Triogenix

Thank you for your application. It was a difficult choice, however, we have decided to go with another applicant. That said, I hope you continue to apply for positions on the lore team in the future!

This is a fair concern and one that I tried to address here. Again, nothing is final yet, but as part of this, my thoughts were to limit the number of times any character, or multiple characters all played by the same player, can be mentioned in "official" lore to like, once or twice, at most, to ensure that we recognize a wide variety of characters, and it's not just one person, or a group of people, to stop characters from ending up looking like; as for the wiki specifically - just due to how we do event arc pages(copy-pasting articles) if a name is in an article it'll go on the wiki. but I agree that we shouldn't have something on the Konyang page like "The rampancy was stopped by the Horizon crew, led by Captain Helena Artigas" or anything similar.

After discussion with the rest of headstaff, we ended up thinking about the following ideas for the future; 1) An In-game memorial, on a computer(or something similar) that will showcase the names of all characters who died during IC arcs, and separate them by arc.(Matt mentioned this in his reply.) 2) Allow for characters to earn accolades, and be mentioned in articles, or other official lore, should it be wanted by the relevant team and the admin assigned to an event, and further approved by the loremasters and head administrators, similarly to the death-retcon rules. The rules will be edited to reflect this once we have a better idea of how we want to handle it going forward. 3) Due to the above - actions during events that are notable will be placed under heavier scrutiny by moderators and administrators. 4) Should the relevant team wish to pursue it, they may hold and publish interviews with members of the crew/characters present regarding events and arcs, which must be approved by the LTA before publishing. 5) The LTA, Head Staff, and relevant teams should ensure that the opportunity for and obtaining of the recognition by all of the above applies to a wide variety of players and characters, not just regulars. Furthermore, the aforementioned members of staff should strive to have it so that different characters/players get any of these types of recognition, either within the same arc, or across arcs. 6) As for events - we have been, and will continue to be attempting to have an increased amount of consistent, low stakes, style of events, in addition to high intensity ones, though this will take significant time, and will not be an immediate, noticed change, due to the way the lore team proposes and decides on events. Beyond that, there are some parts where specifics will be hammered out; like do we have a system similar to what @Fyni suggested? Or something else. This isn’t final either, there may be some changes before being implemented as actual policy just due to how these things work, but this shows the general direction we’re thinking.

In regards to the argument that this should also apply to other parts of lore written by problematic people, there are a couple of things I want to quickly mention. Firstly, in regards to things like ATLAS or other lore, other steps have already been taken to ensure that they are never repeated - the largest of which being these two lines from the lore team rules and regulations. Essentially what this means is, the Loremaster and their deputy have the final say in any official lore that gets added. If anything like ATLAS is attempted to be added again, the LTA can just say "no." and shut it down. Any additions, substantial or not to lore, are done at the discretion of the LTA(most of the time this just means not outright denying something). Secondly, the point of this policy is not to change the past, but to learn from it going forward. You can point out many different areas where it's easy to say "That shouldn't have happened, that person was problematic and we need to remove x, y, z" but that doesn't stop the same thing from happening again in the future. You both mention just scrubbing the name of anyone problematic, but that isn't an actual solution; an actual solution needs to be able to reasonably prevent something problematic from re-occurring, not just fix it once it's happened. If that was a solution, malf would still be in the secret rotation as any bad malf's could just be ahelped, or in other words "fixed/banned if it occurs."

I do not have the time to fully read, and give a coherent response to all of the above points made by people currently, though I will do so at a later date. However, I want to just point this out, because it's something in my skimming that I do not see addressed(I might have missed it however). You can go through the history of the wiki, and find that a specific character, AIMMO, who was incredibly problematic and whose player was banned, was mentioned in official lore. I'm not going to discuss exactly what they did, put simply this is something I'm not okay with repeating, and will likely never be okay with repeating. I don't see a way to ensure that this does not repeat, without something like the current policy we have in place, unless we create an artificial divide between characters/players that are "trusted" and those that aren't, which is something I really do not want to do. Were it not for the fact that this has already happened in the past, I would not care, or have any policy about namedropping people in canon articles or official lore. This is a policy in place due to something that has already happened which I believe should not be repeated, not due to something that might happen.

