evandorf

How do hardsuits figure into your system?

I never assume notes are perfectly accurate. They are very subjective because it is rare that you can accurately gauge intent even if you are actively observing a situation. Notes are not meant to be objective proof but are mainly used to show trends in player behavior. For example, if I am trying to determine the best action to take because someone was killed with little to no RP the exact details of previous incidents matter very little compared to their frequency and how many different members of staff have had to speak to them regarding the issue. I believe making notes easily accessible, and therefore increasing the likelihood of having them be subject to complaint, is flawed because of their subjective nature and narrow focus. It’s better to leave complaints to warnings and bans as they usually occur after some amount of collective scrutiny and the pattern of the behavior proves the intent.

I don’t believe this is necessary. Garn explained the existing system above and, assuming staff are following proper escalation, if you have a warning you can assume that either the act was egregious enough for an immediate warning or sufficient notes exist to warrant it. Warnings are visible to players and if you think a staff member is not following proper escalation then that would be a staff complaint. The staff member attached to the complaint reviews the notes and history and gives a second opinion/makes a determination on if it was warranted. Many of the benefits you list are to provide players who have anxiety contacting staff with an alternative but if someone is incapable of engaging with staff to simply ask for their notes I don’t see them going through the complaints process multiple times to correct perceived errors or misunderstandings. More likely this will be used by less anxious players for frivolous and/or pedantic complaints to change the wording of notes at best. At worst I can see notes, which are often subjective, being used in bad faith as a tool to overturn decisions or admin-shop for more favorable outcomes.

I agree that adding a new dynamic will upset and frustrate those who are already comfortable in established routine but it’s a necessary evil for any large change until the new becomes the norm. I think, as far as pie-in-the-sky longterm goals go, we would be best served making medical treatment something that can be done from multiple areas with low transit time. Sending patient vitals/initial scan data over the network to the machinist for example. Having the machinist be able to respond and give feedback or print a compatible limb/organ. Being able to link your PDA to a roller bed monitor so that you are alerted to a patient’s state degrading, ect. QoL enhancements that make it to where deck 3 medical can be used for its intended purpose and supplementary roles like the mechanist can be more easily integrated into the process.

I might be in the minority but I don’t think the focus of medical should be efficiency, where everyone can be treated quickly and completely. I think extended treatment for niche cases should be part of the experience and when players give their characters synthetic organs they are opting-in to having a different experience than normal. My personal medical competency is somewhat low but my understanding is that unless the organ is destroyed or extremely damaged a good doctor can still mitigate and manage the side effects and a skilled doctor would be able to get close to a correct diagnosis using the context of the patient’s condition, patient medical files, and their own experience.

I’m not sure if artificial organ damage shows up on the full body scanners in medical but if it does I would argue it should be removed. The machinist should be consulted more by medical and making damaged synthetic organ scans their sole domain could add some cooperation.

I agree, I see a machinist as medical for synthetics and should not be opening surgical sites on organic tissue. It would be interesting if cybernetics/prosthetics had deeper mechanics that required diagnostics the machinist could provide but if it’s a replacement organ that requires an organic surgery site you should be a consultant and provide scanning services or replacements as necessary.

I feel like we should endeavor to keep evil or unsavory aspects of the lore intact while making it clear that those qualities are not tolerated ICly within the crew or OOCly among the players. Fascism deserves active ridicule. Using softer language shows an unwillingness to face it.

My personal opinion on surgery in the Machinist workshop is that it’s not sterile enough for organic surgery. It’s too open, both in terms of the mixing of air from public hallways to the lack of privacy (the new room may have tint control, I’m not sure), it doesn’t have much in the way of patient accommodation, it’s just a very dirty place to have surgery done. I would feel like I was getting my appendix out in a garage. Now, IPC surgery? No problem. Borging? Cleanliness and comfort is probably not the primary concern.

Regarding the use of the gloves specifically, wouldn’t you be able to achieve the same results with existing loadout items? You could customize the name and description of a pair of gloves and speak in basic while wearing them and only speak in sign language if you had the gloves removed.

Sorry for the delay. I just reviewed your notes and refreshed my memory on the circumstances of the ban. You're new to the server and haven't gotten off on the best foot but if you're sincere about abiding by the server rules then I'm more than willing to give you a second chance. Unbanned.

Before I go into any details I wanted to clarify the purpose of this complaint. Is this an unban request? If so there is a separate section of the forum for that but this temporary ban will expire in a day regardless. If this was created to hash out the details of the ban then I can give you the context from my perspective. This ban was handed out about a week ago on the 7th. I don't have the full ticket details at the moment but I can ask an admin to pull the logs if necessary. Now, as far as the details I can remember. Someone ahelped and stated that you had ghosted after being detained by security. Upon inspection I found you DC'ed in a cell with security looking on. Looking at your previous notes I see the following relevant entries. There are several notes regarding other antag behavior but I am paring it down to behavior adjacent to this complaint. 10/15/2022 - "Was caught as an antag and then disconnected. Said he had to go and asked for admins to kill him because he didn't want to suddenly SSD but I'm leaving this here in the event it becomes an issue." 10/18/2022 - "Actually ghosted in the middle of processing this time. Told not to do it again, or he'll face an antag ban." 10/19/2022 - "Spoken to about ghosting while in processing again. Didn't give warning or ban since admittedly, it was at the very end of the round. Keep an eye out for him salting about being arrested in LOOC and for him ghosting. If does so again, escalate." 10/20/2022 - "Banned from Antagonist - Spamming technomancer abilities shortly after being told not to, seemingly out of frustration. They've been getting frustrated a lot as an antagonist, probably their last chance." From what I could see at the time this appears to have been a relatively short tempban. This was not for DCing when detained but is relevant for escalation regarding antag issues as a whole. 11/07/2022 - The ban I applied which is the subject of this complaint. After seeing the notes there was some deliberation as to whether this should be a permanent antag ban or a temporary one and I eventually chose the latter but noted in the warning that a permanent ban would be the next escalation. This is what I remember from my end but if I'm missing something or you have questions please let me know and I'll try to answer what I can.

