[StickyMayhem]Roadhog-Saying "yes" then banning

[rdght91]

I attempted to address this in my ban appeal but it got locked so I guess I have to do it here. Apparently my notes and the history stick, which has some pretty bizarre implications involving how security and players are supposed to interact, but whatever. That's not the scope of this.

However, this complaint focuses upon the fact that Sticky said "yes" when I adminhelped if I could space a greytider without captain's/hos authorization and then banned for it after the fact and accused me of manipulating him to say yes. This is just silly. If you're not going to be clear, you better take responsibility for rather than ban me for not reading your mind.

[peoplearestrange]

All notes serve as a long term record, however they only generally reflect upon people with more recent issues. They help paint a picture of the player as opposed to being a permanent record of punishment. In otherwords admins will take in account more recent actions but will balance it up on whether they've known to change (many of our admins have notes from years ago, yet as a person have drasticly changed since then).

Anyway to address your point, there's obviously more than this as it seems somewhat doubtful that Sticky would say yes to allowing anyone to space a greytider without HoS/Cap permission.
But obviously we do take these appeals seriously and we'll look into it for you, I'll ask the admin in question to comment their side of the story and try to bring up some logs.

[Steelpoint]

Speaking under the 'Anon Amendment', also speaking from my long experience as a security player.

Firstly the following below is a full list of all crimes the perpetrator that the OP arrested allegedly broke.

• Code 101: Resisting Arrest
  (Failing to submit to arrest when arrested and actively fighting against being arrested)
• Code 211: Insubordination
  (Failing to preform their job to any capable degree)
• Code 301: Assault With A Deadly Weapon
  (Used deadly weapons in assaulting station personal, including a device capable of turning one into a monkey)
• Code 302: Assault Of A Officer
  (Assaulted a station Security Officer)
• Code 307: Sabotage
  (Went out of their way to prevent the crew from using vital station equipment, the cloning machine)
• Code 311: Dereliction Of Duty
  (Went above and beyond to avoid their primary duty to the station and crew)
• Potential Code 403: Attempted Murder
  (Can be argued that the suspect had clear intent to murder the Security Officer, and it has been noted that being turned into a monkey is a effective death sentence)

At this junction its clear to anyone that the sentence of execution was clear to be given to the suspect.

HOWEVER

What was not clear was the conflicting order given by the station Head of Security to not execute the suspect. Under normal circumstances this would have been the end of this scenario and the punishment against the OP would have been justified. But that's not the case here and there are three (3) extenuating scenarios that should exonerate the OP.

1: The rules clearly state that, and I quote, "Security reserve the right to carry out executions, without authorization, in the case of potential significant risk or extraordinary circumstances". As we all know, the fact that most of the brig was destroyed, let alone the mass destruction to the station, and the fact that the suspect in custody could not be trusted to be let free or be at risk of being freed due to his MULTIPLE attempts of assaulting the crew, made this a clear 'extraordinary circumstance' that ALLOWED the OP to execute without authorization.

2: The station's Head of Security clearly stated on the Sec Radio, and in the logs, that he was going off station and that he ceded his authority to a unknown third party. This means that not only did the Head of Security no longer have any relevant knowledge of station events but that he no longer had any Security authority since he ceded it away while he was off station. This means his countermand order to stay the execution was invalid.

3: A head administrator gave heavily implied carte blanch to the OP to do what he needed to do with the suspect. Said head administrator should have been more clear on his definition of "ok".

(I digress but I think that had the head administrator been far more clear, and less ambiguous, in his statements to the OP then this whole situation could have been avoided.)

I conclude that the ban and subsequent note against the OP is INVALID and should be removed and that the complaint against the head administrator, StickyMayhem, is a valid complaint.

---

Final note: Any head admin should be extremely careful of any in game rulings/bans they make. Because they are in a position of utter authority then anything they do, rushed or half-heartedly, will be taken as law by the playerbase, and at face value. Don't rush or just fob off a decision that could lead to greater negative implications. That or just ask a admin to look into it.

