Mute CE ruling

[PingBeepBuzz]

Admin(s) Key: Nerfection
Your ckey (Byond username): Beepsquad
Your Discord name (if applicable): AJS37#8390(I have two accounts on the discord with the exact same name as I am switching accounts right now)

Date(s) of incident (GMT preferred): 1213PM GMT

ROUND ID: I am told it was round 34478 but it transferred over to the next aswell

Nature of complaint: Disagree with a ruling. 
(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: None

Brief description (tl;dr here. Just the critical elements): I was told I can not play my character I spent significant time developing as the role I want because they have the mute trait and was not provided with a specific ruling I could read about this. 

Full description of events:

So about a week or two ago I decided to make a new character that quickly became my favorite I play currently, the whole gimmick is they are an engineer that can't speak. I tried it as a few different roles but decided that engineer was best. Now due to the fact that it seems chief engineer isn't played as often I actually was encouraged several times to be acting chief engineer to do the station goal and other stuff and it worked out pretty well.

I eventually decided that since Acting Chief Engineer worked fine that I could select Chief Engineer on job start with a few changes after some experimenting. There is currently a bug that doesn't let you emote on radio if you can't speak example ":e! Snaps" would not work if you have the mute trait so I removed the trait itself to allow me to do that, but having the trait only hard locks you from HOS and Captain so I didn't see any issue.

After playing several rounds without issue we come to 34478(Pretty sure its this round) where I had one unrelated incident where I hit a tider with my baton a bit to much which was my fault but not related to the current case to my knowledge. What did happen though was I was moving to engineer, an engineer called for help, I contacted security through PDA who was dispatched, and when I arrived I found them being dragged, pointed at the person dragging as at first it seemed they were bringing them back, but they instead shot me. Despite being shot I continued to contact people through PDA before eventually dying.

I was recovered and defibbed without issue. After a bit I run into the bridge to see if anyone recovered my baton but someone from engineer calls for help so I run down there to help them and on the way run into an atmos alarm a tider caused outside of engi as well. The NTR complains on radio that I apparently walked out of the bridge while they were speaking which I didn't notice. I indicate to them that I am resolving an atmospheric alarm. While freeing an engineer who was trapped in some weird disposals monstrosity they PDA me instantly claiming that my disability is fake because they weren't aware mute people could take heads of staff roles, and I roleplay a proper offended response in my opinion. I attempt to fax CC myself about this matter to which the Captain was unwilling to allow me to so I broke in full well knowing I could be arrested or demoted for that but sent out my fax.

Once the shuttle arrives they apparently receive a response saying I have to be fixed or fired to which I ahelp as due to my knowledge there is no public information that would restrict me from performing my job.

 

Direct admin involvement starts here.

Me and Nerfection had a decently long argument on the matter so for the sake of making this slightly less of a text wall I will list the points as to why they are trying to prevent me from playing this role as this character and why I disagree. 

 

• There is apparently and admin ruling against it.

I was told that apparently there is a head admin ruling against this but I have been playing CE for a bit and the first time I selected round start CE I was involved in an admin event with Sol marines showing up as diplomats. I was acting captain at the time because I was the only head of staff at first, announced this, and was heavily involved in the start of the event to the point of receiving a message from an admin about the office I built for them which exploded and it seemed at least some staff were aware that I was playing this character. Either way I disagree with this ruling and believe it should be reversed.

 

• Command roles have a higher RP standard.

I was actually a bit upset about this being cited, I have put significant amount of time developing this character, completing all the records and coming up with a backstory. Not only that but I have heavy use of emotes on both radios and in person, think of creative ways to share information without speaking and generally try to fit into the environment more. I'm really upset that this seems to imply that some tider CE could be considered a higher RP standard without putting in any effort.

• I apparently could not perform the role.

This part I find completely untrue, the station goal was completed(BSA) within the first hour or so, we had no atmospheric alarms, engine issues, power issues, or did any engineers complaint about my handling of the department, ICly or admin wise. The only damage to the station at round end was caused by an asteroid event that spawned right when the shuttle arrived. I have not had any issues on previous rounds either.

• I could not properly call for help.

This part I would consider somewhat true even if it is not a factor this round BUT there are multiple ways I could get around this or adjust to it which I have done with a character I had years ago with a similar gimmick. If this is considered a significant issue I could roleplay out having some sort of panic button which beeps and calls out my location and need for help on common with radio emotes. I only stopped doing this because it seemed a bit cheap. But for the time I was killed this round it was not a factor as I called security prior to arriving. 

