Skull132

Pardoning? No. If the weight of evidence points towards the arrest and charges applies, then they get to suffer the punishment. The most the captain can do in that case is appeal for a lighter sentence, depending on the circumstances. Or, in the absence of a HoS, order it. However note, if the HoS is in place, the final call should rest with him. Both the captain and HoS should be mature enough to respect each other's lanes and authority, as such, the captain shouldn't go over the HoS's head unless absoloutely necessary. Noow, let's talk about something else, but related: nulling an arrest/sentence. If the arrest is made with no evidence backing it, or otherwise questionable/circumstancial evidence surrounding it, then the Captain should have the authority to call it into question. Along with a third party (an IAA or any other, preferably uninvolved head of staff will do), the evidence can be reviewed and the legality of the arrest brought into question. If the evidence produced is lacking, and can be objectively dismissed, then the Captain has the authority to null the arrest, charges, and any other forms of punishment applied. Makes sense, and is simple, no?

#3 and #5 can't really be helped. I'll see about the rest, though.

It was discussed. It was dropped because it couldn't be done with accuracy. Here is what I mean: a considerable amount of people type, not by using the pop-up, but instead by using the command bar. There is no way to detect input into the command bar, as far as I know. The other servers most likely run a loop for the sprite that stops the moment the input window is closed (whether by the message being put through, or being cancelled). This would make the mechanic in question only useful to those who deal with the pop-up. The main question at that point: is this a mechanic worth implementing with the idea that it works only for 60% of the cases? Think of it this way: an antagonist becomes reliant on the "dotdotdots". They run into a player who, as per their own free choice, uses the command bar. In a situation, the antagonist in question does not spot the three dots, and as such, opens fire, while in reality, the other person was typing. In my mind, this is only worth implementing if it's accurate 100% of the time. But popular opinion may differ.

But I also want to keep the stungloves. Mainly for the sake of just having them, I guess. Sentimental value and all. I just want them to be less evil for that purpose.

You mean, this? https://github.com/Baystation12/Baystation12/pull/9370

It's not really a point of asking for patience -- I know you asked twice, I arranged my head and actions in a manner which didn't get you an answer. I cannot expect someone to wait indefinately, and everyone has the right to request their bans be lifted, unless outright barred (a limitation that I never outlined for you, as such, is not applicable to you). What is written above are my thoughts on the matter, as the administrator managing it, outlining both the intended effect, and the situation at the time. We'll see what the others think and move on from there.

If the ban reason and notes check out, then it's probably worth lifting. While I'm not around, would an admin please tend to this?

It sort of is. The lore staff requested, and was granted, the right to conduct moderation on a limited set of subforums. While they aren't full on moderators, in terms of the forums, they have the liberty to remove off-topic remarks, inflamitory posts, etcetera. If people persist or actual modrator oversight is necessary, they're expected to inform us. And the reason why it's any different here, as opposed to ingame, is that lore staff aren't equivalent to everyone else ingame. Even ingame, they are the lore staff: the bunch of misfits who try to decide where to take our WHM40K ripo- I mean lore. Just that, none of it actually requires them to have anything special in game. The forums and wiki are different, however (by the same argument, they shouldn't also have wiki editing powers). Of course, all of the above comes with the note that they are held responsible, accountable and are otherwise expected to act in a reasonable manner. While no one from staff, that I know off, keeps active tabs on the moderator logs on the forums (with the possible exception of Soundscopes and I, but we're looking at/for other things, generally), we will check their activities more thoroughly as requested in a staff complaint, or on request. The alternate method to solving conflict such as this is talking to Jackboot, and seeing if he can shed light on the specific situation in question. Ultimately, I'd like them to keep their powers, mainly because it makes sense. Should issues arise with their usage of the power, then individual members can be rotated out (only 3 lore members actually have any forum powers, I should add: Xander, Jackboot, Tool, Sue). If issues arise with modus operandi questions (how to make an end solution presentable (one key reason why entire discussions would get purged) while also keeping the discussion around), then those can be discussed here, with Jackboot, or in General forums, I guess. EDIT: Forgot one thing. Lore staff's power over the forums is two-fold: There are those who belong into the whitelist management group, who are responsible for enforcing the rules specific to that subboard, as outlined in the posts in that subforum. They actually carry full moderator powers, and can hand out warnings. In the whitelist applications area only, of course. Then there are those who act as moderators/organizers for the lore questions and lore canonization subboards. This is mostly to ease their work, as having them contact an admin every single time they want something done in their domain is inefficient and silly. Relavent links: ...Actually, I can't post any, due to tablet being a pain. Click on Jackboot's name find Whitelist Management in his groups -- those are the lore people who have power in the whitelist subforums. The only other two areas where they have control are lore questions and lore canonization boards. And only Jackboot + Xander have power there. SoundScopes- http://aurorastation.org/forums/memberlist.php?mode=group&g=10 //Lore writers http://aurorastation.org/forums/memberlist.php?mode=group&g=11 //Whitelist Management (Needs updating due to people resigning or leaving)

