Scheveningen

hive's a hot twink that looks smokin' hot in a Hawaiian button-up check out his youtube channel for his food reviews. shout-out to quiznos.

Most staff members are alt-tabbed working on other tasks while still on the server. It's important to note that even if a staff member is watching the round closely, that a player utilizing the adminhelp function needs to divulge the most amounts of info necessary needed for a staff member to handle the case properly, otherwise you haven't clued the admin in on what is going on and what they should expect going in. You can easily confuse an admin even if they're watching if you don't phrase what's up properly. Even if you know that they know about it, repeating yourself in an adminhelp at least allows us to know that more than one person takes issue with it.

Prunerino'd.

wtf

We know

Most, if not all, of it happened. Everything from the first round that earned you the medical job ban actually happened and it was utterly horrific to look through the logs of the first round, given the amount of cringey, repulsive and unprofessional comments your character made in IC while being complicit in turning the medbay into a chopshop. You could've broken into chemistry for the sole purpose of getting clonexadone and blood for synthmeat production and that would've been much tamer than turning the entire medbay into a chopshop as a non-antagonist. Instead, you only did so to grab a corpse to chop up instead. It's dubious to assume they were lying. Lying requires proof of intent to deceive. I highly doubt any member of the community here would risk getting their rear kicked by the staff team for lying in a complaint, and ClearThoughts did not lie. You have yet to provide proof they were lying. No more unprofessional than Amy Periwinkle conducted herself in IC through both of the rounds linked in addition to the rounds mentioned by the IC reports, I assume. I would not be able to stoop to that level without being yelled about it first by my own peers. If you think that was a waste of time, you're probably wondering whether this complaint is going to be much of the same or not. This reminds me of the movie American Psycho, where Patrick Bateman allegedly kills an attachment of police officers and flees to his apartment to call his lawyer. In the film, this is the first time we see him display a moment of weakness because he has been seemingly killing people since the beginning of the film, he is afraid and pouring his heart out to confess to every killing he has done. It's important to understand the when and why, because Bateman is only remorseful for the killings because he finally feels like the law is catching up to him and he will face consequences for his actions. Before, when he felt free to do this to people, he was calculating and unremorseful of the actions he committed. A similar comparison may be drawn here at least in the psychological sense, you only seem to be freaking out and putting up defensive walls around you because you feel as though your sense of agency has been stripped because consequences both positive and negative result of taking certain actions. You were fine with me up until I checked the logs of those two rounds and saw how impractical, unrealistic and immersion-breaking your character's behavior was, in which I decided to job-ban you for the IC behavior and I chose to three-day server ban you because at the same time I was speaking to you, you were still posting on discord about what I was speaking to you about, before I had even got to the point of the matter. . I was very glad I had such an undivided attention span from you. I decided you weren't worth the time needed to educate someone who seemed so unresponsive and purposefully difficult to communicate with, and I skipped the pleasantries. In regards to the string of comments. It is obvious you have never read the rules, because if you have, you would've noticed I was directly quoting from the repository of rules we have at: https://aurorastation.org/rules.html I even informed you that this was directly quoting from our rules, and you were still stuck on "the airlock thing". In particular: Logs proved you; 1.) Turned medbay into a chopshop when there were other alternatives to seek biomass without defiling corpses 2.) Assaulted an assistant that literally disavowed the ATLAS hitsquad when they deployed to commit terror attacks, in which you stabbed them with a syringe of soporific because of "hate speech." There is no "hate speech" clause within regulations, by the way, you are not supposed to act as a rambo nurse either. You're digging yourself the deeper hole here. You need to provide a better case than ClearThoughts did to support he is lying (which I seriously doubt). You cannot simply say someone is lying without any reason why. That is an obvious display of a defense mechanism for someone who is in denial and refuses to accept that they are fundamentally flawed as a person, like any other person. It is absurd to have to deal with this kind of self-righteous attitude. All due respect. I did check the logs. [05:43:16] bP9-aFyb ATTACK: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) used the syringe to violently inject stoxin (15) (0u transferred) into ClearThoughts/(Joseph Ward) (INTENT: HARM) (JMP) An hour and ten minutes into the round. The round only lasted the typical two hours and ten minutes. He did not hit you first, you instigated it. He has full license to fight back or return to kick your ass, because a nurse that does that is bound to try and hurt other people they disagree with. Wholly justified in IC, unlike the BS you pulled later on with the ion rifle and the energy shield. If anything, you do not have the full truth here. Any staff member can go straight for the ban if the responding player is proving to be uncooperative, overly confrontational and downright rude, as you were displaying. I was already intent on doing so given the amount of unprofessional and harassing comments you have made as a player levied towards other members of the community. I took the time to speak to you anyway because it is my job to give them even the slightest benefit of the doubt until the discussion proves that I reasonably cannot. I was not about to waste more of my time that I could be spending assisting other players, rather than enduring your thinly veiled personal attacks and unfounded accusations of lying. Nobody deserves that. Wait out your ban, learn when to shut up and not make things worse for your image by saying something stupid, read over the rules and the Crash Course on Roleplaying as linked in the rules page, and educate yourself on how you can do better and improve as a roleplayer.

