Retequizzle - Zelnik: Rude behavior, silencing conversation, attempting to circumvent Rule 1.1

Staff Complaints Public Accepted
,
1

Policies and Expectations Violated: Admin Policy 1.1, 1.2 

Do I want this to be made public after processing?:Yes

Detailed Summary.

My Apologies for making this. I did not actually want to file a complaint against an admin, especially a discord admin. Given their tone and behavior in conversations I feel like that this is now necessary. Attempts to converse with the admin to resolve the issue were met with hostility and unprofessional behavior.  The chat log will be attached for clarity and full disclosure. 

The complaint composes two parts. One was the nature and handling of a recent ban, the second was an attempt to discuss the nature of a server rule and how it should be exercised.  

 

The initial ban is still ‘under appeal’ though it has languished beyond the ban time. No action has been taken on it beyond someone reporting what Rule 0 is.  The major issue with this ban is that no warning was given and there was no clear sign that the behavior was against the rules. As it was an action that clearly was cut-and-dry to the admin staff with no ambiguity, I don’t understand why the action is not clearly stated in the rules as they stand.  The link to the appeal is here: 

 

 

Once the ban had expired, I felt that a conversation about the nature of Rule 0 should be had, as it is an easily abusable rule (and I do believe it was used inappropriately in my case). I created a feedback discussion on the discord (which I figure is appropriate, this is feedback on admin behavior and use of an ambiguous rule). It was 9:38 at night.  You can find the conversation in the #bugs-feedback section listed as “Rule 0 Situations need to be enumerated and made public rules” discussion.  

You can find my full conversation there, but a TL;DR is that I used my own example for reference to the problem. I provided suggestions, including punishments to the admins if the ban appeal is not resolved by the end of the ban time. As it was 9:38, I then went to bed.  

 

I woke up the next morning to find limited conversation, then Retequizzle had closed the thread, not permitting further discussion. The whole tone of the post was focused on my particular incident, and not the concept that I was trying to discuss.  Had I the opportunity to respond to  their points I would have made it clear that my example was simply one example and nothing they said actually refuted what I was trying to communicate. 

Retequizzle then, at least in my assumption, violated rule 1.1, which says that admins must be accountable. They stated that they should be the one cited in a complaint and NOT the admin who did the banning because they advised them in the ban.  Even if an admin was advised about a ban, it doesn’t absolve them of responsibility (at least I don’t think it should).  

The first sign of unprofessional behavior was in this post as well. The presumption of my actions in this quote:

" “i wasn’t shopping for antag roles i just happened to be taking roles that were antag related and not assigned to me by the game itself” because frankly everyone involved knows what you were doing, yourself included. "

There was no discussion with me about what I was doing, and the assumption of my thoughts, actions and mind without any input from myself is extraordinarily rude. Especially when I have no ability to defend myself in any meaningful way.  

Another problem is the statement of the use of Rule 0 to ‘prevent rules lawyering’.  If a simple warning was given to me, I would have stopped. No warning was given to begin with and as a result, things escalated. 

 

I then DM’d the admin, the log can be found in the attachments. 

The tone of the admin was cool, that quickly moved to hostile. The admin demonstrated a lack of professionalism in the conversation and diverted it from my attempt to simply unlock the conversation so I could get a word in.  I tried to resolve the issue -without- making this and mostly got extremely rude behavior from the administrator. I would have followed the rules as listed on the wiki and contacted the head admin, but they were offline at the time. 

 

Overall, the adminstrator in question, along with the banning administrator made presumptions about me, namely my intent, ability to follow instructions and desire to follow the rules.  No communication that I was doing something bad or unwanted was made. Any attempt to converse about the topic was silenced. My ban appeal was ignored. 

 

 

 

 

Captain Zelnik — Today at 819 AM.txt (6.77 KB)

2

I’m trying to fully define the scope of this complaint, so I’ve listed a few things that it seems like you may feel are deserving of a complaint. Please list out every one of these statements that you both agree with and are trying to make a complaint about, including any that I missed.

  1. The ban related to the appeal you linked was placed inappropriately.
  2. The current rules are not consistent with admin enforcement, or are not clear enough.
  3. Your thread in #bugs-feedback was closed inappropriately.
  4. After the thread was closed, Retequizzle violated admin policy 1.1 with an action. I’m unsure what you believe that specific action is, so if you agree with this statement, please specify.
  5. Retequizzle violated admin policy 1.1 by advising the banning admin to place the game ban.
  6. The banning admin violated admin policy 1.1 by placing the game ban.
  7. Retequizzle violated admin policy 1.2 with his statements in the discord thread and/or with his DMs to you on discord.
  8. The admin who said in the discord thread that rule 0 is usually used for rule lawyering violated an admin policy.
3

On 3/15/2024 at 2:50 PM, Chief_Engineer said:

I’m trying to fully define the scope of this complaint, so I’ve listed a few things that it seems like you may feel are deserving of a complaint. Please list out every one of these statements that you both agree with and are trying to make a complaint about, including any that I missed.

