Eddy's Interview

-----------
[12:48 PM]
What is your ckey?

EZ — Today at 12:48 PM
eddymakaveli

Mini Moose — Today at 12:49 PM
As a moderator, here are the following perms you have:

- Access to msay. It allows you to speak with other staff members.
- Access to dsay. Self-explanatory, you see the deadchat and can even speak in it.
- Access to in game logs about a lot of things. This include LOOC, dchat, admin actions(like kick, ban, note, warn) and some things to prevent grief. Imagine Urist McUrist open a phoron tank you'll have a message stating it. Same for a fuel tank or a valve of any kind.
- Access the variables of the objects on the server. While you cannot edit them, you can view attack logs on a player, who touched what the last, etc.
- The ability to adminghost, basically will consider you as if you ghosted from the lobby or died. You can aghost again to re-enter your body.
- The ability to Wind people. It freeze them and keep them from interacting with the game.
- The possibility to AdminPM someone, and check all the tickets that have been made on the server.
- The ability to kick, note, warn, ban. More in-depth about this:
Kick = Just boot someone off the server. You can set a custom message. It's not really used often, but still useful to get someone's attention.
Note = It's basically our notepad about players. It's useful for the other staff that will interact with the player, to know their behaviour and if something already happened before.
Warning = Depending the severity of something, it can be directly a warning. This one is visible to the player, and they need to acknowledge it to play on the server again.
Ban = Same thing as kick expect on a larger scale, or even permanently. A ban is often an escalation of warnings.
Every action taken by a staff member is visible on the player's ckey. Only kicks are not shown.
You can ask me about these at any point. Are you ready to begin?
[12:49 PM]
It is important to note that Trial mods can only temp-ban

EZ — Today at 12:50 PM
I am ready to begin, mhm!

Mini Moose — Today at 12:50 PM
I will ask a few scenarios, and then touch up on some questions to wrap up.
[12:51 PM]
We'll start with some general terms
[12:51 PM]
What is validhunting? Answer in your own words.

EZ — Today at 12:51 PM
Going out of your way to engage the antags, usually with hostility.

Mini Moose — Today at 12:52 PM
At any point is it acceptable to validhunt?

EZ — Today at 12:53 PM
No, it goes against server rules. Antags are players too - and if everyone on the ship is going out of their way to frag or grief them - then that ruins their experience.

Mini Moose — Today at 12:54 PM
What is the difference between powergaming, and validhunting? Is there one? Can you give me an example of each?

EZ — Today at 12:55 PM
Oh yeah. Powergaming is like - overpreparing at the beginning of the round because you know antags are going to show up etc. Or having knowledge your character might not have because you know it ooc (Like physicians going into the pharmacy and making advanced drugs, scientists knowing how to do every single science job, etc.)
[12:57 PM]
And validhunting is more the act of pursuing or 'hunting' the antag, such as a bartender during a code red/blue taking their shotgun from the rack and going through maint to find the antag. It's something beyond the scope of believability for the character.

Mini Moose — Today at 12:57 PM
At what point in the round does it become okay to start killing an antagonist?

EZ — Today at 12:58 PM
A clarifying question - do you mean killing as in actually killing them like executing them, or just attacking/engaging in general?

Mini Moose — Today at 12:59 PM
Let's talk about using lethal force in general

EZ — Today at 1:01 PM
Lethal force is typically granted by the HoS/Captain, and shouldn't ever be the default. There's steps to escalation and the call for lethal force is usually reactionary. Like if the antags take the bridge and are moving the horizon into hazards - security will likely get the greenlight to use lethal force. Or if they're trying to activate a code delta, if they've killed multiple crew members, things that are beyond reasoning with. And even then, you only want to employ it after extending a chance for them to turn themselves in.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:01 PM
Is it ever okay to execute an antagonist, or anyone in general? What would constitute such if so?

EZ — Today at 1:04 PM
It's against regulations but also sometimes it makes sense for characters to do such in the moment. Typically you'd want to avoid doing it early in the round and only after they've shown an unwillingness to back down (getting up after a fight is over and trying to continue attacking.) The roleplay and time aspect is exceptionally important as well. Even if a ling has killed several crew members by :45, I'd hesitate to execute them because that ends their round early and if I thought they were going overboard - I'd ahelp it.
[1:05 PM]
But the inverse, if it's around 1:45-1:50 and an antag has gone out of their way to kill/maim/harm crew and such that your character would have strong feelings about, then it's reasonable to consider executing them. I'd venture to say you probably wouldn't want to make a habit of doing it regularly.
[1:05 PM]
It's unreasonable to execute every single antag who has hurt someone your character cares about or who does something that  makes your character upset in general.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:06 PM
What do you think about groups of people singling out other groups based on their gameplay preferences? Character origins, roleplay styles, etc.

