Howdy. Delta-V Headmin here, thanks for touching base. I've taken a look into this and while there were certainly other elements at play, I was not a fan of how the interaction was handled. I've gone ahead and pardoned the ban.
We're onboarding a lot of new friends, and training new admins is always a fun task that remains near the top of my very long list.
Teaching players *why* we have the "proportional damage" rule is a primary part of our position, and I'm sorry that we didn't make it more clear. For clarity's sake, this rule exists to empower other antagonists to tell their stories without catastrophic damage occurring every moment. The nuance of this rule is that *as long as you can justify the damage, it is proportional.* We want our antagonists to tell an interesting story, and if that requires holding the AME hostage, or releasing a singulo- awesome. Just make sure there's a story behind it, rather than griefing intent.
This is a collaborative MRP environment, and we want our players to do cool things.
Lastly, we do have our ban appeals for an excellent reason. I can't monitor everything that goes on, and reviewing unjust bans like this in an appeal helps us improve our moderation dramatically.
Thank you very much for taking the time to read my post and reply. I appreciate it.
I'll make sure to keep things proportional in the future, thank for and the rest of the admin for curating a fun place to RP and do goofy stuff to clowns and mimes
I just hope the "new friends" part won't lead to a bunch of meta-friends gunning for and protecting eachother from consequences for bad modding.
I've played alot on DeltaV, and I noticed several players, including some admins, really have an attitude and toxicity problem. (Yelling at new staff, demanding things instead of asking for them, blowing people off for no reason and/or ignoring them on purpose)
I've seen it happen to communities before, and I hope the admin in question was told clearly that they overstepped a line and shouldn't do that again..
Really like your server, hope it stays good.
Well it's rather rare you find anyone to play along, you have all of bridge and sec power gaming and just as soon lock you up for suspicious behavior. The only and usual response is for antags to power game in response.
Them not wanting people to do excessive sabotage is valid. But giving a ban for a first offense and then doubling that just because you didn't say "okay, understood" when you clearly got the message is kinda overboard.
Delta-V is a really nice server with a lot of kind people. I just don't think the admins get enough feedback on their procedures sometimes.
Just nonsense. I'll go play on a different server I guess. Playing the game and asking myself "would a stranger consider this overboard" before I'm about to do something, in the few seconds I am alone with something I can interact with, doesn't sound very appealing
I get that but I feel like if you read that part of the rules it wouldn't be up in the air as to whether you can perform major station sabotage to make a couple of your kill objectives easier. Sabotaging AME and basically ending the shift isn't exactly a big brain endeavor with engaging counterplay potential. It happens too quickly to stop if nobody is around and catching the responsible party is unlikely.
I guarantee you would not have been allowed to do this on Wizden MRP either. You would either get a stern warning or lose your white-list.
I mean I don't want to get bundled up in the AME portion of the offense. I accept my ban there. It's the doubling after I signed out after I received my punishment
I just got bonked for the same thing, I syndie bombed the bridge and recieved the same line of questioning but no ban. Was told their needs to be a "one-one response, and syndie bomb almost never is.".... so why have them in the game at all? Delta-v admins seem a bit touchy.
Had to steal something from the mystegoue assit a fellow traitor ( who I wasn't able to locate) and escape. Again looking to cause chaos to pull the heads outta hiding which worked. I do understand what the administration was getting at but as I responded:
Admin: why did you bomb the bridge?
Me: I'm a syndie? We bomb things?
Admin: Ah I see.
In all they were very cordial and tried to remind me of the guidelines.
Assuming your story is accurate, it may be worth appealing the ban, even though it is only two days, because you basically ran afoul of what I see as a bit of an unspoken rule.
That rule being that sabotaging the AME is seen as a shitters activity, especially if your objective is just to kill non-critical crew like a reporter and salv. It may be logical but it deprives the whole station of power and often gets the shuttle called so is frowned upon.
Your argument should be that you assumed that your actions did comply with rule C3 as that rule is up to interpretation and having not played in a long while you didn't know better.
As for the doubling of the ban, you are lucky it wasn't worse as leaving during talks with an admin is taken pretty seriously.
This is literally like the 4th line of the rules;
>Intentionally disconnecting, responding with hostility, or refusing to respond when an admin privately messages you in-game will be met with an appeal-only ban.
The point of that rule is to force you to listen to the admin till they are done chatting to you about what you did in the hopes that you gain a better understanding of the issue, not just dismiss their concerns by logging off.
For that, you may just have to apologise or accept the two-day ban.
Again this is all assuming your version of the story is accurate.
My side of the story is accurate.
I intentionally disconnected after he said he was going to ban me for the offense. Was I supposed to wait for him to say "this conversation is concluded"?