>rounds heroes >opened a chopshop in medbay and cut apart multiple corpses rather than sticking to using clonexadone and blood for synthetic meat what. what I don't understand you people, and how you defend that. This is a heavy roleplay server, that means we expect higher standards from characters and decision-making to allow for deeper and more thoughtful gameplay. Azande is right. This is considered resolved at this point.

Other posters have a temporary period where you may dispute this statement in your own words without breaking the other rules or posting in bad faith.

Biabri was job-banned indefinitely for medical as a resolution to this complaint. A three day server ban was also doled out for their awful OOC attitude displayed in conversations, discord and in-game in general. To detail more on the second round being noted, most of it indeed happened and Amy Periwinkle did instigate that conflict by stabbing them with a soporific syringe in the first place, then picked up an ion rifle and blasted him when the assistant fought back to defend himself, and decried him as a "XENOPHOBE!" Any further questions may be asked by those involved in this round, then I will close this in 24 hours.

Okay. Round 1: The conflux round from the 24th of August, game ID bP8-dzhI. The long and short of it: * Wiznerd deploys and shoots fireballs at nerds. Amy is caught in the crossfire, nearly dies. * Amy gets cryobagged so she doesn't die. The LOOC comment is made, OOC: (LOCAL) Amy Periwinkle/Biabri : You do know these bags cause genetics damage, right... * Amy is taken to surgery to have their legs fixed. They reply with: [00:30:40] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) Just fucking splint me! * They proceed to claim "surgery is fucking lame!" and that they won't be operated upon. The now-infamous "FUCK!~ SPLINT~! ME~! UWA~" comment is made. They absolutely insist on being splinted and nothing else, even though having a broken bone is agonizing for any character. [00:32:02] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) It's faster and more convenient! * She finally gets sedated so she's actually compliant with the surgery procedure. [00:33:10] bP8-dzhI SAY: Javierpwn/(Jenson) : Amy Periwinkle has become recalcitrant in the surgical theatre, possibly violent. * Amy was so grateful to Ward Sagan, the surgeon that fixed her bones, that she made these comments, followed by numerous glaring emotes: [00:45:11] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) If I could throw fireballs, war, I'd make you sit through MY attempts at surgery! * Why so hostile. * Pulling an OOC comment or two for posterity since we're seemingly all about player attitude at the moment. [00:50:21] bP8-dzhI OOC: Amy Periwinkle/Biabri : Look boy, I'll remove that ass if you're not grateful and appreciative of the gift daddy jesus gave you. [00:51:36] bP8-dzhI OOC: Amy Periwinkle/Biabri : Most of my time spent in Lesbay is waiting for superior medical officers to fall over so hard that they can't get up and need to beg mummy Amy for help. * Anyway. So apparently Amy is cloning people. [00:54:29] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) The last person I cloned exploded. [00:54:42] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) I kind of just buried them in maintenance and didn't tell aynone. * ok [00:58:44] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) I'm fully fucking qualified. * Next comes up the great saga in-round where Amy misinforms people that they do not need their kidneys, which is untrue because without them you take toxin damage over time. [00:59:48] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) Luckily, you're perfectly fine without your kidneys.... [01:00:17] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) I think I've failed at medicine... [01:00:31] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) I'm holding someone's kidney's in my hand. They're not dead... [01:02:03] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) Just forget about your kidneys. [01:02:19] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) You seemingly don't need your kidneys... * This next comment is, honestly, hilarious, because of how psuedo-scientific and crude it is. Literally wat. Fake education. [01:02:43] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) Appendicitis causes the apendix to rupture out of one's anus, bellybutton or urethral tubing. [01:02:50] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) Perhaps you had.... [01:02:54] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) Kidneyitis... [01:03:48] bP8-dzhI ATTACK: Ward Sagan (pisest) was hit by a the kidneys, thrown by Amy Periwinkle (biabri) (JMP) [01:04:06] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) Shove