Tainavaa

And a slew of other things as well. A lot of people interpret these going-ons on the forum as hostility. I personally have not interpreted it that way for the vast majority of it. I've asked for two things formally since I've been here, and I've kept my bitching to a minimum until very recently.

But as a wise man once told me, "A god who holds the record for eating the most skateboards is greater than a god who does not hold that record."

That's Inis? Mine is Skyler, like my character from Starbound. Except he's a furry instead of a bird. It IS a whole lot of information. Like. A LOT of information. That I don't think is even fathomable to us.

I prefer resto. One thing I've noticed about your beliefs however, it's impossible to determine the outcome of something. I think it is possible if you know the numbers and the functions in the system. Of course this is pretty much outside the realm of plausibility for us as humans to learn it BUT I THINK IT'S THERE.

Anything that ever was, is, and will be can be determined with mathematics. Everything in the universe is a composition of functions. And it's balanced. Even what we think are part of these functions. There are countless variables in this ultimate function and each sub-function can interact with eachother when we observe the interactions in the universe and the variables - or output of those functions depending on circumstance - affect the output and/or variables of the functions they interact with. That's not to say we have no decision. We are variables in these functions just as smaller parts of us all the way down to the subatomic level are part of it as well and each one may or may not affect what occurs at the conscious level. We can alter the variables of the other functions, and therefore the output. Anything that happens in this universe and in this existence happens for the sake of balancing the "ultimate function". There is no good. There is no evil. There is only balance.

I don't much care for talking before most murders. I don't know why people want to talk so much. The way I always thought of it is that in most murders, there isn't much - if any - talking. I think it's heavy roleplay no matter what if I could legitimately think, "Just like in real life! after it happened. Or while it's happening. That isn't the only qualifier. But it's one of them. That includes silent and quick murders. And a lot of wordless, aggressive actions that a lot of people look down upon.

I meant on-duty. Fuck.

And when she's off duty, it's No-RP.

I WANT IT.

I just... want... the hardsuit... It's so close, yet... So far...

Immersion and realism have very little room to fudge in my definitions. The nature of a human being will not change. The nature of a computer will not change. The nature of a government will never change, and neither will the nature of war. So how can it be 'immersive' or 'realistic'? You work around the obvious flaws in the game. Mechanics and current content of the game is not easy to just change to conform to a heavy RP standard. So you work around them through lore. Which we have, and are doing. Will humans evolve to be nearly non-identifiable to a human today in the future, with a psychology that is damn-near unrelatable? Maybe. But not so soon. And as humans are designed in lore, they are not different. Sorry I couldn't provide a more objective definition for heavy RP though, I really could not find or think of some strictly objective definition. I just defined it to my understanding of how it applies to this server.

I think a good look at my two philosophies is needed in yonder thread. I even think it encompasses Sue's concern. I'd like to know if I'm wrong.

Can I take the hardsuit yet?

If I'm wrong on the definition of heavy roleplay, then it should be clearly defined by somebody. Other than that, I really hope it was clear enough because that was exhausting to do twice. I believe when elaborating, anything that might be ambiguous needs to be clearly defined in the current context, so that's what I did.

I spent. Like. Half an hour or something defining things and even providing definitions for some of the words that might be ambiguous in those definitions and summing it all up in a small sentence or two. There was no way there could be any confusion. The whole message was so short. And it took so long because I worked to format it well and make it clear. And now it's all just gone. Gone. I just.

