Garlic

I get where you are coming from and I understand that for those who chooses to dedicate themselves to the sever will have no problem understanding the new DEFCON system. However, in my argument, I said that this DEFCON system is not new player friendly and that making them memorize the code may discourage them from playing the server as when comparing them to the old DEFCOn system, it is a universally well-known system used even by the US military (I think).

What are you suggesting? - Reverting back to the old DEFCON system How would this change better the server? - My opinion is rather negative on the new DEFCON system. Granted, the immediate positive trade off is that it gives a more informative description of the situation but that can always be done through chat. However, when analyzing the negative side, I believe that it brings confusion towards new players. Forcing them to remember the code on the server may seem like a hassle and possibly even discourage them from playing the server. Are there any disadvantages of making this change to the server? If so, explain. - The disadvantages are subjective but the only negatives in discarding the new DEFCON system is that it sacrifices the description on why we are in this DEFCON. But again, that can always be stated in chat. Who would this change mostly benefit? - Everyone Please link any workshop content, screenshots, or anything that you think may be helpful to those who view this suggestion - N/A

In Game Name: Garlic Steam ID: STEAM_0:1:228590597 Job applying for (Medical - MEDIC + | Red Right Hand - ANY MTF/CI RANK OR GENSEC COMMAND | Research/RND - Researcher+): Red Right Hand If applying for Red Right Hand preferred O5 to guard: Any O5 that is currently online, I will How many Strikes do you have: 0 Why do you want to join the O5 staff team: I believe that with these recent open spots, my skill in communication, availability, and combat can make a significant contribution towards the Red Right Hand and the safety of the O5s. Another reason in which I am interested in joining the Red Right Hand is the exclusive ability to protect O5 council members. As stated in the lore, O5s are essentially the backbones, masterminds, and leaders running things behind the scene to ensure the safety of the public and the secrecy of the foundation. The astonishing ability to protect the O5s in my opinion makes this an extraordinary position to have. Why should we accept you: I would say that my most outstanding trait a player is my activity on the server. Although I have been inactive lately, I do plan to resume my activity For the past one and a half week, I have been getting on everyday and remained on the server for 12~16 hours straight. In other words, my availability to protect an O5 would be excellent. Of course, other than my activity, I also excel at the art of communication. As my current role as an E11, I get on TeamSpeak daily and communicate to my fellow E11 comrades any SCP breaches, D-class escapees, CI Raid, and Sarkic activity. As I stated in all of my applications before, I put in dedication into the things that choose to do. Evidently, my activity and my achieved rank in the tender timespan of 1 and a half week in E11 can be supported for my claim. Furthermore, my ability to remain professional and calm also qualifies as a viable trait towards my qualification as an RRH and the way that I act towards certain commentary and scenario makes me very easy to work with. Last but not least, my PvP skills. Although adequate, I must remain humble as I surely believe that their are members within the RRH division with more talented combat skill that I do. In conclusion, my skillset to qualify as an Red RIght Hand Member should suffice as I have proven my Combat, Communication, and Availability to be above average. Traits that Garlic excels at: -Activity -Communication -Combat

as for my input, i personally have not had prolonged interaction with you ingame. As other community member are putting a neutral, I will too remain neutral until further one-sided input has been made

Based on the opinion above, that is a +support from me

-/+ Support So as you stated in your reason to appeal your ban, you did kill four or five people, specifically D class. Now I do appreciate you admitting tp killing D class but I did have mutiple interactions with you through sits and you should've known that engaging in wrench fights is a sure way to be brought into a RDM sit. Therefore, I believe it is best to leave this ban period the way it is to serve as a reminder that it is bad to RDM. On the contrary, I would have no objection for the length to be shorten if other member of the community deems that a 4 day ban is unnecessary.

Ah yes. So let me describe my side of the story. So the author of this post made a sit about 939 teaming in which then he provided me with video evidence. After reviewing the evidence, I concluded that it is not teaming. First of all, the video footage starts off by showing 076 and 939 bumping into each other. Their initial reaction was to create distance between each other with showed their acknowledgement of the rule and that they had no means to break it. Furthermore, as the footage progresses, the negev was fired for about a good 20s before the appearance of 939 which eliminates the chance that 939 was waiting in another room for the action to happen. Lastly, the sound being produced by the bullet gave 939 a valid RP reason to kill the MTF as 939 is suppose to attack by sound. In the end, I concluded that this was rather just an unfortunate turn of events for the MTF in which two SCPs of excellent combination just happened to be at the same place. Of course, seeing that he wasn't satisfied with my handling of the sit, I suggested that he could always report him on the forums for the other players to decide if this was FailRP or not. In the end, I will give this a -/+ Support *I do not wish for my opinion to effect the outcome of this post as I am only here to provide my input and opinion of the situation.

That was probably my prop. This post is just to perm-prop that prop so that when i go offline, the prop doesn't disappear

*NOTE: This post is made for forum user: "Mary" as she is unable to post warning appeal because of forum restriction Your In-game Name: Mary Your SteamID: STEAM_0:1:519066521 The admin's name in-game: Zeeptin What warning did you receive: Topic Bumping When did you receive this warning: 12/24/2020 Please give a description of the situation that led to the warning: The warning was issued for the reason "topic bumping" Why do you think this warn was false: The message was sent with means to be helpful and possessed no intention to "bump" the topic to the back of the queue Evidence the warning is false:

