I am Pseudonym.

[Pseudonym 167]

I am Pseudonym. I have been justly banned for an unjust reason. I am not taking it lying down, for any of my supporters, I grant you this piece of evidence for why you should no longer support me. I am no longer a good person, I am a more genuine form of evil than you can find on this server. As proof, I present to you my ban appeal (skip to the epilogue for a partial self dox +ramblings of the damned)

BAN APPEAL IN ITS ENTIRETY:

Title: Pseudonym's Ban Appeal or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Become Hate
Exact ban message: RDM - Pseudonym - 1d - Strae

PREFACE: Before we get further into this I do have to say: I have aspirations of joining the APD, RNR, and perhaps even the administrative/moderation team, so I care much more about the fact that this ban is on my record, than I do about the duration of the ban. Please, take your time analyzing my reasoning and thinking it over, I don't much care for saving myself a few extra hours so I can get back in the server faster. What I care about is being able to say that I followed the rules and the handbook reasonably, and that my actions were reasonable and did not justify a ban. Please, grab yourself a cup of tea, open up that physical edition of the RNR handbook that I know for a fact you have, and let's challenge our believes.

Clip that banned me, relevant part starts at 5:24

Hello. I was banned for RDM for telling a medic "Collision lights off or die", and then proceeding to kill him because he did not turn his collision lights off. I believe this was an unjust ban. The reason for the ban, from my understanding, was something along the lines of: The RNR handbook says medics "Must operate with collision lights on at all times", therefore, if you tell a medic to turn their collision lights off, you are forcing them to violate the handbook. I disagree with this logic as I think it is pretty implicitly obvious that they would be allowed to turn their collision lights off if they were threatened with death.

If we take this logic of: "If the handbook says medics have to do X, then you are unable to stop them from doing X, as you would be forcing them to violate the handbook", to the extreme, I think we can find some weird examples where this obviously does not seem to be the intent. I will grant, there are sections that say something akin to: "Medics must do X, unless Y", and there are sections that simply stop at "Medics must do X", but I do not believe every section that is simply "Medics must do X" means that you are not allowed to prevent medics from doing that X. 

Quote

Chapter III - Illegal Zones
Criteria To Enter
2. EMT's must be escorted by an Altis Police Department (APD) officer or higher ranking medic to enter an illegal area

there is no immediate exception saying "unless they are forced to", but i'm damn near 100% certain I can take a blueberry hostage, then bring him to a rebel even if that would seem like it ***violates*** this section of the handbook. I can also take them hostage and bring him to an active federal event, even though he "must" be escorted by an APD into an illegal zone, such as an active federal event.

There are "Special Circumstances" for feds saying stuff like: "Medics must not enter, or loiter around, the Blackwater facility while an active robbery is in progress unless they are assisting the APD or being held hostage by civilians" which is a counter to my argument, but I would say it is arguable that it can still be interpreted by the "Criteria To Enter" that they are not allowed to, as they "must" be escorted by an APD officer or higher ranking medic. And that this fed special exception still doesn't even include normal illegal areas such as Rebels and Illegal gather/process spots, thus still if you were to bring an EMT to those areas, it would be forcing them to violate the handbook.

Quote

Chapter III - Illegal Zones
Special Circumstances
12. If a medic has arrived at a rebel outpost to revive a civilian, and it becomes apparent that the APD is conducting a rebel raid, the medic must leave the area and contact the APD to ascertain whether or not responding officers would like R&R assistance during their engagement

If you have a medic hostage, or are just simply forcing them to hold their hands up for the time being, and don't allow them to leave a rebel outpost when it becomes appearnt the APD is conducting a rebel raid, you are FORCING the medic to violate the handbook again! just as you aren't allowed to tell a medic "collision lights off or die", you shouldn't be allowed to tell them "hands up or die" at a rebel when APD area coming, because they "must" leave the area and contact the APD. And if we are allowing the "Special Circumstances" overwriting other parts of the handbook excuse as we could for allowing EMTs to go into a fed if they are hostage, then surely we would need to allow that same "Special Circumstances" again to allow them to stop being a hostage, and to exit the rebel outpost.

