LordFowl

((Weekends and Fridays are naturally the most supreme time. Until Oct 15th I won't have much free time during the weekdays.))

At their core, humanoid races are human. To be more alien requires completely alien concepts, not just focused elements of human culture.

At their core, humanoid races are human. To be more alien requires completely alien concepts, not just focused elements of human culture.

The idea they're getting at is that ghosts don't really exist, but are rather projections that are cast in our mind as opposed to onto the real world. So we think a ghost is there, but in reality the ghost isn't there (Although it IS there, technically.) The question is if robots can have spectral entities cast upon their mind.

The idea they're getting at is that ghosts don't really exist, but are rather projections that are cast in our mind as opposed to onto the real world. So we think a ghost is there, but in reality the ghost isn't there (Although it IS there, technically.) The question is if robots can have spectral entities cast upon their mind.

There is however no specific rule for each of those occurrences, except for the erotica rule, which is covered by the PG-13 rule. (I suppose slagging off on other servers could tenuously be placed under the 'no advertisement' rule.) However, every one of the topics you state we outright ban (Again, only two of the topics you mentioned are outright forbidden) does not induce rage or heated arguments. The PG-13 rule is mandated by the host to prevent legal issues, and the forbidding of advertising other servers is because advertisement generally turns into spam (To be honest, I don't agree with this rule at all, although it's pretty much bog-standard when it comes to rule making). The remainder of the topics you brought up are cut short purely on a case-by-case basis, and that includes politics and religion. Outright banning any topic in my opinion is bad enough, except for the clear case of IC in OOC and violation of pg-13, but a case-by-case basis is a good compromise, and has worked effectively so far as I have seen. I don't really see the purpose of making the process more strict. Also, 'bad for the server' is even /more/ vague than 'inducing rage', and would only set a more nebulous precedent. Ultimately, of the two topics you brought up that actually have a rule tied to them in the official rulebook, their intent is clear. Violation of pg-13 - mandated by the host to prevent legal issues, would probably exist if we self-hosted for that same reason. No advertising - Actively attempts to reduce the playerbase, as opposed to the passive possibility of the playerbase being reduced because of controversial topics.

There is however no specific rule for each of those occurrences, except for the erotica rule, which is covered by the PG-13 rule. (I suppose slagging off on other servers could tenuously be placed under the 'no advertisement' rule.) However, every one of the topics you state we outright ban (Again, only two of the topics you mentioned are outright forbidden) does not induce rage or heated arguments. The PG-13 rule is mandated by the host to prevent legal issues, and the forbidding of advertising other servers is because advertisement generally turns into spam (To be honest, I don't agree with this rule at all, although it's pretty much bog-standard when it comes to rule making). The remainder of the topics you brought up are cut short purely on a case-by-case basis, and that includes politics and religion. Outright banning any topic in my opinion is bad enough, except for the clear case of IC in OOC and violation of pg-13, but a case-by-case basis is a good compromise, and has worked effectively so far as I have seen. I don't really see the purpose of making the process more strict. Also, 'bad for the server' is even /more/ vague than 'inducing rage', and would only set a more nebulous precedent. Ultimately, of the two topics you brought up that actually have a rule tied to them in the official rulebook, their intent is clear. Violation of pg-13 - mandated by the host to prevent legal issues, would probably exist if we self-hosted for that same reason. No advertising - Actively attempts to reduce the playerbase, as opposed to the passive possibility of the playerbase being reduced because of controversial topics.

The difference between discussing in-game events and discussing politics is clear. We ban discussing the round so as to prevent metagame, so that people can't call out their locations of death OoC. You propose to ban politics and religion solely on the basis of it causing rage. We currently do not ban any topic wholesale for the possibility of causing rage, so of course starting to do so will set the precedent.

The difference between discussing in-game events and discussing politics is clear. We ban discussing the round so as to prevent metagame, so that people can't call out their locations of death OoC. You propose to ban politics and religion solely on the basis of it causing rage. We currently do not ban any topic wholesale for the possibility of causing rage, so of course starting to do so will set the precedent.

Any and all cameras were just added to indicate cameras will exist. I've not tested blindspots as AI, but if this idea is implemented proper camera coverage will of course exist.

Any and all cameras were just added to indicate cameras will exist. I've not tested blindspots as AI, but if this idea is implemented proper camera coverage will of course exist.

