Admin’s CKEY: HelloMate
Ban Type: Note
Ban Length: -
Ban Date (YYYY/MM/DD/): 2022/08/20
Round ID: 39999
Ban Reason: The final version (keep that in mind) of the note says “EORG prep as atmos tech. Carried a flamethrower to CC and released the dangerous gas in it.”
Appeal Reason: It was a 2 hour long round with fairly low pop and multiple threats to station like revenant, swarmers and most importantly xenoaliens. I was an atmos technician, the only one during this shift and a person who discovered xeno nest in turbine room. Crew was asked to arm up any way they could, gear from armory was given out, cargo was ordering weapons and giving them left and right while I prepared flamethrower for myself and whole additional kit for someone else to grab (bag included flamethrower, spare tanks, complete firesuit and holofan (which I think is important to show I was always quite careful about using fire)). Crew managed to kill all of the xenos but for a while nobody was sure about it, during that time one of officers encouraged me to go patrol outside of station with them and gave me a laser gun so I hid flamethrower in my backpack. Once we stopped the patrol I instantly gave them their gun back.
For the rest of the round I was either dealing with emergencies like breaches caused by revenant (few engineers out of original team cryoed and the 2 that remained were actually antags so I had quite a lot on my head) or being afk (had to handle few things in RL so 2 or 3 times I’ve spent a while hidden in locker).
I didn’t give that flamethrower much of a thought since I was either afk or running around the station dealing with issues. When shuttle was about to arrive, I grabbed some extra gear from atmos-firefighting backpack and water tank in case of any emergency occurs during the evacuation as I usually do and I went to shuttle. It was during the flight when I started rummaging through my stuff and realised I still had a flamethrower on me.
I did indeed use it after we landed, beecoins were assigned and end round window popped out.
I was then bwoinked by admin HelloMate asking me about it, I told them what I described here, but in much shorter form, explaining why I made the flamethrower and why I still had it on me and to my surprise I got a note.
The note I received what different for the final version of it, it actually described it as planned and malicious act of bringing a whole canister of burnmix hidden as a canister of water vapor (that’s why I mentioned water tank here, cause for a longest time I couldn’t figure out where that water vapor claim even came from since nothing about water was said in our original admin-pm)
Additional Information: Maybe, in theory, you could potentially try to say I shouldn’t have a flamethrower at this point but I honestly don’t believe I would be even bwoinked, not to mention noted, if it wasn’t for original misunderstanding of the situation. After I made ahelp and explained that the note is describing completely different situation that I clearly had nothing to do with instead of getting my named cleared I was told the note will be modified so it stayed at same severity and whole canister relabeled into something else got rephrased into flamethrower.
I’m playing here, with a breaks, since Ssethwave, I was never banned (beside one misunderstanding from which I was cleared) and got just 2 notes over the years (one about leaving during ahelp and one for eating nightmare heart). I have no history of griefing or even preping for end of the round and we know that in this situation I was not doing so either and while I probably should have get rid of the flamethrower I clearly didn’t act against the spirit of the rules.
I believe this note is a product of misunderstanding and lack of admin’s will to back down when they were wrong. It is silly that my will to actually explain things privately with original admin acts against me cause if I wrote appeal for original note I would be instantly cleared since nothing of what was described there would have been backed up by logs and now it will be said that current version of the note technically may be correct.