Rookieblue

Name: Rookieblue Rank: Corporal Steam ID (Example: STEAM_0:1:174348602): STEAM_0:1:42428330 Discord ID (Example: Gucci Bucket Hat#9588 OR "ceyx." if discord updated your username to the new format): Rookieblue#2667 Current Sub-Branches you're in: None Why should you retain your rank (Command ONLY | 100+ words): N/A Any Notes, Questions, or Concerns?: N/A

Or FailRP.

Whoops, fixed!

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

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

- 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.

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.

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.

- 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.

Either in the cells they spawn in and not engage in combat, or otherwise elsewhere in lower D-Block while not engaging in combat.

Bug has been fixed!

Denied

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.

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.

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.

@Coolcaz11

Staff Report Dispostion After reviewing the staff report in question, this report is being denied, and no action will be taken against the staff member in question. The reporting player is accusing Super Admin Weiss of being unprofessional in a sit and going on a "power trip". After reviewing the video of the incident, as well as the reporting player's statements, there is no evidence that Weiss engaged in any behavior that is considered disrespectful. Administrators of all ranks, from Trial Moderators to the Server Managers are encouraged to use their discretion when issuing warnings to players. This is because many factors can go into deciding whether a player is issued a warnings. These factors can include the type of alleged offense, the previous history of the player, the player's attitude in the sit, and other factors. I have been involved in countless sits in which my plan is to issue someone a verbal warning for an incident and they then earn a formal warning, and it appears this was the case in this incident. I see no evidence showing that Weiss engaged in misconduct, nor evidence that the warning itself is invalid. I would like to address this specific comment, because it shows that you don't actually understand the process behind the scenes, nor some of our most recent incidents involving several high ranking staff members that were called out for unprofessional behavior by other staff members and members of this community and resulted in them being removed from their positions or demoted. I highly encourage people to call out staff members that aren't living up to the standards that I, the other SCP SMT, and the overall GL Community set, and no one is above those standards. The simple fact of the matter is that this incident is not one of staff misconduct.

Denied

Denied

DENIED. After review, the SCP-RP SMT team has decided not to accept you for staff. This is due to the poor quality of your application, low forum post count, and poor community support. You may re-apply in 1 week.

Staff Report Disposition After reviewing the evidence and testimony provided in this report, I've come to a final decision. The reporting player in this report accused Trial Moderator MazuzaM of targeting him and being unprofessional. The reporting player failed to provide any evidence of his claims, and therefore this report is unfounded, and this report will not be held in consideration of MazuzaM's further career as a staff member. Additionally, during this report video evidence was provided that shows the reporting player indeed engage in the behavior Trial Moderator MazuzaM brought the reporting player into a sit for. The reporting player has therefore been issued a formal warning for FailRP - Breaching Offline SCPs.

Merged in a new report of same issue.

Not a Bug Whenever you sit on a bench you're no collided. That isn't something that can really be changed.

DENIED. After review, the SCP-RP SMT team has decided not to accept you for staff. This can be because of your application, experience, behavior, feedback, or other unstated reasons. You may re-apply in 1 week.

ACCEPTED! After review, the SCP-RP SMT team has decided to accept you for staff! Please speak to Senior Admin+ for SCP-RP in TeamSpeak to get started!