Quote

Chapter IV - Equipment
Uniforms
2. EMT+ may purchase diving gear from the R&R clothing vendor. Dive equipment shall only be worn when responding to, or operating within the water and must be removed when the water activities are complete. 

If you try to initiate on a medic, you must allow them to take their wetsuit off first, or they would be violating the handbook and you would be forcing the medic to do something against the handbook.

Quote

Chapter V - Vehicle Interaction
Criteria
1. Medics must verify vehicle ownership before repairing a vehicle
3. Medics are authorized to bypass the registration verification process if a civilian threatens to use deadly force against a medic that has advised that they are unable to repair a vehicle because of registration issues

This is an example of a "must" which eventually does get counteracted by an exception. You could say this hurts my case, but I think this just tends to show how inconsistent the handbook is when you take it in totality with other "must"s (or similar verbiage) that do not have an exception, and that therefore my actions were reasonable for a scholar of the handbook.

Quote

Chapter VII - Firefighting
5. Medics must store firefighter gear after the fire has been put out.

Similiar to the diving gear, but this time I'd honestly allow it because firefighting gear is glitchy as fuck, so if they don't store it people are probably gonna blow up from glitches. So they should store it even if engaged.

Quote

 

Chapter VIII - Medical Interaction
Medics do not need permission to administer aid to players
1. Players can still deny themselves medical aid (Full Heal) in which the medic must obey
        Exception: Medics must value their life if threatened to give medical aid

 

Expand  

Here we have an exception to a must.

Quote

Chapter IX - Hostage Situations
Medics may be held hostage for up to 15-30 minutes before they can request to be set free. [See clarification at 5.3 for federal events]
2. "Medics who elect to stay for an additional 15 minutes must not stay and assist for more than 30 minutes. Once 30 minutes has elapsed, medics must return to their regularly assigned duties"

Here medics MUST return to their regularly assigned duties, which means if an entire separate third party who hasn't kidnapped the medic comes and tries to kidnap the medic, that would be forcing the medic to violate the handbook as they "must" return to their regularly assigned duties. Yet I am very confident that medics can be held hostage back to back, as long as it is from separate, completely unrelated groups, even if this part of the handbook says otherwise.

Quote

Chapter XI - Aviation
Aerial vehicles may be landed at any of the following locations
1. Hospital
2. Air Garage
3. Any open, urban or rural, area with the sole intent to provide medical aid to a citizen who has requested a revive
4. Once the call for service is complete, the aircraft must be relocated to one of two previous locations
5. Landing zones must not cause disruption, destruction, or harm to players, vehicles, or buildings

Expand  

Imagine a scenario where you text a medic: "Land or be titaned!". What is the medic supposed to do? First, check if there is a hospital nearby they can land at, if not, check if there is an air garage they can land at, if not, check if there is "Any open, urban or rural, area with the sole intent to provide medical aid to a citizen who has requested a revive", given that landing in any of those areas would not have the sole intent of providing medical aid, as there is the secondary intent of not getting titaned, you are sadly not allowed to land at any of those areas.

So if I message a medic "Land or be titaned" they are required to land at a hospital, or air garage, and if they land in an open field, they have violated the handbook. And if I titan them for seemingly flying off in some random direction, when in truth they are flying to a Hospital/Air Garage, then I have committed RDM.

Now you could say that it says they "may" land at these locations, and that they could just land in a rural area anyway if they feel like it because there is nothing explicitly denying them, and I would have to say: Holy Moly you are thinking like Pseudonym! And secondarily I'd have to say: Why would this section exist, if it was just allowing medics to land at places they were already allowed to land? The only way to justify it's existence in the handbook would be if you treat it as a whitelist system where everything else is blacklisted by default. If you treat this list as allowing medics to do things which they are ALREADY allowed to do, that's kind of absurd. So no, I do not believe the "may" is simply allowing them to land and places they are allowed to land at anyway. I believe the "may" is telling them specifically which places, and in which circumstances, they are allowed to land at all.

