/tg/Station 13

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2020 9:04 am**

Please post any positive or negative feedback for the administrator here.
This is not the place to discuss ban appeals, admin complaints, or ban requests.
This is for specific feedback for this administrator.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2020 2:11 pm**

Absolutely the kindest and most cool headed admin I've ever seen. I'm really glad they're here.

Posted: **Sat Aug 01, 2020 2:56 pm**

Very chill and helpful both in game and in admin chat, usually knows how to fix things when the game has a BYOND moment.

Posted: **Fri Aug 28, 2020 5:22 am**

Handled two tickets simultaneously, one of them having to do with an extremely log and truth muddled escalation situation, and did so professionally and quickly, while thoughtfully considering suggestions and information from a fellow admin. Already more suited to the work than most gameadmins are after a full 6 months of tenure.

Promote.

Posted: **Thu Sep 03, 2020 4:15 am**

Ferretmin
Agree with promote

Posted: **Thu Sep 03, 2020 11:41 pm**

Very Helpful.
Helped clarify and teach some VV edit stuff I was just too dumb to realize or see.
Hugs-The-Admin

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2020 1:26 am**

I had a pretty disappointing experience with Misdoubtful on Manuel.

A security officer with whom I had no previous interaction during the round shoved me onto the cafeteria counter while I was eating. They didn't say a word before doing that, and after doing so only gave me a generic insult (called me dishonourable or something similar). When I tried shoving the officer back, they stunbatonned me (actually giving me an injury) and arrested me. They didn't bother to answer why they were arresting me or why they had initiated a fight with me.

The player didn't even try to roleplay their aggression, like pretending to be drunk, or being hateful towards some characteristic of my character. It felt like the kind of fuckery that I'd expect from a LRP greytider trying to escalate a conflict. Before this event I had very little interaction with other characters, as I was performing organ extractions at the morgue since the round start, and had only went out of there to get something to eat.

I opened an ahelp about it and Misdoubtful responded, claiming they had witnessed what happened and would look into it. Meanwhile, we had arrived at the brig, and I kept asking why I was being arrested. The officer said I had started a bar fight, and in return I said it was them who attacked me in the first place. After a few moments of silence (in which I believe Misdoubtful must have asked them to let me go), they kicked me out of the brig and said I was not welcome there.

After that, Misdoubtful said they talked to the aggressor, and suggested that I could use the situation as a source of conflict in my round. I responded saying that behaviour like that isn't acceptable for security officers, specially in MRP. Misdoubtful once again tried to get me deal with them IC as it could be a fun conflict in their opinion. But the aggressor wasn't even trying to roleplay or at least give a hint of meaning to their actions.

I don't mind dying or getting fucked with in-game, and in most of the rounds I play usually I die in a stupid manner. I get into conflicts with other people (in which a lot of the time my character loses), but there is always an in-game reason for it, even if it's a silly one. As long as a good story can come out of it, it's fun for me. But I can't have that with someone who gives the impression that they're not interested in roleplaying and who's just power tripping while playing a role that should have at least some degree of responsibility.

I expressed my unhapiness with the situation and asked if the player had at least gotten a warning, and in turn Misdoubtful gave me a dodgy answer: "the issue has been dealt with, yes" (or something very close to this. Sorry, I don't have the log). I then responded saying that I could tell the player hadn't received a warning, and wanted them to confirm my suspicion. Then they said they couldn't answer that, to which in return I said they could (because AFAIK there isn't really rule that forbids them from doing so). Finally, they said that they did not like giving details of other people's tickets (even though it was MY ahelp ticket?) and wouldn't answer that, then closed the adminhelp.

I understand that a lot of the time there is reason not to punish a player for a single case of innapropriate behaviour, specially when it isn't something that completely ruins the round for someone else. It could've been a new player, or someone with absolutely no history of bad behaviour, et cetera. Misdoubtful could've suggested that was the case, but the way they dealt with the ahelp made it seem like they were acting too lenient or even being protective of the perpetrator.

I do not feel like this situation warrants a formal complaint, as I do not believe there was any real violation of admin conduct, nor was the offense by the player something that ruined the round for me. But the way Misdoubtful handled my ahelp was really bad IMO, and it left me quite a bit bothered. I'd appreciate a little more transparency and honesty from them in the future.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2020 2:04 am**

Space Panda wrote:I had a pretty disappointing experience with Misdoubtful on Manuel.