The agenda in my first conclusion is actually directly tied with the second. The one who complained about the hardsuit was PumpkingSlice originally, the malfunctioning AI who tried to space me. I have a log of PumpkingSlice saying something later on in OOC. Sound Scopes bwoinked me in place of PumpkingSlice, almost assuredly, so PumpkingSlice didn't look biased because he was the malfunctioning AI. And all the participating staff in the round that responded to my complaint supported that it was most definitely powergaming. No ifs, ands, or buts. We've been taking this hardsuit for a quarter of a year. Almost every round. And most definitely, every round I was Tina. I find it extremely difficult to believe that went under your nose for four months. Why decide all of a sudden to stop it now? And why stop this when people are allowed to do other things that so many other people bitch about things that affect other players much more than that? Because PumpkingSlice, a moderator, didn't like what I was doing. One out of a hundred times, having the hardsuit was a blessing rather than a curse. And that was enough for the administration to say "Yeah. Powergaming." Why? Why, when so many people complain about other things that affect players more? Because a moderator made the complaint. And there was no listening to me at all. Despite describing the cons associated with taking the hardsuit, I was dismissed as having an unfair advantage. So what was the staff's agenda at the time? To protect a member of their team's interest.

In this particular server Frances, yes. To put it in a generic form: A player is someone who plays to coincide with the server's philosophy. So you look at the server's philosophy. Ours contains the words "Heavy roleplay". So what does heavy roleplay mean? To my understanding of the definition, to play a role in an immersive/realistic manner. Definitions, reasons, and other things of the sort need to be concise. I shouldn't have to elaborate any further. If you think there's still some ambiguity, I'm honestly hard-pressed to find it. I've elaborated on the bits that pissed me off before. Particularly the hardsuit and Tina being a shitty HOP. Since the hardsuit issue I haven't played nearly as much. And when I have, I've tried my hardest to avoid another bwoink. Before those two instances, I've never had an issue with the administration and I fully trusted I could do things in legitimate roleplay and not be bothered. Even AFTER my traitor ban because it was a busy night and I understand where he could think I was just murderboning. It's an honest mistake and it was okay. After the two instances I described earlier though, I started to lose trust in the administration. I'm honestly surprised anything even came of my complaint against the Furry. So I can't give you any more instances but those two were enough to come to two conclusions. 1) The administrators are shoehorning gameplay to fit what they like, altering the definition of "roleplay" and "powergaming" to their whim to fit their agenda. 2) Administrators are going to look out for themselves first as team, and the normal players second. So I avoided any sort of deviation from a "model employee" as possible while TRYING to maintain my character. Which hasn't been all that successful. Doomberg, I'm not trying to advocate some sort of "anarchy". In fact, the opposite.

Refer to my definition of a player, and my elaboration on roleplaying. edit: And also what I believe the intent of the server is.

And so as I said for administrators to refer players to their logical reasoning, I will refer you to mine. What does roleplaying mean to you? Because as I hear it, you're playing a regular working person on a space station hired by a mega-corporation. So that's the role we play. Do actual researchers just release deadly viruses to the station? You'd think a person like that wouldn't get hired. As someone who plays a closet sociopath, someone who HIDES their sociopathy, I don't think someone like that would get hired. The admins are giving me obvious examples of grief and that, to my understanding, does not reinforce roleplay. Right now, what's happening is often referred to as a Strawman. The server is intended to be heavy roleplay. So behave like an administrator of a heavy roleplay server. "They can do thing because X and Y. Deal with it." You are a player. But you have additional duties as an administrator. And just that. An administrator. Unless you're a dev too. Then that's also a duty. The thing is though, that nobody is seeking to take away but only to add more. EDIT: Let me define 'player' so there's no ambiguity here. Player is defined in this particular instance as someone who joins the server to play in a manner that coincides with the server's philosophy. In my earlier posts I've outlined what to do with the people who do what you're describing to me so I'm honestly not certain why it's being brought up.