Quote

Chapter X - Interacting with the APD
Medics may not operate police vehicles while assisting the APD
4. "If an APD officer instructs a medic not to enter an area, legal or illegal, the medic shall comply with the order and stay clear of the area for 5 minutes until instructed otherwise or given written or verbal permission to return to the restricted location". 

If I tell a medic to "Revive X or die!" after that medic was instructed by an APD officer not to enter an area, I would be forcing him to violate the handbook, as he is supposed to wait 5 minutes first. There is no exception for being forced at gunpoint. And if we allow that exception because it is "implicit" or "common sense", then again, why would we not allow that exception for turning off your collision lights or dying?

EPILOGUE:

all of what you previously read was written in about half an hour. but i really couldnt care less for it. theres something thats been gnawing at me much harder than the strict meaning of the rules. it's something i only really realized after i went outside for a bit to clear my mind after writing the first part

Real photo of Pseudonym touching grass under the gaze of a street lamp at 12:38 AM

its that i was trying to bring fun to the server. i was trying to have an interesting interaction, i was trying to go further than the cancer that is a simple "hands up or die", a phrase which i believe is a mockery of the server. ive taken to adding it and the end of any of my phrases when i interact with hostages just because of how absurd it is "hey bro whats up or die" "good luck or die"

were in a "light rp" server, yet when someone attempts to go out of the standard "hands up or die" format, and does something with a more unique interaction of "collision lights off or die" its treated as if i killed a medic for refusing to enter a gang turf. it would have been better if i just held him hostage for 15 minutes then killed him cuz no APD came.

collision lights are one of those things where medics are forced to do it for like a roleplay reason, to make it more immersive in a way that they are trying to be responsible pilots, yet when i try to do some kind of roleplay, granted still purely in the "or die" format, i'm punished for it. telling a medic to land a heli or die? 100% acceptable, telling a medic to turn their collision lights off or die? a tremendous violation of the handbook and pure RDM.

i've genuinely seen myself become a worse and worse person on this server. i remember when i joined the server i imagined if i could just not dispute anyone else, they wouldn't dispute me. that was rather foolish. i've still managed to only have 1 real ban on record from my time on this server (a dpi ban, mixed in with dozens of VPN bans). since i've played more and more i've become even more hateful and spiteful. i've finally started IA-ing police because something switched, i went to the pyrgos casino, got killed by enemy gangmember infront of like 5 police, anad they did absolutely nothing. that's something that really got to me, even if i didn't realize it in the moment. but i really felt that after i saw that ban message, and when i watched the video from the medics POV i could just sense that switch again, that i don't care about the RNR anymore, i could have IA-ed you guys dozens of times over, anad now you burn me? well then fucking watch what happens if i'm actually trying. i don't think that's good to feel like, but it is what i feel like.

i used to try not to swear as much on the server, i thought it would be interesting if i could manage to not insult any other players, but i let that slip and it just kept slipping i've gotten to the point of calling people the r word and referencing people as "n word" (verbatim, saying the "n" then "word", not the actual full word its self, yet). i really thought that i could just to just be purely nice, but i failed. i didn't have a hard set boundary to not pass, so it just kept slipping and slipping till i don't even know if i have a boundary anaymore

"You asked me why I let Dom go. I did it, because at that moment, I respected him more than I did myself. One thing I've learned from Dom is that nothing really matters unless you have a code.". I had a code, but I lost it, and i feel no desire to get it back with the people i'm sorrounded by. i don't know if they ruined me or if i was just ruined from the start and it took a push to really realize it.

when i started really reading the server rules and handbooks, i started pushing things to really show of their absurdity, and that they need to be fixed. i was really trying not to IA people, i just wanted to show what was wrong with the rules if we pushed them to hard, and that they could do with a few adjustments. David Miller hoenstly fixed most of my problems with the server rules by introducing the details and examples, it finally felt like there was a path forward for all the secret interpretations of the rules. and that is still how i feel about them.

but now i'm trying to push people, not the rules. i want them to fail, not the rules or the handbook to fail. i want people to expereince pain. 