[peoplearestrange]

Except the officer themselves also committed a fair few crimes themselves, including breaking into an already manned department.
Not only that he also forceabley removed a player from the round, the geneticist actually caught wrap for this as well and was week banned.


HOWEVER all that said, including what you've said steelpoint, is all irrelevant to this actual complaint. This is a complaint of HOW an admin dealt with the situation. I ask you not to bring in material, or reference that applies to the ban appeal. That is a different matter which can be reopened if necessary.

In other words, please remain on topic of the actual admin complaint if you wish to comment at all.

[Steelpoint]

Either way my final point still stands, as a head admin (or admin in general) you need to be very precise in how you approach a situation. In the few time's I've been a admin candidate I was always encouraged to be precise and attentive to each individual case. But in this scenario it seems little attention was given which led to a outcome that, while not intended, was implied to be a option.

[rdght91]

Except the officer themselves also committed a fair few crimes themselves, including breaking into an already manned department.

I'd say that's the only crime I committed and that's pretty debatable, but anyway that's not what this thread is about.

[onleavedontatme]

Apparently Sticky did not actually read the logs of the situation.

[ABearInTheWoods]

STP learned of this a few days after words, so sticky not mentioning something isn't really noteworthy here.

However, this complaint focuses upon the fact that Sticky said "yes" when I adminhelped if I could space a greytider without captain's/hos authorization

You adminhelped "so and so doing so and so gives me a little leeway right?

Bolded relevant part.

edit: full admin help:

PM to-Admins: Just be clear, someone trying to monkey me several times and ignoring all warnings gives me a little leeway right?

I keep seeing "sticky should have been more clear when he replied" and I'm gonna turn that back around on you.

You should have been more clear about what you were trying to get permission for. Sticky interpreted that to mean harm batoning, fucking with them, maybe lasering them if they were coming at you and you had no other way out. But not flat out spacing somebody you already had in cuffs.

I'm not gonna play this "the admin should have been more clear" game. No, the admin helper should have been more clear, they initiated the conversation, they were the one who wanted permission to do something, they should bear the responsibility to not make vague adminhelps than get off scott free because the replying admin misinterpreted their vague as fuck adminhelp.


"a little leeway"

How the fuck is spacing somebody you had in cuffs and posed no immediate danger to you "a little leeway". That is ALOT of leeway.

Like, I get why you are frustrated with how this turned out, but come on man, You have to take some responsibility.

[Stickymayhem]

The geneticist hadn't actually hit you at any point with what is effectively a non-lethal object. Geneticists are capable of monkeying and humanizing people at the drop of a hat so it's in no way fair to call it a deadly weapon or actually lethal in this circumstance. Just like with succumbing, we always have to assume the best when the results of something are up for speculation. It's completely unfair to do it any other way.

A little leeway is very innocent phrasing for what you intended to do. Yeah I should have been more specific but for once I made the error of assuming a player would be reasonable. I know you're an experienced player and I know you know better than to throw someone into space when they are entirely incapacitated and the HoS is denying an execution.

I don't want to have to be utterly specific about everything because most players do have common sense enough to be reasonable. I understand you thought you were acting on my word but the leap from that to outright murder is pretty far.

In any case I'll be completely specific from now on.

[TheNightingale]

The geneticist hadn't actually hit you at any point with what is effectively a non-lethal object. Geneticists are capable of monkeying and humanizing people at the drop of a hat so it's in no way fair to call it a deadly weapon or actually lethal in this circumstance. Just like with succumbing, we always have to assume the best when the results of something are up for speculation. It's completely unfair to do it any other way.

A monkey SE is about as 'non-lethal' as forceborging someone is. Even more so, considering player monkeys are usually KOS due to the changeling meta.

For someone who's been monkeyed, there are (simplified) two options:
- Genetics humanises them.
- They're killed.

