LordFowl

That is untrue.

What is the point of a system that either gives you a shitty spell you'll never use or an OP spell that will probably just end up making everyone hate you?

I see. I guess I won't do that, then.

Implemented in; https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/5255 Moving to completed projects.

I was talked to regarding using the word "autist" on November 20-21stish (It was ingame so I do not have logs), and since then have not used the word "autist". I was talked to regarding the word "faggot" in early November (4-10th or so), and since then have not used the word "faggot". In fact, in general since November 20th or so I have stopped using slurs entirely. So I have to disagree when you say that my use of "foul language" (*correction, slurs, I can say fuck all I want as far as I'm concerned) hasn't diminished since I was talked to regarding using slurs. Saying "Well, he has a long history of using slurs before we told him not to, so inevitably he'll use them again, so might as well punish him for it now!" should be an obviously misguided statement.

I don't really know what you expect me to say. Will I try and act better? Sure, but I don't see a concrete effect coming from that unless I know specifically what makes my conduct "draining". It is easy to act upon specific critiques, hence why when I was warned about using slurs I stopped using slurs, hence why when I was warned about arguing in OoC I stopped arguing in OoC, but how does one act upon "when you talk to people in discord you're draining, sometimes." beyond a vague concession of "I agree, I'll try and do better?". While I'm making that concession right now, even I can see that it's not a particularly satisfying conclusion, so I just fear that if this is settled by that alone this will just resurface sometime later down the road.

So when Jackboot calls me theatrical it is acceptable, but when I turn the same phrase on him it's me deliberately making people feel unwelcome in the community? When Jackboot ascribes so much malicious intent in everything that I do that he believes I specifically am out to get him, it is unfair for me to call that paranoid? So be it, then. And now I am yelling at and belittling Jackboot? Where? All I see is Jackboot calling me a baldfaced liar because I said the PR was open for five days when in reality it was open for six, and then saying that he reads so much malicious intent into my actions that it borders on paranoia. If this is what you classify as "yelling at and belittling someone", then you and I have a serious misunderstanding on what that phrase means. If you are going to cherrypick my post for the most egregious statement and then discard the rest as worthless drivel, at least choose a statement that is actually egregious. I've gone over all the posts I've made in this thread and I've not found one instance of me "yelling" at anyone, nor any instances of me "belittling" anyone either except maybe where I said UM should stop speaking me on a developer v. developer basis (Not me trying to implicate he's inferior to me, it's just fucking weird. I don't go up to Alberyk and say, "Hello there, fellow developer".) and apparently ascribing paranoia to Jackboot's insistence on believing everything I do is out to get him, but I don't buy that one. So if this is meant to be a grand statement of my behavior repeating itself, I think the only thing it states is my angelic innocence.