I dont feel like the good guy anymore. I don't deserve to be unbanned, i deserve to be permenently banned from how I want to treat every player on this server. but I want to be unbanned. not because i deserve to be banned, but because the rules don't deserve to have banned me, you don't deserve to have banned me. your nothing better than every other fucked up piece of shit on this server, but i'm nothing better either, and i'm gonna bring down every fucker around me. I request to be unbanned.

[Rexo 1230]

[JoeL 1358]

[Milo 1262]

Honestly I can understand the ban reason. Under the Altis Life Rules Supplemental page in the RDM common misconceptions section it states:

Quote

Saying Hands up or Die, then tasing is not necessarily RDM or Fail RP. As long as the engagement is reasonable, and players aren't being repeatedly deceptive when engaging, it is OK.

In this case here I would opt to say that the demand was not reasonable. I would equate it similar to if someone asked a medic to drop their uniform or other medic specific gear. Although medics must value their lives, they must value the handbook first and they cannot comply to such a demand that asks them to break it.

39 minutes ago, Pseudonym said:

I have aspirations of joining the APD, RNR, and perhaps even the administrative/moderation team

For what it's worth, I don't see a ban like this making much of a difference for those aspirations. The APD requires you not have a ban for two weeks prior to your application for it to be accepted but I could see them waiving this if you explained the circumstances. As for administration, although no recent bans is highly desired; there also is really nothing saying having a recent ban makes you ineligible. Realistically no one is immune to mistakes and that's why the Staff IA section exists.

For a report like this I would've personally given a warning- really just not a super big deal in my eyes. You might be able to negotiate that in supplement of your ban if your concern is having it on your record. The warning would still remain part of your record as well but it won't bar you from joining the APD at all in any case. A complete lift though would probably be too far out of the question since I would agree that this was ultimately a rule break.

Anyway either way I wouldn't fret it

[Pseudonym 167]

10 minutes ago, Milo said:

Honestly I can understand the ban reason. Under the Altis Life Rules Supplemental page in the RDM common misconceptions section it states:

In this case here I would opt to say that the demand was not reasonable. I would equate it similar to if someone asked a medic to drop their uniform or other medic specific gear. Although medics must value their lives, they must value the handbook first and they cannot comply to such a demand that asks them to break it.

For what it's worth, I don't see a ban like this making much of a difference for those aspirations. The APD requires you not have a ban for two weeks prior to your application for it to be accepted but I could see them waiving this if you explained the circumstances. As for administration, although no recent bans is highly desired; there also is really nothing saying having a recent ban makes you ineligible. Realistically no one is immune to mistakes and that's why the Staff IA section exists.

For a report like this I would've personally given a warning- really just not a super big deal in my eyes. You might be able to negotiate that in supplement of your ban if your concern is having it on your record. The warning would still remain part of your record as well but it won't bar you from joining the APD at all in any case. A complete lift though would probably be too far out of the question since I would agree that this was ultimately a rule break.

Anyway either way I wouldn't fret it

I am going to extremely fret it because I heavily believe my innocence. My point remains something like: The must in this case is not like a gang turf where the wording is: "All Medic units (Meaning BOTH ground and aerial units) are prohibited to enter/participate at ALL conquest, gang base skirmish, or Active Turfs. If you are in the area of a conquest when it starts, leave the area IMMEDIATELY", but rather more like a:

 

Quote

Aerial vehicles may be landed at any of the following locations

1. Hospital
2. Air Garage
3. Any open, urban or rural, area with the sole intent to provide medical aid to a citizen who has requested a revive
4. Once the call for service is complete, the aircraft must be relocated to one of two previous locations
5. Landing zones must not cause disruption, destruction, or harm to players, vehicles, or buildings

Like are medics just not allowed to land in a rural field if they are told "land or be titaned" because it would violate the handbook? This is one of those things where yeah it says medics can't do it, but it would have the obvious implicit exception of: unless someone is threatening you with a gun, or titan in this case.

Quote

 

Medics will follow all rules and laws which pertain to the civilian community, including but not limited to:

• Speed and traffic laws
• Disturbing the peace

 

If i'm chasing a medic, trying to kill him, is he not allowed to speed in a hatchback because that would violate the handbook?