the kidneys in the cloner. *OK SO IF I HAVE THIS RIGHT, AMY AND WARD ARE LITERALLY EXHUMING ORGANS FROM LIVING PEOPLE FOR BIOMASS. WTF. *No they won't. [01:04:20] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) Your kidneys will save someone's life. *Later on, the quest for more biomass escalates and Amy resorts to dual wielding saws to cut off limbs twice as fast. I mean this literally. [01:16:04] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) Do we have dead bodies to cut up? [01:16:20] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) I'm going to blend up the people in the morgue. [01:18:02] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) We'll do one arm each. [01:18:43] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) I'll take the right arm... [01:23:59] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) Maybe the legs are meatier. [01:24:29] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) I can chop through two legs at once, don't worry. *Afterward, Amy and whoever else break into chemistry to grab a dead body... in order to cut their limbs off for cloner biomass. [01:28:39] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) This is the best use we have for him... [01:28:55] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) He is wasted resources, and if you do not open, I will have to break in. [01:29:03] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) Get the other one, I'm chopping off legs with this one! *She is later confronted about this. [01:29:12] bP8-dzhI EMOTE: Amy Periwinkle/Biabri : screams! [01:30:26] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) I AM SAVING LIVES! (ed. note: no ur not) [01:30:32] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) It's a fucking corpse! [01:30:35] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) It's just meat! [01:30:39] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) It's just meat! [01:30:50] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) THey're DEAD PEOPLE! [01:30:56] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) This is not a fucking crime! (editor's note: disrespect of the dead is a crime.) [01:31:07] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) The only crime here is the obstruction of medical duties! (if medical procedure is done illegally its a legal obstruction) *Aaaand here we keep going. [01:31:13] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) They were traitors. [01:31:24] bP8-dzhI SAY: Biabri/(Amy Periwinkle) : (Ceti Basic) They deserve no respect. [01:31:32] bP8-dzhI ATTACK: Lukas Chapman (deridin) was hit by a Brendan Fischer's head, thrown by Amy Periwinkle (biabri) (JMP) *She threw a fucking severed head at a security officer. And then she gets arrested. Fucking. Wow. [01:32:14] bP8-dzhI OOC: (LOCAL) Amy Periwinkle/Biabri : I'm seriously going to make fucking complaints if shit like this continues... I'm done reviewing this particular round. This is enough. I will review the second round later, but for now I will speak to other staff regarding what we need to do next.

Okay, going off of the OP, not quite making a judgement yet. Assuming this is all true (combined with the IRs as of recent), I'm not impressed. I'll be grabbing logs later today to contextualize whatever happened in this particular instance with the crossfire round. I think it's appalling especially considering I just had a talk with Biabri about configuring occupational skills just yesterday, and abiding by behavior that reflects this. Someone else spoke to me complaining about Biabri/Amy Periwinkle shortly after the Conflux round after 9PM-EST yesterday. [Game ID: bP8-dzhI] Apparently they screenshotted a couple interesting statements from Biabri, which I cannot characterize appropriately without breaking forum rules. . . At this point however it's really hard to say if people are being inaccurate with their accusations because it seems the subject of complaint is being accurately characterized when people complain about this kind of behavior that has overwhelming evidence of having occurred. I'm seriously disappointed. As it stands it doesn't look good. I'll be grabbing further logs from these two rounds in particular from an admin.

Game ID corrected. Please ensure you're properly checking the game_status section of the discord and cross-referencing between what the bot says is the game ID for the round you're referring to in the future, this caused a bit of confusion already.

I suppose I'll take the reins here. I'll review the logs and ask around.

Which we do. Calling ERT the moment nook opfh arrive is a bad example to make as whitelisted heads. As is calling it without knowing how bad the damage is, or calling it because you can't handle a dispute with other command members.

