Complaint Admin Cal: unreasonable behavior i'd never expect of an admin

[Violetsaber]

I'm simply going to share the PM exchange. I dont see a reason to appeal this ban since the same admin who dishes the bans out also handles the appeal. Im surely not the first person to point out how this is a flawed system.

--------------------------

Admin PM from Cal: Hey, tone it the fuck down.
Admin PM from Cal: I am aware of what is going on, I'm talking to that player for their rule breaking.
Admin PM from Cal: Why did you demote them?

Reply PM to-Cal: I wasnt planning on demoting them initially. I was gonna give them some brig time after punching an inmate for no reason other than moving, then the HoP said i should demote them instead

Admin PM from Cal: They hit the rancher once and you stunned them and kicked them four times, then forcibly demoted them over it.

Reply PM to-Cal: i am positive you can check the chat log and see that the HoP proposed the demotion. i only followed. as a side point. their general behavior strikes me that they joined as staff assistant without any intention of playing along. im willing to give newbies some slack, but not trolls

Admin PM from Cal: You immediately berated them for telling people "good job, hard worker"?

Reply PM to-Cal: as i was sitting on a chair eating a donut. how is that relevant?

Admin PM from Cal: Ok, so they hit an inmate ONCE, so you stunned them, kicked them while they were down (four times), yanked off all their clothes and demoted them?

Admin PM to-cal (Discord): if you count a sec backpack, a helmet and sunglasses as the entirety of their clothes. then i suppose i did strip them of "all their clothes". also i did not do any demotion. thats the HoPs doing. i only brought them there and took sec equipment. also since you keep bringing up the exact number of punches, im sure you didnt miss the part where they said they were into being hurt since they are, as they said, a machochist. isnt that breaking the strict no sex rule?

Admin PM from Cal: And you didn't ahelp that? Why?

Admin PM to-cal (Discord): the HoP said they'd contact "centcom" implying they would ahelp it. no need to send the same information twice

Admin PM from Cal: No it wasn't sent to us.

Admin PM to-cal (Discord): since i do not see ahelps, i wouldnt have known they didnt do as they said

*10-15 minutes pass*

"You have been banned by cal (Discord). Reason: Tremendously shitty attitude over admin PMs, general toxicity in-game. To try to resolve this matter head to https://forum.ss13.co This is a temporary ban, it will be removed in 3 Days."

----------------------------------

Not exactly sure how answering all questions in a clear manner counts as "tremendously shitty attitude" and not putting up with a troll that refuses to understand things explained to them as "general toxicity". Either amend the rules to state the exact manner in which to answer questions or give some admins an ego-check. It's unacceptable behavior for an admin to ban someone out of anger simply because somebody disarmed all other reason to be mad at them. "Tremendously shitty attitude over admin PMs" seems like a cheap cover-all reason to ban someone when you run out of good reasons.

[Cal]

Hey there!

So, I came in hot on you because I noticed you continuing to engage with this person. They were demoted already and you made a snarky passing comment while they were discussing their demotion with the captain.



This was in the middle of me already talking to them in ahelp. 


Anyway, I was trying to ask you questions and skim the logs at the same time. I came across a few interesting bits.




Sure, this person may be acting a bit rude, but you are getting quite offended over being told a passing comment while eating a donut and chilling. This sets up later -





This new person was playing around and punched this guy once. Once.

Your response was thus:




Even if they were breaking the rules, that doesn't give you an excuse to also break the rules in this way. If a player was frustrating you or even making the round worse (does not necessarily have to fit a rule, we can act on people just generally being bad) it does not give you an excuse to ALSO break the rules.

You stunned, cuffed, and started kicking and punching them while going "How do YOU like it??" Absolutely unacceptable behavior for someone with hundreds of rounds on RP, even worse for an officer, and EVEN WORSE towards a new player.

The "10-15" minutes passing was me skimming the logs and trying to find interactions, just after you were snarky at me I decided to look and see if you were acting like this in-game too. And you were!

By the way, for future clarification - to ANYBODY reading this - it's perfectly acceptable to ahelp something even if you think someone else has already reported it, so that situations where these things go unnoticed don't happen.

[Violetsaber]

Hey there!

So, I came in hot on you because I noticed you continuing to engage with this person. They were demoted already and you made a snarky passing comment while they were discussing their demotion with the captain.



