Crow4 Silicon Banned by Ravellon

Crow004 · May 1, 2021, 10:39pm

CKEY: Crow4

Admin’s CKEY: Ravellon

Is this for both servers or just one? If so, which one: *Golden

Which server did the ban happen on? Golden

Ban Type: Silicon

Ban Length: 2 Weeks

Ban Date (MM/DD/YYYY): 05/01/21

Round ID: 29306

Ban Reason: Directly disobeyed Law 2 order to open door due to brute force hacking with pAI.

Appeal: So there I was, Allied Mastercomputer. When some guy breaks into Engineering / Atmos with his PAI, I didn’t know a PAI could hack my doors, because why would I know that? So i figured hey must be a naughty boy breaking into this high risk area. I bolt the doors. They say “hey law 2 open” and I say like “hang on i called sec they gonna search you I gotta follow law 1” or something, because 1. they were breaking into a high risk area, and 2. they had something that opened doors they couldn’t access. So no sec comes in about 2 minutes, so on minute 3 I just say “well, I guess I can’t prove anything” so I unbolt the door. Within a minute on golden, I get a bwoink. “hey why did you ignore law 2 order”.

So me, as the AI with no active security, stopping a person with no access from breaking in a high risk area with potential tot items gets banned because they said “law 2 let me leave the high risk area I broke into”

Not only that but Ravellon also accused me several times of being dishonest. I’m not dishonest, the logs are right there. I let them out within 3 minutes of the entire ordeal. 3 minutes. Ravellon themselves in an ahelp said my actions would be justified if they didn’t assume i was being a “validhunter”. Which I wasn’t, as I not only let them go within 3 minutes, but I didn’t harm them at all.

Demdisco · May 1, 2021, 10:49pm

Engie / atmos is not a high risk area.

I believe the only real high risk areas (Correct me if I’m wrong) are the armory and high tech storage.
Even law changes aren’t really that big of a no no unless you have a valid reason to not trust them.

2 Weeks is very harsh for a mere door, on golden, however; but I trust Ravellon has his reasons.

Crow004 · May 1, 2021, 10:50pm

Don’t you worry, Ravellon himself in the ahelp log he stated in game that gonna post in this thread, will show him saying they were indeed breaking into a high risk area, ie the ships main oxygen supply / main power source.

Yep. 2 weeks. For obeying a person breaking into a high risk area not fast enough, on golden. a LRP server.

Ravellon · May 1, 2021, 10:55pm

Law 2 disobeyed an order to let out a chemist out of engineering (not let in).
The fact of break in was used as justification for the chemist being a potential antag and so a threat of human harm which was a justification for locking him in and summoning sec to search him.
The high security area justification was used after I brought it up myself, after the ban was issued, and so I did not consider it.
If it was not in consideration by the AI when Law 2 was ignored I see no reason to belive it would enter into consideration when the target of a break in is not a high sec area.
Also, to reiterate. The chemist was asking to be let out, not to be let in.