There is only a handful of things that relate to ss13 only discussion then, and that is from what I can call up in my mind; 1: Events of the current round (Totally not allowed, and in most cases when it does leak through it is whining about an IC event, which will spark argument) 2: Events of previous rounds (Just as likely to cause rage because we're all powergaming dicks that don't like dying) 3: Code and other nifty things. 4: Status of the server (Usually negative comments, which yet again cause arguments more often than not.) If we are to restrict topics of discussion to the criteria that they shouldn't cause rage and that they must relate to ss13, then that really only leaves us with option 2. That leaves us with the question of, "Is that what we want our OoC to be?" If that's the direction the server goes, then that is the direction it will go. But that is not the direction I've so far seen it take. Also, the slippery slope fallacy is not just saying one thing will lead to another. A slippery slope on its own is fine as a logical device. You are then accidentally misrepresenting the fallacy. The slipper slope fallacy is "that some event must inevitably follow from another without any rational argument or demonstrable mechanism for the inevitability of the event in question." There is a clear demonstrable mechanism for my rationale, and that is the mechanism of precedent. If server admins ban something (religious topics) because it can cause rage, then server admins are obligated to ban all things that could cause rage, or else we defy the precedent we have established. As arbiters of law, even if that law is just server law, they are obligated to follow the precedents they establish, lest they invite concepts such as favoritism or despotism. I am far more comfortable with banning rage (As we do now) than banning any and every conceivable combination of elements that could incite rage.

There is only a handful of things that relate to ss13 only discussion then, and that is from what I can call up in my mind; 1: Events of the current round (Totally not allowed, and in most cases when it does leak through it is whining about an IC event, which will spark argument) 2: Events of previous rounds (Just as likely to cause rage because we're all powergaming dicks that don't like dying) 3: Code and other nifty things. 4: Status of the server (Usually negative comments, which yet again cause arguments more often than not.) If we are to restrict topics of discussion to the criteria that they shouldn't cause rage and that they must relate to ss13, then that really only leaves us with option 2. That leaves us with the question of, "Is that what we want our OoC to be?" If that's the direction the server goes, then that is the direction it will go. But that is not the direction I've so far seen it take. Also, the slippery slope fallacy is not just saying one thing will lead to another. A slippery slope on its own is fine as a logical device. You are then accidentally misrepresenting the fallacy. The slipper slope fallacy is "that some event must inevitably follow from another without any rational argument or demonstrable mechanism for the inevitability of the event in question." There is a clear demonstrable mechanism for my rationale, and that is the mechanism of precedent. If server admins ban something (religious topics) because it can cause rage, then server admins are obligated to ban all things that could cause rage, or else we defy the precedent we have established. As arbiters of law, even if that law is just server law, they are obligated to follow the precedents they establish, lest they invite concepts such as favoritism or despotism. I am far more comfortable with banning rage (As we do now) than banning any and every conceivable combination of elements that could incite rage.

http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=580

http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=580

The EMT room is not even touched by this change. My proposed psyche office fits perfectly into the footprint the removed break room left. The only room that I touched is the psyche office. Also, if making the office easier to access to the public doesn't increase the amount of people that come to it, at the very least it will be more convenient to the people who do come to it.

The EMT room is not even touched by this change. My proposed psyche office fits perfectly into the footprint the removed break room left. The only room that I touched is the psyche office. Also, if making the office easier to access to the public doesn't increase the amount of people that come to it, at the very least it will be more convenient to the people who do come to it.

A poetic analogy, but fundamentally flawed in the fact that OoC is designed specifically for discussions of all types, except for the current round. The fact remains that willfully cutting out topics of discussion to pander to the percentage of people that are offended by that topic will eventually lead to nothing being permitted on the OoC, because something will always offend somebody. A more apt modification to your analogy is that everyone in the restaurant is smoking, it just happens that cuban cigars produce more smoke than cigarettes.

A poetic analogy, but fundamentally flawed in the fact that OoC is designed specifically for discussions of all types, except for the current round. The fact remains that willfully cutting out topics of discussion to pander to the percentage of people that are offended by that topic will eventually lead to nothing being permitted on the OoC, because something will always offend somebody. A more apt modification to your analogy is that everyone in the restaurant is smoking, it just happens that cuban cigars produce more smoke than cigarettes.

