Skull132

Can we please not leave our pragmatist shells in favour of having blind faith in people? Here's two principles, both of which exist due to prior incidents, accepting this application would violate: No staff member should be hired before they've spent, optimally, three months on the server actively playing. Plahunter doesn't even have one month spent on the server. And no, his previous activity doesn't matter because it's been two years and shit's changed a whole lot. Who knows, he might not even like it here after his second or third month. No staff member should be hired after being recently unbanned from a two year ban, which was applied for actually hostile behaviour. Specially since the unban in question had a little "but" attached to it as well. There has been no time to properly evaluate his conduct. And the little snippets I've been seeing don't impress me, as far as being staff is concerned. Not only would accepting this cause potential difficulty for the staff, it would put undue strain onto Plahunter himself and cause him to do stupid shit. He should be given time to settle down before such considerations should even be taken with a grain of salt.

The way I see it done, and the most realistic way of it being implemented, would be to implemented like Bay tried to implement the various branches of the armed forces aboard a single ship. Essentially, you'd have different groups with different MO and culture working on the same station, with someone holding the reigns. Would allow for subtle tension ICly.

This won't reliably help, I wouldn't think. The issue is DreamSeeker (the program you use to play the game) getting stuck in an infinite loop, or outright crashing, whenever too much new map data is sent. So, whenever you jump views, swap Zs, etcetera, you run the risk of triggering said crash. It used to exist before as well, on the Exodus even, it just wasn't as exacerbated. The solution proposed wouldn't really minimize the amount of data nor the size of the delta required to update what you see. As far as fixes go, 512 appears to have solved the issue, as far as my testing indicates. However, this requires that both the client and server be bumped, and since 512 has a recent history of really crippling issues, we're holding off for now. No real windows, because this shit runs on Lummox time, but maybe in March/April? We'll seee.

This was actually suggested? Will probably be implementing this over the weekend if none of the other admins beat me to it.

After a bit of discussion with staff, the ban's lifted. However, if you end up targeting people, whether it be by harassment or metagrudging, rest assured, you will not be given another chance.

Apologies for the delay, I got side-tracked with the update. I asked for information regarding you from the staff of other servers and got one response, which I'm getting further details on. We'll see how this pans out once they get back to me.

Considering the circumstances, I am willing to authorize an exception to this policy. Plus, it doesn't forbid a feedback thread.

The amusing thing is that in your case, there's actually a small chance you grew up and matured. Considering your age 2 - 3 years ago. As said, though, I'm going on a two day trip and won't be dealing with this until I get back. Unless GarnAbo want to take over. In the mean time. Input directly related to the ban or banned individual, or from involved parties is welcome. Everyone else, hold your dicks and don't turn this into a meme-fest. Also, it would really help if you were able to cite a server you've played on in the past year or so. Just for the sake of seeing how you've conducted yourself elsewhere.

I was worried about this being shit. But it's actually not. Fuck, how else can I start drama :c

Consider. Whenever you adminhelp a player, you never get to see about the PMs they exchange with the admin/mod either. :thinking_face: I've never seen this happen. Though I've not been on that much lately.

Erm. Why? The staff literally spend all the time they're on Discord with one-another. They're pretty comfortable towards each other. There's also a lack of empirical evidence (cumplants) about this ever being an issue.

Looked unique enough, from a history perspective. So okay, mirror lifted.

Could also make it so that if there's a trap in a box, and a mouse chews it, there's a very high chance of said trap assploding and killing the mice.

Incog sounds like a reasonable man with reasonable idea and view on things.

Didn't your administration impose the rule of Mods not being able to be CCIA and Mods at the same time...? Didn't we have a rule about staff not being able to double over to lore for a long time (notice: we must have had it for a reason, even if it was recently lifted by Jackboot). I think you're being kinda rude. I find my statements accurate in describing the posts I was presented with. As I find your misinformed. So allow me to inform you. Administrative staff are not permitted to be members of the CCIA because the latter is meant to act on IC information as much as possible. There is a legitimate conflict of interest between those two specific teams. Being a mod, or an admin for that matter, gives you access to an immense wealth of IC information via OOC means. This is not something that can be avoided while being a mod or an admin. As such, to retain the integrity of the CCIA, and to dodge any accusations of their decisions being based on knowledge acquired from outside the game, no active members of the administrative staff are allowed to join. From my view point, no such conflict of interest exists between lore writers and the administrative staff. The same can be said about most any combination, which is why they're permitted. Addendum. The main reason I could see to raise the issue as plainly as, "You're an admin, stay in your team," would be to avoid a situation where a small, closed circle of individuals handles all staff operations. That is to say, instead of expanding and recruiting new people, which would bring forth new ideas and so on, the staff would simply disperse responsibility between currently active members. This is, however, far from the present case. For every Synnono that applies to their third department to manage the wiki, we have a SeniorScore the Gondola and Eve hired as new blood. For every Coalf applying for Lore Master, we have a Tomiix getting hired to help out with Unathi lore.

I find it funny, and ultimately shortsighted, how you list admins as something other than players. While I do understand the meme that admins are these dark and private overlords who sit behind ranks of moderators and staff bureaucracy. That they're disconnected from the players, as this is the literal translation of your thesis. If you start viewing admins as something other than players, and worse, start restricting them based on this, then they will become non-players. And they will become disconnected from the community. Understand that, at present, you're attempting to limit a player's ability to apply for an open position merely because of the rank he already holds. You're thus limiting a player's ability to get involved in the community in a manner which is extended to all players, again, merely because of the rank he already holds. Can you understand how idiotic and circular your logic is?

