Jump to content

Ornias

Regular Members
  • Content Count

    379
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ornias

  • Rank
    Head of Personnel
  • Birthday 24/02/2001

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Journalist

Linked Accounts

  • Byond CKey
    ornias

Recent Profile Visitors

565 profile views
  1. ok i'd like 2 withdraw this complaint thank u
  2. I'm sorry, I don't understand what that means. It was highlighted in red because it was not able to be resolved in the complaint. My complaint is that I do not feel that my (old) complaint was appropriately handled. I have highlighted areas to show why, and put explanations on the side.
  3. Yeap, I mean. By extension I guess it calls into question the validity of her resolution of the linked thread but this specific one is against RTNP (as advised in her final post).
  4. Key: Red= Never addressed. Yellow= Subpar-ly addressed. White= Focused on the ruling itself, which wasn't relevant to the complaint. Blue= Messages which convey no information beyond 'I support TT', and are therefore meaningless in a complaint.
  5. BYOND Key: Ornias Staff BYOND Key: ReadThisNamePlease Game ID: Reason for complaint: I feel that the core reasons for my complaint were never addressed and that a lot of things I said were blatantly ignored. These were justified as 'staying on topic', but despite me asking, it was never clarified why the rest of my posts weren't relevant. Even when admitting that TT did something wrong (being 'too blunt'), the entire posts were written in a way to minimize blame (emphasis on 'nothing wrong', and 'conducted themselves properly' for the last two). I just want to play role play space game, but it's really not cool to have this kind of thing be ok. Hopefully the image I've uploaded doesn't implode under it's own mass. A post-by-post explanation is attached. Evidence/logs/etc: Key: Red= Never addressed. Yellow= Subpar-ly addressed. White= Focused on the ruling itself, which wasn't relevant to the complaint. Blue= Messages which convey no information beyond 'I support TT', and are therefore meaningless in a complaint. Additional remarks: I didn't want to make another complaint, but that's what I was told to do by RTNP.
  6. if they did nothing wrong, why do they need to be less blunt, RTNP? yeah, i'd like a staff member to take this over who's going to at least reply to what i write, please. EDIT: also i don't think this 'investigation' ever happened.
  7. tend to disagree on this. you can and should be immersed in the unreal and fantastic. that said, there are so many ways to play a staff of change that this argument isn't fair anyway. it's up to the recipient to maintain believability. while i agree that in it's current state it's rarely used to promote meaningful or engaging interaction, that can see change- changing the staff into a spell that takes time, so people can marvel at the transformation; giving it a cooldown; giving the caster a limited degree of control (and idk if this is still a thing but making sure it keeps clothes on/tearing apart clothes/equipment that's far too small for, say, a vaurca warform).
  8. jfc this is one of the most frustrating things to read in the whole wide world. find attached an artistic representation of my issues, attached to the logs, so there's no confusion whatsoever. and if that's STILL not enough: I obviously consider it to be important to my complaint if I'm posting about it. If something isn't relevant at least take the minimal effort to highlight it and say why you don't think it's relevant. "Find out ICly" was used as the last line of justification in the most laconic response to me when I was clearly frustrated and in a state where I COULDN'T find out ICly, and my ahelp was ended immediately after ceasing my ability to question further or understand why that ruling was given. And if you read the complaint you'd see I don't CARE about the actual resolution. I only CARE about a staff member taking the time to investigate, explain, and outline issues. If you're intent on 'sticking to the reason for my complaint' then you clearly haven't interpreted the reason for my complaint well at all. And this entire section tells me LITERALLY NOTHING. I've put forward reasons for my frustration, and literally everything you've put here is: "I don't think TT was bad. I think I would have done the same thing. TT was perfect. I'm telling you, it was fine, TT did nothing wrong here! What else do you want?". You're not giving arguments, you're not responding to the questions I've asked, you're not trying to resolve this, you're literally giving a stock response that you could have had macro'd and I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. You're trying to hide behind the fact that 'they don't HAVE to tell you anything' to excuse poor staffing. This is blatantly toxic: these staff liberties are supposed to be to ensure they can do the BEST they can do, not to act as a wall to hide behind when they don't take the time to explain rulings to players. Please, reread my complaint, and even if you still hold the same view when you're done at least take the time to justify it.
  9. that's a baby in a comedy show talking to his mum and not two members of one of the most technologically advanced and outwardly 'emotionless' species in the galaxy talking to their coworker. it doesn't matter that upon investigation the matter was concluded to be acceptable. what matters is that there was no investigation into the matter. and i don't want to hear "there's no investigation because it's clearly an IC issue" because the way that i phrased it was "spammed", which is CLEARLY grounds for an investigation. then what was it meant to be????? i'm clearly frustrated, i'm a ghost, and the ahelp was closed immediately afterwards. that is obtuse and mean spirited. i don't know why you have this mindset that it's okay to just end ahelps without investigating under the explanation of 'there might be context for it'. i don't know why you think it's okay to just end ahelps out of the blue without trying to make sure all players walk away from the situation as content as we can get it. my questions were IGNORED. not just 'i can't answer that', but IGNORED. why do you think THAT'S okay? being a staff member is supposed to be a responsibility, and the liberties that you're afforded are supposed to be so you can do the job as well as you can, NOT so that you have an excuse to do it in a subpar way.
  10. Your character doesn't need to be sad he just needs to care.
×
×
  • Create New...