A security officer with whom I had no previous interaction during the round shoved me onto the cafeteria counter while I was eating. They didn't say a word before doing that, and after doing so only gave me a generic insult (called me dishonourable or something similar). When I tried shoving the officer back, they stunbatonned me (actually giving me an injury) and arrested me. They didn't bother to answer why they were arresting me or why they had initiated a fight with me.

The player didn't even try to roleplay their aggression, like pretending to be drunk, or being hateful towards some characteristic of my character. It felt like the kind of fuckery that I'd expect from a LRP greytider trying to escalate a conflict. Before this event I had very little interaction with other characters, as I was performing organ extractions at the morgue since the round start, and had only went out of there to get something to eat.

I opened an ahelp about it and Misdoubtful responded, claiming they had witnessed what happened and would look into it. Meanwhile, we had arrived at the brig, and I kept asking why I was being arrested. The officer said I had started a bar fight, and in return I said it was them who attacked me in the first place. After a few moments of silence (in which I believe Misdoubtful must have asked them to let me go), they kicked me out of the brig and said I was not welcome there.

After that, Misdoubtful said they talked to the aggressor, and suggested that I could use the situation as a source of conflict in my round. I responded saying that behaviour like that isn't acceptable for security officers, specially in MRP. Misdoubtful once again tried to get me deal with them IC as it could be a fun conflict in their opinion. But the aggressor wasn't even trying to roleplay or at least give a hint of meaning to their actions.

I don't mind dying or getting fucked with in-game, and in most of the rounds I play usually I die in a stupid manner. I get into conflicts with other people (in which a lot of the time my character loses), but there is always an in-game reason for it, even if it's a silly one. As long as a good story can come out of it, it's fun for me. But I can't have that with someone who gives the impression that they're not interested in roleplaying and who's just power tripping while playing a role that should have at least some degree of responsibility.

I expressed my unhapiness with the situation and asked if the player had at least gotten a warning, and in turn Misdoubtful gave me a dodgy answer: "the issue has been dealt with, yes" (or something very close to this. Sorry, I don't have the log). I then responded saying that I could tell the player hadn't received a warning, and wanted them to confirm my suspicion. Then they said they couldn't answer that, to which in return I said they could (because AFAIK there isn't really rule that forbids them from doing so). Finally, they said that they did not like giving details of other people's tickets (even though it was MY ahelp ticket?) and wouldn't answer that, then closed the adminhelp.

I understand that a lot of the time there is reason not to punish a player for a single case of innapropriate behaviour, specially when it isn't something that completely ruins the round for someone else. It could've been a new player, or someone with absolutely no history of bad behaviour, et cetera. Misdoubtful could've suggested that was the case, but the way they dealt with the ahelp made it seem like they were acting too lenient or even being protective of the perpetrator.

I do not feel like this situation warrants a formal complaint, as I do not believe there was any real violation of admin conduct, nor was the offense by the player something that ruined the round for me. But the way Misdoubtful handled my ahelp was really bad IMO, and it left me quite a bit bothered. I'd appreciate a little more transparency and honesty from them in the future.

This is the rule that allows admins to not reveal info about the ahelp:
6. In-game administration rulings are final.
Incidences of admin abuse, negligence or disputed rulings can be taken to the forums. If an admin says something was 'looked into, handled, resolved' etc, regarding an issue, it is unlikely an admin will provide any further information. Admins are under no obligation to reveal IC information. Deliberately lying or misrepresenting facts in adminhelps will be dealt with harshly.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2020 2:20 am**

Forgot about that one. I'm sorry.

Guess I should be upset about the rule instead.

Disregard my feedback.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2020 3:43 am**

Either way they acted fine, you shouldn’t run to admins every time something happens that you don’t like. Their character was obviously in the wrong, doubtful obviously told them off, and best of all encouraged you to do something ICly about it. Just because their brand of roleplay (none) doesn’t mix with yours doesn’t mean it’s fruitless to engage.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2020 7:20 am**

Space Panda wrote:words

Cheers on this don't disregard it there is certainly validity to it. This is the sort of feedback I'm looking for most, blanket goods and bads sadly don't leave much for improvement and insight.

