Fighterslam permabanned by RukoFamicon

CKEY: fighterslam

Admin’s CKEY: Lagomorphica on behalf of RukoFamicon

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

Ban Type: Server

Ban Length: Permanent

Ban Date (MM/DD/YYYY): 2020-03-24 07:26

Round ID: 13799

Ban Reason: Metacommunications with Rublax. This ban is permanent and applied on behalf of RukoFamicom. The report in question is [Fighterslam] Player Report - By Xarnata/Ziagfu Appeal if you feel this is in error, although be warned that it may not be accepted.

Appeal Reason: I didn’t metacomm with rublax

Additional Information: I don’t know what else to put here, I literally didn’t fucking metacomm with him

1 Like

@Lagomorphica
@Ruko
this is for you two to look at

If you’re going to write an appeal this early, it’d most likely be better to actually adress things that can be addressed - namely the biggest red herring in the room.

This section to be specific is one of the most damning pieces of evidence available.

To quote Ruko,

[2020-03-16 05:52:46.832] MENTOR: MSAY: Fighterslam/(Fighterslam) : rublax whats your cord
[2020-03-16 05:52:57.512] OOC: Fighterslam/(Fighterslam) “msay rublax youre in the discord right” (start area (8, 174, 1))
[2020-03-16 05:53:02.666] OOC: Fighterslam/(Fighterslam) “woops that was meant” (start area (8, 174, 1))
[2020-03-16 05:53:03.937] OOC: Fighterslam/(Fighterslam) “for mentor chat” (start area (8, 174, 1))
[2020-03-16 05:53:05.512] OOC: Fighterslam/(Fighterslam) “ignore thaat” (start area (8, 174, 1))
[2020-03-16 05:53:20.026] MENTOR: MSAY: Rublax/(Rublax) : ?
[2020-03-16 05:53:25.667] MENTOR: MSAY: Fighterslam/(Fighterslam) : are you in the discord
[2020-03-16 05:53:30.880] MENTOR: MSAY: Rublax/(Rublax) : in the server ya
[2020-03-16 05:53:56.395] MENTOR: MSAY: Fighterslam/(Fighterslam) : i dont see you
[2020-03-16 05:53:58.457] MENTOR: MSAY: Fighterslam/(Fighterslam) : wot
[2020-03-16 05:54:01.213] MENTOR: MSAY: Rublax/(Rublax) : its steff
[2020-03-16 05:54:05.510] MENTOR: MSAY: Rublax/(Rublax) : with the apple profile pic

That would be a much better idea than simply saying “I didn’t metacomm” as your entire section of evidence.

Alternatively, you could also defend the reasons you let him into AI Sat as a secondary to this - however, the biggest and crucial piece of evidence in this ban was this exchange.

You could also go and take a look at the report itself and counter the arguments provided there instead of saying nothing in your defense the entire thread, aside from an anecdote of “i don’t metacoom”.

i don’t remember off the top of my head but this was the extent of my interactions with rublax that day in the discord

https://gyazo.com/576bec7234665aeac4f04c30d488c8f5

https://gyazo.com/c228ab10af63a00b1f60c6f4f9d8124d

i’m pretty sure i just asked him his discord for future reference, because I did use it to talk to him on like the 18th and probably some other times, but metacomms never took place

Similar to what I said in the DM you sent me - I don’t really think there’s an appeal to be had here. The evidence is overwhelming with that chunk of the log I dug up.

As it stands these are the facts behind this ban:

  • The mentor log right beforehand that ends the moment you have the correct contact information for Discord
  • The fact you had been law 2 ordered to de power the whole station, but re-powered for Rublax to get into your core with no direction from him
  • That you freely opened the path to your core door by door
  • That you kept your turrets enabled while doing so, and would definitely have recognized Sleeping Carp instantly with your playtime
  • That you, again, have more than enough playtime and experience to know better than to allow random players access to your core even if they aren’t identifiable as traitors
  • That you did a full 180 on your interactions after being “caught” by one of your Cyborgs

Tiny single-message image clips of a DM don’t prove anything, and there’s no way to know voice comms didn’t occur.

1 Like

I must say letting somwone into your core metacoms or no deserves a ban

Most likely thing that happened is that they metafriended the round before, they were having fun and decided to talk a bit on discord. Mostly for the memes and jokes.

But then towards the end they decided “hehe, let me card and you listen to my obviously dubious law 2 requests hehe”. I don’t think they meant harm by that as Everett backed off from shutting power to tcomms and the guy that did the carding didn’t actually kill me as borg despite me obviously trying to impede his journey to the shuttle and thus giving him IC justification to flash and end me.

Regardless of intent, it seems to be clear metacomms. Unlucky them that Ziagfu was observing and I was nosy as borg.

1 Like

Ok I literally don’t see the harm here and I’m really trying

1 Like

In the metacomming itself or what they did?

Metacomming is against the rules and people got banned before consistently for just doing it, despite them not doing anything else that would have been against the rules such as self antagging.

Metacomms is tricky to prove and sometimes shit just works a certain way without communication. Especially if players know each other from previous rounds.

Letting some one into your upload/core like that allowing yourself to be subverted/carded is a big no no though.

Unga me no read good though. At the end of the day all fighter did was turn power back on. Although fishy it’s not as damning as opening doors volunteeringly.

Bitch hoe U could’ve just sold me the sunglasses for a NORMAL PRICE since you were already charging $300

Liggers pay the ligger price

that really says something about society
back in my day we didnt even use 3rd party programs to comunicate
all we did was open da front door for our friend
unban him
he is friend

everett is kill :weary:

1 Like

So the extent of the meta communicating was just openeing a door?

Ruko for council

It probably doesn’t help that while this is the exact hill event that has been chosen, there’s a lot of stuff that’s quite reasonably considered metacomms but not 100% surefire evidence. This is like getting Al Capone on tax evasion. There have been many incidents, one of which I posted about, in which fighterslam did things that would have gotten the average person beaned for metacomms, or at least given a stern talking to, but were ignored mostly because the admins seem to think that acting against him without surefire evidence would be indicative of an admin’s grudge towards the guy.

This effectively meant that, even though he’s been banned many times before, he would often get a lighter sentence than someone who didn’t do something before in extreme cases. Usually.

not really sure if I agree with this

Should we not merge the 2 topics together?

woops that was meant for meta chat

What’s the other topic?