What are you suggesting? - Few Changes to the MOTD to either make things less confusing for the players or to sync the SOP rules of the branch more. How would this change better the server? - Less confusion Are there any disadvantages of making this change to the server? If so, explain. - no... Who would this change mostly benefit? - E V E R Y O N E !!! Please link any workshop content, screenshots, or anything that you think may be helpful to those who view this suggestion - N/A 1. In the Mobile Task Force Omnicron-9 section, there is a rule that states this: "Omi-9 personnel are not allowed in D-Block unless it is DEFCON 3 or above, or DEFCON 4 and requested by the highest ranking GENSEC online with the minimum rank of Corporal, or Omi High Command." When stated "unless it is DEFCON 3 or above", does it mean DEFCON 3 or below? 2. Under 096's description it is stated as such: "SCP-096: A keter class SCP. SCP-096 is extremely violent and resembles a slim, humanoid figure. It gets very agitated when someone looks directly at it in close range. Furthermore, it is incredibly fast, making it the perfect killing machine." When stated "A Keter class SCP", does it mean Euclid? 3. In the self breach section for SCP 098 its states "SCP-098's self breaching process can be stopped by providing them 2 Class-D. If no MTF are available to escort Class D to SCP 098’s CC, Gensec/RCF needs to escort the Class D in their place. SCP-098 must advert two warnings over a period of 10 minutes that they require one Class-D." In the first line, it states that the breaching process can be stopped when provided to D class. However, in the third line, it conflicts that by saying that only one D class is needed.

What are you suggesting? - Adding a prop to the D block mining elevator to prevent d class from falling in How would this change better the server? - Completely eliminates stuck sits for the staff team and saves time for both D class and Staff Are there any disadvantages of making this change to the server? If so, explain. - No that I can think of Who would this change mostly benefit? - D class | Staff Please link any workshop content, screenshots, or anything that you think may be helpful to those who view this suggestion - No Adding props like these:

+ Support Reason stated below

+Support

hmm...

My side of the story: I have had 2 interactions with him. The first time is which he made a sit to talk to me about the accusation in which he used racial slurs. Ultimately, I decided that because no evidence can be provided, I will not hold the racist charge against him but allow the first lieutenant do what he deems fit to Claw within his branch. Within a 20min timeframe, Claw proceeds to disconnect in which he later claimed "out of frustration". As some time passes by, I receive another sit in with 1LT ZJ provide me with evidence of him using homophobic slur. Upon viewing the footage, he did indeed use homophobic slurs but ONLY in the means to demonstrate that he did not use that word (ex: I never called anyone a f*ggot | https://medal.tv/clips/38380877/aT2ADNuM1KA7). As i understand that he did not direct that word towards someone, I asked my fellow staff in which all of them replied that it is sufficient evidence to warn and issue a ban. Right after I issued the warn, I receive another sit in which is Claw concerning why he received the warns for homophobic slurs and LTAP. In the sit, he demanded to know who authorized the warn in which then I told him it was Ltcol Jack (he provided me with the format of the warn through the staff radio). I then proceed to bring them both to the sit room and this would then become my second and last interaction with claw. Approximately about the first eight mins of the sit, the sit became quite toxic and progress was stagnant. I then proceed to step in in which then I forced one side to talk first and then the other side. The sit turned more productive and I extracted information from claw that he did no leave with the intent to avoid punishment, but instead, out of frustration. After that, I had to come up with a compromise for claw as it was clear he was not satisfied with the week + 3 day ban and the warn. My compromise was to remove the the 3 day LTAP and to let Ltcol make changes that will be less harsh in which 1LT Noah Lee had previously issued. However, he was still not satisfied with the compromise and wished Noah Lee to be demoted for his hasty judgement. This is when Rangiatea decided to step in and take over the sit. Rangiatea ultimately decided that he will let everything go and have this only be a verbal but in the condition that the warning stays and may appeal the warning if he believes that the warn is unfairly issued. And as of now, we are here. My opinion: +Support on the removal of the "LTAP" section of the warn as per my compromise, and due to the fact that he came back to the server. -Support on the removal of the homophobic slurs section Reasoning: Although you did use the word "f*ggot" whilst not directing towards anyone, you did say it in the Gensec Bunnks in which many people spawns. According to the MOTD, Gaminglight have zero tolerance towards these kind of behavior ("Gaminglight does not tolerate bullying or targeting based on race, gender, sexuality, or other identities, nor racial slurs or anything that can be deemed offensive. Gaminglight has a zero-tolerance policy towards this type of conduct."). Furthermore, during the lengthy sit with Ltcol Jack, Rangiatea, and me, you repeated the word "f*ggot mutiples in attempts to make me understand that you said it out of context. Although this time, not directed towards anyone and it was only me and Ltcol Jack in the sit-room, it reflects the desensitization towards the word which then leads me to conclude that I cannot guarantee that he will not say that word again. Your careless usage of the word shows that you may have used the word in the past in or outside of Gaminglight. My intention to have this section of the warn remain is not to provoke you or to flex my power as a staff, but instead, to serve as a reminder which hopefully in the future will remind you not to say offensive words.

For now, it is a -/+ support leaning towards a -. Here is why: - The forum activity needs to be a bit higher (25 is the min. requirement) - According to the above posts, the community seems to be confused on who you are. (It is important to note that a good relationship with colleagues is crucial in your progression in the staff team. Join some branches, get to know these people in your selected branches, let them know what you are capable of, and what you do reflects your competence). -Q16 needs some work... So, what you currently have mildly suggest the fact that you did not thoroughly read the staff handbook. If you did, you would know that MRDM is a 5+ day ban with a warn and a disrespect is a 600s with a warn. Include more details on your sits; the more, the better. Despite all these comments, you should not ever feel restricted when reapplying as I personally encourage you to retry after you believe all the criteria I mentioned above is met!

Indeed it is...

thanks!

+ Active + Chill + Experienced