Admin Complaint - Abydos2

[Sambubu]

Admin(s) Key:  Abydos2
Your ckey (Byond username): VR
 

Date(s) of incident (GMT preferred): 5:09 AM

ROUND ID: 37814

Nature of complaint: clarification required, feedback, other, misapplication of rules(? not rules, but maybe SOP?)

Links to all relevant ban appeals for any bans related to this complaint: Broad security job ban.
Brief description (tl;dr here. Just the critical elements): I was banned from security. Abydos2's description of events are inaccurate, and I think misinterpret things for the worst, and I wasn't able to have a dialogue about any of the messages they sent me or statements made. It felt one-sided and left a bad taste in my mouth in regards to admin interactions.

I don't know, I guess it feels like a bit of an over reaction?

Full description of events: I was job banned from security.

Just had an interaction, and I feel as though I wasn't being heard at all. I've had interactions with other members of the admin team. Every time I felt as though I had an understanding of what I did wrong, and I understood why I was doing it wrong. Often it even came along with clarification of mechanics and the like. The interactions have always been distanced, clinical, and helpful. This time they felt oddly personal? Like, I couldn't get a word in edge wise, and didn't feel like Abydos2 made an attempt to discuss things at all. They just made the accusations, and made a verdict.

 

Every other interaction I've had with every other staff members, it felt like a back-and-forth conversation, and I would adjust how I played based on how the rules and their guidance. With this interaction, I felt like the things I said weren't being taken into consideration at all.

 

More to the point, I will be posting the logs of the round and I want to point out that the way the admin interpreted the event feels like it's in bad faith, and entirely fabricated and misinterpreted.

The job ban is listed as :

Quote

 

You have been jobbanned by abydos2 from: Head of Security, Warden, Detective, Security Officer, Magistrate, Blueshield.

The reason is: Have little to no confidence that this player can take the role of Security properly. Has reportedly been very questionable and outright rather meme / malicious in some of their intents. Labeling their security gear as "Shitsec", seemingly stacking crimes and mis-handling of prisoners, personally watched them nearly get a perma prisoner killed (Vox) by full stripping them and then leaving them with their tank off and when called out on it by another, simply shrugged their shoulders and went "It gets me a higher kill count".

As well as reports of them seemingly targetting other players for previous actions in other shifts, such as getting on someones case for simply having them demoted in another round. Can't be trusted with Security matters at this time.

 

Trying to approach this bit by bit:

Quote

Have little to no confidence that this player can take the role of Security properly.

This seems like a personal take, the entire exchange felt like the admin was very emotionally charged? I can't quite explain it. I certainly play security as a 'hardass' and 'tongue-in-cheek meta level about the stereotypical shitcurity', but I do not think at any point I've not taken the role seriously or properly.

 

Quote

Has reportedly been very questionable and outright rather meme / malicious in some of their intents. Labeling their security gear as "Shitsec", seemingly stacking crimes and mis-handling of prisoners

In two shifts, I have used the hand labeler to label my gear 'SHITSEC', the first time it was after someone I arrested, and was an EOC, called me shitsec. As I understand it, the term 'shitsec' it used to refer to security players who do their job to a very thorough point, and generally grate on other crew members due to how clinical they are. To this extend, this character identifies with this term, as she gives out maximum sentences, stacks every crime committed (column, not row, as per SOP). Actively searched everyone on red alert, as per SOP allows, and arrests anyone on maints on red alert for trespassing, as long as they aren't conducting job duties or are engineering, atmos, or security. None of this is done maliciously, as I understand it, it is following the SOP to an obnoxiously accurate degree, which is the intent with the character.

Quote

personally watched them nearly get a perma prisoner killed (Vox) by full stripping them and then leaving them with their tank off and when called out on it by another, simply shrugged their shoulders and went "It gets me a higher kill count".

As well as reports of them seemingly targetting other players for previous actions in other shifts, such as getting on someones case for simply having them demoted in another round. Can't be trusted with Security matters at this time.

