Jump to content

LordFowl

Members
  • Posts

    1,303
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LordFowl

  1. Every lockdown (except the bridge and the prisoner section of the brig) can be evacuated from via maintenance tunnels, which are not affected by lockdowns.
  2. Voting for dismissal. If you want to do this it is an easily done do it yourself construction.
  3. If only we had some sort of bodily waste and plumbing system that accounted for reagent and hunger caps.
  4. You should replace the already existing cardemon set that was brought from Bay with this, and which has a starter set in the loadout.
  5. While many would argue that the second antag contest was poorly handled, handled it was and what's done is done. I see it as unlikely that there will be any revision to this policy, at least given the current state of the lore.
  6. Moved to policy subforum.
  7. But you can't view the stars from the rafters anyways. So again it's a performance drain with no point. Few people will go up there because there is nowhere to go.
  8. Voting for dismissal for the reasons outlined above. Binning as per protocol.
  9. Meaningless verticality will just be a performance drain. If there is nothing up there what is the point? The proposed bar rafters are a particular exercise in excess.
  10. Implemented in PR #5010: https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/5010 Moving to projects.
  11. Converting the wiki to a more standard format where wiki-devs act more like wiki administrators and the wiki is open to the public sounds infinitely better than our current system where a small number of people of sporadic interest are responsible for the entire wiki development.
  12. It's not metagaming if loyalty implants exist in the lore. Explaining the "lore" is an inconsequential hurdle. This has already been suggested before, here: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=126&t=10904 and here: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=9814&p=90566 Moving to policy subforums as this is undeniably a political situation.
  13. When the suggestion is “Port Polaris traits” and my response is “No, we don’t need to port Bay’s trait system” the buck ends there. That’s all she wrote. I’m not making a grand philosophical statement on the metaphysics’s dynamic between the ported and the unported. The scope of my response is limited to the scope of the request.
  14. What does this even mean? You know you shouldn't be reinventing the wheel. It means that if we were ever to do traits it would be our own system. Not particularly complicated. This is not a matter of the wheel, nor reinvention. If we were to do something like traits it would not be like how Bay does it.
  15. If we were ever to do traits, it would be our own system and not a Bay-port.
  16. That would typically be the person who posts the second dismissal, but its clear that headmins aren't much sticklers for rules.
  17. Will we never tire of Bay ports?
  18. This is a policy decision. Moving to the appropriate subforum.
  19. If only there was a separate role in engineering specifically designed and equipped to perform the low-end duties that don't affect general station integrity, and was designed ultimately to supplant the maintenance technician...
  20. Much as I am loathe to afford credibility to the IAA, there is no reason for them not to have access to the bridge. They are a whitelisted position which benefits both from communication with command staff and access to command staff facilities. If you have a specific problem with an IAA, you should consider talking about it with them ICly if you are a captain or HoP, OoCly if you are one of the unimportant head of staff, or via ahelps if you feel it necessary. Also, the dev team did not give IAA access to the bridge or command staff radios - that was actually a byproduct of the baymerge.
  21. The Vaurca are a perverse and arcane breed. Their technology can work wonders, and I don't really see a reason why the drill's damage couldn't be severely reduced.
  22. Dear Sir or Madame: I have been requested by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company to contact you for assistance in resolving a matter. The Nigerian National Petroleum Company has recently concluded a large number of contracts for oil exploration in the sub-Sahara region. The contracts have immediately produced moneys equaling US$40,000,000. The Nigerian National Petroleum Company is desirous of oil exploration in other parts of the world, however, because of certain regulations of the Nigerian Government, it is unable to move these funds to another region. You assistance is requested as a non-Nigerian citizen to assist the Nigerian National Petroleum Company, and also the Central Bank of Nigeria, in moving these funds out of Nigeria. If the funds can be transferred to your name, in your United States account, then you can forward the funds as directed by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company. In exchange for your accommodating services, the Nigerian National Petroleum Company would agree to allow you to retain 10%, or US$4 million of this amount. However, to be a legitimate transferee of these moneys according to Nigerian law, you must presently be a depositor of at least US$100,000 in a Nigerian bank which is regulated by the Central Bank of Nigeria. If it will be possible for you to assist us, we would be most grateful. We suggest that you meet with us in person in Lagos, and that during your visit I introduce you to the representatives of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company, as well as with certain officials of the Central Bank of Nigeria. Please call me at your earliest convenience at 18-467-4975. Time is of the essence in this matter; very quickly the Nigerian Government will realize that the Central Bank is maintaining this amount on deposit, and attempt to levy certain depository taxes on it. Yours truly, Prince Alyusi Islassis
  23. Whitelisting ERT is ultimately a policy suggestion, however I would be glad to see more variety in emergency response options, and would be happy to work on a foreign legion provided that the overarching policy change proceeds. However since the root of this issue is policy (whitelisting ERT and then creating an unwhitelisted version) I have moved it to the appropriate sub-forum.
  24. That seems a little las-y.
×
×
  • Create New...