Jump to content

VTCobaltblood

Lore Writers
  • Content Count

    403
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About VTCobaltblood

Linked Accounts

  • Byond CKey
    vtcobaltblood

Recent Profile Visitors

760 profile views
  1. Not letting IPCs speak Sol Common is damaging lore consistency for some slight mechanical advantage that already can be nullified by someone basically just getting their hands on a circuit kit.
  2. I also support this. Firstly, there is no reason for Tajara to not be able to speak slurred Sol Common if they can speak TCB, Freespeak and Tradeband, which are all human languages of various origins. Secondly, I also think that the "each species gets a unique language" is a pretty silly restriction. The "their mouths can't pronounce it" stops working when you're dealing with IPCs, since they can transmit any sounds - possibly even sounds humans cannot hear. Lorewise, it does not make sense - and I'd much rather have consistent lore than racial identity or whatever.
  3. Actually, I decided it will be reviewed right now. While I don't think that Martian Skrell population is such an abysmal minority, it can be easily explained by Bova being far away from the main center of Martian trade, and as such, having less aliens in it. In all other ways, the backstory makes sense, and is compelling (perhaps because I have a soft spot for Mars :). Your answers to the questions are also all fine. Accepted.
  4. Hi, sorry for the delay. This will be reviewed today.
  5. I am not upset. It is an example of your policies going unenforced.
  6. You allowed me to do so and approved it personally despite knowing that it breaks a rule. You told me it's "preference". There was precedent for three deputies, so I considered it a soft preference that will not cause me to lose a deputy. There was no indication that the precedent is invalid because the rule is new. We discussed it. You asked me about the activity of my deputies a day before your decision. I replied saying that it's satisfactory. Despite that, you went on to remove my deputy even though Skull and Alberyk both say you did not have to. We've been over this several times already in this thread and I always have the same responses. I have told you I want a headmin/headdev to sort this out - that's why it's a staff complaint. Stop bringing this up because my responses will be the same, and yours will be too. I'm not saying policy is unnecessary. I'm saying that policy feels like kneejerk because it's created to respond to a specific case and is then never brought again. It wasn't ever enforced since the initial two cases. There were some cases which would logically invoke it, like the recent Kyres-Bygone thing that quickly turned the chat very aggressive. Despite me being one of the main offenders in that discussion, I wasn't kicked or even given a talking-to. I presume you had a talk with Bygone because of a suddenly and abruptly posted apology later, while you could have, and according to your policy, should have kicked him. Paradox did milder things than what happened that night and got kicked. That's all up to Skull to decide.
  7. I want a better manager, and I don't really think new policies suffice for this. We need a new loremaster, although I would be satisfied to still see Jackboot as the Unathi loredev. Issues just keep piling up, and the deputy situation shows that Jackboot's poor management is a recurrent pattern of behavior. New policies enforced by Jackboot honestly often seem like knee-jerk, such as the slowdown mode or kicking people out of the lore chat for aggressive behavior, which have been introduced while we were discussing Aut'akh, but never spoken of again (which faintly smells of bias?) despite kick-worthy situations occurring again. Because of this, I don't have a lot of faith in policy improvement.
  8. Fantastic roleplayer. Wish you'd play more often. A definite +1.
  9. You keep saying the same thing over and over and I'm tired of replying to you with the same things over and over, so this will be up to admins to resolve. Though I would be really interested to see where I promised you to postpone any talking. By saying "we can do that later", I did not mean "I will do it later", I meant "I will do it later if needed".
  10. I agree with this. It can already be roleplayed. Also, this supports one-off characters, which will further encourage people to put less effort into creating actual backstories and personalities - which is fairly acceptable for antagonists as they are not canon, but not as good for station characters, especially supposed NT employees (Bridge Assistant and a lot of the miscreant roles).
  11. oh yeah i forgot to mention, a CMO dropping a pair lungs on the cargo table and then putting them in a bag and being very surprised when nobody wants to ship them as bounty afterwards, going as childish as saying "Cargo won't get their bounty today." on the common radio was extremely weird and unprofessional
  12. That has been my experience as well until now. The deputies thing is unrelated to what you're talking about. The supposed rule was talked about for months - since April, to be exact. Jackboot did not communicate it to me and allowed me to break it.
  13. Yes, but this gave me a very valid precedent to base my decisions off of when you tell me it's just a preference to transition out deputies. If I'm told there's a preference for two deputies, I can simply refer to previous experience of teams having three, since you did not communicate that the rule was new, nor that it is a rule. I considered the preference to always exist and to be successfully broken by the synth lore team, and you gave me absolutely no reasons to believe otherwise. Which is, again, extremely shitty communication, since you knew that it is a rule, and you, despite of it, personally approved my third slot. My complaint is not, say, about you abusing your power - it's about plain bad management on your side. What kind of a manager makes me take gambles?
  14. No. It's a preference, one broken before by the synth lore team. With how you worded it, and my previous experience, I had no reasons not to ignore it if I felt confident I can wrangle three deputies - which I were. Again, I did not know you would force me to do this, again referring to the synth lore team experience. Indeed, I have attached this to the thread as well. "We can do that later" does not mean "I promise you Nursie will be fired" - which you apparently told to the head admin team. And yes, I understand that you are the loremaster and can fire people at your discretion. However, you lied to me by omission while doing so. And then... just lied blatantly. Not to mention, the entire firing thing could be avoided if you literally just told me that a third deputy slot cannot be opened and that I can have only two deputies. The communication and lies here are why I'm making the complaint. Your posts just seem like an attempt to shift as much blame as possible on me.
×
×
  • Create New...