BYOND account: Aliceee2ch
Ban/note type (Server Ban/Discord Ban/Forum Ban/Note): Minor note
Ban/note duration: No Expiration Date
Ban/note reason: As an asimov borg intervened in a fight between two people, flashing one and trying to move the other (unflashed) one away. Their attempts to move the other person away were inefficinet and eventually the borg stopped trying to break the fight, resulting in one of the human dying. Was asked to keep trying to uphold their laws.
Time ban was placed: 2024-11-01 19:03:06
Server you were playing on when banned: Garry
Round ID in which ban was placed: 241193
Why are you making this appeal? (Put an x in the boxes):
() - The ban/note is factually incorrect
(X) - The ban/note is not against the rules
() - The ban/note needs modification
() - The ban was unjustifiably harsh
() - I was permabanned and I want another chance
Why should this appeal be accepted?:
Hello, appealing this note because feel like there was slight misunderstanding between us (which couldve lead to creation of this note), tho your guidance "what to do next time" is correct and hard to disagree with.
First of all, as asimov borg i tried to uphold law 1 by first flashing Antoni, then trying to flash QM (since he had sunglasses i obviously couldnt do that, and instead tried to drag em away). I tried to prevent harm untill Antoni was beaten to crit, and therefore couldnt be human. (my bad for not dragging away Antoni, but actually he was first who started harming QM)
Worth to mention - QM wasnt a human, but a vampire. He had a gas mask on and, infact, was human until proven another (i was told that using health analyzer would help, but it was stress situation and i couldnt think about it, tried to prevent harm as best of my abilities)
Secondly, I want to speak how much this situation encourages ignoring problems as cyborg. Basically harm happened when i couldnt see this (i came in only because heard beating sounds from another room) - i was free to ignore this, but i tried to prevent harm, since we had cult AND heretics onstation, but i could easily go just "LALALA CANT HEAR YOU" and walk away. I tried to help both sides as best as i could, but got noted for "bad" attempt of saving. So instead i shouldve just ignore the problem?
[LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
-
Aliceee2ch
- Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2024 10:07 pm
- Byond Username: Aliceee2ch
-
LiarGG
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2022 11:45 pm
- Byond Username: LiarGG
Re: [LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
Heya, just to clarify on why I decided to note this and why I think the note should stay.
From what I've seen in the logs, the very last action you've taken against either of the parties (Antoni and Lukas) was flashing Antoni, after which there were no logged attempts at trying to drag Lukas nor Antoni away while Antoni was being killed. This very much looked like you just giving up your attempts at trying to prevent the harm, which feels like potentially just griefing Antoni. Especially after you've flashed him, skewing the fight heavily against him. The note here is simply to keep track of something like this happening and you getting some info on how to approach similar situations in the future.
Also since discerning vamps on the fly sucks ass, I've decided to look at this as a human vs human fight, so the races don't really have any weight on this decision.
Bottomline for me here is that I felt like this situation was sus enough to keep track of.
From what I've seen in the logs, the very last action you've taken against either of the parties (Antoni and Lukas) was flashing Antoni, after which there were no logged attempts at trying to drag Lukas nor Antoni away while Antoni was being killed. This very much looked like you just giving up your attempts at trying to prevent the harm, which feels like potentially just griefing Antoni. Especially after you've flashed him, skewing the fight heavily against him. The note here is simply to keep track of something like this happening and you getting some info on how to approach similar situations in the future.
Also since discerning vamps on the fly sucks ass, I've decided to look at this as a human vs human fight, so the races don't really have any weight on this decision.
Bottomline for me here is that I felt like this situation was sus enough to keep track of.
-
Aliceee2ch
- Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2024 10:07 pm
- Byond Username: Aliceee2ch
Re: [LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
Im sorry, but how there's no attempts to prevent harm, when i clearly remember how i dragged QM out of icebox bathroom to get them away from Antoni, i tried to get to Antoni but failed and in result they got killed. Didnt meant to grief Antoni, but he started attacking human (as i thought) and in result got flashed, its clearly justified since i really tried to drag away (first i tried to flash QM, it should be logged) QM too to prevent harming Antoni, it wasnt like i flashed just one guy and got away from site.
-
vect0r
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2022 12:37 am
- Byond Username: Vect0r
- Location: 'Murica 🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥
Re: [LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
As a note, a human in critical condition is still considered human. A human is only a non-human once they become a corpse (read: dead).
