Player Report on Phil

[Some Weeb]

43 minutes ago, Zack / Zarl said:

Yes. Also please try to keep attitudes professional when on SF and don't try to use your clearance as grounds to why what an SCP says doesn't affect you.

^

Honestly this whole report seems like one rolled up ball of immaturity on the reporters side. Attempting to not let people roleplay because of position SHOULD be Punished. 

-Support 

[Piller]

Okay so two things real quick:

1. Just close the door.

2. As a member of Nu-7, command, staff, and HSU, your response to 912 was not appropriate or warranted.

Now in regards to 912, I'm sure SMT will clarify this with the closing of the report, but I don't think 912 is able to cuff MTF/GenSec for anything short of one of them going rouge and attacking other MTF/GenSec. I also don't think 912 would have access to SoPs for multiple reasons and I don't really see SoP enforcement as 912's job, that would be command.

Regarding the report itself, this was already handled in game and the staff member did not feel a FailRP warn was warranted and 912 itself has a tendency to go off on someone when even minor infractions occur. I'm sure he'd definitely go off on someone that made it abundantly clear that they had no intention of cooperating. I personally feel that the negative behavior of the HSU outweighs any wrongdoing from 912. Until some things regarding 912 are cleared up, I can't really support any time of disciplinary action towards 912.

-Support

[Southpaw]

-Support

 

[Darby]

On 11/10/2021 at 5:46 AM, [GL] Bacon/Buck said:

-support

Any other job that works within a “Branch” has to follow the SOP regardless of whether or not the person on said job is within that branch:

IE

Nu7 quartermaster:

CI Heavy

Both are required to follow the SOP for that branch even though virtually anyone can flag on that job.

If a SOP rule is broken that is a broken rule.

if an MOTD rule was broken then it should be a staff matter not a 912 matter

 

[I disappear]

7 hours ago, Pillercat said:

Okay so two things real quick:

1. Just close the door.

2. As a member of Nu-7, command, staff, and HSU, your response to 912 was not appropriate or warranted.

Now in regards to 912, I'm sure SMT will clarify this with the closing of the report, but I don't think 912 is able to cuff MTF/GenSec for anything short of one of them going rouge and attacking other MTF/GenSec. I also don't think 912 would have access to SoPs for multiple reasons and I don't really see SoP enforcement as 912's job, that would be command.

Regarding the report itself, this was already handled in game and the staff member did not feel a FailRP warn was warranted and 912 itself has a tendency to go off on someone when even minor infractions occur. I'm sure he'd definitely go off on someone that made it abundantly clear that they had no intention of cooperating. I personally feel that the negative behavior of the HSU outweighs any wrongdoing from 912. Until some things regarding 912 are cleared up, I can't really support any time of disciplinary action towards 912.

-Support

-support

[Mitchell Hugh]

-Support

Yeah I think everything that needed to be said was already said

Also; That response to 912 was totally not needed.

[Kvist]

Moving to have every member of MTF involved in attacking and cuffing 912 to be warned ingame and/or given a strike in their respective branch for attacking an allied SCP. We have seen the opposite happen ingame, where MTF members calling an AOS or even a KOS on Foundation staff have successfully pushed for punishment if their target fought back. This is the only fair, non-biased outcome.

[The Gaming Goat]

18 hours ago, Mitchell Hugh said:

-Support

Yeah I think everything that needed to be said was already said

Also; That response to 912 was totally not needed.

 

[Dang]

Denied