The current LTA has the position that no specific character names should ever be mentioned in official lore; we allow things like non-CCIA given medals and awards, but characters can't be mentioned in articles/on the wiki, and those medals/awards cannot be in-game items(CCIA follows different rules for their awards). As this is related to lore events, I believe that the LTA's authority, and therefore this position, extends over it. It can be brought up that it was done before, however, to be honest, I don't care. That was the decision/position of that LTA, the current one is different, and future ones can be different as well. However, while I am loremaster this is not something I will likely compromise on - ever. Something awarded to the Horizon crew as a whole, or to the Horizon as a ship is fine, and with the event arc now over, this is something the synthetic team considered. Time will tell what their decision was after consideration. Therefore I'm also voting for the dismissal of this suggestion.

Hello, and thanks for applying! I have a couple of questions about/things I'd like to see regarding your answers. You mention the trinary as an example, which is fine, but I'd additionally like to see an example more in line with a majority of synthetic lore. I.E, how you'd accomplish tweaking this theme regarding synthetics in another nation. or do you view it as something that will include the entire species? I.E, if IPCs are demonized here, they're seen as equals here and that's fine. This also ties into my next question; Both of these statements seem to be about the same thing and yet contradict each other. On one hand, you say you like to argue, but will always be open to compromise on the other, you talk about taking it on the chin, which I see as just accepting a "no" so I'm confused. I'm also going to ask a few questions that aren't specific; 1) Both you and NM mentioned the flexibility/versatility of synthlore in terms of character creation, and both in regards to depth; however, do you think this versatility can also be used to create characters with a lack of depth? Why or why not? Is it a problem if so? Do you have any plans to "deal" with it? 2) Concerning themes, how embedded should themes be? An example of a super-embedded theme is with Tajara; all of tajara characters are affected by the fact the species is in a cold war. Whereas the theme you identified for synthlore I'd argue is one that characters don't have to engage with. 3) Lastly, how would you deal with differentiating IPCs from humans?

Hello! Thank you for applying. I have a couple of questions I'd like to ask regarding some of your answers in addition to the discussion we had. While this is fine in theory, it seems rather general, which is understandable given it can be difficult to determine how we work at times from the outside looking in, but additionally not arguably different from what every writer has tried to do since I joined the server, regardless of species. Given that, and the fact that this is still a debatable issue, one that is brought up consistently, I'd like more detail on specifically what you see yourself doing in the writer role that might be different from other people. Furthermore, you mention trying to avoid rigid parameters, and I'm curious whether it's something you're totally against for the species or more along a scale, if so, what is your "too-far" point in terms of adding parameters to synthetic, gameplay, lore, or expectations. Lastly for this section, 2 of the three things you mention in bullet points above the quoted section, the exception being composition, seem super minor, internal, or otherwise sometimes difficult to tell from an outside perspective that they're different from how a human would react. If the issue is players being unable to differentiate between a positronic and a human in RP/mannerisms currently, what do further minor changes cause? How would they be enforced if it's difficult for people to recognize them? and as answering the previous question necessitates answering this one; how different do you think IPCs should be from humanity? Should a clear line be drawn for players, or left fuzzy? I really like this clear roadmap. That said, my main question is; how do you see synthetic-centric factions interacting with the wider spur, and the wider spur with them, while keeping the major theme that their lives are heavily tied to mankinds perception of them? Are they all going to be like the trinary where it's a grudging okay? How do you plan to differentiate between them? Additionally; regarding religion, I'd like a couple examples as to differences these religions would have compared to the trinary, as the line "seeking to answer outside of mankind" implies, atleast to me, similar veneration of synthetics as holy and/or different. And lastly, something not specific, but in general. As one of the questions outright stated, synth lore currently does not currently exist in a way that is freed from other species' lore. What I mean by that is, that pretty much every piece of synthetic lore exists as something between two species, and therefore two teams. Do you think this is something that needs to change? Why or why not? Feel free to reach out if you have any questions for me, and good luck!

