A complaint and a (long) suggestion.

[Psionyx]

Admin(s) Key: @blessedtuna
Your ckey (Byond username): Psionyx
Your Discord name (if applicable): That Guy With The Psi

Date(s) of incident (GMT preferred): 2020-01-01-02:17:35

Nature of complaint: Misconduct, abuse of powers, lack of communication
(Select all that apply: EG - clarification required, misapplication of rules, misconduct, abuse of powers, feedback, other)
Links to all relevant ban appeals for any bans related to this complaint:

Brief description (tl;dr here. Just the critical elements): I was permanently banned with essentially zero effort in communication and after I acknowledged and stopped the offending behavior. More importantly, this is a symptom of a bigger problem as explained below. This is not only about blessedtuna.

Full description of events:

Recently I was banned from the server by Blessedtuna for impersonating Donald Trump as the Syndicate Comms Agent down in Lavaland. While I understand that Donald Trump is an exceptionally polarizing figure, it was my intent to be audaciously humorous in my portrayal, a parody of the man, rather than grossly offensive, and to use the opportunity for some New Year's Eve chicanery. That being said, I recognize that I probably crossed a line and for that I do apologize. However, I feel that the immediate reaction of Blessedtuna to hand me a permanent ban after only a single message of "What are you doing..?" and my response of "I'll stop, I'll stop, it was purely in fun," was excessive.

I've been playing on the server for over a year and I'm sure I have a few notes here or there, but I've never felt that anything I've done was about to get me banned.

In addition, I've taken some time to read a number of ban appeals and it seems like, in many cases, permanent ban requiring appeal is the first punitive step taken by admins rather than the last. In fact, Necladun, back on February of 2014, posted that Paradise had "~5000 perma bans in place." The number has, no doubt, grown by a fair amount since then. Is that really something you want to be advertising as a server? Sure, it means that you don't abide unacceptable conduct, but it also probably means that you've banned a considerable number of players for rather questionable reasons. Many of these banned players are probably otherwise good players who did a dumb thing or had a lapse in judgment, and subsequently decided to move to a server that they felt was a little less ban-happy.

I used to (and in one case still do) serve as an admin for online role-playing communities of various stripes, generally speaking for Dungeons and Dragons and World of Darkness (both old and new) games. Player behavioral problems are always going to be a thing. Even the best players are not perfect and will occasionally make mistakes in judgment or do something that's rather out of character for them. To err is human, after all. In order to maintain a certain level of professionalism among our volunteer staff we always had an escalating ladder of staff responses to player concerns and complaints about other players' conduct, so that a temporary lapse in judgment or a bad day didn't cause a player to be permanently barred from a game they love.

Below you will find an example of the most common sort of response list that staff was expected to uphold on just about every game I've staffed on before. It served as a reminder that an excessive reaction is sometimes just as bad as the initial offense. In this case I've added a couple steps to the ladder that seem appropriate for Space Station 13.

Possible responses in escalating level of severity:

0: Establish that there is, in fact, a problem/rule breaking going on that requires admin intervention.

This one should be self-evident, but will be mentioned in any case. Inserting oneself into an issue where admin intervention is not required is an abuse of power. Occasionally intervention is not required. If it is, move on to:

1: Contact the offending player.

It cannot be stressed enough that this should always be the first step taken when intervention is required. Most people are very reasonable if you just stop to talk to them for a moment. Admins for SS13 have the power to admin freeze people they feel are imminent dangers to the station and its crew as a whole, so there is really no reason for this step to be skipped. In most cases, this step will also be the final step in any admin punitive action. Simply being informed that a transgression of the rules is occurring is usually enough to stop most players from continuing in their course.

In my specific case, this would have been true. As detailed in my ban appeal I responded to the initial admin message with "I'll stop, I'll stop, it was purely in fun." I think it would be hard to interpret that response as anything other than an admission that things had gone over the top and an intent to cease.

In the event that conversation doesn't feel like it's doing enough, you can move on to:

1.5: (More appropriate to SS13) Consider an IC reponse, if appropriate.

Central Command/Syndicate Command/Other Commands exist for many reasons, one of which is to handle issues in an IC manner. Make use of them! It can often make for a much more entertaining solution to a problem, both for the players and for the admins.

In this case, for example, I was fully expecting to get a BSA to the face and perhaps a snarky message from CC. I would have happily accepted that outcome. I would have laughed, applauded CC, raised my glass, said HAPPY NEW YEAR and moved on to the next round. This can often be a creative and hilarious way to deal with a problem situation.

If an IC response doesn't seem to be an appropriate solution, move on to:

2: Provide the player with an official warning, if warranted.

An official warning and/or a note is an admin's way of showing other admins that this problem has already been noted in the past. If the offending player already has notes and/or warnings about this sort of behavior, or the behavior is particularly egregious, this step can be skipped in favor of further escalation.