Egads! He caught my lie! It was actually open for /seven nonsecutive days/, not six! I’m ruined!!! Oh please, spare me your own theatrics. Bygone hits the nail directly on the head. You read so much malicious intent in every action that I’m honestly worried for your health. Such paranoia must cause a lot of stress. I opened the PR on the 10th (and not as a joke, since you seem confused about that). Arrow then closed it in the 14th, as there were Skrell dev applications by that point. I then re-opened it on the 28, the week leading up to devmerge, “just in case it was needed for the devmerge lol winky face!” Everyone had a good laugh at that one, and then I closed and re-opened it for dramatic effect, to mock the idea that I would be removing Skrell anyways since I wasn’t chosen. Arrow then closed it. He did not “have to keep repeatedly closing it”. Twice is not a trend. Especially when both incidents happen /fifteen days apart/. After I made my statement I had no further need of the PR, and expectedly it has not been touched since. Is re-opening a closed PR as a joke an abuse of my GitHub permissions? No, it’s actually not. ”I moved as fast as I wanted to in getting a new skrell lore developer and it is not your place to repeatedly open a PR to remove a race to try to rush me.” You can move as fast as you want, but 90 days is unacceptably slow. And I’m not the only one who thought so, hence why I was encouraged to make the PR in the first place. “If you have a criticism for my conduct then you can use your words like everbody else.” I did. They just so happened to be part of a github PR. And that’s not an “abuse of my power”. Anyone can create a PR. You might know that if you looked at the GitHub for more thsn gathering spurious evidence. “I'm not going to address your criticism of Skrell lacking a dedicated maintainer. You know they were not rotting because I have made repeated announcements about it that when a species loses a maintainer, the responsibilities for that species defaults back to the loremaster” That might mean a little more if the loremaster did anything with the Skrell except let them rot in stasis for 90 days. Maybe he was too busy attending to his own species, acting more as a lore-developer than a lore-master. Maybe he just didn’t care. Isn’t it fun reading active malicious intent into people’s actions? ”Your PR did little more than ruffle the feathers of players who mistakenly thought you had any say in the fate of Skrell.” And uh, y’know, also serve as a call to action directly leading several people to decide they did indeed care about what happens to the Skrell, inducing them to apply and ultimately leading to a Skrell developer being chosen from those applicants. But I guess that part isn’t really important. Probably would have happened anyways. One day. Maybe? As I said before, trying to spin the Skrell incident back on me is ridiculous. The only person who could feasibly be indicted for staff misconduct regarding the situation is the same person who let Skrell rot in stasis for 90 days. And that ain’t me, chief. ”There is no other way to interpret his behavior than him trying to get at me, or whoever else he decides he doesn't need to respect.” It is statements like these that make me worried for your paranoia. I’m not trying to “get at you”. My behavior is problem-orientated - I see a problem, I attempt to resolve it. I don’t have a vendetta against you. I don’t care about you. I’m not out to get you.

There have already been consequences - the calendar event was deleted, as all off-topic posts are. Sometimes they’re accompanied with forum warnings, but while I’m no moderator issuing a warning on literally the first day of a feature’s release tends to be rather draconic. As for abusing staff power? I’m not even aware if calendar events were restricted solely to staff. If they were, there was certainly no documentation regarding it, and if there is no documentation, no expectations, then how can it be classified as abuse of power? Playing semantics? There’s no play at semantics here. UM’s entire argument was that I knowingly exploited a bug - pointing out that I unknowingly “exploited” not-a-bug is not “playing semantics”, it’s rejecting the foundation of his premise entirely. Do I understand the implications of the calendar system being removed? Is it that we don’t have a calendar? I can only be held responsible for my own actions. I cannot be held responsible also for Arrow’s overreactions. If he is content to throw out the whole calendar for want of a nail, then so be it. So to answer your question, no I don’t think there should be any further consequences regarding that specific incident, yes I think this is a perfectly reasonable outcome, and if you really want to know where I draw the line regarding moderating anyone, not just staff, I usually start at “important things that actually matter, like, breaking rules” as opposed to “he created a single off-topic post, headdev removed the entire off-topic subforum, better ban him”

