Skull132

And indeed it was. I admitted during the meeting that retroactive bans are literally hitler, but there was a reason for it. The delay with finding out all of the details was long enough that Covert, once we were capable of reaching the decision, had gone inactive. So the choice was: wait for his return, and revisit the issue, or simply ban him when he lacks a chance to defend himself. The former course of action was chosen.

And indeed it was. I admitted during the meeting that retroactive bans are literally hitler, but there was a reason for it. The delay with finding out all of the details was long enough that Covert, once we were capable of reaching the decision, had gone inactive. So the choice was: wait for his return, and revisit the issue, or simply ban him when he lacks a chance to defend himself. The former course of action was chosen.

That was the start of the conversation. The end of it, was this: I do not imagine this leaves anything left for interpretation.

That was the start of the conversation. The end of it, was this: I do not imagine this leaves anything left for interpretation.

I was simply offering insight, as was requested of me. And I added my own opinion on the matter, with a conditional expletive. As the Head Admin at the time of making the decision, I imagine that's relevant? No? I also did explain why my opinion would have been as it was. Although, I don't imagine the sparking here will be enjoyed by Doom. So how about we take this elsewhere?

I was simply offering insight, as was requested of me. And I added my own opinion on the matter, with a conditional expletive. As the Head Admin at the time of making the decision, I imagine that's relevant? No? I also did explain why my opinion would have been as it was. Although, I don't imagine the sparking here will be enjoyed by Doom. So how about we take this elsewhere?

Touche. But the times were somewhat different at the time. Anyways, we'll see what the rest have to say, shall we?

Touche. But the times were somewhat different at the time. Anyways, we'll see what the rest have to say, shall we?

That isn't fully what I had in mind. Covert had a way of creating drama where none needed to be. He and the people involved know what I'm getting at, it's their matter to sort that out, regardless of how the appeal ends. Not ours.

That isn't fully what I had in mind. Covert had a way of creating drama where none needed to be. He and the people involved know what I'm getting at, it's their matter to sort that out, regardless of how the appeal ends. Not ours.

Allow Skull to find his rocking chair, drag it onto Aurora's front porch, light his pipe and tell you a story. Basically, I'll explain how canon-antags used to work about a year and some months ago. First off, every character involved adhered to a very simple set of ground rules (which I refer to as the gentlemen's rules, or the rules to the gentlemen's game): everything that happens is kept canon, unless it's the result of a griefer/grief (and no off-station deus ex machina); Note though, if you get captured and properly held by a rando, then you keep it canon. Seriously. Because your defeat was underwhelming isn't an excuse to not canonize it. The only excuse is grief. [*]large scale antag operations require your character to be a traitor ingame (contact an admin to set yourself up, seriously, do it); [*]small scale antag operations, such as communications, recruitment, etcetera, can be conducted without a traitor status (however, the character is still susceptible to punishment, which, as per the first rule, is to be kept canon and recorded). The first rule is a showcase of a difference in mindset, perhaps something I miss? Basically, all of the antag-shenanigans-goodness happened on our station and it was kept as a part of the station's canon. I imagine it worked because of two reasons. First, the targets were people, and not the station. So there wasn't a need to explain how the station was rebuilt after everyone died in holy hellfire. The second was the fact that everyone was kind of on the same par, as far as the "snowflake meter" went. It was completely fine to be captured by a terrorist, tortured and then spat out as the ERT rolled in and saved you (obviously, as per the first rule, you did have to RP out the wounds, both mental and physical). There were a few mechanics used by antagonists to get onto the station, and to move around more freely: undercover identities, acquired off-screen; spawning of the character on the nuke-ops base, and usage of the resources there (again, contact an admin to set yourself up. We were helped greatly by the fact that myself and Chris, Head Dev and Head Admin, were both involved with the storyline, so we were rather warm to the idea. You may need to conduct a bit of planning and communicating with the current admins to help this). I was one of the folks who used an undercover identities to play an antagonist character on station with relative frequency, but I kept myself to a few guidelines, as to stop a deus ex machina approach. Namely, all of them had fleshed out records which, upon better inspection, would lead one to suspect my character. Further, I limited the amount of flexibility my character had when it came to his appearance and behaviour. Obviously, an act is required, but the underlying persona was still there and detectable. Things could also get very hilarious whenever the identity did not match his training, and he was forced to figure shit out on the fly. Also, bonus points if you can destroy the blackbox recorder (securityfeeds). That's basically how it worked. Emphasis on the three rules to the gentlemen's game that I outlined.

