Repo - TonyBalone: Questionable Administrator Engagement

[TonyBalone]

Subject:
“Repo”

Policies or Expectations Violated:
1. 1.2 Be Professional, Polite and Welcoming. 

• “We expect you to deescalate, rather than escalate situations.”
• “No matter your opinion on the player, do your best to be respectful towards them”

2.  2.6 Do not interfere unless you are needed.

• “if it looks like the situation will be able to resolve itself, or escalated naturally; and nothing actually actionable has happened, then there is no need to interfere.”

Do you want this complaint to be made public after it is processed:

Yes.

Detailed Summary:

-I apologize in advance to whoever is going to read this long post, I wanted to be as detailed as possible to best articulate my point of view from this interaction.-

The following events occurred on 02/16/2024 Wizard’s Den Lizard [US WEST].

I was playing the captain role and it was approximately 5 Minutes into the Start of Shift. While handing out the Pinpointer to the Head of Security, the Head of Security asked me for “All Access”. I told them I would not give them all access, but I was willing to give them elevated access for better traversal of the station. Not very long afterwards I received a message from Game Admin “Repo”. Repo asked me why I gave the Head of Security additional access, to which I inquired if that decision was not allowed to be made by the station captain. Repo disregarded my inquiry and demanded that I answer their question, to which I responded that I was asking a genuine question, but to answer: The HoS asked for it and I did not think that it was something outside the bounds of the station commander. I did let Repo know I was not appreciative of their response to _my _question. 

Repo then responded “If you don’t want to answer my question I will just ban you for power gaming”

I told Repo that I  did  respond to them, and if I received a ban, that I would include a screenshot of the AHelp window in my appeal.

At this point, I felt as though Repo either did not read my response to them  or  they did not care what I responded with or was even going  to respond with because the time between them saying that I  did not  answer why I gave the Head of Security access that they didn’t “need or ask for” and their next message “Well?” couldn’t have been more then 5 seconds apart (as if they were DEMANDING me to answer). The Head of Security did  ask for more access and I could easily make an argument as to why the Head of Security would benefit from additional access. Still, my intent was not to go back and forth in an argument with Repo. I asked Repo if they read my response, to which they responded that I answered their question with a question, and Repo reiterated to me that I did not answer their question.

I stated to Repo that my Initial response was a genuine question, I was truly uncertain if it was not allowable. I then told them that my second response was straightforward and not a question, and let Repo know that their responses were coming off as hostile so I would like to escalate this issue to a senior administrator. I was then completely dismissed in my concern and Repo told me that “This isn’t a call center” I told them that I would find the information myself since they did not want to respond to my request. They then told me that if I did not want to answer the question they asked me I would be receiving a ban if I was seen “power gaming” again. (At this point I thought to myself, why the sudden tonal shift from  you will be banned  to  if you do it again, you’ll be banned.  From my point of view, once I stated that I would include screenshots in my appeal Repo did not want that to be included so they changed their messaging.

*After looking at previously accepted complaints made against repo, I can say that it would be an extremely fair assumption to make as it seems this behavior has been present in the past.)

To bring my complaint to an end as concisely as possible and not transpose the entirety of the conversation that can be read on the included attachments, I believe that Repo needs course correction on the way that they interact with people in AHelp and that their approach needs serious evaluation. This entire interaction could have been resolved without leaving a bad taste in my mouth afterward. I request that the most recent “Admin Remark” on my account be removed or re-written as they have portrayed the way the conversation having gone to fit their own personal bias of the interaction. The admin remark screenshot includes all of the previous notes for me because I want to affirm that I am not attempting to skirt accountability, if there is accountability I will take it in stride as it is justifiable. However, in this instance the note left on my account is not.

I have inserted the screenshots as well as left them as attachments, please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you for taking the time to read my complaint.

 

 

[nikthechampiongr]

Hello, I am sorry to get to your complaint 9 months later. We have been extremely backlogged on complaints and we are only just now getting to the old ones. I will be investigating your complaint.

