Frances

That's when you hop on sec yourself and try to help these guys get better ingame or through LOOC. In my experience, most players who do a "kinda shitty" job are plain new and looking to learn the game, because most come from LRP backgrounds and probably aren't too sure how to handle security well. So you teach them! Not a sec player? I can see how it would kinda suck, though LOOC is still open for communication. But most of the players I see complain about sec are sec players themselves (not saying everyone finding issues with security is in it, but those that aren't tend to be a lot less vocal and mostly prefer to do their own thing anyway.)

I mean, there's two kinds of sec players I see people finding issue with. There's sec players who are fucking retards. Which can probably be handled with a single adminhelp and sequence of admin-PMs. Then there's sec players who make shady decisions and "bad" judgement calls (according to some people's very subjective standards, which already makes "solving" this issue quite a mess.) Those wouldn't really have any trouble passing a whitelist, as all that's required to do so is to basically display you're literate (and meet a few other arbitrary requirements such as admins not disliking you too much lately). Whitelisting sec would achieve little besides making Aurora look even more autistic as we keep enforcing increasingly insane and obtuse requirements and guidelines (although, do you guys want to?)

It is at this point I'd be tempted to break out pictures of certain old and beloved italian and german political parties, but that'd probably be breaking another rule. I gave a pretty reasonable explanation why the rule didn't need to be applied in this instance, and your rebuttal was "we're gonna enforce it anyway lol". I'm not going to keep arguing this for five pages, but food for thought.

And I pretty much think the fact that people can't agree on the details of the lore (well, the Loremaster posted now) shows just how malleable it is. Nothing is really set in stone for antag rounds. We've had Vox traders, and weird nuke-diplomats (with admin assistance) who we ended up exposing as actual nukes. Given that the lore should exist to serve gameplay, and not the other way around, I particularly like players who are willing to take some liberties to make one-off, throwaway antag rounds a bit more interesting.

Hm, maybe you're taking what I'm saying too literally. Baycode removed some of the trolly stuff (I dunno if /tg/ ever had butts tho) but you can't deny SS13 was designed to be ridiculous by nature - heck the name isn't particularly serious - yet HRP tries to do the most of taking it seriously, or at the very least giving it more story depth. In the end, it's an example of the medium adapting to new possibilities, and I don't think different types of antagging should be disregarded solely because they deviate from the original intent. What you probably wanna explain is why you think they're bad, not different.

And SS13 is designed in every possible way to do incredibly trolly shit, like farting into people's faces and killing them by blasting your ass off and crushing their head in the resulting explosion. Let's not forget HRP was created by playing on the hidden and unexpected potential of certain of the platform's features. Surely if that parallel can be drawn, there should be better arguments for why non-combat antags can't be a thing.

It's not like this thread is going to get muddied up with ten pages of discussion. It's a funny complaint against someone who did a funny thing, and I doubt it's gonna take admins any more than the two minutes needed to read the OP to pass a judgement. Can we please keep the comments from this, at the very least?

Some people vote non-extended to see shit go down, some people vote it simply to be surprised. What's wrong with a bit of both happening?

I've seen shitty "regular" antagging and shitty "peaceful" antagging. A wizard who does nothing but hold a two-hour meeting with the captain behind closed shutters is roughly the peaceful equivalent of a wizard spamming firebombs and ei-nath while teleporting around. We had a peaceful wizard a while back who roleplayed coming from an alternate universe were Aurora was a medieval fantasy kingdom, with Tajarans and Humans race-switched (so humans were basically considered the untrustworthy underlings of the superior Tajaran masters). They had a whole plot ongoing with a malfunctioning teleport device/spell (toying with the actual blink spell) which was increasingly wearing down on the wizard's body. There wasn't any overt conflict, yet we managed to get most of security, medical, and science involved, and pretty much all of the station did know there was something going on, over a relatively extended period of time, which is more than many aggressive antags can claim to have provoked. So I do believe peaceful antags can achieve something good, though they come with the same faults generic ones do. (And to give credit to the player, it was Sue.)

You said you lost your faith in complaints being useful, though. One thing I can assure you is that "let's discuss this problem" threads are essentially useless at achieving anything (yet I still bother). Complaints, however, do benefit from a certain success rate - and when they fail they're sometimes a chance at proving you wrong for having judged a player a certain way. In the end it's not a fight that's going to produce clear and immediate results, though. You can change the community's overall mentality (it has changed in several ways during the past two years, though imo not from anybody's specific influence), but there's always going to be a constant flux of people (and thus ideas) coming in and out, thus making a lot of the work repetitive yet necessary.