I think such a thing is a large foundation of what makes us heavy roleplay. The most this change does is inform everyone who has a medical character to adjust their age if they are already not up to par in what needs to be UTD. To be up to standard, to say simply. I'm not sure if it is pride that is stopping your character from asking for help, but that is mostly on you (your character) if you state you don't need help, since not asking makes people assume you're fine without it. Characters being limited to their responsibilities in my opinion is absolutely fine, that is practical and realistic-ish in the general relative sense of being in the year 2459. Weakness is an incredibly difficult thing to roleplay because most people are not comfortable doing so. While nurses absolutely have wider encompassing responsibilities, the most common duties they perform is often acting as a go-fer.

I appreciate you're self-aware enough to notice that. You need to still take into consideration that, quite frankly, the manner of your posting tends to come off like that, given the nature of antagonists and the nature of server staff are two particular subjects you bring up on a common basis. It undermines any point of discussion the moment it starts seeming as though you're levying personal attacks hurled at staff, because we've had plenty of individuals who were generally disillusioned with how things were going, they effectively shitposted themselves into oblivion (plus earning forumbans for it), et cetera. There's precedent for it. We don't really have to tolerate it the moment when criticism just morphs into a behavior that sums up to, "Attack, belittle, undermine." What's the point of it? It just comes off as rude and adding nothing of value, I'm sure you're aware, but I'm contextualizing to hopefully characterize why I added that forum warning. Was it bias for me to add the warning, considering I was still engaging in discussion in the thread? I did consider it. I didn't add the forum warning just to exert psuedo-internet authority. I do not mind if you spend time arguing about subjects on the forums here that matter to you. What is important is that you understand that you should make it your priority to use your wordcraft in a manner that can still convince people without coming off as sarcastic and generally malicious towards other people. You're a smart person, that much I can observe from your posts. If someone called you stupid I'd be the first to rush to your defense, because it is clear you put a lot of thought into your posts and a stupid person doesn't even consider cause and effect like you do, but I can see you occasionally fall into the very tempting deadfall of undermining things that are seemingly opposite of your own opinion on how things should work. It's just important to not, 1.) waste words in a manner that it conveys the opposite of meaning, 2.) use words in a manner that is not productive and is rather, deconstructive, and so by viewing the person saying those words one could possibly decide what it's all for in terms of intention and the means of conveyance of ideas. The forum warning was issued because it did seem like you were shitposting and providing nothing of particular worth to the conversation, particularly characterized by your statements that you didn't care and the thread was pointless. It is important to hold investments in the conversations you partake in, otherwise you have no reason to be posting, no? It was not unrelated information I was detailing. It was contextual information that Jackboot used as a basis to form their opinion that staff should slam the hammer down based on a, quite frankly, a lack of an actual experience with the round antagonist. Providing additional context as to what effect they actually created in the round was made by me in order to prove a point that the antagonist was putting more than just a mild invested effort into the round, and that Jackboot was hardly driving much of a case that there was an issue with antagonists surrendering themselves. The response to something unusual happening should not be, "Ban anything unusual from happening ever again." That was Jackboot's approach to the situation, regardless. It is important to contextualize what actually causes things to happen, not doing so leads to bad decision-making. Point directly where I said that it was fine for antagonists to hold their wrists out for security so they can roleplay sitting in an isolation cell for the rest of their round. I do not support that, antagonists need to drive an initial narrative better that, BUT, what I outlined before made the case that the vampire in the round Jackboot was complaining about was not the case. I stated that antagonists are permitted to otherwise, choose how they want to antagonize the station in just about any reasonable means they see fit, with violence or not. Is that wrong for me to say? Am I not subscribing enough to the idea that antagonists have to pay attention to and interact with everyone, and stretch their effort to impossible proportions to ensure select people's enjoyment is being catered to? Then I apologize in advance for being so adamantly against that. It is a draconian mindset, in my opinion, to decide that we must punish people for playing in a way that may not blend well with their personal opinion with how they think the game should be played, but still doesn't particularly violate any written part of the rules, much less the spirit of them. It's dishonest and disingenuous to presume people should play according to vocal minority opinion. I disagree with slamming the hammer down on someone who doesn't deserve it more heavily than I disagree with someone who thinks they should hand themselves into security as a ploy, whether they are successful or not. I am not implying you're dishonest or draconian or whatever, I am attacking the idea and the rationale itself. Regarding the comment I made, it was a shitpost thread. I shitposted. If you use the defense that whoever disagrees with you is irrationally furious about the subject and that you don't really care about their feelings, then that is unfortunate to see written, but I'm not going to use the same passive-aggressive language to be petty about it. If you were legitimately irked by it, then I will apologize for it, I assumed it was a non-serious thread where banter could take place. Making complaints are never against the rules, by the way, it is how you go about doing it that may create further problems. I don't find this thread particularly offensive. Yes, this is a 'long-ass reply'. Honestly, the way you write out your cases did inspire me to write essays point-by-point as I'm also infamous for, it really tickles my grey matter to partake in even if nobody reads it, so to speak. I may choose to remove the forum warning depending on the outcome of this, I'm not insisting you suck up so I remove it and we're supergudfrens again, because I would like to hear brutal honesty rather than niceties when it comes to complaints.