This was in the middle of me already talking to them in ahelp. 


Anyway, I was trying to ask you questions and skim the logs at the same time. I came across a few interesting bits.




Sure, this person may be acting a bit rude, but you are getting quite offended over being told a passing comment while eating a donut and chilling. This sets up later -





This new person was playing around and punched this guy once. Once.

Your response was thus:




Even if they were breaking the rules, that doesn't give you an excuse to also break the rules in this way. If a player was frustrating you or even making the round worse (does not necessarily have to fit a rule, we can act on people just generally being bad) it does not give you an excuse to ALSO break the rules.

You stunned, cuffed, and started kicking and punching them while going "How do YOU like it??" Absolutely unacceptable behavior for someone with hundreds of rounds on RP, even worse for an officer, and EVEN WORSE towards a new player.

The "10-15" minutes passing was me skimming the logs and trying to find interactions, just after you were snarky at me I decided to look and see if you were acting like this in-game too. And you were!

By the way, for future clarification - to ANYBODY reading this - it's perfectly acceptable to ahelp something even if you think someone else has already reported it, so that situations where these things go unnoticed happen.

First of i'd like to thank you for the fast reply. Secondly i sadly have to point out that this is hardly related to the core issue, but first i'd like to adress my "unacceptable behavior". I was trying to follow the security guide.

"Weed bad security out ASAP, as one bad egg spoils the bunch. It doesn't have to be sec either; the Captain, HoP, Detective or any acting sec may also be awful. Power corrupts. Could also be a Mindslave unless they are the HoS. People can also get security access from the HoP/HoS/Captain so don't assume they couldn't be an antagonist!"

I've seen other security officers, espcially Heads of Security, deal with abusive officers rather harshly. Turning the misdeed around on the perpetrator, giving them their own medicine, is an almost time honored tradition. I doubt you'll find any regular SEC player who'd disagree with that. I also doubt that the amount of punches matters if it was prefaced with "do it or i will beat you senseless". It's not about one punch, it's about the clear mindset that violence against someone in cuffs is A-okay. I thought i could slap them around a bit, toss them in the brig for a short time and they'd get their act together. Done it a bunch of times before and have seen it be done by other, more seasoned officers, even more. If the message is "do not, ever, do this again" i won't ever do this or similar again. I always follow admin instructions.

The real issue, to me at least, is that i've been banned for 3 days for answering every question and sharing 100% accurate information, while trying to be as concise and clear as possible, just for it to be labeled as "Tremendously shitty attitude over admin PMs". I simply answered and clarified things. I didn't disagree or go against instructions in any shape or form. When i was told to tone it the fuck down, i immediately stopped engaging with the other player and moved as physically far away from them as i could, while still patrolling the station. 

I admit that my initial post was worded a bit harshly as i, foolishly, immediately went to send a feedback post after being banned. I was still heated and baffled by the situation. For that i apologize.

Anyhow. Nobody likes being banned and especially not over something subjective. This is still not a ban appeal, this post/thread is more about transparency and speaking out against admin behavior i've observed in other cases as well. I understand that admins are always busy and overworked, but the same way we players are supposed to have our shit together under stress, so shouldnt admins just reach for the ban button if they get frustrated. If i ever do cross a line and get banned for something actually bad, i'll take it. Though i am happy i haven't been that foolish yet.

P.s. I apologize if my post is weirdly formated or doesn't follow usual etiquette. I've never used forums like this before joining goonstation and as you can see, i'm not exactly a frequent poster.

[Cal]

I did not ban you because of your attitude in PMs. Your ban was not "subjective." I wrote "tremendously shitty" because you have a prior note where you attempted to argue with an administrator, and it was meant to convey that you have a history of doing this, for future reference.

I apologize for writing "tremendously shitty" when "rude and snippy" would have sufficed.


I banned you for your aggressive in-game behavior and abusive Security play, and then you continued to argue after the fact, carrying the same attitude. You were griefing another (new) player. Security assistants are there to learn, not to be pummeled into compliance because they're not used to using proper judgement in a position of power yet. As someone with hundreds of rounds played, you should know this.

"I've seen other people do it before" is not a valid excuse for doing it yourself.  You need to be adminhelping in these situations so they STOP happening.

The demotion was warranted and completely fine. It should have been your first instinct, but it was someone else's. Beating them while mockingly asking how they liked the same treatment was not.