Coding a whitelist takes much less time than reworking something. It already exists in git for many other roles so you’re not having to create it from nothing. As far as work for admins/moderation goes it would depend on interest. Either borgs are niche roles for a handful of players and the administration of them will be low or many more people are interested in which case removing them as a role would be negatively impacting a large number of players and driving them away.

This also would tie into Cybs’ suggestion of moving the roboticist more into research and away from ops.

I still think it would be interesting to move borgs into research completely and have the RD or other staff be able to loan them out to other departments as needed. The AI is already housed in research so it would make thematic sense.

This is what I mean when I say I think the issue is subjective. You think they don’t fit but I do. It’s a matter of opinion and after so many replies on both sides I don’t think anyone is changing anyone else’s mind. That’s why a compromise is needed. The minimum a whitelist will do is to reduce the number of borgs you run into, which should be good if you are irked by borgs. If implemented properly then whitelists can also be used to cultivate a better average borg player. For those who like the stationbounds the whitelist would keep the role we like to play at the cost of having to go through the whitelist procedure and the long-term cost of reducing the popularity of the role as it becomes less accessible to others. This may lead to support for the role withering entirely but it keeps it viable for possible reworks without being removed.

I agree. While I still think the issue is primarily subjective if there is enough of a consensus that something should be done a whitelist is probably the best and easiest option to attempt first. If, as many of the anti-borg posts have said, a whitelist would only serve to kill off the role then I don’t see why they would be opposed to it as it serves their interests. I personally don’t believe it will kill off the role but it is a good compromise that still allows those interested in the role to play it.

Completely. Looking back on it I think I was a little miffed that my character in particular hadn’t been violent at all but in hindsight I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect Matt to have that context especially when he is getting second hand info on the intruders in general.

Improve Don't Remove doesn't mean nothing can be removed or nerfed; it's a baseline. We don't want things to be removed out of hand without an attempt to try an mitigate whatever the issue is because then it will truly never come back without the will to overhaul or rework it. There are plenty of people who enjoy borgs but even if we agree they need to be changed there are plenty of alternatives that have been suggested which should be tried first before outright removal. These changes don't require a rework or an invested dev to impliment; whitelists, removal of the engi/medic modules, access restrictions, ect.

If I had any coding ability I would be more than willing to try and rework it. If medic and engineering are the most affected and AI had already been placed squarely in research then maybe removing the mediborg/engiborg is a reasonable step. It could be that the research option is the only option. There are so many diverse parts of research that a borg could find a spot to help and not be in the way. I would say that other modules like mining should stay because it makes sense but in the new map I don’t know that mining borgs can or should be just taking the shuttle.

How is someone supposed to know that they are irritating you or causing you issues if you don’t let them know? Pestering or harassing someone is ahelpable but the player has to know that it’s an issue to be at fault. I understand that some people have issues with confrontation but you have to take some reasonable action to resolve the issue via normal means. If it’s really an issue I would say ahelp and have the mod/admin speak to them if it’s something you feel uncomfortable with. I wouldn’t have any issue doing that for someone and I don’t think other staff would either.

Telling a borg off is barely an interaction. If they refuse and draw it out then that’s an issue with the player not abiding by server rules and should be ahelped. It’s not an issue with borg as a role and something that can be resolved with other suggestions made in this thread like a whitelist.

I don’t understand why a dislike for how you interact with a character equates to being unable to roleplay with others or having your roleplay suffer in general. There are plenty of characters that I don’t care to interact with. For instance, I dislike talking to dionae. I know some people don’t feel comfortable interacting with unathi because of their somewhat problematic culture. In these cases though there is a reasonable expectation on your part to take steps to inform the other player oocly and take steps ICly to distance yourself. In the case of borgs, the laws make it very easy to do so.

But you’re not required to play them and you’re not required to interact with them. There are people who find them fun to play and fun to interact with. It’s completely subjective. I don’t think removing a role that people enjoy and has utility during lowpop rounds is justified by the reasons given. I think limiting slots on highpop is a good step and possibly even limiting access based on their assignment is reasonable but we should stick to Improve Don’t Remove.

After reading through the replies I still feel like the majority of issues raised with borgs can be resolved with systems already in place ICly and OOCly. An issue would have to be serious enough and without other recourse to overcome the ‘Improve Don’t Remove’ standard. The through-line I see from many of the detractors that has no system in place to correct is the subjective dislike and irritation but I would argue that this runs counter to the other claim that borgs provide no RP value. A dislike of synthetics is almost baked into the existing lore and it’s good to have a “living” reminder of that in-game. Negative interactions with your coworkers are just as valid for RP as positive interactions.