Jump to content

Rookieblue

Retired Staff
  • Posts

    2,229
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32
  • TS: ts.gaminglight.com

    Offline

Rookieblue last won the day on December 17 2021

Rookieblue had the most liked content!

About Rookieblue

  • Birthday 12/08/1994

Recent Profile Visitors

5,685 profile views

Rookieblue's Achievements

Master

Master (13/14)

  • Superstar Rare
  • Dedicated
  • Posting Machine Rare
  • Collaborator
  • First Post

Recent Badges

653

Reputation

  1. Test Authored by: Junior Researcher Rookieblue SCP Tested: SCP 012 Hypothesis: Individuals that have sight deficiencies will not be affected in the same way as normal individuals by SCP 012. Research Report: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16RYiiwG9qYK_F17pzawgonaJpUH946RrlP2gL0K90nk/edit?usp=sharing
  2. Test Authored by: Junior Researcher Rookieblue SCP Tested: SCP 005 Hypothesis: The user's knowledge of an object's locking mechanisms has a direct impact on SCP 005's effectiveness on concealed and complex locking mechanisms. Research Report: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a6TH6wcLJD_9dM9vPgqfnetOswyf73Bbgikx3QtiISs/edit?usp=sharing
  3. - Support This is blatantly looking for loopholes and common sense. Additionally, I point out this paragraph: "Upon successfully connecting to Foundation systems SCP 079 is able to interact with various Foundation systems throughout the Foundation." The doors are systems in the Foundation, meaning they can't be accessed until 079 connects.
  4. If you meet the criteria to legally attack another player you can use either the left or right click, otherwise you wouldn't have the option.
  5. Are you asking that SCP 912 be prohibited from attacking and damaging people that aren't attacking him or others? Because if that's the case, that's already a thing, it would be called RDM. The only difference is that if 912 sees a non-GENSEC or MTF member with a weapon out he orders them to put it away first, and then attacks.
  6. - Support In lore, SCP 912 attacks anyone not wearing a specific police department's uniform, meaning that if it ran into a regular guard at the Foundation, it would attack that guard. For the purposes of the server, we've obviously changed the rule to allow SCP 912 to both listen to, and respect GENSEC and MTF authority. Changing the rule would further allow SCP 912 to be a sole benefit to Foundation forces, however it would reduce SCP 912's RP ability. This rule was intentionally written to force those players with weapons around SCP 912 to be careful, as those not specifically in GENSEC or MTF would be vulnerable to 912 attempting to arrest them.
  7. Either in the cells they spawn in and not engage in combat, or otherwise elsewhere in lower D-Block while not engaging in combat.
  8. Prior to this incident Buck described, he was subject to this staff report: https://gaminglight.com/forums/topic/74500-buck-staff-report/ During my investigation into this staff report, I discovered numerous incident where Buck engaged in abuse of his staff powers by using powers off duty, moving people with his physgun while off duty without the consent of the players, and generally causing problems. Buck was issued two staff strikes during this incident, and I verbally warned Buck personally that any further abuse of his staff powers would result in being removed from the staff team. On May 18th I received a report from the then ET Leader that Buck had engaged in serious misconduct on the Event Team, that being spawning a Micro Cannon, which is prohibited at ALL TIMES, and used his ET powers inappropriately. After this report was substantiated, pursuant to the conversation and expectations that I laid out for Buck he was removed from the staff and ET team and issued a staff restriction. Buck previous appealed his restriction here: https://gaminglight.com/forums/topic/77572-buckapollo-staff-restriction-appeal/ While I agree with Buck that he hasn't caused any issues since his staff restriction, I do not believe overturning the staff restriction is called for. Buck had multiple chances, the consequences of further misconduct were made abundantly clear, and he made the decision to abuse his powers again.
  9. Accepted After reviewing this appeal, I've elected to accept the appeal. While the player in question questioned whether an invisible player was at the location, this could've easily been solved by the admin going, "No, it's staff". Even if there was an invisible player present, the appealing player never used the knowledge for RP advantage. As such, this warning is void and has been removed from your record.
  10. Accepted To have your warn removed, go to the "Bans" Section at the top of the forums, navigate to your profile, find the warning for this appeal, and for the reason on the appeal, link this post.
×
×
  • Create New...