  1. The ban related to the appeal you linked was placed inappropriately.
  2. The current rules are not consistent with admin enforcement, or are not clear enough.
  3. Your thread in #bugs-feedback was closed inappropriately.
  4. After the thread was closed, Retequizzle violated admin policy 1.1 with an action. I’m unsure what you believe that specific action is, so if you agree with this statement, please specify.
  5. Retequizzle violated admin policy 1.1 by advising the banning admin to place the game ban.
  6. The banning admin violated admin policy 1.1 by placing the game ban.
  7. Retequizzle violated admin policy 1.2 with his statements in the discord thread and/or with his DMs to you on discord.
  8. The admin who said in the discord thread that rule 0 is usually used for rule lawyering violated an admin policy.

 

Hello, thank you for the response.  I wlll try to explain as best I can. 

  1. I Do think the ban was placed inappropriately because no warning was given. There was absolutely no written description of this behavior in the game rules. Had an admin messaged me in game, on discord, or through some reasonable means I would have stopped. There was no way to know this cut-and-dry behavior was not permitted. based upon the written rules of the game and there continues to be zero reference to this in the rules of the game. 

  2. There is zero reference to my behavior anywhere in the rules. I had no idea it was a problem, and no warning or notification was provided. If it was not permitted, it should be clearly enumerated in the server rules. 

  3. The thread was closed inappropriately because I was merely using my example as reference, it was not the focus of the discussion. I could have pulled other examples but I was not permitted even a single response before it was closed. The admin in question presumed my intentions as if they could somehow read my mind. I wanted the conversation about the topic, not about my ban in specific.

4-5.Retequizzle violated 1.1 by insisting that they face the complaint and not the banning admin. Even if the admin was being advised, they still have to ‘push the button’ and consider the rules themselves. Ultimately, they both should be held accountable for inappropriate actions IF they are held to a higher standard. I do want to make the point that -i did not want to make this complaint- it was insisted upon by Retequizzle instead of resolving it through DM’s. If a subordinate is ordered to do something that is wrong, both the subordinate and the officer face consequences. 

  1. I do not think this is the case. I would argue 1.2, as no warning came through or explanation that the action was against game rules. As there is no reference to this in the rules to the behavior I did, or even antag rolling in general in the server rules as presented in the wiki (which seems like it should be there seeing as it’s not a gray area), it should have been announced before a ban was placed as a simple act of courtesy. 

  2. Retequizzle violated rule 1.2 by acting extremely hostile and unprofessional in DM’s about the issue, and unprofessional in the thread related to the situation. Presuming my thoughts, presuming that I was doing something for malicious reasons and not allowing me to speak in any sort of defense (or even respond once) before closing the thread. This behavior is clear for all to see.  I was not trying to rules lawyer -anything- I simply wanted transparency, rule 0’s to be publicly discussed and consequences for abusing Rule 0. 

  3. Stating that it is for that purpose isn’t a violation per-se, but it does remove ‘the mask’ of the actual use of the rule. Simply put, it should NOT be used to simply end arguments over a rule and weather or not someone has broken it. The rule is the rule, and if it’s being used to nudge someone into violation status, it’s being abused.  It makes all of the admins look extremely bad because it truly is an arbitrary decision that Retequizzle made clear was not up for any sort of scrutiny or oversight.  This transforms Rule 1.1 into a joke, because instead of being held to a -higher- standard, they are now held to no standard. The action that I did SHOULD BE ENUMERATED IN THE RULES LIST as it is cut-and-dry behavior that can be easily defined and has no gray area.  

 

I hope this gives you some clarification, if I need to explain something further, let me know. 

 

9

Hi, sorry for the lack of activity in ages, the old head admins left and there’s quite the backlog to get through.

Some things I’d like to note:

  • We’ve rewritten our rules since your ban, and it renamed “Rule 0” to “Admins have final say”, but is still often known as “Rule 0”. You can see the latest version here:
  • About the ban:
    • The banning admin (TurboTracker) is no longer an admin (for unrelated reasons) and therefore nothing more can be done about them, but this could complaint could be considered if they ever re-apply.
    • At the time, we did ban people for the kind of antag rolling where you observe on multiple servers looking for ghost roles, but usually after at least a couple warnings.
      • Usually though we would ahelp first instead of banning.
      • The ban reason shouldn’t just
    • Your ban seems to have led to an internal discussion in an admin meeting about what we should do about people on multiple servers, and the conclusion was that is wasn’t an admin issue unless it was extreme, and it we should just prevent people connecting to multiple servers at once.
      • Since that meeting, we have actually mechanically prevented multiple connections.
      • This does suggest that your ban was more extreme than it should’ve been.
  • Now some things about the Discord forum post
    • I feel that Retquizzle was in the right to close the topic, since the purpose of rule 0 was explained, and we .
    • Having read that post, I think don’t think it’s reasonable or feasible to write down every rule 0 usage. People can and do try to find loopholes in rules, and rule 0 is there to stop them.

Conclusion

  • Changes partly because of your ban have improved the rules and game, which I think means we can close this as accepted.
  • The closing of the discussion about rule 0 was okay, because an explanation was given as to why we have the rule and what it does, and your suggestions were unreasonable. The otherwise the post could be seen as you complaining that about your ban, which is against the rules.