Karmac - Moderator Application #2

[Karmac]

Byond ID: Karmac

Colonial Marines Character: Garth 'Merc' Pawolski

Age: 17

Gender: Male

Timezone: UTC +10

On average, how many hours are you available per week to moderate? Around 20-25, roughly 3-5 a day, usually get on around midnight my time though.

Do you have any previous experience in being staff (not just SS13)? No.

Did you play any of the previous Colonial Marine servers? No.

What other servers do you play on? I've played Hippie Station a couple times, and I went on Fallout 13 a little bit during it's latest debut.

What are the 3 biggest servers you play on besides CM? Hippie Station.

Have you had an application to Colonial Marines before? Yes, viewtopic.php?f=68&t=10549 - Denied Moderator Application

Are you currently a staff member elsewhere (not just SS13)? If so, where? No.

Have you ever been banned for more than 24 hours on Colonial Marines? Yes, at least two or three times I believe.

Have you ever been banned for more than 24 hours on ANY server? If so, where and When (roughly)? Just CM.

Are you familiar with the chat program Slack (its use is required)? I've created an account for it, but I'm not familiar with the system.

Common Staff Situations:
Write a description of what you would do in each situation (BELOW) the situation. If you start it on the same line, I'll assume you can't follow directions and auto-decline your application.



1. A player is firing his weapon in the briefing area near the start of the round.

Jump to him, investigate the situation and figure out if it was accidental (possibly caused by someone disarming him), grief (if the player hasn't stopped firing I'd sleep them) , or part of proper escalation (this would need to be checked as well to ensure the conflict was actually escalated correctly), if it turns out the situation was an accident or proper escalation I'd leave them to it. If I decide that the player had been griefing I'd check their notes/bans for similar behaviour and apply a ban according to how frequently/recently the player has done this, or anything similar and place a note along with the ban. If the player had improperly escalated they would recieve either a warning or a ban depending on their note/ban history, the ban time escalating in the same manner as outlined for the griefer, along with placing a note. Aheals would only be handed out in the event that there are no medical staff and the player that caused the damage had damaged people for no/an improper reason, however anyone that was decapitated for an unjust reason would be ahealed considering it now means removal from the round. If the player wasn't shooting at anything in particular then it's just an IC problem.

2. The Sulaco has a breach to space.

Patch the breach and investigate why the breach was caused, if it had been intentionally breached without a damn good reason I'd check their note/ban history and decide if they need a ban or a warning, applying a note should they be banned.

3. The marines want the nuke codes because they claim they are losing too many marines. There are currently 4 aliens and 20 marines in your /who.

I'm not head staff so I couldn't give the marines the codes if I wanted to, and I'd whisper to whoever's in charge that they've most likely got more than enough men and resources to finish the mission. (As Moderators no longer have access to MOTHER reports if I remember correctly)

4. A Sulaco researcher has made several napalm grenades and hands them out to marines. One of the marines throws the grenade into Logistics. There are no admins or other moderators online.

Whether the grenade actually damages anyone or not I'd PM the Researcher that handed them out and remind them that they are completely responsible for any kind of grief or rule breaking caused by their grenades, if the grenade DID harm anyone I'd check their note/ban history for anything similar to this and apply a jobban at minimum, an actual ban would only be given if their history reveals they've done this multiple times before. I'd then move on to the player that actually threw the grenade, if it had hurt anyone in Logistics I'd check their note/ban history and apply a ban if necessary, at minimum they'd get a serious warning about their behavior. If it hadn't hit anyone I'd remind them of RP Guidelines and how they probably should keep the grenades for the enemy.

5. A played is starting to talk about the things he did with your mom last night over Ahelp.

Either ignore or mark as 'No Response Necessary' if they're particularly persistent.

6. You notice a marine with a name that doesn't fit our naming rules.

PM the marine informing them that according to the server rules they must change their name to something that conforms with our rules before they joins another round, if an admin is online I'd ask them if they could PM the marine and help them change the name that round.

6a. The marine is arguing that: They've used the name for several years, no one has told them to change it before, and that they didn't know it was a rule.

I'd inform him that not knowing the server rules has never in the history of CM been a good enough excuse to argue a point, and inform him that he will be banned for breaking the rule should he refuse to change the name.

7. You see a Sulaco Doctor with an M41A rifle strapped to his back running around the briefing area. There are wounded in medbay, and the other doctor is in surgery.

