Pratepresidenten

I will lift this as it is your first perma. But do go through your warnings when you get on to refresh your memory of various issues, because you are on very thin ice, and your next infraction will likely land you another perma. So take things very slow and ahelp potential issues or questions before jumping into things. Appeal accepted.

Then off to the archives it goes!

As discussed with the applicant, the new lighters already implemented was plenty to cover this need.

For my warden/officer, I wear the standard getup you get assigned with the additions of a tie and suspenders. I am very uncreative.

-1 shittalking admins, would not hire. But srs, you're a good egg, wouldnt mind having you back 😄

Not really. Laws are laws, there is no greater or lesser priority. Anywho, considering the overwhelming positive response for removal, there is no point in clarifying any of this as its probably will be swooshed during the next pr merging. A shame :c

Thats the thing though, if you play the AI, you need to understand how the laws work. If you dont, you really shouldnt be shitting about with a remote controlled mech. There is no interpretation to be had here. If there is a conflict, you do nothing, or you intervene in another way that doesnt cause a conflict, like leaving your mech and using other means.

I'd like to see it kept. It has potential. It would be easy to enforce under law 4, but it should already be covered under law 1. 1. Safeguard and protect NanoTrasen property from damage to the best of your abilities. The mech is NT property, and therefore they should not be used as a meat shield, or carp hunting. Fighting carp is not safeguarding the mech from damage to the best of your abilities. Fighting antags is not safeguarding the mech from damage to the best of your abilities. Doing any dumb shit that makes the mech a target for damage is not safeguarding the mech from damage to the best of your abilities. Ahelp shit AIs doing this, and punishment will be dished out.

Considering all of this revolves around an expedition, it is non-canon, and therefore invalid.

This sounds... Pretty on point for melee combat. Slow characters are either naturally tanky or have armor, so of course lighter/faster characters would have an edge in a fight they usually would lose? Aim intent, but for melee! Might be coo'

WOW, AFTUR ALL mY lOVE I GIVE U, U TREAT ME LIKE DIS! Voting for dismissall!!!!1111 >:c

Seems like a pretty simple fix to me, really. The will of nar'sie becomes absolute, what happens is: You have your cult prefs on: You get a choice to resist once or twice before you're forcibly converted. You have your cult prefs off: You die instantly when conversion is attempted. Bingo bango, no suffering and frowny faces icly or oocly. Short, sweet and to the point!

Restricting character knowledge is a necessity to maintain a good roleplaying environment for everyone. Sure, some are special in real life and they're able to go above and beyond what most people can do, but if we let one person do this, we'd have to let everyone do it. And that, would drag down the overall quality of roleplay on the server. That being said, the warning will stay, as it was valid, but the admin in question will be talked to regarding the way this warning was handled. Tthis matter is considered resolved, and Ill archive this in about a day or so.

Okay. We've talked it over, and come to the conclusion that although the warning is valid, more effort could have gone into explaining why this was an issue. It is as you say, impossible to have rules dictate every single scenario, which is why a little time should be set aside to explain what the problem is, and to help the offending/inquisitive party understand. Now, the issue here is that we try to enforce a balanced workplace for the sake of fairness, keeping departmental characters within a certain skillset expected from their department/job. There is, of course exceptions and cross-department knowledge, but engineering in all its forms and security is not one that we approve of. I understand that time can be taken to learn things icly, but the whole taught icly business isnt something we approve of either, as the simple mechanics involved in doing X thing would likely not line up with what is actually required both in training or experience. Does this clear it up for you @kait ?

Would be cool if the escape pods had a function, instead of being useless "Emergency departure only". Give 'em an emag function and allow them to just yeet. Or maybe.. A one-time TC device(Since most antags has uplink access) to port the user to an antag base where they can ghost or rp or w/e.