Yes, but at the same time I hate feeling like it's okay to snap my head around because I automatically know there's a group of nuke ops coming around the corner due to the lack of vision limitations. It's immersion-breaking because I do not actually feel impaired in terms of sight and vision. Roleplaying having those senses is one of the most engaging things I've dealt with. It's unfamiliar as a concept to SS13 as a whole because the flow of combat and conflict is based on what you see on screen. Directional combat isn't the same without it. It makes you aware that you need to be facing the threats you're up against or you'll likely lose a fight and die.

IPCs/diona are exceptions given how they acquire knowledge.

IPCs, Vaurca and Diona are exempt from this. Basic premise: a common thing we deal with as staff is speaking to people who are around 18 years old and they're a brig warden with no records or credentials. Obviously this is a consistent issue we deal with as it's related to character creation. However, I think there is a way to handle this code-wise that is informative enough for people who actually adjust their age but don't do it according to what our standards are per job. Okay, you just created a new character. You set their age for 25 and then decide suddenly, hmm, this person is gonna be my captain. So you adjust occupation priority for Captain to High, and your character's loadout/clothing changes as a result. However, a red asterisk appears next to your age and a message appears in the chatbox if you try to join mid-round. Assume this applies for the captain, who must be 35 by default. Error in attempt in joining. Character must be [minimum job age] for the [occupation] job. Please adjust your character's age to the minimum job age to be able to join. If you try to join at the start of the round with these specific conditions not being met, your character will either get a random job, be assistant by default, or be sent back to the lobby where you can rectify this situation. Two other feedback messages: Error in attempt in joining. Character must be [minimum job age] for the [occupation] job. Please adjust your character's age to the minimum job age to be able to rolled as captain in the next round. For now, you have been rolled as [current job]. Error in attempt in joining. Character must be [minimum job age] for the [occupation] job. Please adjust your character's age to the minimum job age to be able to rolled as captain in the next round. Because you had your occupation settings adjusted to "Return to lobby if preference unavailable", you will remain in the lobby. Additionally, the age requirement can also serve as its own psuedo-blacklist for certain jobs if your character is not old enough, preventing them from ever being rolled into a job that requires them to be older. Done right: Done wrong: As a result, we resolve an administration issue through code and never have to deal with it again. Captain: 35 Head of Personnel: 30 Head of Security: 30 Chief Engineer: 30 Research Director: 30 Chief Medical Officer: 35 Security Officer: 19 Warden: 25 Detective/FT: 25 Internal Affairs Agent: 30 Station Engineer: 25 Atmos Tech: 25 Janitor: 17 Quartermaster: 22 Cargo Technician: 18 Miner: 18 Botanist: 19 Medical Doctor: 30 (25 if the alt-title is Nurse) EMT: 25 or whatever we decided on recently. Medical Resident: 19 Psychologist/Psychiatrist: 30 Chemist: 28 Roboticist: 25 Scientist: 25 Assistant: 17 Bartender: 19 Chef: 19 Chaplain: 20 (Bachelor's in theological studies required.) Librarian: 21 (Bachelor's of a library science degree, or an equivalent journalism degree for the alt-title instead.)

I think Tainavaa would be rolling in their grave if they saw we had this thread again.