Accepted back into the fold. Locking, archiving.

Locking, archiving.

Locking, archiving.

I must point one thing out. The server is linked in the Aurorastation public discord and promoted both via LOOC and general chatter on the main discord. It is by no means secret. It is your choice not to get involved there. But that's enough of that.

I'm going to provide an actual longpost here as well, because it concerns topics that I have an innate interest in. Issues presented: Security staff are deployed throughout the station, and there exists no way for the HoS to be present on all sites. From this stems a lack of oversight and correction as proves necessary. (I skipped the next paragraph because it had fluff in it.) Solution presented: Add 1 - 2 senior officer roles to oversee patrols and report directly to the HoS. They would also be expected to assist and train new officers. This would in turn: Reduce the amount of unreported incidents of bad conduct from security officers. Specifically ones that that stem from the fact that HoS is not with the officers patrolling. Increase organizational capabilities of the department, probably by having someone directly manage officers so that the HoS doesn't have to worry about them. Well okay. There's a bit of truth here but also some issues. First, a bit of leadership theory. It is correct that the HoS position is a bit too straining as far as textbooks are concerned. The optimal amount of people a leader should be directly in charge of is somewhere around 4 - 5. The HoS has 4 officers, 2 detectives, 2 plebs, 1 warden. Which neatly exceeds that limit. So, according to the textbooks, it would be preferred if there was someone else in charge of, say the officers and plebs, someone subordinate to the HoS. Probably from this stems the issue of some HoS feeling like there's a bit too much on their plate. The solution would ideally require a managerial and oversight role. However, the presented solution is that of officer+. Someone who goes on patrol, while somehow being able to solve the presented issue? That's not exactly how it'd pan out. It might help a little on the patrol side of things, if you run strict buddy teams of senior-junior, whereby you'd be able to trust the senior to make the good call. But the HoS would still be in charge of organizing patrols, officers otherwise, the brig, investigations, and threat management. There would still be no filter between the HoS and the rabble of patrol officers. There's also the issue that everything proposed could be executed by simply establishing common protocol between the HoS-s and security members. If the ISD community is organized enough to put together this draft, then they should be organized enough to establish common protocol which would basically implemented this role. By simply, each round, establishing a simple chain of command verbally and dispatching patrols in pairs. That's really all this suggestion is providing. They could also work on their PR a little, if the issue of unreported abuse of position is an issue. With that said. What would be an actual issue would be a "Dispatch Officer" type of role. You need a coordinator who send officers to where the HoS wants them to be and makes sure all of the small details of a security operation are covered, while the HoS worries about the larger details.

Well we now have 52 posts here and the scuttlebutt has also started moving about. So, time to wrap this up. The application itself will be denied. I'm not maverick enough to actually let it pass without looking for suitable candidates from the lore staff first. However, with that said. Since the primary intent of this thread was to provide feedback to Jackboot, I would like the following to happen. Up until now, [mention]Senpai Jackboot[/mention] has been mostly critical of this application, by virtue of his job being at threat. With that threat now removed, I would want Jackboot to go through this thread again, pick out criticism and feedback, both from Coalf and the community at large, and address it in writing here. This should include plans for actions to be taken. Some of the feedback provided may clash with the view from inside, however, then the disparity should be rectified instead. Now, this is a relatively large task, considering the amount of posts and words in this thread, so he can take a bit. But I would like to have it posted in this thread. It might also be worth while for Coalf and Jackboot to talk and see if Coalf can still be of service to the Lore Team. Specially if Jackboot is thinking about somehow expanding the lore team. Just a though. Although, I do think Jackboot and Coalf should talk regardless. Anyways, that is all.

As a side note. If added, this job would be added in stead of one of the existent ones (most likely a security officer spot would be lowered). The amount of folks in sec, otherwise, would be too overwhelming.

They get Discord access for staff, and they still represent us as a member of their team. So basically, regardless of your intent, your conduct will become an issue if it continues to be as it has been. Not the object of this thread. Staff complaint it. well okay.jpg Not the object of this thread. Further, there is either more context to this, which you are failing to provide in an attempt to be snide; or I am indeed left to wonder why you haven't filed a staff complaint. Regardless, I've notified the Head Admins and they'll investigate the matter. Outside of this thread, of course. Everyone gets heated at times. Everyone fucks up at times. None of present staff have been permabanned twice for incredibly awful conduct, however. And there is a list of folks who have been dismissed over their conduct. So to say we do not monitor nor police that is wrong.

I requested a report from the admins/mods regarding Xander's conduct over the past month or two. Because I forget but I saw his name run through the mod chat at some point recently. In the mean time, allow me to express that I believe Xander to be unfit to be a member of staff, specifically due to his conduct. An example would be the fact that since September, I've needed to strike Xander on Discord once, and call him out on two other cases of him being belligerent towards members of staff. All three cases boiled down to him expressing his grievances with the decisions made by the Development team in a manner unbecoming; while ignoring reasonable explanations or his points proven wrong. And please do not think that this boils down to, "He attacked my department, plz no." There are multiple people on the staff team with whom I personally do not agree with. In just about all teams. But they keep their conduct civil, so do I, and hey it all works out. I doubt such a relationship would work out with Xander, however.