[Milo 1262]

All do respect I think you're being dismissive of my entire point. A demand asking a Medic or APD member to break a handbook rule is not a reasonable demand as then they would be liable for that violation internally within the faction. Any other reasonable demand would have sufficed. Perhaps that is something we could add to the supplemental section to make it more implicitly clear but I don't think by precedent valuing ones life should take priority over handbook rules. It would be extremely harmful if civilians could walk up to medics and say "give me your R&R skinned heli or die".

[Sw1nd1le 15]

this is the guy that was taking medics hostage while the APD was doing a OOC training event and spamming Dispatches right?

[HyperGoat 928]

Didn't read everything - Good job to OS 

[-B- 253]

As Wywyh stated in the clip and possibly picked up from something I tell everyone “they can’t force you to break a rule”. You can over analyze the rules until the words start to lose their meaning but one persons misinterpretation doesn’t justify (calling it by a name I’ve used for years so no disrespect) “idiot proofing”. Olympus has active Staff and faction leads to interpret things if needed and a solid Support team.

As a Supervisor, the advice I give to all new and returning medics is “you cannot be forced to break the rules.” This cannot be simplified further than that and I hope carries them through similar situations to what that medic went through. At the end of the day there was no benefit to you telling them to turn off their collision lights so I can assume this was just another thing for you to make a fuss about.

[XnavrasX 439]

Medics are required to have collision lights on at all times while flying. You telling the medic to turn the off is a violation of the R&R handbook and the medic did not follow your command. You cannot force medics to break rules. Ban was more than justified. Play the game, instead of fucking around with medics 

[Pseudonym 167]

5 hours ago, Milo said:

All do respect I think you're being dismissive of my entire point. A demand asking a Medic or APD member to break a handbook rule is not a reasonable demand as then they would be liable for that violation internally within the faction. Any other reasonable demand would have sufficed. Perhaps that is something we could add to the supplemental section to make it more implicitly clear but I don't think by precedent valuing ones life should take priority over handbook rules. It would be extremely harmful if civilians could walk up to medics and say "give me your R&R skinned heli or die".

I do agree with that point. but robbing medics is something that is double extra mentioned is against the rules, where as collision lights off is just a single "must", and there are either similar "must"s without "unless Y"s, that if we apply the collision light logic to, we have to apply to them as well. For example: can i take a EMT hostage, and bring them to a red zone? according to the handbook: "EMT's must be escorted by an Altis Police Department (APD) officer or higher ranking medic to enter an illegal area". So if I kidnap a medic, and we apply this collision light logic to this specific case, we can't take EMTs to an illegal area.

1 minute ago, XnavrasX said:

Medics are required to have collision lights on at all times while flying. You telling the medic to turn the off is a violation of the R&R handbook and the medic did not follow your command. You cannot force medics to break rules. Ban was more than justified. Play the game, instead of fucking around with medics 

Can I bring an EMT to a redzone? Can I force a medic to land in an open field when I tell them "land or be titaned?

3 hours ago, Sw1nd1le said:

this is the guy that was taking medics hostage while the APD was doing a OOC training event and spamming Dispatches right?

wtf is an OOC training event? I tried dispatching the APD but no one was telling me what was going on

[Kratom Enthusiast 7]

My boys wordplay confuses me free him

[Rapture 8]

 

[Natee 204]

All this for 24 hours of no arma?

[Pseudonym 167]

1 minute ago, Natee said:

All this for 24 hours of no arma?

As stated in the preface: "I don't much care for saving myself a few extra hours so I can get back in the server faster. What I care about is being able to say that I followed the rules and the handbook reasonably, and that my actions were reasonable and did not justify a ban."

REEEDUUUUUUUUCCCCCCEEED!!!! REEEEEEEEEEDUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCEEEEEEEDDD!!!!

[Gwate 37]

9 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

The RNR handbook says medics "Must operate with collision lights on at all times", therefore, if you tell a medic to turn their collision lights off, you are forcing them to violate the handbook. I disagree with this logic as I think it is pretty implicitly obvious that they would be allowed to turn their collision lights off if they were threatened with death.