EZ — Today at 1:06 PM
As in the exclusionary sense, correct?

Mini Moose — Today at 1:07 PM
Yes.

EZ — Today at 1:09 PM
I think it's lame and sucks. IC, it's totally valid to an extent and supported by lore - depending on who you're playing and what group they belong to. But on an OOC level, I feel like people make wide blanket judgements of players who have a preference and their style of roleplay. It's not nice to exclude, mock, and even levy extra scrutiny against people just because you don't agree with their preference in what they play. We're all here to have fun on funny spessman game, and that definition varies. Just because someone only plays Dominians, IPCs, etc - isn't a reason to be mean on an OOC level..

Mini Moose — Today at 1:10 PM
Okay, let's go into a scenario
[1:11 PM]
A player who has been around for a while opens up a ticket
"Hey, the antagonists have not been doing anything basically all round. It's an hour and fifteen in, and we're still on code green. The antags have been just lollygagging and talking in the bar. Can you do something about it please?"
The round is Auto-traitor, four of the five traitors are working together in the bar, they're just hanging out - and chatting with everyone.

EZ — Today at 1:13 PM
I would just poke one of the players and get a pulse of the situation. It could be possible they're waiting for a proverbial pin to drop or that they're leading the conversation to an escalation point. It'd be harmless to just ask them and see what the plan is.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:15 PM
"Why?" Is all you get in response from the player you poke

EZ — Today at 1:17 PM
I'd remind them that in enabling the autotraitor role, they agreed to be an antagonist and generate roleplay with such. They have a means to do so through their uplink in TC to buy equipment and the exploitables page. There's an expectation that as an antag, you're going to be doing antag things. It doesn't have to be major or default to fragging, but they have to do /something/.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:18 PM
"I have been roleplaying, and I have been driving a story. That's what the rules say, so why don't you just stop and let me continue?" Is the second response.

EZ — Today at 1:20 PM
At this point I would continue observing them and also begin going through the logs to back up what they've told me. I can see what they've touched and  who they've spoken to, if my understanding of what I have access to as a mod is correct. If I got my first message at 1:15 and they've still not left the bar by 1:25 - and I also have not seen them use any antag tools - I would poke them again and ask them to clearly explain to me what it is they've been doing that's antagonistic. It would be reaching a point of leaving a note on their account and potentially a warning, depending on their response.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:22 PM
They haven't done anything outwardly antagonistic, aside from making some space drugs from exploratory chemistry.

"We're a cartel, and we've been selling drugs. People haven't reported us, get off my back bro"

EZ — Today at 1:23 PM
Can I confirm that they've been selling these drugs to people, as they said?

Mini Moose — Today at 1:23 PM
You cannot by any admin tools
[1:24 PM]
aside from like, dming them and asking i guess

EZ — Today at 1:26 PM
Yeah, at this point I would ask them to tell me who they've been selling to. And explain that while being a lowkey antag is fine, the key part of being an antagonist is in interacting with the crew at-large. If you're only selling drugs to one person, thought technically that's antagging, it doesn't really fulfill the job of getting people involved with your gimmick.
[1:27 PM]
It is the same reason  why ninjas cannot simply stealth through the whole ship, steal everything, then wordlessly leave through their shuttle.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:27 PM
"Bro why do you keep bothering me? I've been following the rules, stop harassing me. I've sold to like, six people - the chef, bartender, a Hangar tech, some cadet and two assistants"

EZ — Today at 1:28 PM
Through aghost I can check people's inventories and what they have in them. If I confirm that they did sell drugs to these people and it simply hasn't been reported - I'd thank them for their time and leave them be. It's the crew's responsibility as well to react realistically to these gimmicks.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:29 PM
You can check the Variables then do a contents check yeah. They all have the pill bottles on them.

Next scenario
[1:29 PM]
If someone you knew was actively powergaming, what would you do? This person is a friend.

EZ — Today at 1:30 PM
Check their account for notes/warning about powergaming in the past. If there's any? I would consider escalating it to a temp ban since I cannot permaban people. If not, potentially issuing a note/warning would be more appropriate. Before any of that, though, I'd ask them to explain what they were doing and why.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:31 PM
"I felt that it was important for me to have an edge up over the antagonists because I am tired of dying dude, duh?" Is  their response.