[Violetsaber]

I did not ban you because of your attitude in PMs. Your ban was not "subjective." I wrote "tremendously shitty" because you have a prior note where you attempted to argue with an administrator, and it was meant to convey that you have a history of doing this, for future reference.

I apologize for writing "tremendously shitty" when "rude and snippy" would have sufficed.


I banned you for your aggressive in-game behavior and abusive Security play, and then you continued to argue after the fact, carrying the same attitude. You were griefing another (new) player. Security assistants are there to learn, not to be pummeled into compliance because they're not used to using proper judgement in a position of power yet. As someone with hundreds of rounds played, you should know this.

"I've seen other people do it before" is not a valid excuse for doing it yourself.  You need to be adminhelping in these situations so they STOP happening.

The demotion was warranted and completely fine. It should have been your first instinct, but it was someone else's. Beating them while mockingly asking how they liked the same treatment was not.

Let's take this one step at a time. "I did not ban you because of your attitude in PMs", then why list that as the first thing on the ban reason, if at all? If that was not a reason for the ban, then following it up with my "history of arguing" (for the record, my closing attitude in that past PM exchange was not okay. im not defending that event, despite it being my only other item of said history) shouldn't be of importance. This goes into the apparent fact that i shouldn't have argued with you ("-then you continued to argue after the fact, carrying the same attitude.) If you ask me questions and i answer them, is that arguing? If you present false accusations("-yanked off all their clothes and demoted them?") and i answer with accurate informations ("if you count a sec backpack, a helmet and sunglasses as the entirety of their clothes. then i suppose i did strip them of "all their clothes". also i did not do any demotion. thats the HoPs doing. i only brought them there and took sec equipment.-"), is that arguing? Probably.

So any kind of arguing, even if the admin is clearly wrong, is forbidden? How is that fair? You showed you were able to pull up logs to show exactly what i did and said, so you should be able to pull up the logs of the HoP saying i should demote them and the logs of me removing the exact items. Both of which you have chosen not to do. 

But okay, let's ignore the first half of the ban reason since, as you said, it wasn't the actual reason for my ban. Let's look at the second (listed) half, "general toxicity in-game". Or rather "aggressive in-game behavior and abusive Security play". 
You're making this part easier for me since you posted the relevant log, but chose not to point the specific part out that tipped me off to the new player acting in bad faith. I give newbies a lot of slack and try my best to teach sec assistants, but they opened with a clear, actually toxic attitude. 



Said player decided to open the round with calling an officer sitting down and eating a donut "hardworking fella." This is no way a security assistant should talk to a SECOF, which i pointed out. At this point, a good faith player, somebody who would aim to play a believable character, would agree and say it was only a joke. Then both parties laugh and that's the end of it. Instead they decide to double down, upon which i tell them to watch themselves, since this behavior will only lead to trouble with other officers. 
Yet they carry on. Later i run into them again and they continue their spiel. I tell them once more to drop the act, pointing out how it is condescending. They continue still, so i simply tell them to "cut it out". They were given multiple warnings, told what is wrong with their behavior. Yet they continue. Does this paint a picture of a good faith player? A new player trying to learn? No. This looks, at least to me, like a troll. But i leave them be and go about my day. 

Then the rancher incident happens. Them threatening to punch the rancher senseless, then actually hitting them and then refusing to aknowledge that punching is wrong was more than enough evidence that i was dealing with a bad faith player, a troll, not a newbie just trying to learn. Stunning, cuffing and kicking the sec assistant may have been seen as too much, but by no means griefing. It was fully logical consequence of RP, was over in less than 20 seconds and after a short stay in the brig would have been over. But the HoP came along and told me to instead demote them. Which i agreed to and then was done by the HoP, not myself. Yet you multiple times use the term "forcibly demoting". As if a) there is something like non-forcible demotion. Any form of demotion is forcibly b) was something i, myself the SECOF, was doing. not the HoP c) is something wrong, despite you 'now' saying was the correct option. 

If i did this to some poor newbie who just didn't know that punching an inmate was wrong, then my following actions would be unjust and wrong. But this isn't a good faith player. And if it wasn't apparent enough, they also clearly broke rule 4 by saying they enjoyed being beaten, since by their words, they were a masochist. I didn't bring this up yet, but can be confirmed by your logs, that they later called me a "filthy bitch" (misogynistic insult against a female character) and other insults that also clearly break rule 4. 

