Admin Complaint: TullyBBurnalot

[monster860]

 

Admin Key: TullyBBurnalot

 

Complaint:

 

Greetings

 

On June 28, I opened a ban appeal regarding a ban I had received: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=8097

 

His response shows that he did not consider anything I said in that appeal, and I'm not even sure if he read the appeal at all. He simply told me why I was banned, and that my powergaming attitude was not welcome, and locked it to prevent any further discussion.

 

On July 5, I opened yet another appeal, addressing both of his concerns: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=8128

 

He simply quoted what he said before, and clearly did not consider anything I said in that appeal either, especially the part where I said that my powergaming levels were already decreasing before the ban. He simply locked it, and prevented any further discussion from occuring.

 

Thank you for reading this complaint.

 

[TullyBBurnalot]

 

Greetings. I shall not be deliberating on the result of this Complaint, as that decision is left to the Senior Staff, as indicated.

 

First of all, apologies for not giving your second appeal as much time as the first appeal was given. Let us take this point for point, then, so that discussion can happen.

 

The reason I was told to piss up a rope in the last appeal, is because of powergaming. Tully has explained to me:

 

While Telecomms exploitation is indeed the crux of the issue, it was by no means the only thing that led to the Ban being applied.

 

Your early actions on Paradise, especially as an AI, Research Director and Scientist, were often on the wrong side of the powergaming line. While I cannot deny that they had decreased in intensity and frequency, by the time the Ban was applied, they were still there. You had to be reminded several times to not abuse or exploit Telecomms. Two times would count as enough, as we expect players to to take permanent lessons from single incidents.

 

In addition, I would like to note here that the way a player is seen by the Staff was, is, and always will be, dependent on past experiences and, in particular, the player's Notes. In your case, said Notes are not exactly positive.

 

You not only managed to accrue a Head of Security Jobban for severe lack of knowledge regarding Space Law, but were also involved in a situation where you deliberately broke a hacked law by informing the crew about it. Having been there for the incident, I can attest that your response to the entire situation was less than ideal, as you seemed to be more interested in attempting to loophole your way out of the hacked law than trying to follow it.

 

Now, admittedly, these were incidents from a few months ago. However, as I noted in my conversation with you, your general attitude towards the game tends to veer towards "What is fun for me?" rather than "What is fun for everyone?". Now, do not get me wrong, wanting to derive personal enjoyment from the game is just natural. It is, after all, a game. The problem arises when your fun begins to take precedence over the fun of everyone else.

 

This problem was already fixing itself before I got the hammer. My occurences of uploading annoying scripts have become very rare, and I was already starting to play other roles than science/ai. I've even started doing traitory stuff (even quite successfully!) without using telecomms scripts.

 

So yeah, the problem in question was already starting to fix itself before I got banned.

 

And again, this may be true. In fact, this is very positive. However, before going on to the final point, I would like to note this:

 

I was present for the incident with the cyborg. You engaged in a prolonged discussion with Fethas, the Administrator handling the situation, where you attempted to make the case that what you did was justified because the cyborg was "breaking its laws" and therefore "could not be trusted".

 

Now, as you were explained at the time, your reasoning was notably flimsy. Your reasoning that the cyborg was breaking its laws relied on the fact that it using its RCD to block off the DJ station was, in some way, breaking:

 

Law 1: Minimize Expenses

 

Now, perhaps you could make the case for it. It would, however, be a particularly weak one, as you were told, and was the main reason why the Ban was applied in the first place.

 

In addition:

 

However, I *PERSONALLY* dragged it back to robotics for revival.

 

As you were told during the incident, this in no way diminishes what you did. In fact, one of the reasons you gave for murdering the cyborg was the ease with which you could just replace the body. That is functionally identical to making a case for murdering someone because you can easily clone them.

 

In fact, during the entire incident, you insisted on arguing for your side, and did not quite seem to really comprehend what was being told to you, despite having had plenty of opportunities in the past to review the Server Rules.

 

But even then, if you had just given it some time before appealing, perhaps that appeal could've been accepted.

 

However, your first appeal, quoted:

 

The purpose of that rule is to prevent people from unfairly getting removed from the round. However, in this case, that did not happen at all. After killing the borg, I promptly dragged it back to robotics so that it could play the round. There is a person behind that borg, and that is why the rule exists - to keep people in the round. The situation at hand was that there was a borg invading my satellite, and I could not apply handcuffs to said borg. While I could have probably threatened it first, and that would have been better, the only difference with what I did and applying handcuffs is that the stat var was 2, and it spent a bit more time incapacitated.