For transparency, here is our full transcript of the ahelps on our side:

00:04:37 Repo: Why did you just give HOS a bunch of access?
00:04:54 TonyBalone: Am I not allowed to make that decision as captain?
00:05:40 Repo: How about answering my question
00:06:19 TonyBalone: It was a genuine question, the HoS asked for it and I didn’t feel as thought it was something that would be outside of the bounds of a station commander. I don’t appreciate the rude response.
00:06:42 Repo: Alright if you dont want to answer im happy to give you a ban for powergaming.
00:07:03 TonyBalone: I just answered you, if you ban me I will include screenshots of this in my appeal.
00:07:39 Repo: You didnt answer why you gave the HOS access they dont need nor asked for,
00:08:26 Repo: Well?
00:08:31 TonyBalone: Did you even read the chat log ingame or my response to you when you asked me?
00:09:09 Repo: Yes you answered my question with a question. I asked why you gave the hos extra access and you didnt answer…
00:10:07 TonyBalone: My initial response was a genuine question in response to yours. My second response was straightforward and not questioning. Your responses seem hostile
00:11:29 TonyBalone: I would like to escalate this to a more senior game administrator, could you provide me the name of one please?
00:11:41 Repo: lol
00:11:45 Repo: this isnt a call center
00:12:00 Repo: why did you give the hos additional access its real simple
00:12:04 TonyBalone: There is a discord, isn’t there? Im just asking for a name of one of the senior admins
00:12:11 Repo: saying cause im the captain isnt a good reason to powergame
00:12:17 TonyBalone: I’ll take a look myself actually, sorry for asking you for it.
00:12:25 Repo: Alright
00:18:02 Repo: Well either way if you dont want to answer a legit question from an admin, if your seen powergaming again you’ll be getting a ban.
00:18:37 TonyBalone: I did answer your question. I still think you have yet to read the next response after “How about answering my question”
00:19:08 Repo: I have, you said im allowed to because im the capt.
00:19:17 TonyBalone: That isn’t at all what I said.
00:20:32 TonyBalone: When I was asking you for guidance because i was not aware if there was a rule in place about giving the head of security additional accesses you responded very bluntly completely disregarding my inquiry.
00:21:16 TonyBalone: Your definition of power gaming seems to be subjective and not objective from my understanding of the conversation we are having.
00:22:40 Repo: You objectively gave out additional access to the hos for no IC reason other than just cause they asked for it.
00:23:00 TonyBalone: But you said they didn’t ask for it
00:24:44 TonyBalone: Listen, all im saying is your approach could’ve completely been different and avoided this needlessly negative interaction. If I did something I wasn’t supposed to that wasn’t blatantly outlined by the rules indiciated by the admin staff, then treat it appropriately and educate me, not be a rude person and completely invalidate all of my responses to you simply because of your own personal opinion on what should and should not happen in a round.
[EN] Wizard’s Den Lizard [US West] (round 46668)

[nikthechampiongr]

Ahelp continued here:

00:27:54 Repo: Powergaming: Don’t rush for or prepare equipment unrelated to your job for no purpose other than to have it “just in case” or to make it “for the end round” (referred to as “powergaming”).
00:29:21 TonyBalone: Ok, I think this behavior should be course corrected on multiple levels. It is standard pratice to give the HoS a PinPointer. It is standard practice to give the QM spesos from the Cap Locker and Vault. It is standard practice to give science the precious metals from the vault even on maps where command doesn’t have access to the vault.
00:30:01 Repo: Hence why im asking why. and you not answering is a problem. If they had a legit reason to have the additional acces, all is well if you are just giving it out just cause, no real reason, its powergaming.
00:30:08 Repo: Anyway chat is done
00:30:13 TonyBalone: Right.
00:30:14 Repo: no more rule lawyer
[EN] Wizard’s Den Lizard [US West] (round 46668)

[nikthechampiongr]

Hello, here are my preliminary findings. It should be noted that this does not yet conclude the complaint as the admin has not been contacted yet about the situation. You are free to review them and provide any feedback, or issue you find with them:

Preliminary findings

On the Player’s Conduct being a violation of the powergame rule

The rules at the time were not sufficiently clear, and left situations such as these to the handling admin’s discretion. Even with the provided clarifications, it’s not possible to make a definitive determination on whether their conduct at the time was allowed prohibited. An admin however could plausibly make a determination that the behavior is power gaming.