-
Aliceee2ch
- Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2024 10:07 pm
- Byond Username: Aliceee2ch
Re: [LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
Yep, im informed. But they got killed when i tried to help them. Rifle after all.
-
LiarGG
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2022 11:45 pm
- Byond Username: LiarGG
Re: [LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
Okay,
gonna illustrate my point of view by dissecting logs a bit, so perhaps you can understand where I am coming from with the note.
Attack and Game logs of the dormitory exchange including you, Lukas and Antoni are here:
I've highlighted your flashings and your grabs of Lukas and Antoni.
The summary of the fight could be Antoni getting into an altercation with Dali and Lukas. Antoni attacking Lukas with his heretic stuff, you flashing him, Lucas shooting him with his rifle and you trying to flash and drag away Lucas as Antoni jaunts. No problem so far.
After Antoni gets out of the jaunt, Lukas accidentally batons himself and as you start dragging him away, you flash Antoni one more time, after which Dali immediately jumps him and you seemingly drop any involvement with the rest of the fight, despite it happening just a few tiles away from you. Antoni was asking you for help throughout this as he was beaten to crit and eventually to death.
Because the very last action taken here was flashing Antoni on your way out as you were dragging the QM, which you knew was ineffective because you couldn't keep him down, and then dropping all involvement once Antoni was stunned and was being beaten to death, this from my perspective looks like you purposefully stopping trying to save him, violating law 1.
This resulted in us chatting about what went wrong and what could've been done differently, which resulted in a note (because I felt it'd be appropriate to note down that we had this conversation) of low severity (because these situations can be hard to navigate).
The reason I think this note should stay is for the offchance of this really being malicious, to establish a potential pattern. Henceforth if this is not gonna become a pattern, there should be very little issue with this note staying, as there would hardly ever be a reason to bring it up outside the scope of law 1 borg violations.
Did this clarify my reasoning a bit better?
gonna illustrate my point of view by dissecting logs a bit, so perhaps you can understand where I am coming from with the note.
Attack and Game logs of the dormitory exchange including you, Lukas and Antoni are here:
► Show Spoiler
The summary of the fight could be Antoni getting into an altercation with Dali and Lukas. Antoni attacking Lukas with his heretic stuff, you flashing him, Lucas shooting him with his rifle and you trying to flash and drag away Lucas as Antoni jaunts. No problem so far.
After Antoni gets out of the jaunt, Lukas accidentally batons himself and as you start dragging him away, you flash Antoni one more time, after which Dali immediately jumps him and you seemingly drop any involvement with the rest of the fight, despite it happening just a few tiles away from you. Antoni was asking you for help throughout this as he was beaten to crit and eventually to death.
Because the very last action taken here was flashing Antoni on your way out as you were dragging the QM, which you knew was ineffective because you couldn't keep him down, and then dropping all involvement once Antoni was stunned and was being beaten to death, this from my perspective looks like you purposefully stopping trying to save him, violating law 1.
The way it seemed was you flashing just one guy and not even getting away from the site, but watching him get beaten to death. I can grant you that it seemed like you were trying to help another person, but tending to a person who was not in an active danger of dying after a first salicilic injection, while watching another person being actively beaten to death doesn't sound much better. Especially after you getting them into that situation by flashing them.Aliceee2ch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2024 9:26 pm it wasnt like i flashed just one guy and got away from site.
This resulted in us chatting about what went wrong and what could've been done differently, which resulted in a note (because I felt it'd be appropriate to note down that we had this conversation) of low severity (because these situations can be hard to navigate).
The reason I think this note should stay is for the offchance of this really being malicious, to establish a potential pattern. Henceforth if this is not gonna become a pattern, there should be very little issue with this note staying, as there would hardly ever be a reason to bring it up outside the scope of law 1 borg violations.
Did this clarify my reasoning a bit better?
-
Aliceee2ch
- Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2024 10:07 pm
- Byond Username: Aliceee2ch
Re: [LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
Yes, you did clarified your reasoning better indeed. The thing is that im still disagree with the note, since I tried to act in good faith and not blatantly grief Antoni. I couldnt manage everyone in that fight since im not omniman, i tried to do as best as I could without violating Asimov.
>dying after a first salicilic injection, while watching another person being actively beaten to death.
