Ban Appeal (Not Really Just a Policy Argument)

[Kailas]

Your Byond ID: Poops_Buttly

Character Name: Damian Cordite

Admin who banned you: Forget, doesn't matter, 3 day vidya ban isn't a real thing

Total Ban Duration: 3 days (very measured and fair)

Remaining Duration: Most, 2.5

What other servers do you play on? I've tried others but 95% is this one

Are you banned on any them? No

Reason for ban (Exactly what the WHOLE text says, if there's a Code (X##XXX##) and you don't give it, you can't be unbanned): I shot a guy for assaulting me with punches. I think that 90% of the time that's the wrong thing to do, so it makes sense that a bright-line rule against inordinate escalation is tempting, but I think you have problems when you try to understand a fact pattern under some pre=determined lens where literally "if punch, then retaliatory gunfire, then second party guilty". I don't think that actually makes sense, particularly on this server, which is much less civil station maintenance and much more war effort, where everything done poorly or well literally saves or loses lives. Yes, obviously, it's wrong to shoot the guy who strikes up some aggressive RP with you during gearing that includes shoving and limited punching, or to shoot the guy who cuts you at RO, or who you think stole your machete.

In this case we're talking about a late-round join where there's a last ditch counterattack mounting and you're specifically ordered to get basic construction tools and fleece the Sully for mats and, in a high time crunch, you run to the little engineering room west of RO and you properly unfasten, unjam and move the window and grille so you can access it, and you're gonna put it all back before you sprint to pod for the finale, and some MT who just clearly doesn't know what's going on thinks you're a saboteur for moving a window and attacks you. First he pushes you while you're trying to move stuff, then he punches a few times, selects tools that will be best for melee, and chases you around. At this point, it's not about this guy pissing you off, it's about needing to get god damn insulated gloves and welders and a wrench so you can build the FOB for the squad. First he just pushes you, so you just go back to work, then he punches you. Clearly, this isn't going to be resolved amicably, and clearly, there's a higher priority (getting an effective constructor to the counterattack) than being polite (allowing a griefer, albeit a negligent griefer, to operate in perfect safety). So you pull your pistol (a .44 you're not familiar with) and you shoot him three times in the chest, which is how many times it takes to get him to fall down and stop moving. Then you grab what you came for and go planetside, congratulating yourself on your restraint, until you get that 3 day ban for first time PK after many days and hours invested as a cooperative team member.

I think I would argue that it's the exception that proves the rule that you can kill people even if you can't kill people. You can kill people when killing people means killing less people. If that's arguably the case, I just don't think you can rationally assign any actual blame to the person who essentially corrects the situation as they can best. A mod Rejuv won't have the same effect, some MT is still sprinting around bullying less knowledgeable people into his heretical hippy bullshit, you probably missed the pod, and lost any gear you used to defend yourself. MPs are mostly people who clicked it by accident because it sounded cool and don't know what to do, so any attempt to involve them will more likely to turn into 5 minutes of standing there followed by 0 recourse and pure strategic and materielle loss in the form of lost time and medical supplies used to heal wounds.

You don't have to make the rule more complex by saying all that though. You can actually make it simpler overall by just saying "when a marine uses unreasonable force under a totality of the circumstances, he becomes blameworthy as the aggressor whether or not his attacks were provoked", which would allow your rule enforcers to consider everything according to their general notions of fairness, rather than giving them a faustian choice between "honorable" bright-letter rule enforcement and "reasonable" digression from the rule. I think the mod in this case towed the line as well as he was able, because I think this is usually a week long ban, he basically gave me the lowest and shortest-level ban he could while still enforcing the red-letter rule. I just think that asking people to use their judgment isn't asking them to do anything complex, and in fact, any amount of formulaic strict-liability, behavioralist approach is always going to be fundamentally unjust because no contemporaneous meta-analysis of the game mechanics and potential situations will ever compare to a live human who can review the series of events and talk to the parties involved and read the larger situation of the round, etc.

Link to previous appeals for the same ban: None

Your appeal, including evidence (screenshots, etc): I don't think the facts are in dispute I'm just trying to raise a policy issue (this game is sick I just want it to be next-level great)

[apophis775]

The "escalation" rule, is for RP arguments, not randos punching people.

Also, remember that modifying the sulaco if your not an engineer or squad engineer IS a crime. In real life, how would you like it if your working in say, a nuclear reactor and some dickbag comes by and stealls the reinforced window?

As far as your policy dispute, i recommend you rewrite it in suggestions a bit more seriously.

[Kailas]

Oh, in this case he was a rando punching me so maybe I just should have been excused under that, I did make that argument repeatedly but I gave it up when it seemed not to matter.

If the nuclear reactor were under attack by dinowolves and a guy in a uniform acting under orders from the guy in charge said "hey I know how to use that and we need more people using that", I would probably let him. Also he doesn't steal the window, he puts it carefully back in place when he's through. Wouldn't his recourse be to call MPs anyway?

I'm dead serious I take my manchild hobbies more serious than my legal career. Humor can be serious.

[Kailas]

I mean he literally just typed STOP repeatedly in all caps and attacked me until I put him down so I guess that's my real appeal then, I actually explained to the GM that exact distinction but I was instructed that it didn't matter, that the physical acts of violent escalation were the crime itself

[Feweh]

Honestly you're really at fault.

If you read the rules you avoid this still completely. A lot of times new players don't read the rules so they end up getting banned for these things. Ahelp that you're being attacked or harmed and that theres a issue... it'll be dealt with usually within minutes and you'd be on your way.

[freemysoul]

Dunno if I get a two cent in this but, IF I remember correctly it was the Chief Engineer who punched you for looting one of the Tool storages as a Standard.

[Kailas]

Honestly you're really at fault.

If you read the rules you avoid this still completely. A lot of times new players don't read the rules so they end up getting banned for these things. Ahelp that you're being attacked or harmed and that theres a issue... it'll be dealt with usually within minutes and you'd be on your way.

I have read the rules, I didn't think I was breaking the rules, because i wasn't. Apophis just said, rules against escalation are for RP arguments not random attacks, so I was totally justified defending myself. You guys should decide what your rules mean.

[Lostmixup]

So you're fine with the ban?

[Kailas]

Are we all speaking English?

[Lostmixup]

Are we all speaking English?

I meant you're okay with your ban, you just want to make the rule better?

[Kailas]

I meant you're okay with your ban, you just want to make the rule better?

Yup! I think it's about up anyway

[Allan1234]

Resloved and locking. If you want to make a policy argument please post it in suggestions.