They have one warning about powergaming but it was from three months ago.
You missed a call from
EZ
 that lasted a few seconds.
 — Today at 1:32 PM

EZ — Today at 1:32 PM
That's an awful response. It's not only powergaming, but goes against the spirit of collaborative storytelling that the server encourages. We're not playing together to win.
[1:32 PM]
//misclick

Mini Moose — Today at 1:33 PM
"I have fun by winning though"

EZ — Today at 1:33 PM
At that point I would probably issue them a tempban for powergaming and leave a note in their account about this talk and their response.
[1:33 PM]
It's just not a healthy perspective to have.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:34 PM
Alright
[1:34 PM]
A mercenary team boards the ship and loudly states in the common radio - "We are here to scuttle this ship so our syndicate can take this sector!" - Fifteen minutes later, they have fortified the holodeck and setup the nuclear bomb they spawn with. They set it to detonate with a ten minute timer. Is this a problem? Why is it a problem if it is?

EZ — Today at 1:35 PM
This is absolutely a problem. Stating intent over common radio doesn't count as interaction. Scuttling the ship, similar to Nar'sie during cult, is a round-ending event. Ending the round so early with no counterplay or without people having a realistic chance to react just isn't okay and not what is expected of an antag.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:36 PM
So how would you handle it?

EZ — Today at 1:39 PM
Do they have any notes/warning about antag griefing or something in the same vein, in the past?

Mini Moose — Today at 1:39 PM
No, they're all pretty new players.
[1:39 PM]
By new, they all have atleast 60+ days

EZ — Today at 1:40 PM
I would message the antags and tell them that this isn't really a proper roleplay situation. They've escalated with zero roleplay and given the crew zero opportunity to react. Seeing as they're new and have no prior actions on their account - depending on how they respond and adjusted their roleplay with the feedback I give, I would issue anything from a note or warning. I would stress that they should consider that being an antag, again, isn't about winning or losing - it's about telling a story or interacting with the crew.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:42 PM
Alright
[1:42 PM]
Someone joins, the account age is 0 - the character name is "Boe Jiden". He is an elderly character, in a wheel chair with no legs and a single arm. He has a purple Afro and a red Gotee. What rule (or rules) does this violate? And, how will you handle it?

EZ — Today at 1:43 PM
This is clearly a reference to US President Joe Biden, which is against the rules. Also not a believable character. I would send them a message communicating such. Are they new to SS13?

Mini Moose — Today at 1:44 PM
They're not new. They are new to the server though
[1:44 PM]
"Idk what the US is"

EZ — Today at 1:46 PM
Alright. At this point it's clear they're trolling. I would explain that Aurora is a HRP server in which someone is expected to roleplay a believable character that isn't a reference to the real world. I would issue a temp ban, and poke an admin about escalating it to a perma-ban.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:46 PM
Alright
[1:47 PM]
Is it acceptable at any point for a non-combative command member (OM, RD, XO, CMO) to get involved with the crew armory whenever it is opened, if the HoS or Captain are not dead/incapacitated?

EZ — Today at 1:49 PM
It depends on what is communicated over the command channel/station announcements. If the captain/HoS asks for all hands and they've clarified that it's a literal 'all-hands' then I guess it's fine. But as a member of command, you're a valuable SCC asset. Throwing yourself into the fray with the crew armory gear probably should be left combative members of command.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:49 PM
Is it ever okay for the OM to order guns?

EZ — Today at 1:50 PM
Yeah, if asked by the HoS/Captain. Or with their permission. I imagine your question doesn't include antagonism.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:50 PM
No, bc the OM cannot be an antagonist

EZ — Today at 1:50 PM
But typically - we have a crew armory for a reason, and members of command all have mini-disruptors.
[1:51 PM]
I meant for Rev rounds, but yes. Only in the scenarios highlighted above.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:51 PM
Is it ever okay for the OM to order a gun for themselves?

EZ — Today at 1:53 PM
I'd be pretty hard-pressed to imagine a situation. Potentially if the majority of security is incapacitated and there is no other members of command who are able to make that call. At that point though, you'd probably likely want to open the crew armory and escalate to red. There's also more justification for that if the crew armory has already been opened and is empty.
[1:53 PM]
But again, you'd probably want a really solid reason - from a suspension-of-disbelief perspective.
[1:54 PM]
Same with why someone taking acting captain and grabbing the autorevolver, is probably a pretty bad idea.

Mini Moose — Today at 1:54 PM
Alrighty
[1:54 PM]
I have nothing else to add!

EZ — Today at 1:54 PM
Alright, thanks!