Like I said, couldnt manage everyone at once and tried to prevent harm in best of my abilities. Theres no list "you must have priority for someone other", since whole situation was a massive harm.
>Especially after you getting them into that situation by flashing them.
Cant understand this part, guy harmed other guy and got flashed for harm, while i tried to deal with future harm after.
>really being malicious, to establish a potential pattern. Henceforth if this is not gonna become a pattern, there should be very little issue with this note staying
The whole thing im appealing this note since I already had a decent note history for sillicons and dont want to make it worse, especially considering that I tried to act in good faith and follow laws as my best. Even if its just minor note that shows you "talked to me". I actually appreciate your guidance and will keep advices, but this one situation just discourages me (and probably more people) in trying to act in a good faith and more to be ignorant borg, since even minor inconvenience can lead to you being in trouble (even when tried to act per rules and in good faith)
>dying after a first salicilic injection, while watching another person being actively beaten to death.
Like I said, couldnt manage everyone at once and tried to prevent harm in best of my abilities. Theres no list "you must have priority for someone other", since whole situation was a massive harm.
>Especially after you getting them into that situation by flashing them.
Cant understand this part, guy harmed other guy and got flashed for harm, while i tried to deal with future harm after.
>really being malicious, to establish a potential pattern. Henceforth if this is not gonna become a pattern, there should be very little issue with this note staying
The whole thing im appealing this note since I already had a decent note history for sillicons and dont want to make it worse, especially considering that I tried to act in good faith and follow laws as my best. Even if its just minor note that shows you "talked to me". I actually appreciate your guidance and will keep advices, but this one situation just discourages me (and probably more people) in trying to act in a good faith and more to be ignorant borg, since even minor inconvenience can lead to you being in trouble (even when tried to act per rules and in good faith)
-
LiarGG
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2022 11:45 pm
- Byond Username: LiarGG
Re: [LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
Okay I will have one more go at trying to explain why I think this note should stay.
First of all, sorry if this is something that's discouraging you from playing silicons. This note, as most low severy notes, is meant to be more of a remark on what we've discussed and clarified so that there is a paper trail in case similar things happen in the future/become a pattern. This on its own is meant to be more of an informative thing, rather than a warning.
On this note I'd like to address two things that feel odd in this appeal, and perhaps clarify a bit further.
First being the comment about Antoni being in crit:
This makes me feel like your reason for not intervening in this was not just about "playing suboptimally", but about not being fully aware of the policy that's supposed to be guiding those actions, which makes the situation more noteworthy, as it's not just about actions, but also about your reasoning.
With this in mind, I still feel like this note should stay.
First of all, sorry if this is something that's discouraging you from playing silicons. This note, as most low severy notes, is meant to be more of a remark on what we've discussed and clarified so that there is a paper trail in case similar things happen in the future/become a pattern. This on its own is meant to be more of an informative thing, rather than a warning.
On this note I'd like to address two things that feel odd in this appeal, and perhaps clarify a bit further.
First being the comment about Antoni being in crit:
Which, as mentioned by Iain, doesn't make them non-human, andAliceee2ch wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2024 7:39 pm I tried to prevent harm untill Antoni was beaten to crit, and therefore couldnt be human.
Well, it's not really about prioritizing "someone" but it's about prioritizing imminent harm. To quote the policyAliceee2ch wrote: ↑Sat Nov 02, 2024 11:54 pm Theres no list "you must have priority for someone other", since whole situation was a massive harm.
Yet it feels like you've, for one reason or another, decided to stop prioritizing a person that was actively being beaten to death, violating law 1 in my eyes.Stopping any immediate harm takes priority over stopping any future harm.
This makes me feel like your reason for not intervening in this was not just about "playing suboptimally", but about not being fully aware of the policy that's supposed to be guiding those actions, which makes the situation more noteworthy, as it's not just about actions, but also about your reasoning.
With this in mind, I still feel like this note should stay.
-
Aliceee2ch
- Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2024 10:07 pm
- Byond Username: Aliceee2ch
Re: [LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
Oh, about crit situation. My bad, I misinterpreted crit and death, but i mean death in that case, not crit.
>Yet it feels like you've, for one reason or another, decided to stop prioritizing a person that was actively being beaten to death, violating law 1 in my eyes.
Let's see what silpol tells about it:
"If faced with a situation in which human harm is all but guaranteed (Loose xenos, bombs, hostage situations, etc.), do your best and act in good faith and you'll be fine."