This post builds itself up quite nicely, but it’s built on a few fallacies, assumptions, and logical gaps. I can’t believe I’m still talking about this fuck calendar. At this rate it’s caused me more grief than Arrow. For one this is the second time you’ve tried to communicate with me “on equal grounds, developer to developer”. Please stop doing that. It’s weird. Starting from the bottom up, even if the calendae incident was predicated on me knowingly exploiting a bug, comparing it to a million dollar Amazon glitcg is just stupid. But let’s circle back to thr more salient nugget - that I knowingly exploited a bug. For the output of “guilt” to be true these two conditions must be true - the calendar system must be a bug, and I must both know this and then wilfully exploit it. Well, we /know/ the calendar system isn’t a bug because it did work perfectly. We /know/ that my access to it was not a bug - I did not exploit any flaw in the system security, did not dupe the forums. I just clicked on the “create event” button. So if anything it’s an oversight, but I genuinely think Arrow believes people should have access to the calendar, as he’s mentioned reintroducing it with stricter moderation. So there is no bug. But let’s pretend there is, and focus on the second part, that I /knowingly exploited/ a bug. Well, I can tell you I didn’t. How the fuck would I be able to tell that the perfectly official fine and dandy “create calendar event” button was a bug? On the very first day of the forums? Maybe I just don’t watch enough anime, but I don’t know how anything about that screams “THIS IS A BUG YOU SHOULD REPORT!”. That’s like banning an AI player for pressing the “door bolt” button because we decided later that AIs shouldn’t have access to that button. It’s nonsensical. What loops do you have to jump through where that starts making sense? So there was no “software flaw”. If there was any flaw it was pure human error. So if it’s not a bug, and I didn’t wilfully exploit it, then what us it? A silly insignificant non-event, just another roadbump in the birth of a new forums, granted disproportionate importance for gods knows what reason (maybe it’s just easy to dupe people into thinking it is important by throwing around words like “exploit” or “software glitcg). As important as an off-topic post getting deleted. So why am I trying to pretend its no big deal? I’m not. It’s genuinely not an important event by pretty much any definition of importance. Why am I proud of it? I’m not. I wouldn’t even be thinking about it except it gets brought up so often. It’s just another off-topic post in the sea of posts to me, otherwise. Does that clear up your confusion?

Rest assured that my memory of said particular conversation is quite different, with the devil horns resting on someone else’s head. As I said, however, I’m going to try and avoid the 12 page long complaints flame wars this server loves. I’ve been here long enough to know how that shit goes down. So I’ll provide a statement to each new article of evidence, and that statement will be final on my part unless I want to add something or an administrator wants something clarified. Obvious bait aside, loaded questions aren’t likely to compel me to consider adding on to my statements.

I was spoken to twice last month, once regarding calling Coalf a faggot and once regarding calling people in OoC autists. You say that this behavior I was spoken to of keeps repeating, but I find this to be incorrect. As the server tightens its opinion in slurs I have been nothing but compliant, and I think you’ll find that their usage has been adequately reduced, and is not “repeating behavior” as you insist. Considering in these cases it was only my useage of slurs that was formally raised, I don’t know what other behavior could be repeating “despite being spoken to about it”. I was never formally spoken to about the calendar event and to be honest I would laugh at any attempt to do so. If this indicts me then so be it, but to me the calendar event is the height of insignificance and all of the controversy it’s produced grossly disproportionate. As for the rest of the complaint Jackboot hit the nail on the head when he said I didn’t think it was worth my time, but I did feel obliged to respond to this in particular as to correct your misunderstanding. For posterity’s sake I’ll address each if the images brought up here in brief and chronologically; 1) I don’t know if Jackboot is purposefully taking this image out of context or if he’s really offended at the idea of someone telling him “Fuck you, telescience should spawn singularities”, but that was what the conversation was about. Telescience spawning singularities. Obviously facetious, even by non-Fowl standards. 2) That staff complaint was really dumb. I was spoken to later about calling people autists, even if big brain autist is a verified meme, but I still don’t feel it’s unjustified of me to call a really dumb staff complaint really dumb, even if I used the wrong words. 3) I genuinely don’t know what the problem with this image is. I was speaking from the heart here. I’ve a Burger style vendetta against the “Its just bait” meme. 4) “Lordfowl has extensively behaved in bad faith. He had a PR to remove skrell for several weeks to remove Skrell while we were actively looking for a lore developer for them. He abused the calender system for the new forum that was enough to make Arrow disable it entirely.“ I don’t think I’ve acted in genuine bad faith but you throw that phrase around so much it’s hard to take it seriously. I am not a particularly notable liar and even if I do lie it’s never duplicitous, so I really don’t know where the bad faith argument comes from. My Skrell removal PR was open for a grand total of 5 days (including the one day I opened it as an obvious joke), so already you’re wrong on that one but I’ll go deeper and say that I refuse to consider opening a PR to remove Skrell to be a bad thing considering up until that point the lore team was content to let Skrell rot. If anyone deserves a staff complaint over that fiasco it is you. And again the extent of my “abuse of the calendar system” was creating a single facetious calendar event. It is as significant as creating an off-topic post. 5) (VUX), again, I don’t see the problem with this image. You had an idea, I disagreed wholly with it and then explained why. Is there an issue I’m missing? 6) (UM), again with the calendar (notice above when I said it was disproportionately significant?). I have no problem with what I said here. I wanted to talk about the problems with the new forums (mostly about the editing issue) but the discussion turned into a lengthy (at least an hour long) diatribe against me for being such an inconsiderate jackass as to ruin Arrow’s day by...creating a calendar event. Am I really the only one who thinks this is ridiculous? 7) (kingoftheping), that is simply wrong. I argue with people that agree with me too. I’m an equal opportunity arguer. Most of this complaint’s examples are insignificant and that’s why I haven’t responded to this complaint until now because I rathered to defer to official arbitration instead of getting involved in a lengthy complaints board flame war. I can only hope that my patience pays off. Do I have incidents worthy of complaining about? Do I sometimes cross the line? Do I break the rules? Absolutely, but considering none of those incidents have been raised here as evidence that indicates to me that I think about them a lot more than anyone else, which rather soundly deflates the “he shows an unwillingness to improve” argument.