So, here I would like to break things down into a complete chronological recounting of events from my perspective.

I joined a few seconds into the round.

I noticed someone else, and P-Hound, a fellow sec member, said something on the comms as soon as I joined. At this point I contacted P-Hound, whom I had been with a few shifts earlier, and butted heads because they pointed out a mistake I did with sentencing. which I admittedly was incorrect (regarding the difference between assault on an officer and battery), and just general disagreements on security behavior, such as when to search people and the like. P-Hound, the character, I don't know the player, has always been very nice, even if our characters disagreed on approaches to security patroling and the like. Still, as momo was corrected, she began to have back-and-forths with him.

 

I went to security, grabbed my gear, messaged P-hound (messages shown later on the post), and began patrols.

I was patrolling med maints and went to engineering maints. As I passed engineering, an engineer flagged me and pointed into engineering. She, a human, wanted me to detain a vox for breaking into maints. The vox came, and as I was taking them to the brig they admitted to petty theft. As I was processing them and removing their gear, I noticed they had an antag nuclear core extraction kit. They were now EOC. They weren't handcuffed yet. I then battoned them to handcuff the EoC.

As I was processing them, I pointed to Hound, and, as I processed them, I would bring up  the security player I had previously interacted with, and the admin said I was 'targeting'. I said "Momo number one sec officer. This, building on the coworker rival / banter that had been done since the shift start.

I have to take him to med bay to check for implants, and I start stripping him. I have never processed a vox before, and I remove his tank. I promptly put him in, and try to turn on his internals. I couldn't find the button for it. So I drag him to more experienced officers nearby, and ask them to turn on his gas, as I don't know how. This exchange can be seen:

As I understand it, this isn't a big deal; the guy has to be taken to med bay anyway, so to me he would be taken to med bay, revived, treated, searched, and put in perma brig.

P-Hound, the one I had been having a bantering with, goes on comms, and to me, and says 'Momo commited manslaughter', at which point I point to them and say 'still have a higher perp count', because, I had arrested one EoC, and they had not yet arrested anyone.
 

Shortly after, I get messaged by the admin, who says 'nearly killed a perma prisoner that didn't deserve it and when called out on it, simply went "I don't care, it gets me a higher body count.', which is not what I said, how I said it, and I believe is a blatant misinterpretation of what had happened.

 

Who says 'nearly killed a perma prisoner that didn't deserve it and when called out on it, simply went "I don't care, it gets me a higher body count.',

 

And, in regards to hound, they said I was immediately hostile to him.

Let's analyze my interactions with P-Hound:

A few minutes later:

Now, I can see how this is confrontational, but hostile? I don't think so. In fact, I do note that if I was doing something wrong, centcom would notify me, and this is because before this I had not yet been notified about my actions as security from an admin (the only other time I had been contacted by an admin was when I commited suicide as a security officer).

This is because I don't think I was doing anything wrong, in terms of following SOP, and if I were doing something wrong with SOP, I would be notified and corrected. Specially because, even if I were violating SOP, nothing I did was majorly disruptive; as P-hound stated, 'SoP violations are not Central's Job.', in other words, all this is an IC issue.

Here we have an exchange about the events of previous rounds. I explain how I understand stacking, what I do, and how I do it. This is also the end of the exchange with the admin.

 

The round logs are attached to this post.

 

 

Job_Ban.html

Edited October 25, 2023 by Sambubu
Trying to edit things to be easier to read

[necaladun]

Hi there, I will be addressing this on behalf of the heads due to how busy they are and Sirryan having to step down leaving them short handed. We've also had to read over a bunch of logs to get an idea of the situation, including your PM logs with Abydos.

The general description you've given of how you play the character indeed seems problematic to me. Giving maximum sentences and "following the SOP to an obnoxiously accurate degree" goes completely against the spirit of play we want. As far as sentencing goes, the ability to vary sentences was given so that security could be more or less lenient with people given the context of their crimes. As far as SoP goes, I'd like to point out the most vital part of all SoP on the wiki:

Quote

blindly following the letter of SOP while ignoring the context of the shift is a ridiculously bad idea. 

