KingOfThePing

Oh, yeah??

They only have two item slots, they are worse than webbing in every way or am I misremembering? They look cool tho...

I have, over the course of two weeks, explained in various posts in the thread why I dislike the idea. Here is an example, for the sake of completness: Just because I did not repeat this, or repeat the other posters, already explained problems with the proposition does not mean I spammed or did a +1/-1 without context. It was a response to an already lengthy discussion. I voiced my opinion, without senelessly repeating the other three or four posts before mine. It does, in fact. It shows what could and probably will happen, when the propsed change is implemented - as it was said by others, in the same thread, too. Here is an example: Sorry, but the warning, as it was applied is not valid and I would even go as far to say that it was applied arbitrarily. I do not agree with it and still want it removed.

I guess you meant two last replies to the thread. Yes, they were short, since I basically just agreed with previous posts. I didn't feel the need to regurgitate them, but still wanted to post my opinion on the newly applied changes. They are still not spam. Have you read my other replies in the thread? I posted a lot, because there was a lengthy discussion, not because I spammed the thread.

I have played an IAC character that has been "leased" out to NT for years now. Not sure if I like this idea. This can be done over records already. Contractors are more for Corps or factions, the IAC isn't really either of them. Or st least doesn't work like the usual corps.

BYOND Key: KingOfThePing Staff BYOND Key: Simon_the_miner Game Round ID: N/A Reason for complaint: I checked the forums after waking up today and was notified about a warning applied. I had no idea what it was for so I checked it, it is attached. I was warned for spamming in this topic: I have re-read the entire thread and cannot see spam posts from me. I also didn't see any posts that were hidden. Over the course of a few weeks I have, in great detail, explained why I dislike this idea, I did not +1/-1, I have not shitposted nor did I flood the thread with unnessecaey replies. While a warning point doesn't really restrict me, I will want it removed since I disagree with the application of it. Evidence/logs/etc: a screenshot of the warning should be attached here somewhere. Additional remarks: I was told I had to make a complaint if I disagree with this.

While I dont think you are not qualified or shouldn't do it, far from it - I dont think you should put even more workload onto yourself. There is only so much someone can do without the already existing responsibilities to suffer. This is not a +/- 1, because I would totally +1 you in an instant because I've worked with you for a while now, but I think you should ask yourself "should I really put more work onto myself, besides lore writing and besides CCIA?", not "CAN I put more work....". In the end it's not my decision though, and I wish you the best of luck l.

Last round we had revenants getting shitfaced at the bar. It was great. It can be a fun gamemode thanks for your work Geeves

KACHING HERE COMES THE MONEY BABBBBBBY

make a bling

This is even worse than what was proposed. I'll just stop voting altogether, as soon as this is in, what a shame

Well if that's the case, nothing speaks against it. Or maybe make a poll to get a more representative insight on what the players think

While I am not against this suggestion or is there anything wrong with it I wonder how much it adds, when most people turn it off anyway. Not sure if it's worth the effort?

2508

2506test

Basically what Carver said. I can see the reasoning but don't think the solution is a good one

I am, on the other hand, not sure how much gain there is to "force" people to play, so to say. Why not raise the required player count for "meme" roundtypes, so a few voters cannot sway the /entire/ server and then not join. With a high enough player need, the majority of the server has to actually ready up. If the majority of the people want to play that gamemode and there arent enough players it will be randomly drawn anyway. Not sure what seeing the names adds to anything. Sorry, but this is a straw man argument. Just because I do not instantly join the round type I voted for, does not mean I "have no intention of being part" of it. I will ignore the second part because it has nothing to do with voting for a game mode on a video game. For your argument to work every vote that is being "meme-y" (read: anything else than secret and extended) is being made with malicious intent, which is inherently wrong, except you want to accuse the playerbase of the opposite.

I still disagree and again point out that there is no rule that states that I have to play the game. The fact that a PR, #10964 'Vote Checking' kind of quietly implements this as a first stage right now, without the locking in part despite the controversy is nothing I feel good about. It should at least have a proper feedback thread. The only that comes out of this is that people will just not vote and/or just not ready up.

Lmao, we have gone full circle

2505

three fiddy again?

Only Zundy