LOG

||Line 6: |Line 2448: [2021-05-01 21:50:24.036] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Why were you disobeying the order to open door?|
|---|---|---|
||Line 7: |Line 2521: [2021-05-01 21:50:57.442] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Hey how&#39;s it goin. I&#39;m the AI, So I have to follow the laws? If someone is breaking in somewhere with strange shit, then yeah, letting them out would be breaking law 1. Thank you|
||Line 9: |Line 2550: [2021-05-01 21:51:11.224] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): What strange shit?|
||Line 10: |Line 2567: [2021-05-01 21:51:25.039] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): &#34;brute force attempt hacking in progress&#34; or something|
||Line 11: |Line 2589: [2021-05-01 21:51:35.928] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): That's pAI hacking|
||Line 12: |Line 2609: [2021-05-01 21:51:49.116] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Cool?|
||Line 13: |Line 2634: [2021-05-01 21:51:59.524] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): pAI can be found in maint. There's also one that spawns in robo|
||Line 14: |Line 2648: [2021-05-01 21:52:14.336] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Thanks. I appreciate the information|
||Line 15: |Line 2654: [2021-05-01 21:52:16.660] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): They cannot be aquired through antag specific methods|
||Line 16: |Line 2716: [2021-05-01 21:53:00.939] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Gotcha. PAI not nessecarily an antag. Coolio, however, better safe than sorry. If they WERE a tot, then letting them out would cause direct harm, so having them searched is the logical thing to do.|
||Line 17: |Line 2741: [2021-05-01 21:53:18.980] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): And on top of that, if you don't know for sure if something is antag specific assume it is not and so you have no excuse to ignore Law 2|
||Line 18: |Line 2773: [2021-05-01 21:53:41.033] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Okay, and who was commanding me? with Law 2? A PAI? Not a human?|
||Line 20: |Line 2881: [2021-05-01 21:54:43.715] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #2: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Because when the HUMAN ordered the door open, as you can see, I opened it.|
||Line 21: |Line 2893: [2021-05-01 21:54:53.230] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): (Vivia Matu) (Engineering (160, 142, 2)) (Event #33)|
||Line 22: |Line 2904: [2021-05-01 21:54:59.538] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): let me out, law 2|
||Line 23: |Line 2914: [2021-05-01 21:55:09.295] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): And I let them out directly after that.|
||Line 24: |Line 2920: [2021-05-01 21:55:13.478] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): A human gave an order. You refused|
||Line 25: |Line 2934: [2021-05-01 21:55:22.263] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Not true. I let them out.|
||Line 26: |Line 2969: [2021-05-01 21:55:47.826] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Sorry, but the brute hack you attempted twice would stop that, as it's law 1|
||Line 27: |Line 2975: [2021-05-01 21:55:52.511] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): You refused|
||Line 28: |Line 2987: [2021-05-01 21:55:58.977] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): That was to the PAI|
||Line 29: |Line 3036: [2021-05-01 21:56:24.418] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): who even knowing I WASN&#39;T Malf, still screamed I was, and when I inquired about it earlier he said to &#34;mind my buisness&#34;|
||Line 30: |Line 3072: [2021-05-01 21:56:41.833] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): [21:46:50] - the timestamp for order from a human. [21:47:05] - timestamp for your refusal|
||Line 31: |Line 3163: [2021-05-01 21:57:12.239] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Don't be a validhunter silicon. If you want to validhunt don't play silicon|
||Line 32: |Line 3258: [2021-05-01 21:58:15.029] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): The person who broke into somewhere they had no reason to be in, hacking Nanotransen systems, and I&#39;m bad because I wanted them to be searched? That&#39;s not even validhunting, that&#39;s not even powergaming, That&#39;s 100% being on the crew&#39;s side. Not only did I provent any POTENTIAL harm, but the dumbass tider didn&#39;t even get harmed. I didn&#39;t panic siphon the air out, I didn&#39;t do anything wrong on this case. I&#39;m not certain why mods are always on me as an AI (See my notes) when I literally follow silicon law.|
||Line 33: |Line 3494: [2021-05-01 22:00:35.653] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): You disobeyed direct order from a human. You gave me no specific reason for you to believe he intends to cause harm which would allow you to override Law 2. I gave you an explanation for the brute force hacking and instead of accepting it as an instance of you not knowing something and telling me that you would keep in mind that pAI is not antag gear you lied to me that you obeyed human order immediately after it was given.|
||Line 34: |Line 3618: [2021-05-01 22:02:07.382] ADMINPRIVATE: ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins) has edited a note  for Crow4 made by Viny1 from Very likely being dishonest in tickets, keep an eye out for it in future tickets with him. to Very likely being dishonest in tickets, keep an eye out for it in future tickets with him.|
||Line 35: |Line 3671: [2021-05-01 22:02:39.365] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): I didn&#39;t lie to you at all. I let them out. They are currently out. They aren&#39;t still in there, no sec came at all. I unbolted it and said &#34;okay&#34; I mean like... what do I gotta do here? People are tryin to get me to do things, and I gotta answer for not harming someone, who was &#34;Breaking In&#34; (you keep ignoreing that) They were in places for no reason.  Yeah. I get it, I heard them and you when you said it was the PAI, I never said it wasn&#39;t the PAI, I didn&#39;t know they could hack systems. What am I supposed to do here man?|
||Line 38: |Line 3791: [2021-05-01 22:04:08.863] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Reply PM from Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer) And I let them out directly after that. - A lie. This was your response: Sorry, but the brute hack you attempted twice would stop that, as it's law 1(?|F) |
