Ornias

ok i'd like 2 withdraw this complaint thank u

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.

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).

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

what about everything else i said

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.

Bump.

Bump.

Bump.

hi i was the captured AI

Your character doesn't need to be sad he just needs to care.

because he looks new and doesnt have a whitelist you're justifying all this essentially as "my character's desensitized to death and security didn't do what i thought they should", which is a big issue. character history isn't a justification to take potshots at other players because they didn't take your preferred route, and this justification can be applied to literally any and all contextually inappropriate insults against character/player actions. that's what character complaints are

BYOND Key: Ornias Game ID: Round before b2I-bPzx Player Byond Key/Character name: Ilshle Huzu Staff involved: Karolis2011 Reason for complaint: I didn't want to make this complaint, because I might have missed context for it or whatever, but I was told to make one because the round was ending. It's hard to take their statements as believable when there's no emotion to them, even seconds after watching someone die/knowing about a large number of people dying. The pointedness and detachedness of them makes it seem like it's targeting the players, rather than the characters. We uphold emotion, reason, and FearRP in the actions of even reserved or cruel characters. Did you attempt to adminhelp the issue at the time? If so, what was the known action taken by administration/moderation? Approximate Date/Time: 11:00 PM NZST

surely this is already covered by the rules, though? that using meta-knowledge and ooc interest to drive character action is against the rules. by focusing on the player making the deception, rather than the character, you're extracting one of the only meaningful ways for characters to have long-lasting impact on others.

these responses do not matter to me because they do not address my reason for complaint

this was ~20 minutes. they never went offline. every attempt has been made to avoid elaborating or answering my questions.

BYOND Key: Ornias Staff BYOND Key: TrickingTrapster Game ID: Round before b2D-bRYd Reason for complaint: I had an issue with certain characters IC behaviour. I ahelped it after seeing and hearing about a repetition of such behaviour. No attempt was made to investigate my issue, my ahelps were closed while flatly ignoring the questions I asked, and both staff members did not take my frustration seriously (which can be seen most clearly in the 2nd and 3rd ahelps). This felt mean-spirited and intentionally obtuse. Answers I received were laconic and didn't address why the action was or was not acceptable, even when I expressed I couldn't picture any kind of scenario where it would be acceptable. Evidence/logs/etc: Additional remarks:

I think it's important to clarify that you shouldn't be afraid to subvert any and all of the above when it would be appropriate for your character and the story. If you've got a character who would frequently break a large number of these tips, it's probably important that you examine your characters believability within our setting. But OOCly, your objective shouldn't be to make sure that the hostage gets out unharmed, but instead to ensure that the story continues to develop in a natural and interesting way. Attempting to save the hostage can be and often is a part of this, but don't be afraid of imperfections in the pursuit of this goal if they strengthen your character or the developing story.

this is incorrect and limiting. i have stated why i disagree but i will quote it here: you can individualise your meals, and we have a mechanical system to allow you to do so. a 5 star chef can make a burger better than i can even with the same ingredients. you can use a little RP magic and pretend he used better spices, timed it better, etc. sometimes someone might have a special gimmick (eg. where they prepare the food in front of you) and this would stifle any creativity in that department as well. your system is limiting and obstructive for seemingly no reason.

look!!!! you're trying to enforce a status quo of conformity again!!!!!!!! you're enforcing standards for characters based on your opinions rather than an organized system (aka: you think the dining area is a cafeteria, you think that NT wouldn't hire a talented chef, you think that all meals are exactly the same, etc), and killing creative character design and interaction as a result!!!!!!! that besides, we already have a precedent to be the top of your field even in stuff like the bar. you can be one of the best chefs/mixologists in the galaxy. nanotrasen will hire you. this is accepted. a chef needs a bachelor's degree at the minimum but we shouldn't NEED a precedent for character design!! i shouldn't need to show this image!! the status quo you want provides us with nothing but repetition

this whole "stop thinking you're more important than you are" mentality is stupidly toxic. there's a difference between a five star chef and a fry cook, and i don't know why you think acknowledging this difference is snowflakey. they make different meals, even if they both make burgers. you have the option to use a pen to specifically describe what the meal you've produced is. you can't argue this point.