Being able to understand and adjust for context is vital to the security role. No one should be following it to an obnoxiously accurate degree. Intentionally playing an obnoxious character generally falls under rule 0. We do not want a server with people being intentionally obnoxious. Searching 'everyone' also somewhat falls under this - you should be using your ability to search people for the safety and security of the station, not simply because it is allowed. This comes across as an abuse of your power - something that absolutely lowers admin confidence in you playing the role properly. It is not within your 'right' to search people. Security officers have extra duties, not extra rights. 

On 10/25/2023 at 4:42 PM, Sambubu said:

As I understand it, this isn't a big deal; the guy has to be taken to med bay anyway, so to me he would be taken to med bay, revived, treated, searched, and put in perma brig.

P-Hound, the one I had been having a bantering with, goes on comms, and to me, and says 'Momo commited manslaughter', at which point I point to them and say 'still have a higher perp count', because, I had arrested one EoC, and they had not yet arrested anyone.

I've snipped the unnecessary details about the arrest here to focus on the real issue here.

A prisoner in your care dying due to your actions absolutely is a big deal. Committing manslaughter is a big deal, especially as a security member. Just because they can be revived doesn't make it any more legal. It appears in this case they didn't actually die, due to Abydos giving them a moderate admin heal. Regardless, a critical error was made here. The fact you arrested an EoC is irrelevant here, and the attitude that it doesn't matter as long as you arrest EoC's is very worrying. We don't want our security staff purely focusing on 'redtexting' antags.

On 10/25/2023 at 4:42 PM, Sambubu said:

Shortly after, I get messaged by the admin, who says 'nearly killed a perma prisoner that didn't deserve it and when called out on it, simply went "I don't care, it gets me a higher body count.', which is not what I said, how I said it, and I believe is a blatant misinterpretation of what had happened.

This is a misinterpretation of 'body count' it appears, based on the 'still have a higher perp count' - this is more about paraphrasing than misinterpreting as I see it. 

On 10/25/2023 at 4:42 PM, Sambubu said:

And, in regards to hound, they said I was immediately hostile to him.

The 'favourite security officer' comment does indeed come across as sarcastic and hostile to me. Overall the exchange seems unpleasant.

On 10/25/2023 at 4:42 PM, Sambubu said:

. In fact, I do note that if I was doing something wrong, centcom would notify me, and this is because before this I had not yet been notified about my actions as security from an admin (the only other time I had been contacted by an admin was when I commited suicide as a security officer).

This is absolutely not true - we are not able to see or intervene in all actions. We absolutely rely on the community to self-police and teach each other to be better security officers. If you are not willing to listen to other officers - especially more experienced ones, and double especially when they legally demote you - then this is a very bad sign.

On 10/25/2023 at 4:42 PM, Sambubu said:

Specially because, even if I were violating SOP, nothing I did was majorly disruptive; as P-hound stated, 'SoP violations are not Central's Job.', in other words, all this is an IC issue

Minor SoP violations are an issue for most roles. When it starts to negatively affect other players, then that's often when admins start to step in as it has become an OOC issue. We do give some leeway for mistakes, but if you are acting in a way that is getting you demoted then you are not playing your role responsibly. Security is held to a higher standard in these cases, due to the power they have over others and the round.

 

Given your responses here and general behavior, I have to agree with Abydos that I have little confidence in your ability to play the role on your current path. Playing other roles for a bit seems a good idea here - antags especially may be a good idea of how to see things from the 'other side'. Security is held to a higher standard than other roles, so it is by far the most common for us to jobban people from, next to command. 

Should things change, I hope within a few months to see an appeal that shows us you've changed your attitude towards security play, and will be willing to play in a less intentionally-obnoxious way, and without the focus on 'winning' by catching as many EoC's as possible, and instead play in a way that makes the entire game more fun for everyone - antags included.

Complaint is ruled to be without merit and resolved.