 

Demonstrates that you still did not understand what the actual message was, and appeared to believe that you were, in some way, justified.

 

You were not.

 

But even then, as I noted in your first appeal, had you simply given it a few months, gained more experience with the game, revised your playstyle, and then come back, you would've had a shot. A long one, but a shot nonetheless.

 

But then your second appeal contained the following:

 

The law-breaking was just a shitty excuse, the real reason is I was salty about the way that he visited me.

 

This indicates a few things:

 

1) You deliberately lied to Fethas during the incident regarding your actions and your intentions;

 

2) You have not yet developed a respect for the Server Rules that would be expected out of someone that has been on the receiving end of an Adminhelp so many times;

 

3) Your attitude, that you claim to be improving, is still vulnerable to bouts of anger, despite the fact that you very well should know better

 

Anything other than a declined appeal would be unacceptable. Not only did you invalidate everything you said before, you invalidate it in the absolutely worst way possible.

 

Not only did you further dig the hole you were already in, you compounded more dirt on top of you. There is sincerely nothing else I could say to your second appeal apart from:

 

"So you admit to lying, and to having broken the Rules even more severely than you initially let on?"

 

Killing people because you are annoyed at them is absolutely unacceptable. You have been on Paradise for well over half a year.

 

You have been talked to several times.

 

You were on the receiving end of Jobbans due to your behaviour.

 

You were on the receiving end of a Permanent Ban for exploiting game systems after having been already warned (multiple times) to stop doing it.

 

And now, you murdered someone because you were "salty".

 

This is absolutely unacceptable behavior, warranting nothing less than a long-lasting Permanent Ban.

 

If you wished for an appraisal of your second appeal, this is it. You may discuss it as required.

 

[monster860]

 

On the hacked law: While I don't remember the details of the incident, I was definitely not trying to reveal the traitor. In fact, I was trying to be helpful, however there was people breaking in my core ready to kill me like a malf-AI. I was attempting to delay them into using less powerful weapons so that I would be able to protect the traitor for longer.

 

On the dj station incident: If that was a human that walked in and done that, I would have probably applied peels and cable cuffs and thrown him out, however, you can't do that to a borg, so I applied toolbox instead. Now, there was definitely things I could have done better, I admit: I could have applied 1 toolbox, told him to get out, and I also could have located a flash to pull him out. However, that is the solution that came to my head at the time, even though it wasn't the best one.

 

On the "lying to admins" part, I admitted so in the appeal. Also, when he started "usurping me", I announced over the radio that he was breaking his laws, so that is what was in my mind for the reason at the time. I came to the "salty" conclusion only later, after reflecting back upon the incident.

 

And of course, the fact that the powergame was on a decline did matter - In fact, I was completely out of the mindset of "fuk u traitors" by the time of the ban. There was *no* syndie intercept scripts, *no* muting scripts, and *no* swear filters. My traitoring happened successfully a few time with no mute scripts as well.

 

[Regen]

 

While I appreciate your time in making an appeal, I don't think you're ready to come back.

 

We did see a positive curve in your behavior, but this was the straw that broke the camels back.

There's been a lot of discussion about your behavior, and admins were starting to question why you weren't banned before this.

 

Tully's response to your latest appeal was justified in a sense that it has been just a week or so since you last posted your appeal, which was declined.

It was unprofessional of him to quickly brush you away, and I think he understands that.

 

The bottom point is that your ban is the result of many cases of stepping over the line, and that ban is supposed to sting a lot more, because of all the warnings you've received in the past, and I do not feel comfortable with letting you off this easy.

 

I hope this clear things up, I have in no way a problem with you coming back, but again, the ban is there for a reason, and it's supposed to be long.

That being said, I see no reason for you to make a third appeal basically reformulating an apology.

I have changed the length of the ban to a month, from the date of this post, that's 40 days

This will be your last chance, I don't think you do this on purpose, but you really need to shape up and show us that these appeals aren't empty words.

 

I hope this resolves your complaint

 

[monster860]

This does. Thank you.

[FreeStylaLT]

Complaint resolved, moving to resolved.