I received no warning (And in fact no communication beyond the initial "What are you doing..?"), as Blessedtuna chose to skip directly to 5.

3: (More appropriate to SS13) Consider a Jobban for the offending player.

If the offense is particularly bad and job-related, a temporary or permanent jobban may be warranted. Permanent job bans should really be reserved for chronic and/or blatant abuses.

For example, in this case, if admins felt it was warranted, they could give me a temporary or permanent ban from mob spawner roles, if that's a thing, or perhaps some sort of temporary or permanent antag ban appropriate to the role.

If this is not applicable or doesn't address the issue, you can:

4: Temporary Ban.

Where I served as an admin, this was handed out to people who were frequent abusers or who displayed a particularly unpleasant attitude in their conversation with the admins while we were speaking to them. (Being obviously upset didn't count, open insults, racist language, etc. did) The duration of the ban wasn't set in stone, but generally started with a relatively short ban and quickly extended for further offenses. Repeat offenders would either find themselves banned for a month or more or simply escalated to:

5: Permanent Ban.

This was reserved primarily for repeat offenders who had already received one or more temporary bans. There were very few ways to earn a permanent ban outright: Making OOC threats against players and/or staff, posting long strings of extremely violent/racist/eliminationist language, highly offensive sexual content, links to illegal materials, that sort of thing. This is going nuclear and should be treated as such.

In my case, Blessedtuna went from asking me, "What are you doing..?" directly to permanent ban. There was no other response, no other attempts at communication. Just, "What are you doing..?" me responding, "I'll stop, I'll stop, it was purely in fun," followed by a permanent ban. This sort of extreme response is unbecoming of staff and leads to people not trusting admins to be fair and impartial in administering the server rules.

I know this was a long post, but please consider what I've written here today as a potential guideline to future admin-player interactions to avoid knee-jerk bannings. I understand that admins have bad days, too, but that's why the response scale existed for us. It was to protect the players as much as ourselves. When we held to the guidelines, it allowed us to take a step back from any situation and approach it with an impartial eye. We knew that we were taking the appropriate steps, rather than reacting based on personal feelings or spur-of-the-moment decisions, and that contributed to a better environment for everyone involved. I love this game and I want it to be better for everyone, admins and players alike.

[necaladun]

46 minutes ago, Psionyx said:

Recently I was banned from the server by Blessedtuna for impersonating Donald Trump as the Syndicate Comms Agent down in Lavaland. While I understand that Donald Trump is an exceptionally polarizing figure, it was my intent to be audaciously humorous in my portrayal, a parody of the man, rather than grossly offensive, and to use the opportunity for some New Year's Eve chicanery. That being said, I recognize that I probably crossed a line and for that I do apologize. However, I feel that the immediate reaction of Blessedtuna to hand me a permanent ban after only a single message of "What are you doing..?" and my response of "I'll stop, I'll stop, it was purely in fun," was excessive.

 

This is indeed against the rules, as memes and IRL references go very against the rules and idea of the server. Your notes indicate admins have had to speak to you at least 7 times in the past, so a permanent ban I don't see as excessive here. Someone who has had to be spoken to this much in the past is someone who should either be following the rules and server atmosphere. A ban for the 8th warning seems quite merciful to me.

49 minutes ago, Psionyx said:

In addition, I've taken some time to read a number of ban appeals and it seems like, in many cases, permanent ban requiring appeal is the first punitive step taken by admins rather than the last. In fact, Necladun, back on February of 2014, posted that Paradise had "~5000 perma bans in place."

Your ban ID number was 54758, to give an idea. Although some ban evaders make up a few hundred of those by themselves, and job bans for all of say, sec, are multiple bans (HoS+warden+detective, etcetc).

50 minutes ago, Psionyx said:

Is that really something you want to be advertising as a server? Sure, it means that you don't abide unacceptable conduct, but it also probably means that you've banned a considerable number of players for rather questionable reasons.

It's something I'm happy to advertise - we're quite willing to ban people who don't fit into the community. Given the amount of people on the Internet and SS13 in general who are toxic, racist, homophobic, this shows that we take the rules seriously. When it comes to an RP server, we're not trying to go for the biggest player numbers we can. SS13 in general also attracts many griefers, and that isn't something we'll tolerate. Quantity is not something we want over quality. I wouldn't want 10 times our number and people "roleplaying" as Donald Trump.

A huge number of our bans are simply for randomly attacking people/SSDs, and then failing to respond to numerous admin messages. 

I'm not sure what a "considerable number" is - or where your evidence is that it's for questionable reasons - or what this really means except to spread FUD. All reasons can be questioned, and we've absolutely gotten things wrong in the past. This is what appeals are for.

56 minutes ago, Psionyx said:

Many of these banned players are probably otherwise good players who did a dumb thing or had a lapse in judgment, and subsequently decided to move to a server that they felt was a little less ban-happy.