“Feel free to consult with other detractors of this change in what they think is reasonable or what you should've implemented instead. You can take their opinion with as much of a grain of wheat.” Other detractors are free to post here. That is the purpose of this thread, is it not? I will judge their opinion on their own merits. “There's enough time between the times it was implemented and now to presume that it likely wasn't worth the concern of anyone in the past, because they judged the mechanic through the lens of "it's just a video game" rather than "an actual simulation of sci fi/fantasy mechanics." It's a relatively safe assumption to make that not dealing with it was intentional.” That is not an estimation one can make. Unless the exact reason why a thing is the way it is is posted and set in stone, then stipulation is for the birds. You judge things based on the data available, not the data that best fits your intent. “You don't have to toss the baby out with the bathwater. Okay, rather, 'don't serve the bun out from the oven until it's done.' As it stands, teleporting into a window enclosure (no grille) has equal amounts of lethality as teleporting into a 1x1 wall. That's not fun for anyone. To diverge from that, there's also more enabled use for malicious people to use telescience now rather than the telesci explorers themselves as it stands. If you send a GPS out into a wall to comb through the mines... well, you just lost a GPS. Telescience used to be a decent way of finding the random dungeons. Now they have to be found the harder way.“ A perfect balance of malicious/non malicious is not my intent (indeed near anything that is non-malicious can be used evilly with enough creativity), but I think you are jumping the gun here. Is exploring the asteroid with telescience harder? Yes, but I don’t think this is bad because it is neither impossible nor strictly speaking worse than the alternative. Instead of using the GPS to cheese for dungeons you instead use a low value, high quantity item to scan for safe turfs (if you can warp it back the turf is safe), and then you teleport in something else (a gps, a camera, an explorer), is the method that pops into my head. ”Here's my issue with this: You believe in moderating people's actions, but you won't moderate your own 'tude and how you speak to others. I hope you recognize the conflict between the message and the messenger there, and that you realize the mistake there and better yourself as a person and a staff member. That's all else I'll say on that point.” I believe that everything and everyone has a proper time and place and that my proper work here is to do my job. I don’t see this as hypocrisy, and if you really want to continue discussing telescience in context of my ability as a developer instead of in context of telescience then I believe you have the right to do so. Just not here. And I believe I have the responsibility to direct you to do so. If you think this is hypocritical then I encourage you to discuss it, to shitpost it, to even meme it. Just not here. “Beyond that, I am still adamant that either a revert or a rework of this PR needs to be done to be less punishing to the benign users while still being attractive to the explorer-type telescience users, while still adding a element that does punish overzealous attempts at exploring or even malicious intent in general. I don't mind Teleport into Wall > Lose arm so much as I mind losing an arm teleporting into a partial window. Gibbing is also something I believe should be restricted to high-yield explosives, Vox Armalis, Vaurca Warforms, Xeno Queens and etc.“ I am open to reconsidering the window situation and am open to alternate suggestions for gibbing that carry a similar gravity to gibbing.

