Tator - Banned for giving people AA as a captain, critting and asking an inane question

[Tator1]

I was not even sure if I would appeal this since, honestly, I do deserve at least some kind of a ban. But, in the end, I think I want to be heard by the broader admin team here, as well.

My side of the story here is that I unintentionally broke the rules but don’t think this framing of what I did is fair.

I did not know it’s an OOC issue to give people AA as captain, this is honestly due to complacency since I am so used to it being an IC issue back in the day. I apologize for this one, my bad.

However, I don’t think asking a QM that persistently keeps calling you a shitter as a captain if they are going to commit treason an “inane” question. That is a part of what I object to.

The QM was furious because a scientist that I gave AA to quickly visited cargo, going through cargo-access doors and maybe (I did not see) taking a non-essential cargo item for their job, and left. I don’t think the scientist in question made the QM’s job any worse for him, from a more objective sense.

It would be stupid to just let the QM arm up and be a bigger problem later if they are going to treason me. When I ask them directly, they at least have to lie about it or be honest and be arrested. The QM did not answer me even though I gave them more than enough time, around two to three minutes, to answer a yes or no question. With a final warning that I will consider their answer to be “yes” if they choose to continue to evade the question, I took action and arrested the QM.

I did not have a disabler with me so I had to put them to crit to detain them. I dragged them to medbay, let the CMO heal them and demoted them, taking their ID. I asked the QM several times if they wanted another job, they chose not to answer me. The admin that banned me said that I completely ruined their round but I don’t think that’s a fair assessment: they had a hand to play in ruining it for themselves. They could have de-escalated by saying that they are not treasoning me or even accepted a new job. They did not want to. That’s their choice, not mine.

Also, I did give a medical doctor AA since they asked if they could be captain. I did not want to disappoint them so I let them be my lieutenant. Unfortunately, they started to straight-up grief later on.

The admin in question said that it’s on me they chose to do this. I disagree. It was their choice to break the rules, not mine. I never told them to be a griefer, they chose to do that on their own. I feel that holding me responsible for this is unfair. With that being said, I fully accept the blame for giving them AA in the first place and breaking the command rules.

Now, the reason for my topic’s title is that I don’t want to appeal my sentence if it’s only for giving people AA as a command role. Based on how the ban description is written, though, it seems not to be. That is the part I am typing this appeal to.

I don’t have the admin’s name that banned me offhand, it ended in 55. I think they were uncooperative and had already chosen the punishment before even discussing it with me, making the discussion largely pointless. It felt very far from an objective assessment of the situation, rather, it was a person that was already angry with me doing what they were going to do from the start. I might be wrong, of course, but I don’t think it’s too unreasonable to suspect this due to what my chat with them was like.

My intent as a command staff role is, for the most part, improve people’s rounds while having fun, myself. That is why I gave the scientist and medical doctor AA, to have fun with. To be the cool captain. It was a low population EU round so I thought it would be fine. In hindsight, this was a mistake, but I don’t think the way the admin framed it all was okay.

Thanks for taking your time reading my appeal.

[Tator1]

I can’t edit the post anymore so here’s a summary that fits the ban appeals template:

SS14 account username: Tator
Ban reason: See picture.
Date of ban: See picture.
Length of ban: See picture.
Events leading to the ban: I unintentionally broke the server rules as the captain by giving two people, a scientist and a medical doctor, all-access. This angered the Quartermaster, who started to berate me, which ultimately lead to me critting, arresting and demoting them. Meanwhile, the medical doctor was choosing to use their all-access to grief and was punished by an admin, separately.
Reason the ban should be removed: Please see above.

[Tator1]

Oh and the admin in question was lonesoldier55.

[lonesoldier55]

I can’t handle this appeal since I was the banning admin but let me just re-iterate the reasoning behind this:

Handing out all-access and sensitive equipment to random players is 99% of the time a liability to everyone else on the station. The Captain should not just bend the knee to random crew members who ask for free stuff because you “want to be the cool Captain”. As the top authority on the ship I DO place some blame on you for enabling a troublemaker to go off and blatantly start killing people unattended which is precisely a reason why we forbid heads of staff from giving out all access and promoting people at random. It is not entirely your fault or in your control that they break the rules, but obviously you were a major contribution to their ability to go around arresting people for “calling them sillyhead” and then shooting them to death, both giving them the color of authority and the resources and means to do that.

On the subject of the QM: The QM has a right to be upset that a person you randomly promoted immediately ran into their department to pilfer it for supplies instead of utilizing the proper channels. They have a right to verbally disagree with you over it. I do think it is going extremely far to assume that because of this verbal disagreement they are planning to arm themselves and mutiny you later in the round with absolutely no evidence of that taking place other then their refusal to answer your question of which you admitted they were either going to “lie or admit to it and be arrested”, painting to me that you already assumed they were going to “treason you” regardless of their answer. 