A momentary lapse of judgement or a single dumb thing is unlikely to get a ban. People who have been given a half dozen notes in the past and continue to cause trouble aren't an otherwise good player - they're a repeat offender. 

58 minutes ago, Psionyx said:

. Player behavioral problems are always going to be a thing. Even the best players are not perfect and will occasionally make mistakes in judgment or do something that's rather out of character for them. To err is human, after all. In order to maintain a certain level of professionalism among our volunteer staff we always had an escalating ladder of staff responses to player concerns and complaints about other players' conduct, so that a temporary lapse in judgment or a bad day didn't cause a player to be permanently barred from a game they love.

We indeed do have this. We use various warnings, discuss the players in question, and place bans of varying severity and ease of appeal. 

3 hours ago, Psionyx said:

0: Establish that there is, in fact, a problem/rule breaking going on that requires admin intervention.

This is quite self evident, yes. That's why we do it.

3 hours ago, Psionyx said:

1: Contact the offending player.

 

This was also done. At a certain point (Eg, numerous past warnings), we get sick of telling people to knock off their shittery, and a ban is placed to prevent further shittery.

 

59 minutes ago, Psionyx said:

1.5: (More appropriate to SS13) Consider an IC reponse, if appropriate.

Breaking the rules gets an OOC response, as it is an OOC issue. ICly responding to, for instance, Donald Trump, encourages it as the kind of RP that gets admin IC responses. This is not something that should be done when the rules are broken.

1 hour ago, Psionyx said:

2: Provide the player with an official warning, if warranted.

This is something we already do - a half dozen or so times in your case, and twice in the past month. After a certain point, warnings are not enough. I think banning you only after so many warnings is in fact quite merciful.

1 hour ago, Psionyx said:

3: (More appropriate to SS13) Consider a Jobban for the offending player.

Jobbans are effective if the issue is with the job they are playing, and these are handed out in that case - usually to security or command roles. This is something we already do.

1 hour ago, Psionyx said:

4: Temporary Ban.

This is something I am generally against. Breaking the rules does not result in a brig sentence. You either follow the rules and directions of the staff, or you do not play on the server at all. Not a timeout in the corner like you're a naughty kindergartener. We are not interested in punishing people with a time out. These are usually reserved for someone who needs a quick break, or for hectic times like shuttle grief.

1 hour ago, Psionyx said:

5: Permanent Ban.

This was reserved primarily for repeat offenders who had already received one or more temporary bans. There were very few ways to earn a permanent ban outright: Making OOC threats against players and/or staff, posting long strings of extremely violent/racist/eliminationist language, highly offensive sexual content, links to illegal materials, that sort of thing. This is going nuclear and should be treated as such.

This is not how we do things here, and the server environment, and huge player numbers despite the metric fuckton of bans shows it as quite successful.

With 169 pages of successful appeals, this should show how "permanent" they actually are. Many have lasted for only a few days, or even hours. If we believe you'll follow the rules, we'll allow you to play. If we don't, or don't believe you're overall good for the environment of the server, we won't allow you to play.

Calling this "going nuclear" hugely over exaggerates the severity of this. 

 

1 hour ago, Psionyx said:

In my case, Blessedtuna went from asking me, "What are you doing..?" directly to permanent ban. There was no other response, no other attempts at communication. Just, "What are you doing..?" me responding, "I'll stop, I'll stop, it was purely in fun," followed by a permanent ban. This sort of extreme response is unbecoming of staff and leads to people not trusting admins to be fair and impartial in administering the server rules.

There is nothing extreme about this. Someone who has had as many warnings as you in the past, does not need extended discussion on the server. This can be handled in a ban appeal. By not using a timed ban, this forces an actual discussion and appeal to occur, not just someone waiting out the ban time.

 

Overall, I see no reason to change the quite successful way we do things, because someone who has repeatedly caused problems has copped a ban for spewing memes and IRL references. This complaint seems to boil down to you feeling this is was not properly escalated. For someone who has played as long as you have and has a litany of previous warnings, you should well know not to impersonate Donald Trump. This should be pretty obvious by now. If warnings are not working and someone is not improving their play, then a ban is the tool we use. In the end, this is the best way to improve the server - remove the offending parties.

 

This complaint is without merit, as Blessedtuna was correct in banning someone who had repeated warnings for poor behavior in the past. This easily could have been avoided by you putting some effort into RPing properly. Blaming the admin staff and policy for your ban rather than examining how your own actions have been of a detriment to the server is not a good sign.

The suggestions are almost entirerly things we already do and have been for many years, or are things we've discussed at length over the years and have decided against for varying reasons. My personal opinion remains that we do not ban enough, and are too merciful with people with numerous notes. No one should really be getting more than 3 warnings.