Fal Complaint 4, I guess the old one was just invalid?

I've dealt with the main point of the previous complaint, which was his decision regarding the AI. Which as I've said, was fine. The rest were emotional arguments, as well as screenshots of perfectly fine admin-player conversations. Arrfurr's screenshot was literally Falaskian quite calmly explaining part of the rules. Your evidence was the conversation you had with him, and you based the complaint on how he handled a case you were not directly involved in. Which wasn't a valid basis for a complaint. And the conversation itself was also fine.

On your second complaint, arrfurr doesn't like the alien infestation event that randomly happened. Not triggered by an admin.

I've looked into this case. Essentially, you trusted the word of mouth of a borg with an opened and unlocked interface, as well as some random guy and acted on that to kill a person. You indeed did not have enough evidence to kill someone. Doesn't matter that you didn't put them in the locker, you pressed a button that killed them. Two people accusing a guy is plausible enough evidence for you to ask for the emag, their unlocked PDA, search them, anything of the sort.


I'm not entirely sure where people sense hostility in their interactions with falaskian. Perhaps it's his writing style of not capitalizing anything? Or you have some kind of personal vendetta against him? Either way, I think we should talk about this over DM as well because I'm getting a bit tired of these frivolous complaints.
Especially since it seems that based on your history, for the rule 1 violation you just admitted to in this complaint personally I would've given you a ban. He seems to have been a lot less strict and didn't administer any formal punishment.

jacktheling That statement is indeed bold, given your complete lack of evidence in support of it. If you have anything to actually back it up, feel free to DM me with that evidence or post another complaint.

You're very persistent in trying to coax us into taking some kind of action against falaskian, either due to disliking him or due to a genuine perception of him dealing with you unfairly - as unfounded as that perception may be. At this point, your overall use of tactics in these complaints is starting to paint a picture of dishonesty. Part of our objectivity is also looking past anything other than strictly the evidence. Unfortunately, your dissatisfaction isn't evidence of you being mistreated, and all the evidence provided thus far has no indication of falaskian treating you poorly.

As for accusations of us giving founders special treatment, we don't really take those seriously. Firstly, because a lot of players that have issues with authority in general will perceive authority as being given special treatment, regardless of whether the facts support that. Secondly, because if anything, founders have a smaller margin for error than standard admins. While cohesion is pretty good within the founders, should any one founder be found in violation of either admin regulations or rules, they're treated no differently than an admin or player. If a ban would've been issued to a player, the same would be done for a founder. This is also not just theoretical, as these situations have happened before.


These complaints are slowly becoming, bluntly put, a lot of crying wolf. Here are some guidelines for what constitute a valid basis for complaints.

1. Abuse of admin powers - this means an admin deliberately using their powers to further their personal interest, outside of the scope of any kind of valid admin intervention. Events are not admin abuse (not counted as personal interest) unless the admin centers the event around themselves, thereby using the event as a means for self-antagging.

2. Discriminatory / unfair punishment - this means an admin punishing you much more severely than should be allowed by any admin guidelines, your history or the circumstances at hand. The reason I'm absolutely sure this isn't the case and that he most likely really doesn't care about you any more than he does about any other player is, because in his place I would've already banned you. Your most recent violation, the one you mention in this case, according to our guidelines even if considered 'borderline' carries an absolute minimum punishment of a 2 hour ban. These minimums are rarely used in real cases. Given your history it would've easily been a day ban.

3. Clear verbal abuse - this necessitates the verbal abuse being one sided. If you're extremely uncooperative or even directly abusive towards the admin and the admin returns the favor in kind, this still isn't in line with our policies but at best the admin would get a slap on the wrist for allowing themselves to be provoked. Admin PMing as part of an investigation, or entirely unrelated to ask a question is entirely fine. That isn't verbal abuse.


As far as I can see none of your complaints were on the basis of admin abuse. As for him personally discriminating against you, simply put that isn't happening. He's being very lax with handling your cases. He's also being a lot nicer in dealing with you via PMs than would be expected given your attitude. Which is very kind of him.

At this point I'm becoming quite tired of investigating petty complaints. I would prefer you DM me your evidence directly and what happened so I can look at it then and there. I'd also like to speak to you in regards to your complaints against him in general. If there's actual some validity to it all, it will be investigated and dealt with. If not, you may be misunderstanding what is and isn't admin mistreatment and I'd like to rectify that.


Complaint denied