[Cobby,Cedarbridge] Poor understanding of escalation

[Gouty]

Byond account and character name: Gouty - Carlos Danger
Admin: ExcessiveUseofCobby and Cedarbridge
Time and Server incident occurred: About 2145 GMT

Detailed summary:

I was playing as an atmos tech, 2 of us had been using the 1 available space suit and placing it back in the storage. A late start atmos technician comes in about 30mins into the round and takes the suit with the reason they want to "explore":

Spoiler:

Code: Select all

Jenny Taylia says, "Hi"
((Jenny removes the atmos hardsuit from storage))
Carlos Danger asks, "Why?"
Carlos Danger says, "Leave it in there"
Jenny Taylia says, "Going to space"
Jenny Taylia unlocks atmospheric technician's locker.
Jenny Taylia says, "Explore"
Carlos Danger says, "If you don't need it don't take it"
Carlos Danger has pushed Jenny Taylia!
Carlos Danger tries to remove Jenny Taylia's atmospherics hardsuit helmet.
Carlos Danger tries to remove Jenny Taylia's atmospherics hardsuit.
Jenny Taylia says, "I need it autist"
Carlos Danger attempted to disarm Jenny Taylia!
Carlos Danger says, "Fuck off and do your job"
((at this point my client craps out))
Jenny Taylia has attacked Carlos Danger in the chest with the welding tool!
Jenny Taylia has attacked Carlos Danger in the chest with the welding tool!
Jenny Taylia has attacked Carlos Danger in the right leg with the welding tool!
Jenny Taylia has attacked Carlos Danger in the chest with the welding tool!
Jenny Taylia has attacked Carlos Danger in the right leg with the welding tool!
Jenny Taylia has attacked Carlos Danger in the chest with the welding tool!
Carlos Danger has died at Atmospherics.

So as a summary I asked them not to take it, pushed them once, and they killed me for it.

I thought, oh they must be antag, but a bit weird that they used a welder to do it, and also I'd been told by admins that ahelps at the end of the round are difficult to deal with, so I thought I'd ahelp it after it happened.

The admin seemed to think that being killed for disarming was perfectly within the rules, and that a single disarm constituted starting a fight, they also mashed that "marked as IC issue" before I was given a chance to respond.

Spoiler:

Code: Select all

PM to-Admins: Jenny Taylia an antag? just killed me
Admin PM from-Cedarbridge: what happened before that?
- AdminHelp marked as IC issue! -
Losing is part of the game!
Your character will frequently die, sometimes without even a possibility of avoiding it. Events will often be out of your control. No matter how good or prepared you are, sometimes you just lose.
PM to-Admins: Uh, I told her not to take the atmos hardsuit if they didn't need it, disarmed her and tried to remove it, whe attacked me  ith a weldoing tool enough times to kill me
- AdminHelp marked as IC issue! -
Losing is part of the game!
Your character will frequently die, sometimes without even a possibility of avoiding it. Events will often be out of your control. No matter how good or prepared you are, sometimes you just lose.
PM to-Admins: Yeah if they're not an antag that's not an IC issue
PM to-Admins: What's this nmew "marked as IC" balls? it's pretty misleading, if it's valid just say it's valid
PM to-Admins: Can you answer me, does the new "marked as IC issue" thing  mean "valid"?
Admin PM from-Cedarbridge: It means its an IC issue.
PM to-Admins: So you thin kthat the proper escalation for 1 disarm is killing with a welder?
Admin PM from-Cedarbridge: I think that starting a fight and getting dunked isn't a reason to mash that ahelp button.
PM to-Admins: 1 disarm is not starting a fight. I was talking to them, client crapped out and I died, you want to encourage shit behaviour then this is the way to go about it

The player that killed me clearly broke the rules with regards to rule 1 and escalation using excessive force, and the admin immediately acted in favour of the other party before even hearing me out.

[PKPenguin321]

yeah, murder for a verbal request and one shove isn't gucci
@cedar: curious, did you check the attack logs at all?

[lollerderby]

killing someone for disarming you while they take absolutely no further hostile actions against you is ridiculously over the top and this ruling was bad

although excessiveuseofcobby marked it an ic issue first

[21:45:40]ADMINPRIVATE: HELP: Gouty/(Carlos Danger): Jenny Taylia an antag? just killed me - heard by 5 non-AFK admins who have +BAN.
[21:46:23]ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Cedarbridge/(Dalton Wolffe)->Gouty/(Carlos Danger): what happened before that?
[21:47:01]ADMINPRIVATE: ExcessiveUseOfCobby/(Probably Your Fav Admin) marked Gouty's admin help as an IC issue.

[Cobby]

She was arrested on murder and you went straight to cloning though, There was no point of handling it on an OOC level when everyone got their just due immediately in IC [she was later killed or whatever, and again you went straight to cloning].

Cedar messaged you though so I let him handle it after I initially just IC issue'd it. I didn't check to see if he ever messaged the other AT, as I had later left [before he was finished].

[TehSteveo]

It could at least warrant a talking to the party for jumping straight to murder and explain escalation in that they shouldn't went straight to killing but rather disarmed back; with a possible note of the situation and explanation they were talked with. Ban isn't necessarily needed due to security actually functioning, but IC punishment doesn't get treated like OOC punishment. People tend think the former is often treated as being lesser inviting them to continue behaviors that may cause more issues in the future that are more detrimental.

[Gouty]

She was arrested on murder and you went straight to cloning though, There was no point of handling it on an OOC level when everyone got their just due immediately in IC

Except the "IC issue" button was pressed before it was clear that they were going to be arrested.

Also, from my understanding, just because it was handled IC doesn't mean it shouldn't be also require admin involvement.

Ban isn't necessarily needed due to security actually functioning, but IC punishment doesn't get treated like OOC punishment.