I was gonna read everything but just stopped here because you kind of lost with this mention. You can't threaten someone to break a rule of the server/faction through a hands up or die threat. Pretty simple as that.

In the first chapter of the life rule it does clearly state "If another player breaks rules it does NOT give you the right to break a rule yourself." So you gotta start on the assumption that if someone asks you to break a rule or breaks a rule themselves that you can't follow along and break that rule. Pretty simple

In the Supplemental Rules under chapter 2 it also states "It must be reasonably clear who a player is engaging and that it is engagement and not a troll or a joke." Asking someone to break the rules of the server or die seems like a joke, almost even a troll perhaps . So the medic shouldn't be appreciated to have reasonably taken your engagement as anything but a joke. It would be just as preposterous if someone messaged me "VDM me or die".

I could stop the response here but I'll respond to your other points.

9 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

The RNR handbook says medics "Must operate with collision lights on at all times"

So the RNR handbook, an official rule/guidebook gives a clear mandatory requirement or obligation imposed onto them. This isn't a Ought statement or should statement, it's a must statement. You must do X, or you violate rule Y. You can rewrite the rule logically to mean, you must not operate without collision lights. Written as either a prohibition or mandatory statement, it is still a clear requirement that must be done or you break the rule. 

 

9 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

there is no immediate exception saying "unless they are forced to", but i'm damn near 100% certain I can take a blueberry hostage,

My issue with this characterization is how you separate how hostage-taking does change the positive status of the individual arrested. When you hostage take someone, they are unable to participate in their active duties. You may be a medic in name when you are taken into a rebel area but you are not participating in any medical activities as you are unable to. If you took a medic hostage then forced them to do the role of a medic in a illegal area without another higher ranked medic present then you would be forcing them to break the rule. A better way to understand this is a medic violates a rule when in the pursuit of their duties they wilfully undermine or break a rule. 

 

9 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

f you have a medic hostage, or are just simply forcing them to hold their hands up for the time being, and don't allow them to leave a rebel outpost when it becomes appearnt the APD is conducting a rebel raid, you are FORCING the medic to violate the handbook again!

Same reasoning applies, the medic is not participating in their duties currently as you have forced them as a hostage. If you had them as a hostage and forced them to heal someone inside rebel, you are asking them to perform their duties which would break the rule. 

 

9 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

If you try to initiate on a medic, you must allow them to take their wetsuit off first, or they would be violating the handbook and you would be forcing the medic to do something against the handbook.

Yes you would be breaking the rule by forcing them to do anything before taking off their wetsuit. Pretty cut and dry mandatory statement. You write this with the implication of preposterous nature of the rule but its a mandatory requirement. So yeah....

 

9 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

This is an example of a "must" which eventually does get counteracted by an exception. You could say this hurts my case, but I think this just tends to show how inconsistent the handbook is when you take it in totality with other "must"s (or similar verbiage) that do not have an exception, and that therefore my actions were reasonable for a scholar of the handbook.

I don't get what you're saying here. Musts are mandatory and if not followed they break a rule. Exceptions give certain permissible activities to otherwise prohibited behaviour. Look at a real life example. You must not kill someone, but an exception to this rule is self defence. If you kill someone in self defence, you have been granted an exception to otherwise prohibited behaviour. If there isn't an exception to the rule then the rule must be followed? Don't need to be a scholar to understand that. 

 

9 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

Here medics MUST return to their regularly assigned duties, which means if an entire separate third party who hasn't kidnapped the medic comes and tries to kidnap the medic, that would be forcing the medic to violate the handbook as they "must" return to their regularly assigned duties. Yet I am very confident that medics can be held hostage back to back, as long as it is from separate, completely unrelated groups, even if this part of the handbook says otherwise.

The assumption in the rule is that they are clearly discussing a single matter of hostage taking. As the rule kind of presumes with allowing an extension to hostage taking time and hostage extension times only applies when the same group has kept a medic hostage. All the rule is saying is that the same group can't take the medic hostage after that. Pretty cut and dry considering almost this same dynamic for hostage taking is defined in Chapter 8 of life rules. 