Outside the IC interactions where you looked to the use of the cobweb infested court that could have potentially made what felt like a lackluster experience into something more worthwhile (and as you said I do wish it did play out this way), I do aim to keep the specifics of things like 'were they warned, noted, banned, etc' out of things. Its less about the ruling saying its okay and more about the principle of confidentiality, personally.

Things certainly could have been made a lot more clear on my approach to that in the 'heat of the moment' though. We all have our off days.

Posted: **Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:42 am**

They are without a doubt a great admin and makes sure the playerbase has the best round they deserve, with no interference from rule-breakers.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:10 pm**

Very knowledgeable and in between posting ferrets have impressively polished posts and comments. Whenever I'm proofreading they pop into my mind.

Also a great admin!

Posted: **Fri Sep 16, 2022 9:12 pm**

Ran absolutely deranged event on a MRP server where 'lul 2 supermatters' and 22 minutes in the shuttle was called as everyone could've forseen.
Much to the annoyance of most players.

Posted: **Fri Sep 16, 2022 9:23 pm**

Dax Dupont wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 9:12 pm Ran absolutely deranged event on a MRP server where 'lul 2 supermatters' and 22 minutes in the shuttle was called as everyone could've forseen.
Much to the annoyance of most players.

As both Magma and myself told you:

Having two SM's works just fine even with the standard setup
Engineering made the choice to do a custom engine setup that flopped
Engineering was unable to save their own setup
Their setup would have delammed regardless of whether there was one or two or three or ten SM's

You made the choice to behave like a child about it IC the entire round, next in OOC, then in the next rounds lobby, and finally threatened us both in ASAY.

I'm incredibly disappointed in the way you chose to behave here, and told you that you needed to chill.

I'd expect better of someone I admin with to not choose to throw a fit when a round doesn't go their way and use it an opportunity to whine, complain, and tinge the remainder of the round. Especially when that was something that gave engineering player agency to work around, and failed due how engineering choose to work around it. Measures were taken to ensure they had the tools to succeed with a basic setup. It was their prerogative to experiment.

I will not tolerate you making the elective decision to blame me for what those in engineering decided to do with it. Something that has been run multiple times on Manuel and never delammed when the crew didn't experiment with it the way it was now.

But I'll keep in mind your recommendation to do this sort of thing on only LRP and not MRP. Afterall, you're the subject matter expert on the mini event you elected to call grief.

I kindly urge that you reconsider this post over 24 hours, and look into the atmos logs for the round. The round ID for your convenience is: 190612

Posted: **Fri Sep 16, 2022 9:33 pm**

Misdoubtful wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 9:23 pm
Dax Dupont wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 9:12 pm Ran absolutely deranged event on a MRP server where 'lul 2 supermatters' and 22 minutes in the shuttle was called as everyone could've forseen.
Much to the annoyance of most players.
As both Magma and myself told you:

Having two SM's works just fine even with the standard setup
Engineering made the choice to do a custom engine setup that flopped
Engineering was unable to save their own setup
Their setup would have delammed regardless of whether there was one or two or three or ten SM's

You made the choice to behave like a child about it IC the entire round, next in OOC, then in the next rounds lobby, and finally threatened us both in ASAY.

I'm incredibly disappointed in the way you chose to behave here, and told you that you needed to chill.

I'd expect better of someone I admin with to not choose to throw a fit when a round doesn't go their way and use it an opportunity to whine, complain, and tinge the remainder of the round. Especially when that was something that gave engineering player agency to work around, and failed due how engineering choose to work around it. Measures were taken to ensure they had the tools to succeed with a basic setup. It was their prerogative to experiment.

I will not tolerate you making the elective decision to blame me for what those in engineering decided to do with it. Something that has been run multiple times on Manuel and never delammed when the crew didn't experiment with it the way it was now.

But I'll keep in mind your recommendation to do this sort of thing on LRP and MRP. Afterall, you're the subject matter expert on the mini event you elected to call grief.

I kindly urge that you reconsider this post over 24 hours, and look into the atmos logs for the round. The round ID for your convenience is: 190612

I did not threaten anyone, I asked what thread to post it in and didn't want to be forced to log dive. I am entitled like any player to voice my feedback, I had to ask again in asays because you didn't want to answer publicly in OOC which is not very transparent. A lot of players were understandingly annoyed and complaining about centcomm in IC. Spawning in two supermatters is dumb and carry a high risk for shorter rounds.