Somehow, I don't see that last one happening. Assuming the best would mean it's alright to kill someone and hide them in a locker, because you might come back for them and clone them eventually.

[Scones]

The geneticist hadn't actually hit you at any point with what is effectively a non-lethal object. Geneticists are capable of monkeying and humanizing people at the drop of a hat so it's in no way fair to call it a deadly weapon or actually lethal in this circumstance. Just like with succumbing, we always have to assume the best when the results of something are up for speculation. It's completely unfair to do it any other way.

A monkey SE is about as 'non-lethal' as forceborging someone is. Even more so, considering player monkeys are usually KOS due to the changeling meta.

Nightingale is absolutely correct, Sticky - Maybe you've never been monkied by genetics but it's about as close to a death sentence as it gets. There is no way for you to regain humanity without the help of another human, and the majority of the crew now wants to kill and/or cannot communicate with you because universal translator recorder things are not very common. A monkey SE is pretty much a fucking lethal escalation because if it goes through, you're dead.

We ban people for non-antag monkeying for precisely this reason. Seriously, I agree that an experienced player should not be killing people without authorization after they're incapacitated but I find this particular line of justification to be flimsy at best and outright objectivley false at worst. A monkey SE is a serious thing. People will not attempt to humanize you.

[Falamazeer]

Especially since the monkey-er is the guy in charge of the machinery that would be required to fix it.

This whole judgement sets a precedent and a rule that makes security undoable after a certain point in many rounds, and go's completely against the rules as they have been presented thus far, If you're going to enact and enforce a rule change like that, you have a duty to make an alternative, and you definately can't make the rule AS you punish someone for breaking it.

[rdght91]

I attempted to address this in my ban appeal but it got locked so I guess I have to do it here. Apparently my notes and the history stick, which has some pretty bizarre implications involving how security and players are supposed to interact, but whatever. That's not the scope of this.

However, this complaint focuses upon the fact that Sticky said "yes" when I adminhelped if I could space a greytider without captain's/hos authorization and then banned for it after the fact and accused me of manipulating him to say yes. This is just silly. If you're not going to be clear, you better take responsibility for rather than ban me for not reading your mind.

Your ban appeal has been approved due to a very recent rule change.
I will remove the notes when I get the chance.

Thanks!

Consider it closed then I guess.

[Sometinyprick]

I attempted to address this in my ban appeal but it got locked so I guess I have to do it here. Apparently my notes and the history stick, which has some pretty bizarre implications involving how security and players are supposed to interact, but whatever. That's not the scope of this.

However, this complaint focuses upon the fact that Sticky said "yes" when I adminhelped if I could space a greytider without captain's/hos authorization and then banned for it after the fact and accused me of manipulating him to say yes. This is just silly. If you're not going to be clear, you better take responsibility for rather than ban me for not reading your mind.

Your ban appeal has been approved due to a very recent rule change.
I will remove the notes when I get the chance.

Thanks!

Consider it closed then I guess.

Sorry no, I mean this admin complaint continue to argue sure I will read it all in full tomorrow but I was being dumb and rash when I said that, I think the ban was bad but even if the rule is changed it's irrelevant
sorry dude.

[Falamazeer]

Soooooo... Bascially sticky is digging in his heels?
Again, it's not right to change a rule, notify nobody, then punish people for breaking it.

Not to even mention it's a fucking shitty stupid thing to change.

[Sometinyprick]

Soooooo... Bascially sticky is digging in his heels?
Again, it's not right to change a rule, notify nobody, then punish people for breaking it.

Not to even mention it's a fucking shitty stupid thing to change.

No he is not, and not to blame for my decision.
The rule always existed, he is not the one who brought it in.

[rdght91]

I attempted to address this in my ban appeal but it got locked so I guess I have to do it here. Apparently my notes and the history stick, which has some pretty bizarre implications involving how security and players are supposed to interact, but whatever. That's not the scope of this.

