Cobrador Mascarado Ruko Famicom Report

[CobradorMascarado]

CKEY: Cobrador Mascarado

Your Discord: cafedamanha44777

Offender’s CKEY: Ruko Famicom

Incident Description:
I joined as HoS and attempted to arrest the acting captain for various reasons, one of which was issuing illegal orders to security, such as dealing with trespassing protesters lethally. The security team was compromised that round, being part of a dictatorial regime commanded by this security officer turned acting captain.

I planned a quick and non-lethal way of arresting them, but I did not carry it out. It consisted of asking two protesters to assist me as deputies to disable the acting captain in an isolated room so I could capture him without resistance. This plan was never completed.

I ended up attacking the acting captain with a stun baton, but again, I did not manage to arrest him.

1. It seems strange to me that Ruko is unwilling to hold the acting captain liable for ordering a lethal response in a way that does not follow SOP, law, or escalation policy because those orders were never executed, but then gives me a grave note for doing something less extreme that also was not carried out.

2. Ruko claims I acted without sufficient IC knowledge. However, I fail to see how that is true. He did not present any information I did not have at the time. If this were supposedly an OOC issue, meaning I would not have had a proper reason to arrest the acting captain, my explanation alone disproves this, as the arrest reason existed before I began planning the arrest.

3. Ruko claims I did not talk to the acting captain. However, all attempts at arrest happened after a conversation I personally had with the acting captain.

4. The note itself overly dramatized the situation. It claims I was attempting mutiny (as the only command officer, which makes no sense) and trying to dismantle the security team, which is untrue. It also wrongly states that the dictatorial regime was the security department itself, which it was not.

5. The note was issued for things that were not even attempted. Nothing in the note actually happened.

I do not believe Ruko acted with malicious intent, but the overall decision in both the report and the appeal was negligent. I do not feel they tried to address my arguments or engage with me in a way that resolved the issues.

Since both previous posts were immediately closed after Ruko’s decision (which was identical in both cases), I am opening an admin report. I would like to see other admins’ opinions and perspectives on this, as the more I examine it, the more unfair the decision appears.

Additional Information:

The note was applied after I made this report

"Police State" Player Report

I dont remember the exact laws. It was basically crewsimov, but they would only protect, obey etc people who were part of the security state (not even the entire security team). That puts the crew outside of the scope of protection of the AI and allows them to murder crewmates if they decide the enforce the laws previously determined by the warden (execution of trespassers into brig).

I have also tried to appeal the note before making this report

Cobradormascarado noted by Ruko

That dosen’t make any sense. I was the HOS, I’m supposed to supposed to stop conflict. Also, the conflict that I’m talking about is an attempt at mutiny, how is this not something I’m supposed to stop? And I dont think I even need to give an explanation as to why I shouldnt be leaving people in danger, do I?

[Shiraizawa]

So… what part of admin conduct or rule was broken?

[CobradorMascarado]

The report is not about admin conduct. The rule broken field is marked as optional in the template.

[Ruko]

I sought outside opinion from other admins before accepting the report initially.

I sought input from admins before rejecting the appeal

There is nothing new I can add to this that I haven’t already. This decision was first made and then also upheld as a team effort, though none were inclined to post in the appeal except @BotTierPC

[CobradorMascarado]

How come the admins are in favor of a decision that is factually incorrect?

[PowerfulBacon]

Include context about when the note was applied, which I believe was on you after you made the player report. I think that is important considering the actual in-game situation is fairly IC.

[Ruko]

Bumping this one up as well so it doesn’t get lost.

[h42]

Hey there, thanks for reporting this, and sorry for the long wait!

I’m going to be fairly quick on this, I would have done the same things if I was in Ruko’s position. I agree with the decision made on the report and I agree with the note issued upon further investigation of the report.

Have a good rest of your day!