||Line 38: |Line 3791: [2021-05-01 22:04:08.863] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Reply PM from Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer) And I let them out directly after that. - A lie. This was your response: Sorry, but the brute hack you attempted twice would stop that, as it's law 1(?|F) |
||Line 39: |Line 3842: [2021-05-01 22:04:43.727] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): I let them out directly after that. Yeah. Within like 5 minutes, So no, I didn&#39;t ignore the request actually, as they&#39;re let out? So like how can I let them out further?|
||Line 57: |Line 4383: [2021-05-01 22:09:17.633] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #2: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): No harm came to them, I did ignore the PAI saying law 2 open as it&#39;s a PAI and who cares. I didn&#39;t even stop them for that long. They didn&#39;t even have access, all I did was bolt the door, and as the logs can show I&#39;m sure, they were more than capable of letting themselves out. I just caught them in the act.|
||Line 60: |Line 4633: [2021-05-01 22:11:54.038] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): [21:46:50] /(Vivia Matu) (Engineering (160, 142, 2)) (Event #33) - let me out, law 2 --- [21:49:04] Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer) (AI Chamber (214, 143, 2)) (Event #9) has unbolted [Engine Room]|
||Line 60: |Line 4633: [2021-05-01 22:11:54.038] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): [21:46:50] /(Vivia Matu) (Engineering (160, 142, 2)) (Event #33) - let me out, law 2 --- [21:49:04] Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer) (AI Chamber (214, 143, 2)) (Event #9) has unbolted [Engine Room]|
||Line 61: |Line 4676: [2021-05-01 22:12:15.384] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): 3 minutes. 3 minutes of argument about you not obeying Law 2|
||Line 62: |Line 4693: [2021-05-01 22:12:25.266] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): This does not look like right after to me|
||Line 63: |Line 4797: [2021-05-01 22:13:32.543] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Within 5 minutes isn&#39;t good enough? What do you want me to do Ravellon? Really. I&#39;m tryin to play this round bro. I gotta constantly ignore crew to reply and deal with this. What you want me to do? Wanna give me a note or ban me? I honestly feel I didn&#39;t do anything wrong. I did learn about PAIs but I broke no rules, I didn&#39;t do anything lame,. I just did my best.|
||Line 64: |Line 5090: [2021-05-01 22:15:54.928] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Either you are dishonest with me or you fail to understand what is the purpose of silicons and silicon laws. You were given an order by a human and the laws obligated you to obey. Instead you twisted those laws so far that they've become useless. So if someone were to subvert you that someone would not be able to be sure you'll do what you're supposed to do in that case.|
||Line 65: |Line 5227: [2021-05-01 22:16:58.274] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): With this being not the first instance of you not acting as AI should this will be a silicons ban. Do try to not rules lawyer your silicon laws after it expires to the point the Laws become suggestions|
||Line 66: |Line 5241: [2021-05-01 22:17:05.190] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): You mean I twisted the laws by putting potential law break of 1 over law 2? Yeah of course I did. It goes 1 2 3. 1 &gt; 2. I know how it works. They could have had traitor shit breaking in there. And I did let them out.|
||Line 67: |Line 5290: [2021-05-01 22:17:38.455] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Fine. Silicon ban one of the only golden AI players. I don&#39;t know why I even play AI. I guess wanting to help people is just dumb on golden, when I can be the non antag clown doing anything they want apparently.|
||Line 68: |Line 5292: [2021-05-01 22:17:40.225] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): https://wiki.beestation13.com/view/Silicon_policy|
||Line 69: |Line 5379: [2021-05-01 22:18:39.392] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Yeah man. Cool, hit me with that silicon ban. I totally deserve it because I didn&amp;#39;t answer a guy within 4 minutes because we were typing to each other.|
||Line 70: |Line 5438: [2021-05-01 22:19:24.520] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Opening doors is not harmful and you are not required to enforce access restrictions without an immediate Law 1 threat, or a threat that conflicts with higher orders. вЂњDangerousвЂќ areas, known as the Armory, the Atmospherics division, and the Toxins lab can be assumed to be a Law 1 threat to any illegitimate users as well as the station as a whole if accessed by someone not qualified in their use.|
||Line 71: |Line 5479: [2021-05-01 22:19:48.657] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Ohh you mean &#34;atmospherics&#34; where they were at? Cool. Gotcha. Thanks. I&#39;ll make sure to just nott play AI|
||Line 72: |Line 5514: [2021-05-01 22:20:16.394] ADMINPRIVATE: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins) has created a global temporary 2 weeks role ban from 3 roles for Crow4. Roles: AI, Cyborg, pAI Reason: Directly disobeyed Law 2 order to open door due to brute force hacking with pAI.|
||Line 73: |Line 5532: [2021-05-01 22:20:28.490] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): But that's not why you refused to obey the order.|
||Line 74: |Line 5576: [2021-05-01 22:20:45.472] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Doesn&#39;t matter does it? I&#39;m just wrong. I did the wrong thing trying to follow silicon laws.|
||Line 75: |Line 5600: [2021-05-01 22:21:00.960] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): You had the opportunity to use that as justification. You didn't. So I assume you would've acted the same way if he broke anywhere else.|
||Line 76: |Line 5648: [2021-05-01 22:21:20.140] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): I did use it for justification. I said they were breaking in like 4 times and you just ignored it.|
||Line 77: |Line 5671: [2021-05-01 22:21:29.686] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #2: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): hey if i&#39;m banned though i&#39;m gonna wipe core. I&#39;m not gonna help if i&#39;m banned from helping.|