I have always been ready to accept that. I have always been one for letting things happen as they happen. I don't want people to ask me for permission to kill me. I'm okay with Sue's behavior IC. I'm okay with Xander's behavior IC. I'm okay with literally everyone's behavior IC so long as there's a REASON for it. The one thing I have asked NOT to be allowed was The_Furry's telescience bullshit because there was literally NO reason to do it other than to annoy people, and it's evidenced in the thread by the Furry himself so you can not convince me otherwise. It didn't reinforce roleplay for me as the Warden, all it did was make me have to move a million and a half monkeys and to fruitlessly tell Travis "No." As HOP. If there are more undue complaints/objections being risen out of players, then refer to what I said earlier. It is allowed because reason. Bitch all you want, I will refer you to my objective reasoning. If you can't provide much more reason beyond "I don't like THING" then sucks. Just playing means legitimately playing the game as was intended. Like I said. Your job is to facilitate a quality roleplaying environment, essentially, as an administrator.

Casper. No disrespect, but I choose not to heed your response if you will only pick what and what not to pay attention to in mine. edit: Thank you, Jboy. To Frances, you will not change the nature of people. People will bitch. People will whine. Look at any government. If people do not enjoy roleplay without being railroaded, that isn't your concern. Look at what the server is about. Yes, it's about the community. Does the community want to have an on-rails story? I don't think so. People don't know what's best for them. It's your duty as an administrator/mod to determine to allow something they dislike just so it allows other things that they DO like. When you disallow something because reason, you're forced to disallow other things for similar reason. And chances are, those things will be something that the original complainer liked. You can explain that to them. But they won't always listen. And thus, here we are. People are afraid of the bwoink, people believe they are entitled to biased allowances and disallowances on the server, and people are pissed off that they can't just. Play. You will never make everyone happy. But that isn't your job. Your job is to facilitate a quality roleplaying environment. And I don't know about you, but I never was a fan of on-rails stories.

If the issue is people making complaints over minor issues, then why not say "It's fine because X and Y. Deal with it."? If you're an administrator, it's your duty to help them understand why it's fine but if you've explained in a clear and concise, objective-as-possible manner then it's out of your hands as to whether they understand it or decide it's fine. Otherwise there's nothing else for you to do as an administrator or moderator. If they want to bitch more, shut them up. If they want to leave, so be it. If it's half as minor to them as it is to you as a mod/min, then they'll forget about it and move on. Maybe they'll even come to an understanding later on. But that isn't your concern. You're a mod/min. Basically, to sum it up, behave and act like a mod/min. Nothing more. Another edit. I want to emphasize concise, clear, and objective when explaining things. No emotions, no opinions. Objectivity is key when communicating intellectually.

Thank you, Jboy. And I want to reiterate this, and I want to make this hammered into everyone's heads because I'm just as pissed as Delta, and have been for a long time. You want to know what we should do? I'll tell you what we should do. We should That's it. Simple. Chill the fuck out and let us play.

I've elaborated on my issues and what how I think it could be resolved. I have one suggestion. Let the players play the game. Like. Let me play. I gave you some examples, and it's not too late to just LET ME TAKE THE FUCKING HARDSUIT. LIKE. WHY DOES IT MATTER THAT MUCH TO YOU. IT MATTERS TO ME BECAUSE MUH ROLEPLAY. LIKE. COME ON. REALLY? POWERGAMING? We rarely have suggestions to better the community, I think, because there are no suggestions to worsen the community. These limitations aren't brought on through a suggestion thread. My limit to take a medical hardsuit wasn't brought upon through a suggestion thread, and not allowing people to decorate their workspace was NEVER disallowed through SOP OR station directives or anything so I don't know why people even bother to care IC. It's completely allowed IC. They just kind of happened through other threads or through someone bitching hard enough and it just kind of stuck. Is it that difficult, and does it take that much work, to just let players play? And cherrypick the obvious shitters, or players that continuously cause problems? Maybe the question isn't what SHOULD we do, but what SHOULDN'T we do. I think the mentality here is reminiscent of regulations in the Army. The army has general regulations that can not be taken away from on a post-by-post basis but can be ADDED to. And so far, what I'm seeing is "What can we ADD?" not "What should we take away?" You've already added to the core structure, why can't you take it away now?