Our transcript of the ahelp shows that it was made within the first 5 minutes of the round. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the HoS went to immediately acquire further access. As such we can say that there was not an immediate threat, or other reason to justify the HoS’ new access.

On the player’s and Repo’s conduct in Ahelp

I overall find that Repo’s approach to the ahelp was overly antagonistic, and in violation of Admin Policy 1.1

While it does appear that Repo relented during the end of the ahelp, his actions before that only served to escalate the situation.

Overall I believe the player responded reasonably considering the circumstances.

Rules relied on by Repo

Repo relied on our powergaming rules for their intervention

At the times the powergaming rule was:

Excerpt on powergaming from the rules page

Don’t rush for or prepare equipment unrelated to your job for no purpose other than to have it “just in case” or to make it “for the end round” (referred to as “powergaming”).

1. A medical doctor does not need to rush insulated gloves. The Head of Personnel does not need to give themselves armory access and then go grab guns for “self defense”. Interface with the proper channels to obtain these things and only obtain them if you have an actual purpose and reason for needing them, not just because “something might happen.”
2. Do not hide known antagonist objectives or otherwise secure them with a higher amount of security then would normally be required. Do not go around collecting all of the antagonist objectives as you first order of business and hide them in the vault just to make sure nobody can get them. Unless you have a specific and direct reason to believe a certain item is being targeted, you have no reason to go put it in the highest security area possible.

MRP Amendment

When it comes down to the securing and lock down of areas and items Standard Operating Procedure is expected to be followed.

1. Don’t manufacture weapons, bombs, death poisons, or anything similar before you know of any threats to the station or any reason you would need them. Making things “for the end of the round” when the shuttle docks with Central Command is also forbidden.

Additionally the following Rule clarification existed for metagaming at the time:

Rule clarification on powergaming

Activities performed as an antagonist are not considered powergaming.

For non-antagonists, generally it is considered powergaming to get or collect materials or items not relevant to the performance of your role, or to do so in a way that bypasses reasonable interactions with players. Like self-antagging, powergaming has a grey area where there may be some subjectivity, some examples are provided below to attempt to provide more clarity here.

The collection of materials for purposes that you have no IC reason for needing yet, but know you may because of OOC knowledge is sometimes also referred to as powergaming, but can also be described as metagaming. Examples of this are preparing for nukies without an IC reason to believe they’re coming, preparing for the end of the round, or collecting weapons “just in case” someone attacks the station.

Not powergaming:

• Collecting items from maintenance for your role, to build a rage cage, or to give to the clown as a peace offering.
• Asking atmos for an air canister for a shuttle or so that it can be used for self-service jetpack/tank refills.
• Making weapons to defend against a known significant threat.
• Security asking the janitor for galoshes because they’ve been slipped a lot during the round.

Possibly powergaming*:

• Breaking into atmos and stealing an air cansiter without any reasonable attempt to get it by interacting with atmos/engi. - Security getting galoshes roundstart.
• HOP using their access to take things from departments without interacting with the department head.
• Getting weapons because “it’s too quiet”
• Arming yourself roundstart as a non-security role
• Hiding/overly securing antag objectives preemptively.

*Depending on the exact situation, these may need to be done frequently or combined with other “possibly powergaming” things to be considered an issue.

Relevant Resources

Server rules in force at the time

Powergaming Rules Clarification

[Geekyhobo]

After reviewing this complaint among others, Repo has been removed from the admin team, that being said this complaint will be finished soon.

[nikthechampiongr]

Final outcome of the complaint:

• All facts sent above remain true
• Repo was contacted about the complaint, and rejected that his behavior was inappropriate. Stating that he was simply inquiring on the complainant’s intent and that the complainant was refusing to answer.
• I disagree with Repo’s arguments, and determine that the ahelp was handled improperly.
• This in conjunction with other complaints led to Repo’s removal from the admin team. They will be allowed to reapply in the future.

[nikthechampiongr]

Should you contest any of the findings above, you may request it be reopened.