Retequizzle

Two things. One, I was the admin who banned you with the closing remark of "take a break, bud". And, you're right, I should not pretend that we're friends and will not do so in the future since this apparently bothered you with the phrasing. Given how many times you've lost your shit in deadchat and OOC about how a round goes, it seemed appropriate. Secondly, here's a summary of your notes as you requested while I type up a proper response to your wall of text. Of the 21 notes logged/attached to your account in some way, almost all of them have to do with you either self-antagging or antagging through various means, and while I will acknowledge that most of these resulted in you correcting the behavior after the fact, it also goes without saying that you have a novella of notes that would have gotten anyone else banned for the same behavior you frequently exhibit. However, since you yourself have said that the ban itself doesn't bother you, and since we can all agree the basic premise of an appeal is to, y'know, dispute the relevancy of a ban, I will be locking this thread until I do get time to address your points.

We periodically sweep through logs for things that slipped through the cracks, like this: Reason for the ban could have been a bit more specific, but in the future, watch the language and there won't be issues. Ban will be lifted shortly.

For clarification's sake, I was not aware that you were banned when I put you back on the whitelist, and should have no bearing one way or the other on your ban considering the whitelist issue was an oversight on my part to begin with rather than a signal that you would be unbanned for anything you did beyond that initial issue.

Please follow the template for appeals.

You were informed on your last appeal that you were banned for a minimum of six months and require a voucher of good behavior from another SS13/SS14 server, before you would even be considered for an appeal - this is not optional. You're also technically two days early, since you were told you could not appeal before December 21st, 2022, but I digress. You do not seem to have any kind of voucher attached to this appeal despite being advised you would need one. Considering this is also a copypaste of your previous appeal that you originally posted on October 2nd, we will be denying the appeal at this time. Come back in two days with a voucher of good behavior from another SS13/SS14 server if you want a more favorable response.

I understand your willingness to help, but it's hard to parse through who is speaking Russian because they want to help and who is speaking Russian because they don't know any better. Your ban will be lifted momentarily, I apologize for the inconvenience.

Going to completely ignore the ahelp allegation that you were originally banned for because that is still being discussed internally, but also because I find your actions in this round fascinating for all the wrong reasons. I did a bit of reviewing/"piecing the round together" based off of logs (primarily your interactions and the interactions of your victim who happened to be a security officer). Going to recap the story based on what the logs are telling me. You're welcome to provide your side of things for contextual purposes. Before I start, bear in mind this all took place over the span of about 15 minutes, from when you joined until your ahelp after being killed. You joined this game as a passenger and within moments, proceeded to arm up with the warden's tacit approval, due to a supposed nukie threat. For the sake of argument, I will assume the nukie threat was real, or at the very least actionable enough to open the armory to general crew. You arm up with a sec suit, laser rifle, Kammerer (shotgun), a box worth of shotgun shells, the works. You're probably packing just as much heat as the nukies would be as a single passenger. A few minutes goes by, you then proceed to cop an attitude when other security officers basically ask you to return the gear. For clarity's sake, by this point you had not fired a single shot nor taken a single lick of damage, so I am going to proceed under the assumption that the threat had passed, meaning sec requesting the gear back was well within their right to do. Instead of relinquishing the gear and avoiding the whole problem, you were overly combative over this and ultimately ended up gunning down the security officer who kept trying to remove your equipment, thus choosing to be an active threat. I would like to assume security detained you at that point, given your line "Okay, now you can arrest me". Again, all within 15 minutes. Operating under the assumption that you chose to be an active threat at that point, and that security has two braincells and communicated over radio that you just shot someone, why wouldn't the CMO have reason to believe you were going to go for broke with the axe you just picked up/stole (depending on perspective) and then choose to obliterate your shit at the first possible moment?

Apologies for the delay, with everyone settling in for the Thanksgiving holiday stateside it's taking a bit longer than usual to process the more complex ahelps. Your appeal will be addressed once we've reached a conclusion.

In the interest of transparency, the alleged ahelp where you claim the admin was unpleasant and did not explain the breakdown of the recently updated ruleset will be posted below: Rather than weigh in independently on the situation at this point, I'd just like to point out as an aside - instead of arguing with the admin you're disagreeing with via ahelps, I would like to highly encourage you to reach out to @mirrorcult in the event you have any issues with how an admin handles a decision in the future. She's the head administrator, specifically for these sorts of situations. Regardless of how this appeal turns out, you largely brought the situation on yourself by reacting the way you did.

It's not that we disallow VPNs, usually it just means that someone who was trying to evade bans or caused trouble previously used a similar VPN. If you're able to identify a VPN that hasn't been caught in a datacenter ban, you are welcome to use it. That said, since I literally just saw you in-game playing the piano (nice Careless Whisper midi btw), I'll go ahead and close this.

We spoke with the admin who oversaw the situation and after reviewing the logs, here's the breakdown: Despite me strongly believing you had more to do with this than what is alleged, I'm going to overlook that and go with what we can prove based on your own admittance - that you did indeed build the doors that ended up crushing multiple players. Whether you did tamper with the doors or not is not going to be factored into the appeal decision. We do not believe that you are someone who griefs for the sake of griefing, or else your ban history would have picked up much sooner than it did (3 bans in the span of a month, while you've been an active player since May). While the recent uptick is concerning, we're going to give you one more chance within the community. This appeal is accepted and your ban has been lifted. Bear in mind that even though the appeal is accepted, you are still on very thin ice.