Allow Skull to find his rocking chair, drag it onto Aurora's front porch, light his pipe and tell you a story. Basically, I'll explain how canon-antags used to work about a year and some months ago. First off, every character involved adhered to a very simple set of ground rules (which I refer to as the gentlemen's rules, or the rules to the gentlemen's game): everything that happens is kept canon, unless it's the result of a griefer/grief (and no off-station deus ex machina); Note though, if you get captured and properly held by a rando, then you keep it canon. Seriously. Because your defeat was underwhelming isn't an excuse to not canonize it. The only excuse is grief. [*]large scale antag operations require your character to be a traitor ingame (contact an admin to set yourself up, seriously, do it); [*]small scale antag operations, such as communications, recruitment, etcetera, can be conducted without a traitor status (however, the character is still susceptible to punishment, which, as per the first rule, is to be kept canon and recorded). The first rule is a showcase of a difference in mindset, perhaps something I miss? Basically, all of the antag-shenanigans-goodness happened on our station and it was kept as a part of the station's canon. I imagine it worked because of two reasons. First, the targets were people, and not the station. So there wasn't a need to explain how the station was rebuilt after everyone died in holy hellfire. The second was the fact that everyone was kind of on the same par, as far as the "snowflake meter" went. It was completely fine to be captured by a terrorist, tortured and then spat out as the ERT rolled in and saved you (obviously, as per the first rule, you did have to RP out the wounds, both mental and physical). There were a few mechanics used by antagonists to get onto the station, and to move around more freely: undercover identities, acquired off-screen; spawning of the character on the nuke-ops base, and usage of the resources there (again, contact an admin to set yourself up. We were helped greatly by the fact that myself and Chris, Head Dev and Head Admin, were both involved with the storyline, so we were rather warm to the idea. You may need to conduct a bit of planning and communicating with the current admins to help this). I was one of the folks who used an undercover identities to play an antagonist character on station with relative frequency, but I kept myself to a few guidelines, as to stop a deus ex machina approach. Namely, all of them had fleshed out records which, upon better inspection, would lead one to suspect my character. Further, I limited the amount of flexibility my character had when it came to his appearance and behaviour. Obviously, an act is required, but the underlying persona was still there and detectable. Things could also get very hilarious whenever the identity did not match his training, and he was forced to figure shit out on the fly. Also, bonus points if you can destroy the blackbox recorder (securityfeeds). That's basically how it worked. Emphasis on the three rules to the gentlemen's game that I outlined.

Yes, but the first step to dealing with a problem is admitting to it. Hence my admittance of the truth, the reason why I feel annoyed, angry, when I die. As corny and as cliche as it sounds, it is correct. Once you admit what's going on, and you see it, you are able to keep track of it. Once you're able to keep track of it, you're able to control it. And once you're able to control it, you're able to deal with it properly. Also, please don't build a strawman off of my arguments. They're a little too easy to burn. My point, perhaps unfinished, I'll grant you that, is that feeling angry when you're defeated in any game is fine. It happens. You just need to be aware of it, as I explained above, for the reason that I explained above. How you deal with it properly, yes, that's your own business. And, pardon my self-centered-ness. My way is the only one with which I am intimately familiar with. As such, it is the only answer I can provide outright and explain the mechanics of, instead of putting my thoughts and presumptions into someone else's head. If it helps people, then great. If it doesn't work for them, then so be it. Hopefully they can find something else. EDIT: Actually, fuck that, I have nothing to apologize for. Read the question again, will you? The question was personal. I answered from the key required.

Yes, but the first step to dealing with a problem is admitting to it. Hence my admittance of the truth, the reason why I feel annoyed, angry, when I die. As corny and as cliche as it sounds, it is correct. Once you admit what's going on, and you see it, you are able to keep track of it. Once you're able to keep track of it, you're able to control it. And once you're able to control it, you're able to deal with it properly. Also, please don't build a strawman off of my arguments. They're a little too easy to burn. My point, perhaps unfinished, I'll grant you that, is that feeling angry when you're defeated in any game is fine. It happens. You just need to be aware of it, as I explained above, for the reason that I explained above. How you deal with it properly, yes, that's your own business. And, pardon my self-centered-ness. My way is the only one with which I am intimately familiar with. As such, it is the only answer I can provide outright and explain the mechanics of, instead of putting my thoughts and presumptions into someone else's head. If it helps people, then great. If it doesn't work for them, then so be it. Hopefully they can find something else. EDIT: Actually, fuck that, I have nothing to apologize for. Read the question again, will you? The question was personal. I answered from the key required.

I think you missed the underlying point: It's fine. Feeling sour over a loss is completely normal, and completely natural (obviously within certain bounds). The actual question is: how does one deal with it? Some people deal with it by scrutinizing the adversary, and then trying to sate themselves with that (by posting a complaint). My own mechanism for dealing with shenanigans like that is to simply stop, go do something else a little, maybe brood (which is better than just spawning a grin on your face and telling yourself that everything's fine and dandy -- in the grander scheme, if you keep bottling up anger, it will start slowly breaking you, and chipping away at your capacity to deal with anger in the future), then see how I could do better in the future and come back to enjoying the game.