Mininukes? Are you kidding me? Moving on, I didn't do a "teleportation loop" because I didn't (and don't) think it makes any sense at all. Creating "teleportation loops" just seems to be a cheap and easy solution, not the 'right solution'. Explosive emissions of energy and maiming on the other hand seem like perfectly reasonable and logical outcomes when you teleport into a wall. That's an assumption that is more than often wrong. Simply because something is unaddressed does not mean that it's intentional. I don't know what this means. Nothing is being warped here. Not far off in estimating the lethality of these changes, rather. Losing an arm or a leg to a 1x1 wall mishap is no small thing in gameplay terms. Neither is a finality of a gibbing through a 3x3. That wasn't your statement though. Your statement was: And yes, while I concede that it's technically correct that all objects explode insoasmuch that all most objects actually just produce a flash of light and a puff of sound, I felt that rounding up here was in good faith. The exception was considered initially. Do not misinterpret my statement as "I was unaware of this possibility and never intended for things to work like this." I consider windows an edge-case that can safely be rounded up. If I had a way of easily and consistently estimating how much "space" an object consumes I would make it a maybe 25% chance for each window (As a window pane consumes approximately 25% of a tile), but I don't and I don't consider it such a large problem as to scrap the baby with the babywater. No, actually, I did not ping you. I pinged moondancer who was showing off the severity of some of the changes you made. Given your current serial habit of discussing topics, I had no interest at the time of asking you directly, knowing full well that your ability to be professional is not a consistent thing anyone can rely on, and you being "unprofessional" when you are would be by itself an understatement. I was mistaken, but whoever you pinged is irrelevant to the actual content of my statement (which you should probably focus on instead of disparaging my "professionality" despite my "professionality" having no bearing on this conversation, considering I have answered all of your points raised fairly, in good faith, without deception, and without intent to memepost.). The content of my statement being "I know you asked this question, know that you were given an answer, know that you used this specific answer as a point in your topic, and know that you did not investigate further despite the extrapolation you made off of this answer being wrong." Honestly, if you can go around calling people autistic, insulting people, etc., under the cover of sardony, and seemingly get away with it, I believe I can chance getting away with making such a jab that pales in comparison to whatever vitriol you have a tendency to type out either on the discord, forums or github nowadays. I don't think you can really go around waggling your finger about what is or isn't classy, regardless. Interesting that you only have a problem with daggered statements when it's directed at you. Rest assured that you can't. Unlike the administrators I believe in moderating people's actions. If the topic of this discussion continues to drift away from the original purpose (discussing telescience) into an off-topic purpose (fowl is a big big poopyhead) I will not feel particularly remiss in doing my job and pruning off-topic content. And if you believe I am overstepping myself, then yes you can add that to my staff complaint. The master of the dagger knows how to parry better than they know how to thrust.