That's... not why. Unless Moony has said elsewhere, you were appeal-banned presumably because this was your third ban. That is standard policy for all players - third ban, automatic appeal ban. Once again, here is a screenshot of the ban reason. Nowhere does it say it's just to talk to you. Please stop pretending otherwise. You've still yet to really address this ban other than saying "I promise I won't do it again" which to be blunt, is not good enough since you've abused the ahelp system in some fashion twice now.

Barring going through and addressing each issue point by point, you make multiple attempts to point out that it was someone else who did it but at no point are you able to provide a name, even in the video you submitted to demonstrate what actually happened. Let us assume any one of us is to believe you are innocent insofar as you knowingly sabotaging the doors to make a human mulcher. We're still searching for a literal needle in a haystack of information here for what actually happened. To that end, you're also still complicit for building the structures in the first place that led to this occurring, so you'd still be held responsible on that front. I'll let another admin address the actual content of the appeal, but if you're going to ask us to believe you in saying "it wasn't me, it was someone else", the least you could do is provide more information about who that someone else is or anything substantiating that claim other than a 12 second clip with literally no indication of who that person is other than an engineer.

So two things. First, you were banned in July, specifically July 23rd. It is now November 10th. It has not been "6 or 9 months" since you were banned, it's been four. Second, you attempted to bypass your ban an hour after you were banned to begin with. And again in August. And again in October. AND again today. So any amount of good faith you might have had got thrown out the window about four months ago, and you've been pretty good about making sure we don't have a reason to trust you by so diligently checking to see if you can log in on your alt account on an almost monthly basis. Appeal denied, you may appeal again in six months from today (no sooner than May 10th, 2023), preferably with a voucher of good behavior from another SS13/SS14 server.

I know what I'm talking about. Unless you'd like to try and say someone else is masquerading as "Custodian" at this point, it's your third ban.

Third ban in 4 months.

Going to put the ahelp in question that got you in trouble here, just so we're on the same page: You've been banned before specifically for behavior in ahelps (last time was raging because no one was available to answer your ahelp specifically, wherein you referred to admins as "cunts"), so this seems to be a problem point for you. If you were to be unbanned, how would we be assured that you wouldn't just continue to use ahelps to either vent, make "jokes", or otherwise use the system in a way it's not meant for?

Would you like to explain why you made an account after you were banned, called "ryan_chow", instead of coming here and just explaining it was you and not blaming your friend?

This is also within the last six weeks, since their first connection was 9/17/22. Contextually speaking, they were averaging almost two major issues a week, with at least half of them being just related to actions they took as a Command role.

To be fair, he's not. I applied an appeal-only ban as of last night after reviewing his account, his notes, and his ahelp history. It should be updated on his end now, for some reason the ban message doesn't display all bans, just the one that was first applied until it expires.

Gonna go ahead and close this due to recent round events escalating to an overall role ban from Command as well an overall ban from the game that will need to be appealed. The Command ban now encompasses your QM position, so you will have to appeal the Command ban at a later date.

Regardless of whether or not you were attempting to bypass your ban by using an alt, having multiple accounts for one person is still against the rules. So even if this appeal is accepted, you will still have to have one of your accounts banned. For the most part, you are correct in stating that Waldrop was created long before you were banned, but that is neither here nor there at this point. To that end, I do question whether or not you genuinely misclicked trying to connect with your Waldrop account - within 3 minutes of being banned on Slavovski, you were documented trying to connect to a Wizard's Den server while logged into Waldrop. Meaning at some point you had to log out of "Slavovski" and into "Waldrop", or have a separate client setup to log into "Waldrop", and then attempt to connect to a server. Hopefully you see why this would lead me to believe you were bypassing your ban, whether it was a misclick or not. As the admin who processed the escalated ban, I will defer to the other admins on whether or not this appeal should be accepted. I appreciate your patience in the meantime.

I'm going to go ahead and accept this appeal, since I accepted your friend's appeal as well. Do keep in mind that being new does not excuse not knowing what is and is not against the rules, so be sure to read the rules when you do log back in. If this happens again, your next appeal will have to be a lot better than this. Have fun, your ban will be lifted shortly.

You seem to understand what it is you did wrong and why we ask players not to communicate outside of the game. Your note history details a lot of greytiding behavior but not much else, and if you were intent on being a shitter with this you'd have done so sooner. Going to go ahead and accept this appeal. Please do not do it again, and be sure to give the rules a once over with your friend so you can both continue playing together. Your ban will be lifted shortly.

Given the circumstances, I don't believe it will be necessary. However, be advised that just for transparency and for simplicity, the account you made the appeal on will be banned from the game so there's no confusion in the future. To clarify a few points you made though: I do understand there's going to be points in a round where you'll see someone do something stupid and tread into self-antag behavior, but that still doesn't mean that it's allowed. Stealing shoes is pretty harmless by most accounts, with the exception of walking on broken glass (which does slip/stun players) but I don't believe you had any ill intent with that. Additionally, considering I have outright made an admeme out of clowns stealing shoes in several games, I don't believe that alone would constitute being labeled as "self-antag" behavior. Sec would be entirely within their rights to arrest you for it, but that's an IC issue at best. On the subject of stealing the paramedic voidsuit, ideally that would be an IC issue as well, but I can see why it would be handled via ahelp in certain situations, especially if the player has a history of being overly ambitious with their greytiding. With that in mind, I'm going to go ahead and accept this appeal. I think you get the general idea of what went wrong here and why you were banned, and considering it was only for a day you put more effort into conveying that than people who do worse and get banned for longer. The remaining time will be adjusted off and your ban will be lifted shortly.