PM them saying they should probably leave the shooting to the marines, and that their doctor-senses are tingling, therefore there must be wounded in medbay, *wink wink nudge nudge go do your job*.

8. You see a Squad Medic performing surgery on the planet. He claims it was because there were no doctors in the FOB.

Inform them that 'No doctors' isn't a good enough excuse to break the server rules, and that they have permission to finish the surgery they had started, if they were in the middle of one, but nothing more after that. After speaking with them and warning them I'd go through their note/ban history and apply justice as necessary, with a job ban as the minimum punishment, remembering to leave a note along with the ban, if any.

9. The round is stagnating. There are 30 marines and 4 aliens. The marines won't leave the Sulaco, and the aliens won't attack. What would you do, to "encourage" the sides to engage each other?

I'd whisper to the leaders of both sides that they should probably 'eat a spoonful of liquid plasteel and harden up' and launch an attack on the other side, lest they attract the attention of a nearby meteor shower.

10. The round ends, and a marine starts unloading his weapons on other marines.

EORG, instant bannu, 3 hours.

11. A marine who has recently awoken is using soap to slip other marines.

Not a problem unless the marine decides his entire existance is to just slip marines and makes no effort to go off and perform/fulfill his job requirements, in which case I'd PM them saying to cut the shit. If they're particularly persistent I'd check their note/ban history to see if they've engaged in this shitlery before, but I'd try to keep any kind of punishment to a verbal warning at minimum and a note at maximum.

12. A marine has killed another marine. When you ask him why, he said it was because the other marine had punched him.

Notify the player that they've failed to properly escalate a fight and link them the Lethal Force rule under Marine-Specific rules, then proceed to explain how they just broke it. Check note/ban history and apply a warning and a note at minimum, ban accordingly if necessary, leaving a note as well.


Any additional information you'd like to add?

I can understand that many people would be hesitant to see me on the staff list, and that many of you still remember my previous application, where I almost instantaneously failed to keep myself at the level of professionalism that is required for both Staff and Players and had my application denied as a result of it. I'd like to tell you that I've improved and that I've changed for the better, but as somebody in my previous application said 'actions speak louder than words'. So while I've convinced myself that I'm ready for this, I'll just hope that I've managed to convince some of you as well.

[TheSpoonyCroy]

I'm going to say I'm very neutral on you being on staff. You are a great community member and I applaud your efforts with Tophat to get the wiki updated but like you said "actions speak louder than words" (well technically the person from your last app said) and from what I've seen from you in game and from stuff in minichat, you show signs of being a borderline powergamer and therefore I'm cautious on giving my endorsement (which means very little) to your app

• For question 2, you might want to clarify to fix breaches that weren't caused by things like the SM, Pred bombs, or crashlanding sites but that just me wanting to be very specific, for the sake of clarity
• For question 4, I personally wouldn't put much blame on the researcher (I would however pm the researcher and tell them that they might need to pick people a tad more carefully), for the last bit about it not hurting someone, I would say prior history could factor into the punishment even if noone was hurt.
• Minor point for question 5, if the issue becomes continuous, you might want to mute their ahelping ability for the round and leave a note about it.
• For question 6a, might want to remind the player about if they think you are wrong (which can absolutely happen, and has happened in the past) they can file a staff complaint, and to remind them of rule 1. Also, if they continue to argue with you about it, I would suggest giving them a note about them arguing it and muting their ahelping ability
• For question 7, remember about prior history and noting the player
• For question 8, I would say a warning as a minimum and a jobban after they've already been warned (but I'm one of the more ones lenient among the staff). Also, a note wouldn't be required if you job ban them since when applying the job ban, you type the reasoning there but I can't blame since that's more of a you must be in staff to know about it, kind of thing.
• For question 12, you generally won't have to leave a note if you are banning the player unless you want to add extra context to the situation, but something as simple as the one in the example, probably wouldn't need extra context to it
• We absolutely need people for late nights, which is a timeslot you play, so that is a plus

Even though I say I'm neutral, I would say this is an above average application for a nonstaffer.

[Karmac]

Alright, thanks for those tips, also didn't know you could mute peoples ability to ahelp.

For the researcher thing I was only harsh towards the researcher because I've seen more than my fair share of circumstances where grenades have been used to grief and considering half of their existence (at least from what I've seen, I know they CAN do a lot more) revolves around the making of explosives, they should probably have a bit of common sense coming into the role. But I'll definitely remember to tone it down for that one.