However, this complaint focuses upon the fact that Sticky said "yes" when I adminhelped if I could space a greytider without captain's/hos authorization and then banned for it after the fact and accused me of manipulating him to say yes. This is just silly. If you're not going to be clear, you better take responsibility for rather than ban me for not reading your mind.

Your ban appeal has been approved due to a very recent rule change.
I will remove the notes when I get the chance.

Thanks!

Consider it closed then I guess.

Sorry no, I mean this admin complaint continue to argue sure I will read it all in full tomorrow but I was being dumb and rash when I said that, I think the ban was bad but even if the rule is changed it's irrelevant
sorry dude.

The fuck? Whatever, I give up anyway. Can you at least remove my note? I think that's fair given how convoluted this is.

[Sometinyprick]

I attempted to address this in my ban appeal but it got locked so I guess I have to do it here. Apparently my notes and the history stick, which has some pretty bizarre implications involving how security and players are supposed to interact, but whatever. That's not the scope of this.

However, this complaint focuses upon the fact that Sticky said "yes" when I adminhelped if I could space a greytider without captain's/hos authorization and then banned for it after the fact and accused me of manipulating him to say yes. This is just silly. If you're not going to be clear, you better take responsibility for rather than ban me for not reading your mind.

Your ban appeal has been approved due to a very recent rule change.
I will remove the notes when I get the chance.

Thanks!

Consider it closed then I guess.

Sorry no, I mean this admin complaint continue to argue sure I will read it all in full tomorrow but I was being dumb and rash when I said that, I think the ban was bad but even if the rule is changed it's irrelevant
sorry dude.

The fuck? Whatever, I give up anyway. Can you at least remove my note? I think that's fair given how convoluted this is.

I'd rather stick to the point of the complaint to start.
Yes sticky did say yes, but his intent was not communicated to you it seems, as mso put there is a difference between a little leeway and a lot of leeway.

On the point of the note you did break a rule which is in limbo at the moment due my poor communication skills (I do apologise)
but the rule itself is
Executions are to be authorized by the captain or acting captain, if avaiable. If neither are available, it is up to the HoS or acting HoS. If security are in agreement that the captain is a condom, they may skip to the HoS, but whoever that is will be held accountable if they authorize shitty executions without understanding fully the crimes.

[Falamazeer]

Executions are to be authorized by the captain or acting captain, if avaiable. If neither are available, it is up to the HoS or acting HoS. If security are in agreement that the captain is a condom, they may skip to the HoS, but whoever that is will be held accountable if they authorize shitty executions without understanding fully the crimes.

And yet even the wiki clears extraordinary circumstances on the space law page under use of deadly force. https://tgstation13.org/wiki//index.php ... &section=4

4/5 of those conditions were met in which it was acceptable

Non-Lethal Weapons Ineffective-This is an example that was meant for hulks and mechs, as it says, but non-lethal weapons had also proved ineffective as he'd stunned him and left him as a warning, and he came back with a vengeance.

Severe Personal Risk- The examples given are space, fire,wizards and changelings where normal arrests cannot be made due to the targets capability, or an inability to arrest due to enviromental concerns, but the man had proven he constituted a clear severe personal risk against the officer.

Armed and Dangerous - Speaks for itself, doesn't it?

Multiple Hostiles - Him and another officer got medbay rioted over this guy if you read the first thread.

And the fifth one is code red, which I have no knowledge of. Basically, if you aren't allowed to violate your provably retarded HoS (Flew into space at round start and gave his power up)
orders, and space a hostile, When the fuck can you?



tl;dr you have conflicting rules, rules where it says you NEED permission, and rules where you don't, seems like one is being followed, and the other ignored, as well as years of precedent here where if you fuck with someone hard enough, you can't cry about getting dunked.

[peoplearestrange]

Executions are to be authorized by the captain or acting captain, if avaiable. If neither are available, it is up to the HoS or acting HoS. If security are in agreement that the captain is a condom, they may skip to the HoS, but whoever that is will be held accountable if they authorize shitty executions without understanding fully the crimes.