Quote

 I think they were uncooperative and had already chosen the punishment before even discussing it with me, making the discussion largely pointless. It felt very far from an objective assessment of the situation, rather, it was a person that was already angry with me doing what they were going to do from the start.

Yes, I was rather frustrated that I had to hop onto Miros and deal with:

• A QM upset that a Captain whom was handing out access for free had crit/killed/demoted them for a verbal disagreement
• Someone who was pretending to be the captain arresting people on non-charges and then me getting on just in time to see them shoot their detainee to death with a WT550 they looted from the armory. This person then largely denied they were causing any issues and just said they wouldn’t do it again.
• Which lead me to having to find out the actual identity of the Captain who was the catalyst for all of this, who claims little/no responsibility for the issues which were caused

[Tator1]

Let me make clear that I completely agree that I had some responsibility for the griefer’s actions but only to the point of giving them AA, the rest is up to them. You made it sound like it was entirely on me enabling them when we talked, though I do see why you would be frustrated, at the time. It’s okay to feel that way but I believe it had a detrimental effect on your actions as an admin.

The QM absolutely had a right to verbally disagree, though they were more than just upset. That is putting it very lightly. When they don’t even bother answering if they will conduct treason, I don’t see it far-fetched that that is their plan, based on my experience.

If they said that they are not going to treason me, I would have just let it be even though they might backstab me later. I can’t prove it beyond any doubts, either way, naturally, but I can point out that I was banned for being too lenient. I would have been lenient with them as well, meaning that my claim is at least in accordance with my track record.

 

[MysticPhantasm2]

After some internal discussion, we have reviewed this. Starting from all of the a-helps leading into this, to all the drama that followed. This punishment is completely fair. To start:

As a command role you are supposed to use non-lethals first. You went straight bringing them to crit. You could have gotten a disabler, a stun gun, even the security team to back you up to ensure a non-lethal arrest. Or if things did turn lethal you had backup anyway.

 

3 hours ago, Tator1 said:

Let me make clear that I completely agree that I had some responsibility for the griefer’s actions but only to the point of giving them AA, the rest is up to them.

4 hours ago, Tator1 said:

The admin in question said that it’s on me they chose to do this. I disagree. It was their choice to break the rules, not mine. I never told them to be a griefer, they chose to do that on their own. I feel that holding me responsible for this is unfair. With that being said, I fully accept the blame for giving them AA in the first place and breaking the command rules.

I do want to reiterate this part. You are responsible for this. For example, the medic who decided to kill someone with a WT550, do you have any idea how hard it is to just break into the armory without AA? Double reinforced walls, or breaking through a lot of doors in an area filled with security members. Though with AA, they are in and out in seconds, instead of minutes. This is why we hold captain’s and HoP’s responsible for these actions. I am glad you realize that giving AA in the first place is wrong, though your actions do go further than just giving them AA. 

 

4 hours ago, Tator1 said:

My intent as a command staff role is, for the most part, improve people’s rounds while having fun, myself.

It is fine to try to have fun, but as a command role you need to realize your actions have more weight behind them. Case in point, giving out the first AA to a scientist lead into the QM getting demoted, for something you did wrong.

Giving out AA to a medic lead into someone else dying. 

You did 2 actions and it lead into 2 people not doing their job, one person getting demoted from a job they were doing, and one person getting RDMd.

So no, you arent just being banned for giving out AA. You used lethals when it wasnt necessary, demoted another head for your own mistakes because you were afraid of your actions having consequences against you. From what it seems like, your actions as a captain caused most of the chaos that happened that round.

Command roles have a lot more rules against them, simply because it is too easy to destroy a round as a head. I do sincerely hope you understand that before your role ban is up.

[Tator1]

Just give me the griefing medical doctor’s ban then if I am the only one responsible for them to start randomly murdering people, hah. You do see how that’s crazy, right? I did not mind control them or anything like that. I did not tell them to start griefing, either.

Also you are preaching the choir about saying that giving AA for little reason as cap is wrong on this server, I am aware of that now, as I have said earlier. Let me also reiterate that I did not intend to ruin the QM’s round from the start, that is why I spent so much time asking them if they really were going to go up against me. I chose to escalate but so did they, though, of course, I am more in the wrong than they are. It’s an unfortunate set of circumstances.

But yeah, it wasn’t a long ban and you are the boss. I have read the rules carefully now so that mistakes like this would not happen again. Apologies once more. Further, I’ll make sure to spare inventory space for disablers in the future, since critting and healing people is much, much worse than non-lethaling them even on LRP.

[MysticPhantasm2]

Since ban has expired, I am closing this. If you have anymore questions, we do have a questions area in the forum.