that you read the rules and most importantly read the room. Given the tone you also took with the admin who applied your current permanent ban and also what I witnessed personally from this incident back in November I believe this ban was justified. It would have been more appropriate for you to make a ban appeal in this situation.

You are claiming Abuse of Power and Admin Misconduct here, neither of which are with merit as the admin in question was enforcing our server rules as intended on the discord. Consider this admin complaint resolved.

 

[How to delete forum posts?]

I moved it for you.

Unfortunately, forum posts cannot be deleted, only hidden.