Since I was the banning admin, I'll leave the decision for someone else to make. Also considering my present leave, it'll probably be faster this way. The effectiveness of a move like this depends very much on the person in question. This was moreso about resolving conflict. When a person needs to be pulled down from a, "I am holier than thou!" (specially when they are plain and simple in the wrong, but continue to aggressively defend the point regardless) attitude when a legitimate issue exists, then their wings probably do deserve to be clipped. This appeal is actually amazing illustration of this. And yes, I know that you tried to contact me personally about it, and I never did get a reply back due to being busy. Ultimately, though, the ban may be worth lifting. If only for the simple reason that it didn't really have any effect. Maybe we'll take a step back, and see about approaching this another way. And, I say "maybe" mostly because I am on vacation, and my contact with staff is minimal, so I have no clue as to what they're thinking is on this.

In time, all the things will change. I don't much like it either, but eh, it may improve a few specific instances, were they to come up again.

A whitelist application is, in essence, a contract. "I will agree to fulfill staff's vision of being a head of staff to the best of my abilities." And it's a contract that we can very easily track, by the virtue of the whitelist.txt and forum archives. It allows us very easy and very good control over that specific role-set. If we were to lose the contract, then we would have a lot more clashes between wouldbe heads of staff and administration. We would also have a lot more calls about command staff roleplay. Which has and will always be a curious topic, but losing the contract means that we lose something that, effectively, puts you in your place (I wish there was a better way to say it, but there really isn't). The process by which you attain an item inevitably changes your view on it. And while more difficulty doesn't necessarily mean more valuable, the whitelist process probably, hopefully has some positive impact on the players. As for the AI not being whitelisted? Role has amazingly clear limitations that heads of staff do not Role is accessible only at a very specific time, once per round Grief/Chucklefucking as said role is very easy to spot (as opposed to with a head of staff, where you can attempt to argue for days about being a dick roleplay) Ultimately, role has less strict roleplay requirements that a head of staff, once the laws are acknowledged and followed

Okay, sooo. Stungloves. Everyone knows'em, everyone either loves'em or hates'em, depending on which side of the fence you are on. Buut they are slightly above everything else: Easily enough constructed Very concealable Instant knockdown Multi-use So. I've been thinking on this for a bit. While shooting the shit with a few folks, we came up with roughly two ideas on where to take stungloves so they're less instant-win material. This all comes with the preface of us considering to add complete makeshift batons alongside these modifications, do note. But, on point, the two options on where to potentially take stungloves: HALLOSS based damage: They start working like taser shots do. That means, they abide by the siemens coefficient (which is variable, depending on what you're wearing), they will knock out only after you zap someone enough times, and they will put you into paincrit, again, much like a taser does now. One-shot use: Literally, make them into a one-shot type deal. You use'em, and you're done. This would knock down whoever you're zapping, and potentially cause burn damage depending on what they're wearing and where you're hitting them. Once your gloves are used up, you are pretty much forced to run, at this point. So, thoughts, ideas?

I'm actually with Cres on this one: the detective's office just. Is. That's it. It just, is. It could be better, way better. So if anyone can make it look way better, post it here, plx.

http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=2549&p=27274#p27274 <-- This will be put into effect soon. And regarding the bridge: aye, I've been mulling over this for about a week and more. And I have roughly two solutions to propose: Make bombs cost crystals for nuke ops See about creating some sort of energy field around the AI core/bridge Both should be interesting in their own right.