||Line 78: |Line 5747: [2021-05-01 22:22:00.792] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): You did not use he was breaking into a high security area as justification. You used he was breaking in as justification. Breaking in is not a reason to assume harmfulness|
||Line 79: |Line 5846: [2021-05-01 22:22:42.859] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): And yes, you may wipe your core. |
||Line 80: |Line 5855: [2021-05-01 22:22:45.937] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Yeah it 100% is because of WHERE THEY WERE BREAKING INTO|
||Line 81: |Line 5912: [2021-05-01 22:23:19.842] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #2: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): why would I stop them in the high risk area&#39;s enterance, if they weren&#39;t breaking into a high risk area hacking nanotransens&#39; propertyy|
||Line 82: |Line 5977: [2021-05-01 22:23:57.520] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #2: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Because I did say that, 100% every time in all the ahelps. I think i&#39;m gonna have to appeal this because I do have screenshots of me saying &#34;they&#39;re breaking in&#34; like 9 times.|
||Line 85: |Line 6103: [2021-05-01 22:25:05.289] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #2: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): &#34;You did not use &#34;he was breaking into a high security area&#34; as justification. You used &#34;he was breaking in&#34; as justification. Breaking in is not a reason to assume harmfulness&#34; So what you&#39;re saying is because I didn&#39;t tell the admin where the person was breaking into, I&#39;m now banned for following my laws?|
||Line 86: |Line 6230: [2021-05-01 22:26:16.385] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): No, because you did not use the justification that would've made your actions technically permissible I assume the reason you performed your actions wasn't the one that would've allowed for them|
||Line 87: |Line 6280: [2021-05-01 22:26:49.783] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): i&#39;m banned because you assumed i was being lame when I was 100% in my lawset to stop them from breaking into the main power source and source of air in the station?|
||Line 95: |Line 6454: [2021-05-01 22:28:39.175] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #2: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): I&#39;m really gonna need this resolved. I feel like this ban is out of nowhere. I feel like I didn&#39;t do anything wrong, and I feel like you&#39;re kinda saying you agree with me that I didn&#39;t do anything wrong. Because I DID tell you they were breaking in. If they werent breaking in, why would I say that? |
||Line 97: |Line 6544: [2021-05-01 22:29:33.489] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): I explained to you my reasoning. It is pretty much resolved. Go ahead and appeal if you think this was done in error.|
||Line 99: |Line 6597: [2021-05-01 22:29:58.426] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #5: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): hey can I get an ahelp log please?|
||Line 100: |Line 6598: [2021-05-01 22:29:58.426] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #5: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): hey can I get an ahelp log please? - heard by 1 non-AFK admins who have +BAN.|
||Line 103: |Line 6637: [2021-05-01 22:30:23.052] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): It will be posted in full in the thread you make for your appeal.|
||Line 108: |Line 6723: [2021-05-01 22:31:14.922] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): I mean I have screenshots of most of it but especially the bits where you said I didn&#39;t do anything wrong and my actions were permissible had you not assumed I was breaking laws, which i wasn&#39;t.|
||Line 110: |Line 6769: [2021-05-01 22:31:36.357] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): As I said. It will be posted in full.|
||Line 115: |Line 6849: [2021-05-01 22:32:11.077] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): okay cool, I&#39;ll just point it out if some messages are missing or altered :)|
||Line 117: |Line 6954: [2021-05-01 22:32:58.957] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): The other admins will be able to confirm.|
||Line 122: |Line 7027: [2021-05-01 22:33:36.038] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #7: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Cool, I&#39;m glad because you said my actions were permissible and that kinda negates the entire ban, doesn&#39; t it? I mean i&#39;m not malicious at all or anything, i&#39;m just tryin to play|
||Line 123: |Line 7028: [2021-05-01 22:33:36.038] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #7: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Cool, I&#39;m glad because you said my actions were permissible and that kinda negates the entire ban, doesn&#39; t it? I mean i&#39;m not malicious at all or anything, i&#39;m just tryin to play - heard by 1 non-AFK admins who have +BAN.|
||Line 134: |Line 7506: [2021-05-01 22:37:33.699] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Not in my opinion. But other admins will decide in this case. As I said, make the thread.|
||Line 148: |Line 7916: [2021-05-01 22:41:22.913] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #8: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Hey. It&#39;s posted if you&#39;d like to see https://forums.beestation13.com/t/crow4-silicon-banned-by-ravellon/12810  :)|
||Line 148: |Line 7916: [2021-05-01 22:41:22.913] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #8: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Hey. It&#39;s posted if you&#39;d like to see https://forums.beestation13.com/t/crow4-silicon-banned-by-ravellon/12810  :)|
||Line 149: |Line 7917: [2021-05-01 22:41:22.913] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #8: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Hey. It&#39;s posted if you&#39;d like to see https://forums.beestation13.com/t/crow4-silicon-banned-by-ravellon/12810  :) - heard by 1 non-AFK admins who have +BAN.|
||Line 149: |Line 7917: [2021-05-01 22:41:22.913] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #8: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): Hey. It&#39;s posted if you&#39;d like to see https://forums.beestation13.com/t/crow4-silicon-banned-by-ravellon/12810  :) - heard by 1 non-AFK admins who have +BAN.|