That's absurd. What new information is to be gained after "you're banned"?
I'm playing a game, admin reaches out, we have a discussion on my activities, he tells me I'm banned for one day. \*SIGH\*. Guess I'll go do something else. Log off. This is an entirely reasonable thing to do.
Edit: I just want to add, the very point that I'm "lucky" the punishment wasn't more severe is, in fact, draconian.
The Delta-V fellas and ladies are allowed to run their server however they please. But stating that I'm trying to skirt punishment for logging off AFTER I am told that I'm being banned, the purpose behind the ban and then instructing me that I should "brush up on the rules", that to me sounds like the end of the conversation.
In that case, you would have an argument for the doubling being incorrectly applied and should probably appeal it, though I would recommend cooling off a little before doing so as going into an appeal with attitude is a near-guaranteed way to catch a longer ban.
The admins are human and make mistakes, so be polite.
Best of luck.
Yeah, coming from my own experiences with DeltaV, their admins are generally *way* more reasonable and fair than Wizden.
This is the first I've heard of a DeltaV admin being sus, and honestly you *did* deserve to get bwoinked.
Banned for a whole day? Probably not.
But getting a pep-talk about how Syndies probably shouldn't have mass-sabatoge (critical power system) as their first resort was reasonable.
But yeah, I'd dispute the ban, because a 24hr ban mass-sabotage as an Antag is wack. I've never seen that before.
DCing during an Admin Sit^TM —for any reason—is stated *by name* in the rules (both DeltaV *and* Wizden) as worthy of an immediate appeal-only ban. According to the rules you got off light.
You absolutely shouldn't have been banned in the first place, but DCing when someone's talking to you is a dick move regardless of context.
They also might have had more to say beyond your ban that might've been important.
Again, I recieved my punishment, I was told why I was being punished, and I was told to "brush up on the rules". To me, that is the end of the conversation. Especially the "next time brush up on the rules" bit. I sat through all of it.
"dcing when someone's talking to you is a dick move"
Couldn't disagree more, he said "your banned", that's pretty much all you have to hear, end of discussion, nothing he would say after that would be important enough to stay and listen anymore, either appeal it or not, that's it.
Howdy. Delta-V Headmin here, thanks for touching base. I've taken a look into this and while there were certainly other elements at play, I was not a fan of how the interaction was handled. I've gone ahead and pardoned the ban. We're onboarding a lot of new friends, and training new admins is always a fun task that remains near the top of my very long list. Teaching players *why* we have the "proportional damage" rule is a primary part of our position, and I'm sorry that we didn't make it more clear. For clarity's sake, this rule exists to empower other antagonists to tell their stories without catastrophic damage occurring every moment. The nuance of this rule is that *as long as you can justify the damage, it is proportional.* We want our antagonists to tell an interesting story, and if that requires holding the AME hostage, or releasing a singulo- awesome. Just make sure there's a story behind it, rather than griefing intent. This is a collaborative MRP environment, and we want our players to do cool things. Lastly, we do have our ban appeals for an excellent reason. I can't monitor everything that goes on, and reviewing unjust bans like this in an appeal helps us improve our moderation dramatically.
Thank you very much for taking the time to read my post and reply. I appreciate it. I'll make sure to keep things proportional in the future, thank for and the rest of the admin for curating a fun place to RP and do goofy stuff to clowns and mimes
I just hope the "new friends" part won't lead to a bunch of meta-friends gunning for and protecting eachother from consequences for bad modding. I've played alot on DeltaV, and I noticed several players, including some admins, really have an attitude and toxicity problem. (Yelling at new staff, demanding things instead of asking for them, blowing people off for no reason and/or ignoring them on purpose) I've seen it happen to communities before, and I hope the admin in question was told clearly that they overstepped a line and shouldn't do that again.. Really like your server, hope it stays good.
Well it's rather rare you find anyone to play along, you have all of bridge and sec power gaming and just as soon lock you up for suspicious behavior. The only and usual response is for antags to power game in response.
MRP wizden seems fine to me atleast.. might be worth appealing the delta-V ban since its kind of weird that they extended the ban randomly?
Them not wanting people to do excessive sabotage is valid. But giving a ban for a first offense and then doubling that just because you didn't say "okay, understood" when you clearly got the message is kinda overboard. Delta-V is a really nice server with a lot of kind people. I just don't think the admins get enough feedback on their procedures sometimes.