 

9 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

"Land or be titaned!". What is the medic supposed to do? First, check if there is a hospital nearby they can land at, if not, check if there is an air garage they can land at, if not, check if there is "Any open, urban or rural, area with the sole intent to provide medical aid to a citizen who has requested a revive", given that landing in any of those areas would not have the sole intent of providing medical aid, as there is the secondary intent of not getting titaned, you are sadly not allowed to land at any of those areas.

So if I message a medic "Land or be titaned" they are required to land at a hospital, or air garage, and if they land in an open field, they have violated the handbook. And if I titan them for seemingly flying off in some random direction, when in truth they are flying to a Hospital/Air Garage, then I have committed RDM.

Yeah, you would be breaking the rule. You know what doesn't violate that rule? "Auto hover or be titaned" Lol,  it's pretty simple to not break the rule there and therefore not be forcing the medic to break a rule. 

 

9 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

I would be forcing him to violate the handbook, as he is supposed to wait 5 minutes first.

Once again, yes you would be breaking the rule because that is a mandatory requirement for them to follow? Very cut and dry answer.

 

9 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

I dont feel like the good guy anymore. I don't deserve to be unbanned, i deserve to be permenently banned from how I want to treat every player on this server. but I want to be unbanned. not because i deserve to be banned, but because the rules don't deserve to have banned me, you don't deserve to have banned me. your nothing better than every other fucked up piece of shit on this server, but i'm nothing better either, and i'm gonna bring down every fucker around me. I request to be unbanned.

Kill piggy cops and taser and hostage take everyone. Bonus points for hostage taking a piggy cop. 

 

I'm not proof reading any of this shit

[carrot 4]

You meticulously combed the medic rules to find something like this to try to force them to "rule break", didn't you?

Psychotic behavior, perfect APD material. 

[Pseudonym 167]

2 minutes ago, carrot said:

You meticulously combed the medic rules to find something like this to try to force them to "rule break", didn't you?

Psychotic behavior, perfect APD material. 

no collision lights is one i do regularlay because i don't have to take them hostage, but i get to have a fun littile interaction with the RNR, normally they just turn their collision lights off and go on with their merry way. but i guess i can start taking them hostage for 15 minutes and then killing them if APD doesn't come within that time.

s

20 minutes ago, Gwate said:

10 hours ago, Pseudonym said:

there is no immediate exception saying "unless they are forced to", but i'm damn near 100% certain I can take a blueberry hostage,

My issue with this characterization is how you separate how hostage-taking does change the positive status of the individual arrested. When you hostage take someone, they are unable to participate in their active duties. You may be a medic in name when you are taken into a rebel area but you are not participating in any medical activities as you are unable to. If you took a medic hostage then forced them to do the role of a medic in a illegal area without another higher ranked medic present then you would be forcing them to break the rule. A better way to understand this is a medic violates a rule when in the pursuit of their duties they wilfully undermine or break a rule. 

Your mostly interpreting the handbook in a way which I thought would cause some more ridiculous outcomes, but would still be consistent, with the exception of some new stuff about medics being in a different state when they are a hostage. I think you might be conflating the medic being a hostage, with the medic being restrained. The general idea I'm getting from this is: If I restrained a medic, I can bring them anywhere, fed, illegal areas, gang turfs/gang base, whatever. But if I try to force them to do something in that situation, then it would be against the rules? How would this play out if I have a medic hostage, say fighting the cops at frog pro, then the cops tell him to "leave the area or be tazed", is he no longer allowed to stay there unless he is restrained? The cops can just completely nullify the ability of a medic to do anything when he is a hostage? In the rules it mentions hostages medic hostages being able to provide service to people they are instructed to, you can't do that while restrained, which means they do have some freedom of movement to refuse to be in that area.

also, it turns out that even though an EMT "must" not enter a redzone unless escorted by APD or superior medic, there is apparently a surprise "common sense" exception, the same "common sense" which doesn't apply to being able to force them to turn off collision lights, a matter equivalent to trying to force a medic to drop their medkit apparently.