And yet even the wiki clears extraordinary circumstances on the space law page under use of deadly force. https://tgstation13.org/wiki//index.php ... &section=4

4/5 of those conditions were met in which it was acceptable

Non-Lethal Weapons Ineffective-This is an example that was meant for hulks and mechs, as it says, but non-lethal weapons had also proved ineffective as he'd stunned him and left him as a warning, and he came back with a vengeance.

Severe Personal Risk- The examples given are space, fire,wizards and changelings where normal arrests cannot be made due to the targets capability, or an inability to arrest due to enviromental concerns, but the man had proven he constituted a clear severe personal risk against the officer.

Armed and Dangerous - Speaks for itself, doesn't it?

Multiple Hostiles - Him and another officer got medbay rioted over this guy if you read the first thread.

And the fifth one is code red, which I have no knowledge of. Basically, if you aren't allowed to violate your provably retarded HoS (Flew into space at round start and gave his power up)
orders, and space a hostile, When the fuck can you?



tl;dr you have conflicting rules, rules where it says you NEED permission, and rules where you don't, seems like one is being followed, and the other ignored, as well as years of precedent here where if you fuck with someone hard enough, you can't cry about getting dunked.

Except when he was finally executed he was non of these these.

He was in a straight jacket. So harmless, he had no weapons on him to add to personal risk and was not armed or dangerous.

[TheNightingale]

The 'Use of Deadly Force' is for "diffus[ing] a situation" involving the circumstances above: that is to say, 'when can an Officer laser someone in combat?'. This comes under executions, and raises two questions:

First, was the execution legal, given the circumstances of the Brig and the denial by the HoS?
Second, is breaking Space Law (if, indeed, this was done) an IC matter? What if the HoS had said yes?

[Falamazeer]

And as there was nowhere to put him...?
What would he have been after he was released? either victorious, or all four things I stated before.

He had no other way to diffuse the situation that I can see, the guy wouldn't stop trying, just because he sucked ass at trying to fight the security officer doesn't make him less of a threat, anyone can out robust anyone if they don't see it coming. or are caught doing something else.

[tedward1337]

I attempted to address this in my ban appeal but it got locked so I guess I have to do it here. Apparently my notes and the history stick, which has some pretty bizarre implications involving how security and players are supposed to interact, but whatever. That's not the scope of this.

However, this complaint focuses upon the fact that Sticky said "yes" when I adminhelped if I could space a greytider without captain's/hos authorization and then banned for it after the fact and accused me of manipulating him to say yes. This is just silly. If you're not going to be clear, you better take responsibility for rather than ban me for not reading your mind.

Your ban appeal has been approved due to a very recent rule change.
I will remove the notes when I get the chance.

Thanks!

Consider it closed then I guess.

Sorry no, I mean this admin complaint continue to argue sure I will read it all in full tomorrow but I was being dumb and rash when I said that, I think the ban was bad but even if the rule is changed it's irrelevant
sorry dude.

I love being rash about things

[Stickymayhem]

The 'Use of Deadly Force' is for "diffus[ing] a situation" involving the circumstances above: that is to say, 'when can an Officer laser someone in combat?'. This comes under executions, and raises two questions:

First, was the execution legal, given the circumstances of the Brig and the denial by the HoS?
Second, is breaking Space Law (if, indeed, this was done) an IC matter? What if the HoS had said yes?

Space law is an IC guideline and never OOC justification. If the HoS had said yes this ban wouldn't have occurred.

The execution by our current standards was not legal, based on the denial of the HoS. The Head of Security has full rights, when the Captain is out of commission or communication, to determine every execution. It is one of the few concrete powers he has. This has been the case for a long time and I've been arguing to keep that rule as it is. It may not do this edge case complete justice but it has server us well a long time.