To recap: This player started the round with toxic behavior, refused to change or listen, didn't attempt to learn or do their job, clearly did not read any sec job guide or space law, clearly did not read the rules, clearly broke the rules and me refusing to give said player any more second chances, tossing around a bit and following the HoPs orders qualifies as "general toxicity in-game" or "aggressive in-game behavior and abusive Security play"? Clearly not. 

I stand by my original point. This was unreasonable behavior of an admin and a ban over answering questions and correcting false information, which was percieved as a "Tremendously shitty attitude over admin PMs". The playerbase is well aware that a lot of admins react extremely harshly to being told they're wrong, even when they truly are in the wrong. I didn't write all of this to say that i was falsely banned and want it lifted, though the ban was unjust. If i wanted an appeal i would go to the appeal forum and apologize, because you do not get unbanned for saying an admin is wrong, you get it by apologizing regardless of anything. This complaint thread is to say, not just to Cal but to all admins: You demand being treated like a human person, with respect and politeness. Then also aknowledge that you as a human person make mistakes instead of getting angry over being told you are wrong about something. But most importantly, to treat the players as human beings who deserve respect instead of treating them, as many players feel, as simply "non-admins."

I'm looking forward to return to the station in a few days.

[Sord213]

Hi, another admin here since you were calling on all admins. If you can't respond to the equivalent of a "workin hard or hardly workin" joke without becoming a massive puckered asshole and playing your "secoff superiority over secass" card you're probably playing the wrong game. You were being an asshole to the player, and got punished for it.
Cal already said

I apologize for writing "tremendously shitty" when "rude and snippy" would have sufficed.

because "tremendously shitty" wasn't correct and he corrected it.

Also, this isn't about what the other player did. It's about what you did. We do not, and will not, tell players what happens to another player with regard to punishments other than "It was dealt with"

[Violetsaber]

Hi, another admin here since you were calling on all admins. If you can't respond to the equivalent of a "workin hard or hardly workin" joke without becoming a massive puckered asshole and playing your "secoff superiority over secass" card you're probably playing the wrong game. You were being an asshole to the player, and got punished for it.
Cal already said

I apologize for writing "tremendously shitty" when "rude and snippy" would have sufficed.

because "tremendously shitty" wasn't correct and he corrected it.

Also, this isn't about what the other player did. It's about what you did. We do not, and will not, tell players what happens to another player with regard to punishments other than "It was dealt with"

I do not recall asking about the other player's punishment in any shape or form. Please do not accuse me of things i did not do. I listed off what they did to say that i didn't mistreat an innocent newbie, but a bad faith trouble maker. I thought i made that pretty clear.

[Cal]

I already went over the fact that I stated it too harshly, logged it for noting purposes, and I have very clearly stated it was not the reason for your ban (which is the part we are over, and the reason you made this thread.)

The player was dealt with. If you think I didn't handle them, that's simply incorrect.

The rest of your post is a ban appeal, which you may post in the proper forum - How other people are acting is not up to your interpretation. Have a nice day.

[Violetsaber]

I already went over the fact that I stated it too harshly, logged it for noting purposes, and I have very clearly stated it was not the reason for your ban (which is the part we are over, and the reason you made this thread.)

The player was dealt with. If you think I didn't handle them, that's simply incorrect.

The rest of your post is a ban appeal, which you may post in the proper forum - How other people are acting is not up to your interpretation. Have a nice day.

Please put in the effort to read my post instead of skimming it. At what point did i say that i thought you didn't handle them? I clearly stated, twice, that this is not a ban appeal but about admin behavior to refuse to admit mistakes, make false accusations and not treating players with the respect admins expect to reciev themselves. All of these points being proven again and again.

[Cal]

admin behavior to refuse to admit mistakes,

I apologize for writing "tremendously shitty" when "rude and snippy" would have sufficed.

Pardon? I literally admitted my mistake.

make false accusations

they joined as staff assistant without any intention of playing along. im willing to give newbies some slack, but not trolls

Like the false accusation you made here?

not treating players with the respect admins expect to reciev themselves

Like the respect you showed to your fellow player when you stunned them, kicked them repeatedly and brigged them for 5 minutes?

[CaptainBravo]

This thread is being locked as the rest of the administration believes everything useful that would have come out of it already has.