[Gwate 37]

1 hour ago, Pseudonym said:

Your mostly interpreting the handbook in a way which I thought would cause some more ridiculous outcomes, but would still be consistent, with the exception of some new stuff about medics being in a different state when they are a hostage. I think you might be conflating the medic being a hostage, with the medic being restrained.

Holding a medic hostage and restraining them is just semantics for the same thing. In both cases the medic is being forcefully taken with you. Only certain exceptions allow them to continue partaking in their duty while in a hostage state.

1 hour ago, Pseudonym said:

But if I try to force them to do something in that situation, then it would be against the rules? How would this play out if I have a medic hostage, say fighting the cops at frog pro, then the cops tell him to "leave the area or be tazed",

If the rule states the medic can't revive or do anything for people in illegal areas without an APD escort or another medic present (bar exceptions such as federals) and you have that medic hostaged then asking the medic to revive people would be against the rule. However because you can take a medic hostage irrespective of anything else, you can shoot a medic for trying to run away if you tell him to stay in place even when cops tell them to leave the area. Because them running away isn't them partaking in any medic duties. And listening to APD is not a required hard set rule for R&R. Yes in certain occasions you have to listen to APD as a rule but not all situations. 

 

1 hour ago, Pseudonym said:

hostages medic hostages being able to provide service to people they are instructed to,

Once again, hostaging a medic and telling them to provide service to people is allowed BUT is prohibited in certain occasions. Thats the whole point of this whole thing. You can take a medic hostage or restrain them (still the same thing) and taking them to illegal areas. But once they continue their duties such as providing aid to someone, they are now once again doing their duties. And when you do your duty you have to follow the rules. So that means medic in illegal zone (bar federals once again) can't be forced to revive because they aren't allowed to do their duties in a rebel zone without another medic present. Its very simple to get 

[Zoekmaar 2]

R&R might have a psych ward ready for you...

[XnavrasX 439]

38 minutes ago, Zoekmaar said:

R&R might have a psych ward ready for you...

Bro is going in a padded room for a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time.

[Xlax 2799]

[batGooseCan 652]

12 hours ago, Sw1nd1le said:

this is the guy that was taking medics hostage while the APD was doing a OOC training event and spamming Dispatches right?

OOC 

[Millennium 6045]

It would be the yapper @ Milo that would read pseudo's yap

[Pseudonym 167]

44 minutes ago, Millennium said:

It would be the yapper @ Milo that would read pseudo's yap

Milo actually engaged with my points intellectually AND respectfully, where as you lack either. It takes me a while to profile someone, but I think I'm getting there with Milo. If we look at his message: 

17 hours ago, Milo said:

All do respect I think you're being dismissive of my entire point.

This is such an ELITE, KING TIER message right here. Remaining firm in his convictions, showing respect, yet not letting his own intellect be pranced around and evaded by someone attempting to undermine his walls, rather than tackle them directly. He manages to show his respect by challenging you with this message. And it's beautiful. If we look at other examples like his "apolocheese" for when mines had a 99% EV, or the way he lets rampant @'s on discord flow off his back like water. Milo is one of the best staff in this server, and I am not afraid to call many staff members retarded. Although I do not like using that word, I feel I become a worse more hateful person every time I say that word against someone with genuine emotion.

If we look at @ Gwate , his comments definitely lacked respect, and despite saying he was not gonna proof read any of what I wrote, he kind of did. But what he had was intellectual rigor, and while I believe he has a long way to go, along with myself, and along with all of us, but especially with him. I really do respect that he engaged with my messages, challenging me with his views.

And if we look at the messages from the sRNR, we can see what honestly appears to be to be the issue with the RNR in its current state. They are weak, their comments are nothing more than a drive by, they are unwilling to discuss the issues of how underpowered the RNR faction is, and how abusable the RNR is to the other two factions. They act as if it is not a problem, they act like because they fly around a xian every once in a while they are helping cultivate a good culture in the organization. They act as if contradictory logic in the handbooks is their strength, that is if they are even willing to admit there is logic in the handbook. I will say from my understanding marcus did basically have to solo write that entire thing, but maybe if you did that you could try accepting help from others when they have comments, rather than shunning them.