Now that Silicon Nightmares is over, we are looking for applicants to fill the position of synthetic writer. When making your application, please include the Lore Developer Template: Ckey/BYOND Username: Position Being Applied For (Wiki Maintainer, Lore Developer, Deputy Lore developer): Have you read the Lore Team Rules and Regulations wiki page?: Past Experiences/Knowledge: Examples of Past Work: Include answers to the following questions in your app as well. 1. What do you think are the primary themes of synthetic lore? If you got this position, how would you develop them? 2. What do you think is the strongest part of synthlore currently and why? 3. What do you think is the weakest part of synthlore currently and why? 4. The Synthetic Team’s arc, Silicon Nightmares, recently finished. Given what happened, what would your next steps be? 5. What do you think are your strongest and weakest attributes in terms of working on a team, and why? 6. As the writer of synthlore, you will often find yourself required to work with other teams, primarily the human team, consistently to further your lore, and reach compromises as their lore is highly intertwined with other species. Therefore, how do you think you'll deal with not being able to do what you wanted, either in part or in full? 7. The synthetic writer is a position that comes with two deputy writers under them on the team. It is the writer's job to manage their team, in addition to their duties of moderating the WL. Given that, what skills do you have that you think will assist you in this? On the opposite end, what do you believe is your weakest link regarding management and moderation? Good luck to all applicants!

This was recently PR'd and discussed by the head developers, who said the following on the PR: "I've spoken to this with Arrow at length (seriously, we've had a lot of discussions about this PR) and the resolution we both came to is that this is ultimately just another band-aid on a system held together by duct tape. We can't keep adding duct tape to our languages system - it fundamentally does not work and does not make sense because it relies on chains of contorted OOC reasoning and Bay holdovers that make no sense in our universe (tradeband, freespeak) along with unmaintained languages (Sol Common) that should be less monolithic. In short, this PR is at this time not wanted. Anything that touches languages needs a comprehensive rework by the lore team. I'm willing to put forward my full availability to make sure it happens if there's a concrete effort, and to discuss the head developers' thoughts/visions about it." So therefore, I'm voting for the dismissal of this suggestion, as before this can happen, headstaff and the lore team will first need to complete an extensive/total rework of our languages.

The lore team already has plans in place to address the current lack sol consulars, but due to the nature of these plans I can't discuss specifics without massive spoilers. Therefore, while I understand the reasoning behind this suggestion, and recognize that there is no way people could have known what was being planned in private, I see nothing more to be gained by keeping it up; for all intents and purposes, it has been accepted for some time.

I second what campin said here. This is a far lesser issue than people make it out to be, and implementing this policy would merely be an overkill solution to an overblown problem. The far greater and present issue is the importance command characters have in events, consistently having a major part to play; something that can be further discussed in a different thread as it is outside the scope of this suggestion. Voting for Dismissal.

There is some weight to this argument. It's been considered in the past, but we decided against it for one main reason. The reasoning is that whenever possible we should encourage interactivity with the event arc for characters, even if they missed an event. I.E., talking with other characters about it in the game. It doesn't take much effort to ask around the ship as to what happened during an event round, and isn't as impactful as command not knowing what is going on. This is, however, open to interpretation but a discussion for another time. I'm not strictly opposed to having an open summary of an event, but it isn't necessary in the same way as one for command is, as outlined above. I'd leave such decisions in the hands of the event managers and the overall team running the arc.

I echo what Matt said. It's an alright idea but doesn't fit the overall setting of our lore, and would feel forced/silly if implemented. I think we already have a good enough system in place with CCIA punishments for minor offenses, which are canon and, therefore interesting. However I will say it is important to keep in mind that the lore of the server in some ways reflects the mechanics of the game, so should Matt and Arrow/the rest of the dev team move forward with something similar to this, things can be tweaked to make it somewhat more reasonable.

In regards to an OOC channel for this stuff, I specifically had the thread locked so that discussion didn't happen. The point of that post is to let command players retain a general sense of what's going on, so they don't make nonsensical decisions because they didn't catch themselves up in the middle of an arc, something non-command doesn't have an issue with because they're not in a decision making role. I like doing them IC'ly because I find it more interesting that way, but I could just as much do it OOC'ly because that's its primary function; I wouldn't do them if I didn't think it was necessary to ensure that stupid, uninformed decisions don't happen. As for discussions, any OOC discussion surrounding arcs can wait until they are over, I don't want people asking "why didn't x happen that would make more sense" when the full picture hasn't been revealed yet and they're working with incomplete information. As for an IC channel for discussions - if you want to discuss it talk about it in the game. I am categorically against any official expansion of the relay in such a way because I only see it ending poorly and alienating non-command players from participating in events even more. We already have an issue of command and security monopolizing event content, and creating a chat specifically for command to talk about event content in an IC format just exacerbates that problem. Voting for dismissal.