The use of deadly force by an officer should only be in the case of permitted execution or immediate harm where there is no other reasonable option. Being attacked by a group where it would be impossible to safely cuff and extract someone, or by an antagonist that can escape cuffs/is still dangerous in them like changelings, traitors who have already demonstrated use of implants, team antags, wizards and so on. Not having any cuffs LEFT is also a reasonable excuse, but deliberately or negligently not having any would generally not be acceptable, and being careful not to outright kill them would usually be the norm in a situation like that. These are not exhaustive examples but they give the general idea.

[Tsaricide]

Lethal force during contact is authorized when the security force faces a significant risk, now or later, by resorting to non-lethal means.
Now or LATER it says, so was there a future threat with the geneticist?

Lethal force is not allowed on appropriately subdued threats, unless there are extraordinary circumstances.
Extraordinary circumstances like maybe not having a brig? I have no idea the state of the entire brig, was it just the permabrig bombed or the front brig cells?

[Stickymayhem]

Lethal force during contact is authorized when the security force faces a significant risk, now or later, by resorting to non-lethal means.
Now or LATER it says, so was there a future threat with the geneticist?

Later refers to the antagonists potential to get free. Changelings, for example, are nigh impossible to contain so you can freely kill them on the spot just like the other antags I mentioned

Once a human is cuffed they are no longer a threat.

[Tsaricide]

But with no brig what was he expected to do? Drag the guy around the entire time? Unless there is a safe place to put him then there is still a chance he will escape.

[onleavedontatme]

It's a fucking videogame not a real police force, one guy was being a murderous asshole and the other player killed him. After five threads of yelling and novels about space law there have not been answers to two very simple questions

1. What is the appropriate action to take when the brig no longer exists?

2. Why should the rules be followed so blindly as to protect a rule breaking player who was trying to ruin the game for several other people? This isn't a real life cop executing someone it's a player being banned for removing a rulebreaker for five minutes from a fucking videogame

[Falamazeer]

Couldn't say how badly it was bombed, But as far as a future threat with the geneticist, he proved he wasn't letting it go after he got left behind bucklecuffed in medbay and returned for more.

Also, the HoS was in space and left some "red lizard guy" in charge, and if you read the logs, kinda seemed a bit retarded anyways.

I'm actually less concerned about this one individual case, and more concerned with this line in the sand in general, Because situations like this, brig is gone, command is absent or retarded, or gone with the brig, and you got a shitler in cuffs you can't do anything with. the fuck am I supposed to do?

Can't fight the station, and the admins at the same time bro, I'd need like... Four more tasers at least, preferably at round start.

[Stickymayhem]

It's not his decision. That's the point. If the HoS or whoever in charge didn't want someone killed, then the officer can ask him for an alternative since he is responsible.

If the HoS can't think of a single place on the station for the dude to be kept (Medbay recovery rooms, converting almost any room with access, straightjacketing) then he can get let go.

The HoS makes the call, and while the correct solution is debatable depending on the circumstances, the next step most certainly is not to immediately go "fuck it I'll space him anyway."

As for your second question Kor, both players were being shit in my opinion so I don't entirely agree with that statement, but for the sake of argument rules like this serve an important purpose, several in fact, and weakening it with edge cases where you have to reach an event horizon of shitlery and you are suddenly and permanently valid for the rest of the round no matter what is just a plain bad idea. It's going to raise questions about where that line is, and eventually become more limiting than what we have now, if not as strict.

That's also why I'm against removing the rule in it's entirety.

[Saegrimr]

What's the difference between straightjacketing someone in maint while the shuttle is on its way and the station is half destroyed, never to be seen again, and spacing someone who is only going to make more problems for the security team?

The hopes that someone might find him?

[Falamazeer]

If you're ruling is to find a room and ditch them and hope they won't come back
then it's clear we're arguing for no reason as we obviously aren't on the same server.