 

What I am hoping to get from this report.

I really just want to return to playing my character and as CE, the way I have them setup it makes more sense for them to want to be CE and to completely remove the mute trait which is the entire thing the character was made around would just ruin the character. I would like reversing this ruling to be reconsidered as I would really like to play my character again, while difficult at times I can still perform everything required by the CE role without the ability to speak by using emotes and cool gimmicks that make the round more interesting.

[necaladun]

Hi there - I won't be ruling on this but I would just like to comment on my previous rulings.

 

A huge part of being in Command is communication. Being mute severely impacts your ability to do this, which negatively affects all the people under your command. We wouldn't let someone be a blue shield without hands since they couldn't do the job, and the same seems to apply to command. Inability to communicate with your team and other command on radio goes completly against what we have in mind for how command should be played.

[Sirryan2002]

Hello there and thanks for writing this admin complaint,

I agree that a head of staff ruling on disabilities has not been made abundantly available or clear to players, that is our fault. Thank you for deciding to continue this conversation through this section of the forums instead of extending the discussion in-game, it's the best way to go about addressing stuff like this. Here's what I'm sure of in this situation:

• I am sure that you are great a roleplaying, as indicated by your character choice, you are definitely very involved with the story of your character and how you interact with the world
• You are likely very good at engineering related skills.

And while this is all true, there is still the communication aspect. The radio still remains the most important form of communication for command/security members and we believe that having the downside of having the mute disability cannot be made up through alternative accommodations you make for other people in-game in order to circumvent this issue. At the moment, our leadership team has agreed that this is how we are going to handle command/security related disability choices for characters as per our Rule 5. 

So unfortunately I will not be reversing the current ruling. The admin was properly enforcing server policy in this case and provided a fine justification for it in the conversation y'all had with each other. In terms of the warning about the actual disability, I will make sure this is clarified and not necessarily held against you in the future. Also to make sure this is much more clear in the future, I will be revising our advanced rules precedents for rule 5 so that this graphic is made available once this complaint is resolved.

I will leave this admin complaint open for another week if you would like to reply / counter-point what I've said, otherwise it will be closed once that period elapses. This is not the place to necessarily ask for this policy to be changed/altered if you do not think it is good for the server, but you are welcome to make a suggestion on other parts of the forums about changing it.

[PingBeepBuzz]

On 2/7/2023 at 9:53 AM, Sirryan2002 said:

Hello there and thanks for writing this admin complaint,

I agree that a head of staff ruling on disabilities has not been made abundantly available or clear to players, that is our fault. Thank you for deciding to continue this conversation through this section of the forums instead of extending the discussion in-game, it's the best way to go about addressing stuff like this. Here's what I'm sure of in this situation:

• I am sure that you are great a roleplaying, as indicated by your character choice, you are definitely very involved with the story of your character and how you interact with the world
• You are likely very good at engineering related skills.

And while this is all true, there is still the communication aspect. The radio still remains the most important form of communication for command/security members and we believe that having the downside of having the mute disability cannot be made up through alternative accommodations you make for other people in-game in order to circumvent this issue. At the moment, our leadership team has agreed that this is how we are going to handle command/security related disability choices for characters as per our Rule 5. 

So unfortunately I will not be reversing the current ruling. The admin was properly enforcing server policy in this case and provided a fine justification for it in the conversation y'all had with each other. In terms of the warning about the actual disability, I will make sure this is clarified and not necessarily held against you in the future. Also to make sure this is much more clear in the future, I will be revising our advanced rules precedents for rule 5 so that this graphic is made available once this complaint is resolved.

I will leave this admin complaint open for another week if you would like to reply / counter-point what I've said, otherwise it will be closed once that period elapses. This is not the place to necessarily ask for this policy to be changed/altered if you do not think it is good for the server, but you are welcome to make a suggestion on other parts of the forums about changing it.

Well thats unfortunate, but with the chart I do question why IAA is marked as not allowed. At least when I played it I was mostly told to just relay everything to the magistrate before performing anything.

 

As for recommending the policy be changed I was told in ahelp and discord that making an admin complaint was the proper way to request that unless I misread something. I'll make something else in the suggestions section then.

[Sirryan2002]

IAA roles are almost entirely communicating with other players, if PDA servers go down you're smoked. I will talk about this policy on Sunday with the heads of staff as I'm meeting with them then, at that point we'll make a decision on how to handle this policy going forward but it will likely look much like what I mentioned above.

Consider this complaint resolved.