Elucidate to me the abundance of "layered walls" and I might reconsider my position, but considering that these "layered walls" literally need to be a 3x3 box of walls I don't think that it's quite as common as you think they are. Way to magnify a remote possibility in its importance. It's funny because if you posted this statement on literally any other server with telescience than it would still be true. Welderbomb triangulated on top of the wall above the AI's APC and then remotely detonate it with the signallers scientists have easy access to and you kill it. This is also an uncounterable explosive. I arbitrarily literally did not affect the meta whatsoever. Is it more effort? Well, considering in both cases it's literally 0 effort and 0/2 is 0 both times... I never said that this PR wasn't pushed because telescience was being discussed. I said that this PR was not pushed as an effort to resolve the "problem" with telescience Arrow outlined, nor was it pushed as an "arbitrary nerf" to telescience, nor was it related whatsoever to Arrow's announcement except that I thought about teleportation, thought about how people can teleport into walls, and then thought "huh, funny how nobody's ever addressed that." I then addressed it. Buy whatever you want, but you're wasting your money here. The PR does not currently account for how much "space" an object that is both anchored and dense occupies, because as far as I know there is no way to measure "space" except in terms of tiles. So the code makes a shortcut here, assuming that for the vast majority of objects if it's anchored and dense it occupies enough space that there is a not-insignificant possibility of you phasing into it, and then rounds up. It's a quite reasonable convention of estimation. I'd make a gaff about "that going in the staff complaint" but I already expected this sort of attitude coming from you. I'm sure someone else will deal with this after you are. I feel quite justified in saying that you did not investigate further considering that: A) Your statement was wrong. B) The statement you used in attempt to prove was sourced from a direct ping from me, and after I answered you did not request for further clarification, proving that no you did not investigate further. And bringing up my staff complaint is quite the classy move. I'd bring up your colorful history of administrative wrist-slaps, but I understand that they're actually totally irrelevant to the topic at hand.

We'll start top to bottom on how *wrong* this is: A sneak peak of something that can't happen. That image is a joke, and an explosion of that size can only be achieved if you teleport something with a w_class of 100. Because it isn't "prohibitively dangerous". Was I wrong? Welderbombing as a telescientist is piss-easy. Notice how this welderbomb doesn't even accomplish any damage to the AI? If only the telescientist had just attached a signaller and detonated the welderbomb directly adjacent to the AI core itself. Notable, this even makes bombing slightly harder because if you teleport an actually important bomb into a wall it will get destroyed I am fairly sure. Yes, a window is both anchored and dense. Where is the issue here? The only ham here is you. This PR was not made in a response to telescience abuse nor Arrow's announcement. This PR exists solely because I think "Oh, I teleported into a wall. Oh well" is an oversight that should be resolved. So I resolved it. Yes, literally all objects have mass. Most objects however explode in such a minor fashion that all they produce is noise. If you investigated further before getting your knees all ready to jerk you'd know this. Another suggestion: Please stop assuming an intent behind an action just because it's the easiest intent to argue against. As I've outlined before, this assumption is incorrect. This PR was made in response to an oversight, not in an attempt to REEE NERF TEEEELEESCCIIIIEEEENCE. It's bad manners.

king of the forums is dead long live the king

history repeats itself

[THIS USER HAS EXCEEDED THEIR 10 DAILY POSTS. FURTHER ATTEMPTS TO CIRCUMVENT MODERATION WILL MARK THIS USER AS A LATENT SHITPOSTER]

Voting for dismissal. Cuffs are balanced as they are. If you are having difficulty cuffing someone then re-evaluate the situation you are in and proceed as appropriate.

Stun batons can be used to reliably take down an IPC nonlethally

Voting for dismissal. The integration of lore cannot be achieved by boiling lore down to meaningless 1 sentence long trivia snippets. I cannot foresee this ever conveying useful lore information.

I would not be opposed to removing more than just cloaks from the loadout - it has become a bloated cesspool of ridiculous items like philosopher wigs and sombreros, but the cloak is in particular egregious. It's like everyone who works here just got off from a Game of Thrones convention. It's ridiculous.

Please read the thread before commenting. As has been stated before, this change has nothing to do with timezones, real or imaginary. The time in-game will still be randomized. Technically speaking BYOND uses GMT to measure timezones, but that is still irrelevant. This change just makes BYOND compare seconds instead of counting ticks in order to measure time.

This thread is about making the server rely on an "external" clock for calculating time instead of an internal clock which can be affected by micro-lag. This will make rounds last exactly 2 hours. Currently due to aberrations in the timing mechanism voting time, which is supposed to happen at the 2 hour mark, can be delayed by microlag causing rounds to actually last longer than two hours. As far as I'm concerned, this is really just a bugfix.