I agreed that ban was not necessary, but people at least need to know that their actions were wrong and that it has been observed. I don't agree that IC punishment should be taken into account.

It's also not great to be told immediately and repeatedly that it's an IC issue, without discussion or explanation, and be chastised for what I regard as being a perfectly valid ahelp.

[Cobby]

beep

Well, considering I was the first person who IC issued it, I'm going to have to disagree with the whole "it wasn't clear" bit. I can assure you if I didn't want to read ahelps I wouldn't mark them as IC, I'd just deadmin, unless you think I have some personal grudge against you or something silly.

And I disagree with the second bit as well. It's a roleplaying game and if people can turn grief into a tasteful experience [especially with you getting cloned immediately after the incident so no one really loses except the offender], then why should I shoehorn myself in the situation? I agree that I could have spoken to them [although I will state again Cedar took the torch and may have very well spoken to them, and we're just arguing over fantasy], but I personally didn't think telling someone that "Well, what you did wasn't normally ok, but because of <parameters> I'm going to let it slide" is really a good thing in the long run, nor thought of a nice way to word it. If they were genuinely being trash, they would do something similar again too, to which I'll happily talk to them and discuss my concerns with them.

Just to reiterate though, Cedar took the torch after my initially IC Issuing it [and I'm assuming that's who he is referring to when he says he was "chastised"] and most of your actual concerns [such as the offender being spoken to] may have been addressed without you knowing. I just wanted to express my thoughts on the matter since my name was dropped around the issue.

And, as always, hindsight can be a real jerk [on all ends, including my own]. My apologies for not making my reasoning clearer at the time and making you feel like you had to address this elsewhere just to get some closure on the issue.

[TehSteveo]

Thing is Cobby, you kinda set the precedent for the Cedarbridge not to pursue it by intervening then saying you're going to leave it as he was being cloned. Cedar then looks at the logs and decides that it was valid due gouty starting the fight; which was not corrected by any the senior admins online at the time as senior admins can overrule trials. While Gouty did engage first; disarming twice is not really valid escalation for what occurred at all honesty. Looking at the logs further with the player's dealing with security also shows they didn't really care and thought it was perfectly fine to "end it quickly." This should have warranted admin intervention to talk with the player and a note about the behavior.


Attack logs for reference:

Spoiler:

[21:44:32]ATTACK: Carlos Danger(gouty) disarmed Jenny Taylia (NEWHP: 100)(126,92,1)
[21:44:37]ATTACK: Carlos Danger(gouty) disarmed Jenny Taylia (NEWHP: 100)(126,92,1)
[21:44:53]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: 85)(126,90,1)
[21:44:54]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: 70)(126,88,1)
[21:44:55]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: 55)(126,86,1)
[21:44:57]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: 40)(126,83,1)
[21:44:58]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: 25)(126,82,1)
[21:44:58]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: 10)(126,82,1)
[21:45:00]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: -5)(126,82,1)
[21:45:00]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: -20)(126,82,1)
[21:45:01]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: -35)(126,82,1)
[21:45:02]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: -50.6667)(126,82,1)
[21:45:03]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: -65.6667)(126,82,1)
[21:45:04]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: -81.3333)(126,82,1)
[21:45:05]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: -96.3333)(126,82,1)
[21:45:06]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: -112)(126,82,1)
[21:45:07]ATTACK: Jenny Taylia attacked Carlos Danger(gouty) with welding tool(INTENT: HELP) (DAMTYPE: FIRE) (NEWHP: -127)(126,82,1)

[TehSteveo]

I have given the offending player a note and a message that will appear upon the next time they log into the server. My response to this thread should be enough to say that it wasn't handled correctly, that it should have been looked into further, and the admins on at the time should have discussed with the offending player about proper escalation and noted it. As such, all admins are expected to take note from this to look into matters further rather just brushing things aside for whatever reasoning. We need to be concise as plenty of others who have done similar actions in the past have been talked with, warned, and/or even banned. As it's not even out the question that a ban here could have been easily applied looking over the logs and history with this incident and complaint.

[cedarbridge]

yeah, murder for a verbal request and one shove isn't gucci
@cedar: curious, did you check the attack logs at all?

I differed to Cobby's judgement at the time as it related to marking it as an IC issue. The PMs I received relating specifically to that simply sounded at the time to be the sort of anger that people generally send when told that their issue is a simple IC issue. I handle that improperly and a bit too casually. I expected that whatever had occurred had already been either witnessed or given the due investigation. Did give the logs a quick glance but as I saw the altercation was started by the ahelping party I took it at first glance to just be a scuffle that turned into an ahelp when one party lost. I did not observe the other person involved in the scuffle later in that round so I did not really have full context of their actions or play later in the round.

Ultimately I think I should have either just left the fuller investigation to the senior admin or done a full investigation myself. Instead I did both in half-measure.

[PKPenguin321]

sounds to me like cedar may have been mislead by cobby's use of the IC Issue button? hard to give full blame to them in that case but i might be misreading something here

[cedarbridge]

sounds to me like cedar may have been mislead by cobby's use of the IC Issue button? hard to give full blame to them in that case but i might be misreading something here

To a degree, thought I am responsible for my own follow-ups, which I really didn't put must gusto into in this case. I admit fully to not really doing due diligence to properly follow up on this issue as I should have.

[TehSteveo]

sounds to me like cedar may have been mislead by cobby's use of the IC Issue button? hard to give full blame to them in that case but i might be misreading something here

That's pretty much what my posts said in regards to this as a trial is expected to make errors; gameadmins are meant to help and guide them as they are meant to listen to senior admins.

[Cobby]

I'll take full blame for this since he was misguided, my apologies to all parties involved.

[TehSteveo]

Well, this is pretty much resolved.