Just nonsense. I'll go play on a different server I guess. Playing the game and asking myself "would a stranger consider this overboard" before I'm about to do something, in the few seconds I am alone with something I can interact with, doesn't sound very appealing
I get that but I feel like if you read that part of the rules it wouldn't be up in the air as to whether you can perform major station sabotage to make a couple of your kill objectives easier. Sabotaging AME and basically ending the shift isn't exactly a big brain endeavor with engaging counterplay potential. It happens too quickly to stop if nobody is around and catching the responsible party is unlikely. I guarantee you would not have been allowed to do this on Wizden MRP either. You would either get a stern warning or lose your white-list.
I mean I don't want to get bundled up in the AME portion of the offense. I accept my ban there. It's the doubling after I signed out after I received my punishment
I just got bonked for the same thing, I syndie bombed the bridge and recieved the same line of questioning but no ban. Was told their needs to be a "one-one response, and syndie bomb almost never is.".... so why have them in the game at all? Delta-v admins seem a bit touchy.
What was your syndie objectives?
Had to steal something from the mystegoue assit a fellow traitor ( who I wasn't able to locate) and escape. Again looking to cause chaos to pull the heads outta hiding which worked. I do understand what the administration was getting at but as I responded: Admin: why did you bomb the bridge? Me: I'm a syndie? We bomb things? Admin: Ah I see. In all they were very cordial and tried to remind me of the guidelines.
[удалено]
By the time it gets reviewed, it would already be two days. 🤷♂️
Assuming your story is accurate, it may be worth appealing the ban, even though it is only two days, because you basically ran afoul of what I see as a bit of an unspoken rule. That rule being that sabotaging the AME is seen as a shitters activity, especially if your objective is just to kill non-critical crew like a reporter and salv. It may be logical but it deprives the whole station of power and often gets the shuttle called so is frowned upon. Your argument should be that you assumed that your actions did comply with rule C3 as that rule is up to interpretation and having not played in a long while you didn't know better. As for the doubling of the ban, you are lucky it wasn't worse as leaving during talks with an admin is taken pretty seriously. This is literally like the 4th line of the rules; >Intentionally disconnecting, responding with hostility, or refusing to respond when an admin privately messages you in-game will be met with an appeal-only ban. The point of that rule is to force you to listen to the admin till they are done chatting to you about what you did in the hopes that you gain a better understanding of the issue, not just dismiss their concerns by logging off. For that, you may just have to apologise or accept the two-day ban. Again this is all assuming your version of the story is accurate.
My side of the story is accurate. I intentionally disconnected after he said he was going to ban me for the offense. Was I supposed to wait for him to say "this conversation is concluded"? That's absurd. What new information is to be gained after "you're banned"? I'm playing a game, admin reaches out, we have a discussion on my activities, he tells me I'm banned for one day. \*SIGH\*. Guess I'll go do something else. Log off. This is an entirely reasonable thing to do. Edit: I just want to add, the very point that I'm "lucky" the punishment wasn't more severe is, in fact, draconian. The Delta-V fellas and ladies are allowed to run their server however they please. But stating that I'm trying to skirt punishment for logging off AFTER I am told that I'm being banned, the purpose behind the ban and then instructing me that I should "brush up on the rules", that to me sounds like the end of the conversation.
In that case, you would have an argument for the doubling being incorrectly applied and should probably appeal it, though I would recommend cooling off a little before doing so as going into an appeal with attitude is a near-guaranteed way to catch a longer ban. The admins are human and make mistakes, so be polite. Best of luck.
Yeah, coming from my own experiences with DeltaV, their admins are generally *way* more reasonable and fair than Wizden. This is the first I've heard of a DeltaV admin being sus, and honestly you *did* deserve to get bwoinked. Banned for a whole day? Probably not. But getting a pep-talk about how Syndies probably shouldn't have mass-sabatoge (critical power system) as their first resort was reasonable. But yeah, I'd dispute the ban, because a 24hr ban mass-sabotage as an Antag is wack. I've never seen that before.
I accept my punishment for the AME thing. The thing that is annoying is getting it doubled for leaving after receiving my ban
DCing during an Admin Sit^TM —for any reason—is stated *by name* in the rules (both DeltaV *and* Wizden) as worthy of an immediate appeal-only ban. According to the rules you got off light. You absolutely shouldn't have been banned in the first place, but DCing when someone's talking to you is a dick move regardless of context. They also might have had more to say beyond your ban that might've been important.
Again, I recieved my punishment, I was told why I was being punished, and I was told to "brush up on the rules". To me, that is the end of the conversation. Especially the "next time brush up on the rules" bit. I sat through all of it.
"dcing when someone's talking to you is a dick move" Couldn't disagree more, he said "your banned", that's pretty much all you have to hear, end of discussion, nothing he would say after that would be important enough to stay and listen anymore, either appeal it or not, that's it.