Did I act in good faith? Yes. Did I tried to stop harm from beginning? Absolutely. Am I fine? Not so. (despite its only minor note, but it's still a bit of a problem)
>Yet it feels like you've, for one reason or another, decided to stop prioritizing a person that was actively being beaten to death, violating law 1 in my eyes.
Let's see what silpol tells about it:
"If faced with a situation in which human harm is all but guaranteed (Loose xenos, bombs, hostage situations, etc.), do your best and act in good faith and you'll be fine."
Did I act in good faith? Yes. Did I tried to stop harm from beginning? Absolutely. Am I fine? Not so. (despite its only minor note, but it's still a bit of a problem)
-
LiarGG
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2022 11:45 pm
- Byond Username: LiarGG
Re: [LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
Hey there, sorry for a bit of radio silence. Ended up taking a break when the servers were down and kinda didn't come back around to pick this up again.
Regarding this appeal, I've taken some time to consider all the factors again, discussed this with other admins and ultimately came to a conclusion that this note should stay.
The reason for me pushing it past a verbal warning were big questionmarks regarding your thought process behind, what in my mind is, stopping to try and break the fight. With human harm as a consequence.
Just to address your final point, it's unclear whether this was a case of good faith/bad faith or a policy misunderstanding. Your appeal makes me think it was the latter, but I can't really say for sure, so I think the note should stay as a memo of this being talked through. Unless you plan on toeing the line regarding silicon play (not saying that happened in this situation) I don't think this will ever come into play in any admin decision.
I don't think this situation really fits that clause. You had one person being beaten to death in front of you and you decided that there is nothing you can do - but there were things you could do, like dragging the person away.
Be it a poor situational judgement, bad understanding of silipol with the crit thingy, or a case of bad faith play.. can't say for sure, can only note it when it happens for the offchance it's more than just a one off thing. And that's why I think the note should stay. I can notify the headmins if you still wish to dispute this note.
Regarding this appeal, I've taken some time to consider all the factors again, discussed this with other admins and ultimately came to a conclusion that this note should stay.
The reason for me pushing it past a verbal warning were big questionmarks regarding your thought process behind, what in my mind is, stopping to try and break the fight. With human harm as a consequence.
Just to address your final point, it's unclear whether this was a case of good faith/bad faith or a policy misunderstanding. Your appeal makes me think it was the latter, but I can't really say for sure, so I think the note should stay as a memo of this being talked through. Unless you plan on toeing the line regarding silicon play (not saying that happened in this situation) I don't think this will ever come into play in any admin decision.
I've always red this clause as "in case you cannot reasonably prevent harm, you won't be held liable for it happening". Ergo if you have like 5 people dying in medbay due to oxyloss, you are obligated to try to rescue at least one to be off the hook from "not saving the other 4". In a similar vein this clause could be invoked in a hostage situation where you know the hostage is gonna get harmed, but you get an order akin to "stay back or I will kill him". In this case it could protect you from both action or inaction, depending on what you ultimately do, cuz you can argue that both actions would lead to harm."If faced with a situation in which human harm is all but guaranteed (Loose xenos, bombs, hostage situations, etc.), do your best and act in good faith and you'll be fine."
I don't think this situation really fits that clause. You had one person being beaten to death in front of you and you decided that there is nothing you can do - but there were things you could do, like dragging the person away.
Be it a poor situational judgement, bad understanding of silipol with the crit thingy, or a case of bad faith play.. can't say for sure, can only note it when it happens for the offchance it's more than just a one off thing. And that's why I think the note should stay. I can notify the headmins if you still wish to dispute this note.
-
Justice12354
- In-Game Admin Trainer
- Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2021 1:41 am
- Byond Username: Justice12354
Re: [LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
Given that Aliceee has not replied to LiarGG's post for 6 days now and due to their inactivity lately, taking in consideration previous patterns, I will be closing this appeal in 7 days to give them time to return and still address this. They have also been notified about their appeal over Discord.
Spoiler:
-
Justice12354
- In-Game Admin Trainer
- Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2021 1:41 am
- Byond Username: Justice12354
Re: [LiarGG] Aliceee2ch - Sillicon note
Well, we haven't had any news of Aliceee in nearly a month and we cannot leave this appeal open forever. I hope that Aliceee is okay and, shall they return in the future, they may re-open this appeal.
Spoiler:
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users