Posted: **Fri Sep 16, 2022 11:47 pm**

Dax Dupont wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 9:33 pm
Misdoubtful wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 9:23 pm
Dax Dupont wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 9:12 pm Ran absolutely deranged event on a MRP server where 'lul 2 supermatters' and 22 minutes in the shuttle was called as everyone could've forseen.
Much to the annoyance of most players.
As both Magma and myself told you:

Having two SM's works just fine even with the standard setup
Engineering made the choice to do a custom engine setup that flopped
Engineering was unable to save their own setup
Their setup would have delammed regardless of whether there was one or two or three or ten SM's

You made the choice to behave like a child about it IC the entire round, next in OOC, then in the next rounds lobby, and finally threatened us both in ASAY.

I'm incredibly disappointed in the way you chose to behave here, and told you that you needed to chill.

I'd expect better of someone I admin with to not choose to throw a fit when a round doesn't go their way and use it an opportunity to whine, complain, and tinge the remainder of the round. Especially when that was something that gave engineering player agency to work around, and failed due how engineering choose to work around it. Measures were taken to ensure they had the tools to succeed with a basic setup. It was their prerogative to experiment.

I will not tolerate you making the elective decision to blame me for what those in engineering decided to do with it. Something that has been run multiple times on Manuel and never delammed when the crew didn't experiment with it the way it was now.

But I'll keep in mind your recommendation to do this sort of thing on LRP and MRP. Afterall, you're the subject matter expert on the mini event you elected to call grief.

I kindly urge that you reconsider this post over 24 hours, and look into the atmos logs for the round. The round ID for your convenience is: 190612
I did not threaten anyone, I asked what thread to post it in and didn't want to be forced to log dive. I am entitled like any player to voice my feedback, I had to ask again in asays because you didn't want to answer publicly in OOC which is not very transparent. A lot of players were understandingly annoyed and complaining about centcomm in IC. Spawning in two supermatters is dumb and carry a high risk for shorter rounds.

I was hoping you'd think on this, and do some due diligence to research it over the course of 24 hours.

I'll post the atmos logs then (they do not include a picture of the SM being cooled by its own plasma, heat exchanges that were made, the SM not having freezer cooling and only having space cooling, and many other changes, nor do they include the engineer accidently hitting the SM with a pipe while setting things up, starting the delam):

► Show Spoiler

You let the event sour your experience during the round the moment you heard '2 sms'. You demanded to know who did the event and wanted an answer immediately, 60 seconds of waiting was 60 seconds was too long, you didn't wait more than 20 seconds to let someone answer. That wasn't cool.

Giving the players the agency to make those choices, have an interesting challenge, and mix up the norm even if it results in a shorter round, is not a problem to me and NEVER will be. Yes people that were frustrated IC that were not working on the engine. They did not experience what was going on in the engine room, nor know why the engine was delamming. The thing is though, they were frustrated IC, but not actually frustrated OOC. They weren't taking things into a new round lobby and onto the forums like you are now, nor were they complaining in OOC. The only person that was actually upset about it, was you, and that is unfortunate.

This was content for engineering, and engineering tackled the out of the ordinary situation. They did not shy from the challenge, nor shy from their right to make a wacky engine, and live with the consequences of their hubris.

You are absolutely entitled to your feedback, but I do not appreciate you leaving feedback like this driven by your frustration regarding an event you quite frankly, do not understand, did not make the effort to understand, and did not in the slightest attempt to play around or experience.

You very clearly let it taint your round from the very start, why?
You took the context of 2 sms, delam, must be the admins fault, and ran with it even when you were offered explanation by the both us that were present, why?

If you decide to want to have a full picture understanding of this, I invite you join me the next time I do this mini-event on Manuel to spice things up (and I will be doing it again) as an observer, so that you may understand that the risk of the double SM delaming is no higher than it normally is, unless the crew decides to be creative with what they are given, in which case it will be as high as it would normally be with any creative engine design. Unless you would rather take that burden of proof unto yourself, I am more than happy to.

There is going need to be some proof my method of doing two sm's is dumb and carries the risk for shorter rounds (without including how people playing interact with it) before I'm willing to even consider this.

/tg/Station 13

Misdoubtful

Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful

Re: Misdoubtful