Because locking people in random rooms is worthless for the same reason beepsky is worthless, people uncuff prisoners all the time without ever even asking a question, why? because 'fuck da police'

[onleavedontatme]

It's not his decision. That's the point. If the HoS or whoever in charge didn't want someone killed, then the officer can ask him for an alternative since he is responsible.

If the HoS can't think of a single place on the station for the dude to be kept (Medbay recovery rooms, converting almost any room with access, straightjacketing) then he can get let go.

The HoS makes the call, and while the correct solution is debatable depending on the circumstances, the next step most certainly is not to immediately go "fuck it I'll space him anyway."

As for your second question Kor, both players were being shit in my opinion so I don't entirely agree with that statement, but for the sake of argument rules like this serve an important purpose, several in fact, and weakening it with edge cases where you have to reach an event horizon of shitlery and you are suddenly and permanently valid for the rest of the round no matter what is just a plain bad idea. It's going to raise questions about where that line is, and eventually become more limiting than what we have now, if not as strict.

That's also why I'm against removing the rule in it's entirety.

I'm not asking for a hypothetical HoS's opinion on what to do with a prisoner, I am asking you, the person in charge of all our rules, what a security officer should do with a prisoner during code delta when the brig no longer exists.

Also in regards to "if we allow one edge case to slip through rule of law will be dead and the server will descend into griff"

Anyway we're pretty much all reasonable people. When it gets to the point that admins accept they got a bit overzealous with buttons it's going to calm down.

Admins don't need clearly defined rules but players do apparently.

[lumipharon]

Sticky, the part of the rules regarding lethal/non-lethal force is not relevant. What is relevant is the part regarding unauthorised executions, and the circumstances under which it is ok.

> Security reserve the right to carry out executions, without authorization, in the case of potential significant risk or extraordinary circumstances.

Firstly, as people have said, the HoS had fucked off long ago and given up his authority or whatever,so he shouldn't even be relevant.
Secondly, brig/station is bombed to shit.
Thirdly, the guy has repeatedly attempted to monkey him/lynch him/dereliction of duty etc etc.

If this is not grounds for an unauthorised execution, what the hell is?

[rdght91]

How was I being a shit before I spaced him? And even if I was, that has nothing to do with this.

Anyway, this thread is to focus on ONE simple part of this. I asked you for clarification, you said yes, then "lol no you didn't ask right banned." It was REALLY obvious what I was asking you in context. I had literally asked the HOS over the radio one line above if I could toss him out the airlock.

[Jeb]

Sticky what the fuck man.

It was Pax that was the HoS, all Pax said was IM OUTSIDE THE STATION OLE.

He cannot effectively be consulted for shit at that point, hes in fucking space dicking around with a hardsuit.

So let it be known that you can't space douchebags under extreme circumstances, but you can straightjacket them and leave them to rot in maintenance.

It's a bad ban, a bad call, and it's showing that we're going to have 6 months of a shitty headmin that needs to learn that sometimes he needs to accept he's wrong and not continuously try to spew bullshit that says "guys im rite"

[TheNightingale]

Space law is an IC guideline and never OOC justification. If the HoS had said yes this ban wouldn't have occurred.

If Space Law is an IC guideline, why does it matter whether the HoS approved or not (therefore making the execution legal under Space Law)?

[lumipharon]

space law itself is IC, but the part about asking the cap or hos for executions is also in the ooc rules.

[Sometinyprick]

Yes lumipharon is correct it is an ooc rule.
Now the problem here is that we are going back to a clearly defined rule to ban someone who killed a guy who was clearly being a dick. Now in this case It would be good if we could be more flexible and make exceptions when someone has a really good reason to kill somebody for being a dick like this when playing as security and has less options than he normally would for subduing him.

[rdght91]

I request this be closed. I doubt anything productive is going to come of this, everyone has dug in their heels, everyone is bringing in the drama from the other sticky-releated stuff and I don't want to be known only as some "anti-admin" guy.

[peoplearestrange]

Closed as requested by OP. PM me or another admin if this needs to be reopened.