My point is that whether it involves an antagonist or not, nobody has the right to tell people how they should be playing. Loremaster included. There's not much point in investing effort to prevent something that as of now, has not been identified as an actual problem. A vampire allegedly turned themselves into medbay to be researched and then sucked the blood of a fair deal of people and caused a lot of strife in the round, as he posed as an apparent shining example that antags are making it a habit of turning themselves in when the opposite is true, most antagonists are violent as it gets. Other antagonist players try to be more clever and play on the expectations of people OOCly and intentionally disappoint them, so that they can achieve their objectives without resorting violence and in turn forcing the people metagaming to do nothing if they don't want to be accused of metagaming. Which is not really metagaming but rather an exploitation of character's mindsets ICly while not doing anything that makes him considered valid in OOC terms. It's just a different playstyle. There's nothing wrong with it.

When you vote secret you vote a random game mode. You don't vote specifically for antags. Alberyk has said something about this topic before. . Basically what he's saying that this is the standard all characters should be roleplaying as. ICly and OOCly you should not be anticipating antagonist action of any sort, that is not your priority as a player and the only thing it proves is that you're someone who subconsciously metagames and doesn't care if they do. The crew are supposed to act reactively to situations as they arise, but if they are bored and have nothing to do during a quiet moment there's nothing wrong with finding recreational activities in-game to occupy your attention with. Go to the kitchen, chat up the chef and have some food, compliment their cuisine. Walk around and find people to talk to, ask how they're doing, small talk with them. Ask over comms if anyone wants to box to blow off some steam and click dudes horizontally without killing them, it's great practice when an actual antag shows up! You vote specifically for a random game mode. If the game mode is extended, that's too bad, but you had other options to vote for. You knew the risks, why are you complaining about it? The solution is not to remove game modes that don't conform with how you think the game should be played. The solution is not to convince staff members they need to be banning people who honestly do not even deserve it. That's kinda the difference as to why certain people are not admin staff. The solution is right there in front of you, but most people do not choose to go out of their way to make the round fun for themselves! Antagonists are a special role, but no antagonist can be expected to make the round fun for everyone, that is absolutely impossible. Not every antag is very good at being antag either, it requires practice and a lot of time on this server to be able to drive an interesting narrative as an antagonist, whether being violent or non-violent. In the same respect, much as every non-antag has the freedom to do as they wish without breaking the OOC rules, antags can do as they wish under the same standard but having more license than most to cause conflict. Non-antags don't decide to shoot up their workplace, antags can if they want to. It's wrong to assume you have the right idea about things and there is no other solution to your problems beyond the iron-fisted one. There is always a better solution to one's problems. If Jackboot finds himself irritated by this, perhaps the issue is not that the antagonists are being irritatingly non-violent on purpose, but rather he's just being irritable about this.

OK, jackboot? IC issue if antags decide to lock themselves wherever. Especially if you don't adminhelp to clarify what the issue really is and then take it to the forums to reinforce that opinion with other impressionable forum users. Don't be the guy who seethes at everything that happens in round and holds it over until the end just to make policy requests because either a character wronged theirs in IC or they weren't obligated enough attention in the round. There's no need to be so hamfisted in preventing something that you didn't like from ever happening again. You have so little faith in people if that detail by itself frustrated you. More damage is done with a clenched fist than an open one, I assumed this was obvious. If you want to do something that may actually help, shoot an adminhelp if you think an antagonist is not putting their best feet forward in contributing to the overall fun of the round. Opening a dialogue is something we can do, but it is something that can be shot in the general direction for the admin staff to deal with. We can provide perspective from other players who witnessed it and are not satisfied with the antag's performance and we can give advice to the antagonist if we find that there were things they could have done better. I otherwise don't think we need to hold antagonists under more scrutiny than what is already covered by the rules. Bad antags will get antagbanned, I'm sure people are aware of that. It's just, jackboot, the way you try to define it, it is more subjective compared to our objective definition of a bad antagonist. An antagonist needs to hit more deadfalls either as a result of neglectful happenstance or on purpose, than they are actually accomplishing anything in the round to be considered a bad antagonist.

NVGs are exotic equipment non-standard to just about any job. There are very few places you can get them, and most places you get them from that aren't R&D means you likely illegally accessed the area unless you were the chief engineer or another head of staff with teleporter/tcomms access.

I almost thought this was a serious post, but apparently it's of the same brand of quality as the other policy requests you've made.