Read was tremendously helpful to my team with Steel on the Horizon, in addition to the above points made by bear. +1

Christmas distracted me, apologies.

This seems to be handled. Unless there's anything else, this complaint will be closed in 24 hours.

This complaint has been handled, and we have reached out to those involved regarding a verdict.

Okay, me and @La Villa Strangiato will be handling this complaint. As Rooster already said, please keep all posts on topic in this thread, and act like adults. We'll be reading through everything over the coming days.

Hello! I'm back after my original post, and have some questions for you! 1) What would you say is your biggest flaw in terms of potentially writing for the lore team? 2) As a human deputy, you will need to comprise alot, not only with Lain, but with other teams or the LTA to get things you want added. What do you think is the best attribute that would help you reach these compromises? 3) Human lore is one of the most oft-criticized sections of our lore and has a large player base as it is the only unwhitelisted species. Given this, do you think there are some topics you'd be nervous to approach due to how player feedback may be massively negative? If so, how would you go about approaching such topics? If not, why? 4) What are your thoughts on the current size of human lore? Is it too much? Is it not enough? With reasoning. 5) Lastly, what are your thoughts on article arcs vs in-game events? Is one better than the other? Which stories should be told using which? Again, good luck with your application!

Hello! Glad to see you've applied, and I especially like the ideas you have of focusing on expanding already existing planets, and their relationships in both the Alliance and Coalition. With that said, onto some questions. 1) What would you say is your biggest flaw in terms of potentially writing for the lore team? 2) As a human deputy, you will need to comprise alot, not only with Lain, but with other teams or the LTA to get things you want added. What do you think is the best attribute that would help you reach these compromises? 3) Human lore is one of the most oft-criticized sections of our lore and has a large player base as it is the only unwhitelisted species. Given this, do you think there are some topics you'd be nervous to approach due to how player feedback may be massively negative? If so, how would you go about approaching such topics? If not, why? 4) What are your thoughts on the current size of human lore? Is it too much? Is it not enough? With reasoning. 5) Lastly, what are your thoughts on article arcs vs in-game events? Is one better than the other? Which stories should be told using which? Good luck with your application!

Hello! I'm glad to see you applied, as though we've never worked together, I've enjoyed simply speaking with you in the staffcord or elsewhere on Aurora. With that said, onto some questions. 1) What would you say is your biggest flaw in terms of potentially writing for the lore team? 2) As a human deputy, you will need to comprise alot, not only with Lain, but with other teams or the LTA to get things you want added. What do you think is the best attribute that would help you reach these compromises? 3) Human lore is one of the most oft-criticized sections of our lore and has a large player base as it is the only unwhitelisted species. Given this, do you think there are some topics you'd be nervous to approach due to how player feedback may be massively negative? If so, how would you go about approaching such topics? If not, why? 4) What are your thoughts on the current size of human lore? Is it too much? Is it not enough? With reasoning. 5) Lastly, what are your thoughts on article arcs vs in-game events? Is one better than the other? Which stories should be told using which? Good luck with your application!

Hello! I'm glad to see you applied, as I greatly enjoyed working on the Steel on the Horizon Mini-Arc with you. With that said, onto some questions. 1) What would you say is your biggest flaw in terms of potentially writing for the lore team? 2) As a human deputy, you will need to comprise alot, not only with Lain, but with other teams or the LTA to get things you want added. What do you think is the best attribute that would help you reach these compromises? 3) Human lore is one of the most oft-criticized sections of our lore and has a large player base as it is the only unwhitelisted species. Given this, do you think there are some topics you'd be nervous to approach due to how player feedback may be massively negative? If so, how would you go about approaching such topics? If not, why? 4) What are your thoughts on the current size of human lore? Is it too much? Is it not enough? With reasoning. 5) Lastly, what are your thoughts on article arcs vs in-game events? Is one better than the other? Which stories should be told using which? Good luck with your application!

I thank everyone for keeping their posts concise so it was not a difficult task to review everything. I have decided to issue a warning to Lavilla, as I believe this behavior does not comply with the Lore Team Code of Conduct. I will be speaking with them about this behavior, and working with them to ensure it does not happen again. Unless there is further evidence to be presented, this complaint will close in 24 hours.