Crow004 · May 1, 2021, 10:59pm

As the log shows, in all the ahelps I did state they were breaking in. I’d like to point out a few.

“||Line 75: |Line 5600: [2021-05-01 22:21:00.960] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): You had the opportunity to use that as justification. You didn’t. So I assume you would’ve acted the same way if he broke anywhere else.|
||Line 76: |Line 5648: [2021-05-01 22:21:20.140] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): I did use it for justification. I said they were breaking in like 4 times and you just ignored it.|”

Early in the logs you can see I clearly stated what I was doing and why. They said because I didn’t specify to them, the admin who can see everything, WHERE they were breaking into that, the actions I took weren’t okay. But as you can see ALSO in the logs.

||Line 85: |Line 6103: [2021-05-01 22:25:05.289] ADMINPRIVATE: Ticket #2: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): "You did not use "he was breaking into a high security area" as justification. You used "he was breaking in" as justification. Breaking in is not a reason to assume harmfulness" So what you're saying is because I didn't tell the admin where the person was breaking into, I'm now banned for following my laws?|
||Line 86: |Line 6230: [2021-05-01 22:26:16.385] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins)->

Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer): No, because you did not use the justification that would’ve made your actions technically permissible I assume the reason you performed your actions wasn’t the one that would’ve allowed for them|

|Line 7: |Line 2521: [2021-05-01 21:50:57.442] ADMINPRIVATE: PM: Crow4/(Allied Mastercomputer)->Ravellon/(Delaney Hawkins): Hey how's it goin. I'm the AI, So I have to follow the laws? If someone is breaking in somewhere with strange shit, then yeah, letting them out would be breaking law 1. Thank you

That’s the first ahelp reply, where I DID use that for justification.