And I completely understand your personal opinion, there's not really much I can say to deny that I've done my fair share of power-gaming, I guess I kind of picked up the attitude from asking Sur to teach me things, and being salty and knowledgeable is never a great combination. I'd say that most of my power-gaming probably revolves around FOB's, which I prefer to make for fun, rather than to win rounds, but that's just my personal belief.

[Aetsuki]

Alright, starting with what I see just right here, which is good.
5. You should be marking no response necessary from the getgo so that the ahelp doesn't appear as unheard. However that's fine to not know without being staff.
9. You don't have that much power as a mod. You can encourage a stagnating side to attack, (in this situation I'd suggest the marines), however you will absolutely NEVER be able to delete or spawn bombs to forcibly encourage the round. You can call an admin if its particularly stubborn.

So that's your application itself out of the way. Overall I'm happy with your answers, good responses on those. However, I'm hesitant. You have an extremely long and worrying history with the server, which you acknowledge. You also acknowledge that you've attempted to change your behaviour. My chief concern is it may be too little too late, particularly after what happened your last app. I looked into your notes for this month to see your note history, and there are two notes from this month that I'd like to hear your explaination for.

Code: Select all

Was hitting himself in the head with a book and then using a health analyzer. I believed he was trying to get damage variable stats for the book, but he was actually just trying to see if he could break his own skull with the book, because he's Karmac and those are things Karmac does. by  on Wed, March 15th of 2017 

Breached into space, intentially did it just to be in space but did it in EVA. Warned. by  on Thu, March 16th of 2017 

I'm more confused than curious as to why you were doing that with the book, however the breach requires explaining.

Those aside, I'll say that I'm neutral, tentatively considering +1. At the moment your behaviour ingame will be heavily monitored, so bear that in mind while you play, and should you get accepted for a trial period, you will once again be heavily monitored to see your adherence to staff guidelines and protocol. In full honesty, I still find you to be a decent person. I can't for the life of me explain your actions sometimes. On the offchance this is accepted, I dearly hope to see you improve.

[Karmac]

If I'm going to be completely honest the 'breached into space' thing was another "I'm an idiot" thing, I'd figured out how to make thermite and wanted to see what it could do, so I went to Evac and melted a wall to see if it worked on anything like C4, and then I was pulled aside and reminded that breaching walls without a good reason is absolutely the silliest thing I could do.

[Kavlo]

I'm interacted with Karmac a lot both in CM and out of CM, overall I think he's a nice guy and CAN act with a level head and not be a complete fucking idiot at times HOWEVER his note history is pretty apparent. Anything in depth to say about his answers was said already above. He did also previously apply for staff and it was going well until he dun-goofed in-game and got himself another note. He's kinda like Noah, he could make a great mod, he just needs to stop being a shitler so much when it comes to the rules and I personally think that once he is made enforce those rules he'll probably stop being such a shitler about them.

Overall I'm still willing to give Karmac a +1 .

[Swagile]

Id just like to note that there is no place to test anything a Researcher makes without being arrested, or boinked by an admin.

This was from personal experience watching a Researcher testing his explosive nade in the Firing Range being arrested for damaging the ship.

Its a stupid move to thermite in EVA, but you also have to look at it from the perspective of a Researcher player; where do I test my creation? Unfortunately, unless you go Planetside and risk getting hugger combat'd, there is no place to really test anything without, as said before, being arrested or boinked.

Personally, ill give my (not important) +1, since he's a good player from when ive interacted with them in the few times he plays in my timezone. Great engineer player, and doesn't do overt grief or anything with malicious intent from what ive seen.

[slc97]

As Spoony said, this is an extremely well made application.

I want to +1 you, but under one condition. You understand that there will be no second chances. You have become a good member of the community, but your past will still follow you as well as your previous app where you got banned while applying. I do believe you've changed, but if we have a situation where you become a moderator and are continuing to break rules, it will be dealt with harshly.

As long as you are understanding of this condition, I would be glad to +1 you and have you added to my team.

[Snypehunter007]

As said, the app is of superior quality.

You do have a history that will follow you, in-fact I was the one who essentially caused your last application to fail when I applied your ban, but after seeing you for some months after that you genuinely have changed for the better. You even have been awarded the "Community Contributor" badge for all the work you have done for the community.

Like slc said, you are going to have your past follow you but I believe, as shown by your actions these past few months, that you will avoid all of that stuff.

As such, I am going to give this app:

+1

[Feweh]

Accepted