I think you missed the underlying point: It's fine. Feeling sour over a loss is completely normal, and completely natural (obviously within certain bounds). The actual question is: how does one deal with it? Some people deal with it by scrutinizing the adversary, and then trying to sate themselves with that (by posting a complaint). My own mechanism for dealing with shenanigans like that is to simply stop, go do something else a little, maybe brood (which is better than just spawning a grin on your face and telling yourself that everything's fine and dandy -- in the grander scheme, if you keep bottling up anger, it will start slowly breaking you, and chipping away at your capacity to deal with anger in the future), then see how I could do better in the future and come back to enjoying the game.

He went inactive, and so the issue was stowed for review once it became prudent again. Once it was back up, the issue was reviewed with all staff in attendance, to provide a fresher perspective. Consider it sort of like dealing with cold cases, once they heat up again. And this is simply not true. The apology that Covert posted, he did so of his own volition, fully knowing the decision that was made before he posted it. In fact, it was made clear to him that an apology is not what we're looking for, but let's keep going. Point one, I never care for apologies. And I would never ask someone for an apology, not as a member of staff. Point two, date of apology post: 20Apr2015; date of ban: 2015-04-19. Now, if Covert did in fact tell that to FFrances, then I'd probably tell him to go and get bent. Again. Because dishonesty like that is what landed him in that issue in the first place. Of course, the discussion could have been ages old, which is why I'm going to square my own self away, and stick with a response of, "Eh. Eh. Eh. Eh." And also, contrary to what you believe, FFrances, there are people who still remember and continue to play here. People who were affected by Covert's actions as an admin, and as a regular player.

He went inactive, and so the issue was stowed for review once it became prudent again. Once it was back up, the issue was reviewed with all staff in attendance, to provide a fresher perspective. Consider it sort of like dealing with cold cases, once they heat up again. And this is simply not true. The apology that Covert posted, he did so of his own volition, fully knowing the decision that was made before he posted it. In fact, it was made clear to him that an apology is not what we're looking for, but let's keep going. Point one, I never care for apologies. And I would never ask someone for an apology, not as a member of staff. Point two, date of apology post: 20Apr2015; date of ban: 2015-04-19. Now, if Covert did in fact tell that to FFrances, then I'd probably tell him to go and get bent. Again. Because dishonesty like that is what landed him in that issue in the first place. Of course, the discussion could have been ages old, which is why I'm going to square my own self away, and stick with a response of, "Eh. Eh. Eh. Eh." And also, contrary to what you believe, FFrances, there are people who still remember and continue to play here. People who were affected by Covert's actions as an admin, and as a regular player.

Because I lost. I was outplayed. My knowledge, skills and ability to control the in-game situation was not enough to win. And, in my case, it's not even a question of, "Was RP involved?" It's literally about the fact that I lost, regardless of how it happened. I tend to look at this game as a challenge, I am, after all, a mechanical player. And the more involved I get in trying to beat this challenge, win, the more sour the loss, as is natural. This can become especially compounded if my perceived adversary is a singular character, for example, whenever I am trying to chase down and catch an antagonist as a security officer. Even if it's a good, fair fight, I will still be begrudging for a bit.

Because I lost. I was outplayed. My knowledge, skills and ability to control the in-game situation was not enough to win. And, in my case, it's not even a question of, "Was RP involved?" It's literally about the fact that I lost, regardless of how it happened. I tend to look at this game as a challenge, I am, after all, a mechanical player. And the more involved I get in trying to beat this challenge, win, the more sour the loss, as is natural. This can become especially compounded if my perceived adversary is a singular character, for example, whenever I am trying to chase down and catch an antagonist as a security officer. Even if it's a good, fair fight, I will still be begrudging for a bit.

Ckey/BYOND Username: Skull132 Position Being Applied For (coder, mapper, spriter): Coder Past Experiences/Knowledge: Head Developer here, also some coding knowledge with PHP and Javascript on my own. Examples of Past Work: The Aurora website. Also a good deal of background work in our code. Preferred Mode of Communication (Skype, Steam, etc.): Skype, TS, ingame, forums (in order of preference) Additional Comments: I like cupcakes.

Ckey/BYOND Username: Skull132 Position Being Applied For (coder, mapper, spriter): Coder Past Experiences/Knowledge: Head Developer here, also some coding knowledge with PHP and Javascript on my own. Examples of Past Work: The Aurora website. Also a good deal of background work in our code. Preferred Mode of Communication (Skype, Steam, etc.): Skype, TS, ingame, forums (in order of preference) Additional Comments: I like cupcakes.

I'd hold my horses.

I'd hold my horses.

They're not mechanical, though? Or, at least, not fully. It's odd. Also, we discussed them surviving off of another type of gas. Basically, air is a mix of N2 and O2. So the idea was to use Nitrogen. It would mean that, on station, they can live without needing an auxiliary air supply. But to go EVA, even if they don't need a suit, they need a slightly more niche airsupply. Also, they have the ability to maul things with they jaw-claws.