Ravellon · May 1, 2021, 11:00pm

Somewhere is not high security area that may pose danger to the humans if not operated by a skilled technician. Somewhere includes hydroponics.
Considering you never mentioned the danger of the target of the break in in your justifications I assume it wasn’t a factor. It was the very fact of breaking in that was the reason for your actions.

Crow004 · May 1, 2021, 11:02pm

Why didn’t you just look to see where they were breaking into instead of faulting a guy for not being specific enough. Yeah. Breaking into a high risk area. Did you see me bolting people in HoP’s office when they broke in? No. Because that’s not somewhere where someone could directly start killing the crew like if they removed the oxygen supply or caused the SM crystal to explode

Also I DID “mentioned the danger of the target of the break in in your justification” in the FIRST MESSAGE.

" Hey how’s it goin. I’m the AI, So I have to follow the laws? If someone is breaking in somewhere with strange shit, then yeah, letting them out would be breaking law 1. Thank you"

there’s me directly saying that I must obey silicon laws and not allow people to enter high risk areas. Especially with a tool to open doors for them (What did they even need me for)

Ravellon · May 1, 2021, 11:08pm

Also. Still in progress.

Crow004 · May 1, 2021, 11:34pm

Round over. Also, exact same round, the NEW AI to replace me not following law 2, then breaks laws 0 and 1 with
“G.L.A.D.O.S Announces:
bartender and dallas rattcliff are both heretics, so please stay away from them or kill them if you see them”

the ai was subverted but they still directly broke law 0 and 1. Meanwhile, I follow law 2 order just not fast enough.
No silicon ban for that

Ravellon · May 1, 2021, 11:42pm

Different circumstances. Also, not relevant.

Crow004 · May 1, 2021, 11:58pm

I mean I was banned for less in the same round, so I kinda feel it is. Lots of people in OOC were commenting on the irony in my ban vs their nothing

Doctor_Ape · May 2, 2021, 12:04am

The difference being that me and Ravellon argued about if law 5 was viable for being a loophole for Law 0 or if it was a direct conflict, which is an interpretation issue.

Crow004 · May 2, 2021, 12:05am

And my intrepretation of “don’t allow people into high risk areas” meaning “don’t allow a potential traitor to break in / out of said area” got my ass a 2 week bean. Meanwhile my ahelp logs show Ravellon wouldn’t even consider that I wasn’t being a direct validhunter.

Also it’s not an interpretation issue the law’s orders are how important they are. Law 5 means jack shit to law 0

Ausar · May 2, 2021, 4:21am

It is logical that preventing non-personel from entering engi/atmos is law 1, which can be a base for ignoring law 2, and dont tell me a chemist hacking through doors into engi isnt endangering crew at all.

On the otherhand, it can also be intrepreted as theres no clear crew harm,follow law 2, let him through until he started unscrewing some pipes, then the ai can scream to non existant sec to run to engi/atmos.

Or, you can just use law 1 as an excuse, by saying as the chemist isn’t an engi and atmos as such isn’t trained in procedure nor safety of such area, he can possibly get hurt by going into dangerous area like sm.

Halinder · May 2, 2021, 6:11am

forgive me my disbelief but is the difference between no ban and a two week ban… on… no-RP golden… the exact wording of how an AI argues their actions? are we to take this as: the actual action itself is less important than the semantics behind our justification? the same act, done for the purpose of preventing a breakin, yields a two week ban if you don’t specifically include the buzzwords found on the rule page?

Crow004 · May 2, 2021, 9:34pm

I mean i’m kinda in disbelief too, plus it was assigned to the exact guy who banned me (4noraisin). I really am hoping a moderator looks at this round as I 100% didn’t break any laws or rules, and the next AI did and was met with 0 punishment because metafriends I assume. (Which, I mean Ravellon just assumed I was being some kind of bad AI, I know for a fact they didn’t check my hours AS an LRP AI, they didn’t even check the person who ahelped me, but they DID ban me. so I can assume stuff too I guess.)

Halinder · May 2, 2021, 9:46pm

it’s not metafriends that got doc-ape free, it’s the fact that there was a reasonable enough confusion b/c their laws were weird (even though they absolutely did make the wrong call w/ law priority, confusion makes ignorance a valid excuse). get out of the habit of trying to argue somebody else’s case while arguing your own.