One positive argument for this is that the existence of an "actual" night shift reinforces and contextualizes the population shifts among the real server. Imo it's a lot cooler for players that come on during dead hour to feel like they're part of an actual night shift rather than just a particularly quiet day shift. Plus you get the idea of time-sensitive events (a chef serving breakfast at the kitchen?), and the schedules of characters matching players' times of activity finally make sense. Well, of course, there's no night in deep space. But Mendell time?

So you go complain in useless threads instead of making new, useful ones.

­­­>unironically liking catgirl characters shiggy diggy doo

u wot m8

Wat No, I'm not saying that at all D: I just mean that I understand the people who say that security is sometimes justified in locking antags (and even non-antag criminals) away and throwing away the key. This shouldn't be the default stance, however. If you're playing sec and put some effort into giving your prisoners a good time I'll have a lot of respect for you. Same for every crewmember who chooses to play along with antags' plans - you see it so little, yet it's so cool when it happens and is well-executed!

Is security obliged to go out of their way to humor antags who make no effort to create interesting situations? No. Should security try their best to remain open to RP opportunities and try to provide antags as a whole with the same quality of RP they come to expect from them? Yes.

Fair enough, then. Thanks for the help, and best of luck to Viking. Sorry we couldn't settle this by talking here. Complaint resolved on my end, I guess?

I dunno, I sorta would've preferred to have a honest conversation with Viking but if it's already been dealt and done a while ago I can see him not wanting to come back to this for basically little reason. So things are cool on that. That's for point A. As for points B and C, saying "this issue doesn't bear addressing because the person's opinion bears no effect" isn't a call I agree with. You can't look at that alone, like, I think it's worth thinking about what was said and why it was said, rather than saying "well, it's just opinions, doesn't really matter what they are". Example: You're a manager of a Pizza Hut. If one of your cooks suddenly started to profess their admiration for Hitler, you'd probably feel a little concerned even if it had nothing to do with their ability to make pizzas, right? I'm not equating Viking to Nazis (lmao), but if anything what happened here is even more relevant to his position as an admin, because even if he wasn't in the position to make the final call on moderator applications he is an authority figure passing judgments on people he's working with, and thus these judgments deserve to be considered, especially if they're hastily made or inaccurate. Plus I'm pretty sure admins get listened to when they say things about other users, no? At the very least I'd like to see some discussion happening around this, because I feel like somebody caught flak simply for posting a comment in a thread involving me (when said comment wasn't even supporting me, which is something Viking seemed to strongly imply), and somebody else (who was at the time a mod applicant) was given a semi-interrogation to see if they disliked me. I am about 95% certain Viking does not have a personal vendetta against me, and that he was operating in the way he judged was best to deal with issues I was involved with, but I seriously want to question these methods of problem-solving.

Not meaning to be pushy, but I'm still waiting for a response, both to the thread as a whole, and from Viking to the last replies I posted.

Maybe not 100% related, but as a small suggestion (for LordLag and anyone else in the same situation), if you want to cry out of a head role at roundstart for whatever reason (didn't get antag?), you can send an adminhelp and an admin should be able to cryo you out instantly to free the spot.

Yeah, but is it honestly so different from the way some human characters also constantly flirt? I feel like it's being considered differently because "ew, furries", but it's really not a species issue imo. Tajarans being cunts to people and constantly playing the species card is something that should involve their whitelist, but simply flirting shouldn't, unless they're openly looking for sex on the station erry day and it gets really ridiculous in some other way.

Furthermore, a way to remove repetition could be to bring back the "like" button in the complaints, so that when multiple people are in agreement we don't have a comment thread of five people rephrasing each other.

I wasn't disagreeing with your suggestion, simply stating that I didn't think complaints were as chaotic as you made them to be.

It's actually not. Though I'm assuming the guidelines are expected to be something akin to "only contribute if you have information relevant to the topic at hand". That seems reasonable, no? Why can't we just make a rule like that? It gets us rid of mods and regulars alike chastising users by reminding them "they did bad" (and contributing nothing besides stating the obvious), while still letting relevant discussion happen. That way if someone else wants to argue against or for a person's behavior they can do so as long as their argument is relatively intelligent.

These are player complaint threads. I'm fairly sure most of what was posted in them was from people who had direct interactions with him, so I don't think it's really applicable.