[Cimika] Admin complaint

[IcePacks]

Ticket #8 on round ID164143.

Our forums are a garbage pit, so I'm only going to provide a brief for those that can't see the ticket: I am allegedly (as of this writing, the ban isn't up on banbus and I have no desire to log in after my interactions with Cimika) job banned for firing bad aim (45-60 degree left-right scatter on projectiles) at a single assistant in an empty hallway. Eventually, the assistant ran into one laser and then ran up to the door and tried to provoke me into more. I took the bait like a fucking dingus and hit him three more times, which was not lethal. An officer walking to the brig walked into a few more of the shots. A riot ensued.

Afterward, Cimika PMed me repeatedly while I was dealing with an antag in executions at the captain's orders. Cimika repeatedly asked me multiple times, despite having access to logs, whether or not an assistant successfully pied me, the answer of which eventually got me killed when the guy I was interrogating (I was doing a bit: the captain had assistant several assistants in escaping and attacking officers so I was going to do a torture session on the antag and then let them go depending on how they went with it) simply resisted out of restraints and cuffs and killed me. I went absolutely batshit and Cimika circled back around to how using the literal impossible aim quirk isn't an excuse to miss lethal shots at assistants, especially when assistants run into them. To be entirely frank, even as I'm pointlessly wasting my time screaming into the void of this useless forum, this is casual targeted harassment. There are no consequences to their actions, and this is while I feel the need to post about them.

[Cimika]

Hey, thanks for taking the time to write this complaint.

I will not touch upon the ban, and its validity, as this is a complaint as opposed to a ban appeal. In doing so, I will focus on the issues you have brought up with my behaviour, which appears to be that you feel it was a misconduct on my part that led to you getting killed while handling a prisoner, as well as that I am allegedly harassing you/targeting you specifically.

For the first point, as I stated in the ticket, I empathise with how frustrating it must have been to get killed because you were answering a ticket. There are no policies or conduct guidelines that state we cannot PM a player that is going through something, however, and I advise you in the future to take your time to answer or simply state that you needed time. Nevertheless, I apologise for the bad experience that this brought to you, and I can assure it was not my intent to make you feel pressured.

For the second point about targeted casual harassment, it is not my intention, and we have only been involved in a handful of tickets together. I am not, in any way, looking to single you out and harass you while I admin any shift that you're on, and I once again apologise if that is what you perceived during our interactions.

[Vekter]

It's been stated and advised in complaints before that admins aren't responsible for players dying while being PMed and are advised to inform the admin they're busy and need a moment before responding.

[IcePacks]

My complaint here is Cimika's complete unwillingness to listen; I have stated numerous times that the laser fire I am banned three weeks for is completely and utterly harmless considering the nature of the bad aim quirk and Cimika's reponse was to deny my appeal with logs of me firing an entire clip with only four hits. This incident will no doubt be cited the next time I'm playing security and, say, harmbaton a greyshirt who provokes, attacks, or otherwise antagonizes me. It's actually really funny in a terrible way, I used to do the same shit, although I didn't get admin backup (despite being similarly incapable of taking the L when defeated).

To be entirely honest, though, I am seeing all of this through the lens of understanding just how our current administration works; I have a friend who plays every once in a while who logs in simply to grief. In one such round, he simply ran around spamming gunpowder bombs. I was trying to kill him for this; it was more or less a game of cat-and-mouse between two friends. I think his body count was eight? The part that blew him away was him simply walking up to and gibbing the clown. I killed two people fighting like idiots in the aftermath over the captain's laser to kill my friend with. Neither of us were antagonists. He didn't get checked a single time, I was banned the next round for assaulting both assistants and my friend, all of whom would have more than likely killed me (I think my friend actually did kill me, but that's not really the part of the round I've memorized). The ban ID is 52782. You're free to look it up yourselves, although I doubt you will, considering the utter lack of care for details I've seen in recent months.

As I said earlier in this post, this ban will be used to justify the next ban, and the next after that. I half-expect to never see a permaban for any of this; that's too much of an investment, and your reasoning for my bans typically amounts to "you have a history", but constantly fending off admins for resolving matters IC myself is tiresome, this ban is tiresome (really, go check the logs that Cimika posted in defense of the ban, and having all of this happen knowing that it doesn't happen to anyone else doing the same and worse is simply awful. Getting killed because I was busy dealing with an admin who wouldn't hear me out is just the cherry on top.

[MrAlphonzo]

I'm going to weigh in on this since I believe it falls under a precedent that was established during my first trial, which I was involved in. Mind you, it was over a note.
It can be found here: https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 1&p=336423

Since IcePacks has moved discussion of the ban itself to a complaint thread, I'll be discussing the ban here, along with his concerns over malicious administrative action against him, although my thoughts on that are rather short.

The ban itself:

Spoiler:

The precedent I cited earlier, which resulted in a whole lot of in-fighting for a good few days, involved a detective turning a janitor into swiss cheese and putting him into crit over making the floors wet while he's cleaning.
The final ruling was penned by feemjeem, a former gameadmin, and the headmins at the time replied with "makes sense to me" to his thoughts, so I'll treat it as a headmin ruling from the time.

1) Absent of any existing behavior patterns, in the case of an overreaction that didn't lead to a player death, with no mitigating circumstances, in which recompense could easily be achieved by the wronged player (i.e. aggressor gets dunked), I think that:
a) A note may be unnecessary, as you can just tell the player not to be so hasty next time
b) The issue can be resolved ICly by retaliating with force

In the case of IcePacks, the interaction could be considered an overreaction, but it did not lead to a player's death. The rest of the precedent should be true as well.

6) The player in question, while not having a substantial history of this particular behavior, has been noted for other overreactions and behavior issues in the past.

The previous ruling was made with a problematic history in mind, both in me writing the note and the headmins decision.

What differentiates this instance from the precedent of actions taken against security players for unnecessary lethal force that did not kill someone is the intent.
IcePacks could have just as easily walked up on the assistant and beaten the shit out of him with a baton, so I'm fairly sure he is being truthful when he said they were only intended to be what were essentially warning shots.
Are warning shots that connect with people actionable? Typically, that is a definite possibility. But in the event of a serious greytide going about? I would not consider that actionable.

IcePack's last documented instance of security misconduct is from roughly two months ago. For an offense from two months ago to turn a laser blast oopsie into a three week roleban is, frankly, insane, especially given the precedent I've shown above (And, again, that was over a note).

On the allegations of malicious administrative action against IcePacks:

Spoiler:

Most definitely lmao half the team is out to get you.

To put it more seriously, not to name names, or leak adminbus, there have been some discussions about IcePacks that gave me some concern that, if those who may be biased against him themselves don't make unfair rulings, it would knowingly or unknowingly encourage other members of staff to take disproportionate action against him, as well.

[Cimika]

On the allegations of malicious administrative action against IcePacks:

I would like to comment on that by saying that I stoop up for IcePacks in the past, when discussion was brought up around the alleged "long history". I have only taken Pax's recent history in consideration for my ruling, notably the last incident that I won't disclose until they choose to do so themselves, as opposed to picking apart someone who has been playing on /tg/ for close to a decade and has mostly irrelevants notes by now.

[oranges]

MSO said you can't complain about admin conduct in a ban unless the ban appeal was successful anyway so this thread should just be closed

[Coconutwarrior97]

Locking this post until the ban appeal is resolved per his ruling

and the appeal leading to the ban being overturn is the minimum bar required before a complaint

Also please follow the right format.

[Coconutwarrior97]

Note was upheld here: https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... ead#unread . So closing this complaint.