SingularJame - ERP, As CMO Declared PP inspection day

Ban reason: ERP, As CMO Declared PP inspection day.
Length of ban: Appeal
Events leading to the ban: During a weird round where CMO was set to infinite, there were about ten CMO’s and announcements were being made constantly. I declared PP inspection day as an announcement.

Reason the ban should be removed:

I really dont think this counts as ERP. I disagree with the ban and think this was an overstep in administration.

Going through the ERP rule as stated, I don’t think this counts as ERP or sexual content in any way. this was not ERP, this was not Sexual content or a direct or indirect mention of sexual behaviour or actions. I believe that there was nothing according to this rule that I have broken. Please enlighten me otherwise.

I see very well the ZERO TOLERANCE at the bottom but I don’t believe myself in violation of it. This was a silly little joke, not some egregious act of sexual behaviour on the server.

As per this rule: Some leeway is afforded to insults, ex: ‘You are a dickhead’, but if you push the boundaries of this rule expect to be contacted about it.

I was contacted about it and told I was getting an appeal ban without a warning. As an admin said, I had some previous behaviour, but that ban was overturned, I served my time and let me be clear here I admitted fault in that ban appeal.
I don’t appreciate using an argument of previous behaviour against me here as it feels targeted and malicious, especially since I’ve had probably over 200 hours of trouble free play time since then. Feel free to reach out to me on discord if you want to discuss this further.

I’m not trying to be a rules lawyer here but this feels overtly heavy handed.

Perhaps if the intention of the ERP rule is to disallow any mention of genitalia at all including outside of sexual content, it would be better that it was clearly stated. let me be clear here, I don’t believe mention of genitalia is inherently sexual. as per your own leeway to insults exception.

but I feel this 100% comes under the leeway afforded to insults part especially since no explicit terms for genitalia were actually used. outside of a slightly cheeky Euphemism. 

I don’t believe a cheeky Euphemism should be considered the same as sexual content/erp.

I accept fault when it comes to inappropriate use of the announcement console. No excuses there. Command should be held to a higher standard.

ERP rule appended below.

Erotic Roleplay (commonly abbreviated as “ERP”) and any sexual content is strictly forbidden. This includes direct and indirect mentions of sexual behavior or actions.

  1. Some leeway is afforded to insults, ex: ‘You are a dickhead’, but if you push the boundaries of this rule expect to be contacted about it.

  2. Spamming or copy/pasting erotica content (ex: WGW or other lame shock-value garbage) also violates this rule.

  3. In-game romantic relationships should not become the focus of the game for you and anyone else involved. It’s a game about running a space station, not a dating simulator. Dedicating significant portions of rounds to romantic relationships/dating or other nonsense violates this rule if done continually and purposefully after warning.


I’m open to talk about this and willing to consider changes, please don’t consider this an indictment against the servers staff and its administration. it’s better that we work together towards a better SS14 rather than have this devolve into arguments over semantics and intentions. 

how is declaring “penis inspection day” not sexual content

to be fair, it is a sseth reference so. it’s only erp if they actually you know, rp the examination.

5 hours ago, B0lt3rBr1ght said:

to be fair, it is a sseth reference so. it’s only erp if they actually you know, rp the examination.

it’s only not erp if you actually you know, don’t think sexual organs are sexual.

So anything Sseth says loses all context and gets metabolised into ‘just a meme’? You’re assuming every person has the same experiences as you and knows precisely what you’re referring to. It’s still a dick joke in either context.

im asking the person appealing. The ERP rule encompasses sexual content itself as well. Declaring “station-wide penis inspection day” is very flatly sexual content. Its talking about inspecting sexual organs. How is this not sexual content.

That’s a very uncharitable reading of the situation. If I had intended it in a sexual context rather than the humorous reference that it is, I would have used the term penis instead of PP. I feel you’re inserting context here that isn’t there on this one. I do think the fact i used PP instead of penis makes a difference here. the intention is clear.


Simply referencing that people have genitalia with no sexual action mentioned isn’t what I would qualify as sexual content. there was no direct reference to any sexual act.

This really does feel like you guys are making a mountain out of a molehill. This is a very long running joke that has existed before the internet, and has been a part of internet popular culture for multiple decades about an awkward interaction that someone had at a high school, and the confusion around that no one else had it. I dont think it’s unreasonable to assume that the vast majority of ss14 players would know that this isn’t a joke about a sexual act, but an awkward medical experience. 

I’m confused by the spectrum of what’s deemed acceptable behaviour here as SS14 is a game where the intention of the player is to murder, gore, literally rip bodies apart, commit acts of terrorism etc. but simply acknowledging the existence of genitalia tangential to a joke is an immediate ban? Not even a warning?

This does seem to be squarely within the realm of “exceptions for insults such as dickhead, etc.” as that is the use of a word that is “sex-adjecent” without any underlying sexual context. Unless the reader is to assume that they mean the person literally means that we’re talking about people running around with penises on their head. 


no, declaring penis inspection day is not afforded leeway, and calling it something different while intending the same thing does not mean I am “inserting context that wasn’t there” since you are making it apparent the context is exactly was initially believed. 

we do not operate off of your definition of sexual content

this is your second ban within three months for sexual content after you faxed players a sexual copypasta. denied. appeal again in two weeks.

From Rejected to Ban Appeals