Basically, the current psychiatric office is laughably bad. It is hidden away in the deepest darkest most distant corner of medical, and is cramped and devoid of some essential features. It was clearly an afterthought when the mappers designed medical. This only disservices Psychiatry, which is a difficult role to pull off well as it is. As such, I have lent what talent I have in designing a remodel of the psychiatric office which does not change the actual structure of medical severely. (Image taken from the PoV of an AI, proving that the cameras work. Shutters start off open, but I displayed them as closed.) Firstly, this change makes Psychiatry infinitely more accessible to crew, which it should be. Not only is it much closer to the medical lobby and central medical, it also as direct access to the central primary hallway, so people coming in for psychoanalysis do not have to wander through medical, potentially disrupting medical procedures. It is also larger and more inviting, which I think is important for a psychiatrist. Some essential features have been included, primarily a request console to facilitate form printing. A clipboard and two folders have also been provided, to easier categorize the psychiatrist's paperwork. (Note, in this current build there is no intercom. An intercom has been added to the waiting room area so that the AI cannot spy on psychoanalysis.) As the room is also larger, additional amenities such as a disposal chute has also been added. As the door to primary access is probably going to be general access so that people can enter freely, it is locked down when the psychiatrist activates his privacy shutters. Instead of this, the door could be made restricted access and rely on the psychiatrist to open it for potential patients. Altogether, I think this provides psychiatry the importance it deserves, it being a unique occupation of its own. It should not be just a remote broom closet. Now, the eagle-eyed observer will probably note that this office occupies the current position of the break room. The break room could be moved to the recovery room that is adjacent to surgery, or could be downsized and moved to the former psychiatrist office, or could be removed entirely. I don't know why full time staff need break rooms, but it does offer a cyborg recharger which is a useful addition. If the break room is moved to recovery, it means that the rare patient that needs to use the patient dorms that are a bit farther away. The break room can retain all of its current furniture and machinery. If the break room is moved to the former psychiatry office, it will mostly become just a soda fountain table with some tools, perhaps a medical laptop, and a cyborg recharger. If the break room is removed entirely, lesbayians everywhere will weep tears. The former psychiatry office could be put to other use. I don't know why the psychiatry office was given so little thought, but hopefully that will change.

Basically, the current psychiatric office is laughably bad. It is hidden away in the deepest darkest most distant corner of medical, and is cramped and devoid of some essential features. It was clearly an afterthought when the mappers designed medical. This only disservices Psychiatry, which is a difficult role to pull off well as it is. As such, I have lent what talent I have in designing a remodel of the psychiatric office which does not change the actual structure of medical severely. (Image taken from the PoV of an AI, proving that the cameras work. Shutters start off open, but I displayed them as closed.) Firstly, this change makes Psychiatry infinitely more accessible to crew, which it should be. Not only is it much closer to the medical lobby and central medical, it also as direct access to the central primary hallway, so people coming in for psychoanalysis do not have to wander through medical, potentially disrupting medical procedures. It is also larger and more inviting, which I think is important for a psychiatrist. Some essential features have been included, primarily a request console to facilitate form printing. A clipboard and two folders have also been provided, to easier categorize the psychiatrist's paperwork. (Note, in this current build there is no intercom. An intercom has been added to the waiting room area so that the AI cannot spy on psychoanalysis.) As the room is also larger, additional amenities such as a disposal chute has also been added. As the door to primary access is probably going to be general access so that people can enter freely, it is locked down when the psychiatrist activates his privacy shutters. Instead of this, the door could be made restricted access and rely on the psychiatrist to open it for potential patients. Altogether, I think this provides psychiatry the importance it deserves, it being a unique occupation of its own. It should not be just a remote broom closet. Now, the eagle-eyed observer will probably note that this office occupies the current position of the break room. The break room could be moved to the recovery room that is adjacent to surgery, or could be downsized and moved to the former psychiatrist office, or could be removed entirely. I don't know why full time staff need break rooms, but it does offer a cyborg recharger which is a useful addition. If the break room is moved to recovery, it means that the rare patient that needs to use the patient dorms that are a bit farther away. The break room can retain all of its current furniture and machinery. If the break room is moved to the former psychiatry office, it will mostly become just a soda fountain table with some tools, perhaps a medical laptop, and a cyborg recharger. If the break room is removed entirely, lesbayians everywhere will weep tears. The former psychiatry office could be put to other use. I don't know why the psychiatry office was given so little thought, but hopefully that will change.

Lorewise, a Skrellian slur is a biological construct, not a psychological construct. I don't really get how Skrell could possibly train out of this biological defect. However, since I'm currently wasting e-space on this thread, I'll just say that while GhostInSpace's record may be a tad spotted, I've found his characters to be refreshingly believable, and I think he would only add to the Skrellian gene pool.

Lorewise, a Skrellian slur is a biological construct, not a psychological construct. I don't really get how Skrell could possibly train out of this biological defect. However, since I'm currently wasting e-space on this thread, I'll just say that while GhostInSpace's record may be a tad spotted, I've found his characters to be refreshingly believable, and I think he would only add to the Skrellian gene pool.

If we were to implement it mechanically, the most simple way I think would have it so that the cloning machine could only clone people that currently have a loyalty implant in their body. I personally would exclude security and science from the cloning plan, and even engineering if we were to do this as well. I'm all for making death more serious.

If we were to implement it mechanically, the most simple way I think would have it so that the cloning machine could only clone people that currently have a loyalty implant in their body. I personally would exclude security and science from the cloning plan, and even engineering if we were to do this as well. I'm all for making death more serious.