Alrighty, Pull request 607 will put us onto this version of security. Why do I want to this map into the running without having a vote or anything? Well, from a development standpoint, the things I like with this brig over Jamini's rendition: More access from maintenance (and actually into halls, instead of right into perma) More open/accessible lobby design, less of a clusterfuck with doors Better flow in terms of the hallway placement and overall design, in my opinion Holding cell area is open to public, partially, so that cousin Bob can come down and bitch about Security being corrupt and shitty Oh, the modifications made to the original: CSI morgue decommissioned. If they really want it, they have to pester engineering. Individual cell lockers added back for the sake of the specialized jumpsuits. The 3x wall by the armoury is gone, with a special modification (see image below). IMAGE OF UPLOADED VERSION: http://puu.sh/ijAzM/eb5d7a9c43.png Plus, I the key note: I want to see the communal brig design in effect. As such, it was easier to take this one on, instead of modifying Jamini's design. Why do I want to see the communal brig design in effect? Because it offers up neat ideas. It basically removes permabrigging as a simple, swipe of the hand type of option (thus giving antags more ground). It also makes brig escapes and riots an option again. So, we'll give it like two weeks to run its course, and potentially cause a catastrophy here and there. If it doesn't work out, then we'll have a vote, see which layout is liked more and roll with that.

Since I was around, and people were actively discussing the issue, I picked up. As it stands, Frankster is sitting on an antagonist ban, a temporary one. If any other instances of gank are reported with him as the culprit, it'll be escalated to a permanent antagonist ban and a ban from the server. If his attitude keeps up and further reports are filed on that, then he'll be banned from the server.

Basically this. As much as I am up for being harsh-handed with shooting people who disobey instruction, you cannot expect an order for evacuation to be completed immediately and without fault. To do so is to set your expectations too high. On the individual case: you more than likely identified that the security officer is of minimal threat, or of no threat at all. Why? Well, because they weren't charging at you, or otherwise trying to subdue you. Opening fire without any interaction can be done if there is an open gunfight (which it wasn't), or if you're given no alternate option (which was not the case). While you weren't required to take them as hostage, you did not have the grounds to just kill them. The alternate to not taking them as hostage would be just simply disarm them and leave them be. Your personal preference on this matter is ultimately null. What is entailed above is entailed in the rules.

Person was reprimanded for ridiculous warden play a few days ago by myself. So if this checks out, yeah. For the sake of the record.

I'll drop this for review: It's a REALLY good video, and explains the issues we'd run into if we want to think of this.

Picking antags leads to claims of favoritism and tends to not work so well in my experience. Take what you will from it. I'd rather we just have a day/weekend/week of extended. You'll get claims of favourtism regardless~ In my experience, it's worked out rather well, usually. But we might be straying now.

I'm up for an extended day or a weekend, just for a sake of seeing how it goes. However, since I, personally, will be gone for the majority of this week, we'll consider it for the next. I'll also see if I can talk to admins and lay out some passive events as a minimum. The rest will either be up to the players, or a spur of the moment type deal.

Something to keep in mind. The like button can be toggled for specific boards, user groups, etcetera. That is to say: I have full control over who and where people use it (as far as being able to actually ban individuals from using it, if we ever wanted to). So, if required, it can be disabled from certain subboards (like complaints), while keeping it on others. There are probably different fun things that can be done with it as well, as Erik illustrated on another board, buuuut. Unless you gents dig me a HTML/PHP coder with the actual willingness of looking into PHPBB3, that's off the table.

Because the belief that "We are heavy RP and thus must shove extended down everyone's throats!" is childish. Extended for a week will end in boredom. Specially on deadhour.

Not for an entire week, please no. Deadhour will suffer immensely. It'll end with me pulling stupid shit on a daily basis to stop the dead.

Quick note. Since we're talking about objective assessments, http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=2709 is by no means a ban-requestable thing. No plasma was leaked, and there are no rules which actively stop you from fucking around with the mix loops. No plasma was leaked into the distro loop, as such, it's not grief. Overall though, yes. Not liking something is not a valid reason to submit a complaint, and I am starting to slowly regret my urging for people to make complaints. Complaints require thought and assessment of a situation in order to be valid. "He didn't RP the way I wanted!" is not grounds for a complaint. "He RP-d in a way that broke the rules!" is. The slugfests that these create are silly (half of them are created for no good reason, either). And as it stands, there are roughly two choices on how to actually fix the issue: Privatize complaints to be more player->admin->subject dependent, through the use of forms and spreadsheets. Or simply have my staff run a tighter leash on actually dismissing useless complaints, instead of amusing them for the sake of amusing them.