Jump to content

Arrow768

Head Admins / Devs
  • Posts

    1,691
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

Linked Accounts

  • Byond CKey
    arrow768

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Arrow768's Achievements

Cyborg

Cyborg (35/37)

1

Community Answers

  1. I would like to point out that once a complaint is retracted its retracted. There isnt going to be a revive card for the complaint.
  2. This complaint has been discussed and dismissed by the headmins/devs. The implementation that I communicated was discussed by the headmins/devs before it was communicated. As such you would have to file a complaint against all of the headmins/devs which is not possible. However, I will post my point of view on the concerns raised. I am aware of this issue, and I consider it already rectified with the appointment of Matt as second headdev. Matt has pretty much the same powers that I have as a headdev, however I still reserve a right to veto/override decisions on a case-by-case basis (primarily to be used when it concerns hosting questions). Votes have always been non-binding and merely a way to gauge the general opinion of the playerbase on a larger scale. As such the timeframe when or if the results of a vote are announced is not important in relation to a implementation of a specific feature. As mentioned above. Votes are only a way to evaluate the opinion of the larger player base and not a promise to implement something in a specific way if a vote passes. I believe it is also important to point out (again) that the vote did not mention Xenos becoming the second in command of the ship. The thread was locked after certain people were unable to have a civil debate in a public setting. In the closing post (I encourage you to actually read it), i have made the following statements: as well as Not a single person has contacted me so far regarding the 2IC XO (to the best of my knowledge).
  3. I have locked this complaint for now because it is becoming another 2icxo feedback thread. I should note that this does not mean the complaint is closed.
  4. That has been added. You can order multiple meat slabs in one order and they are thrown together into the same freezer -> Just order as many as you want and you will get them. I have reduced the prices accordingly as they were priced quite prohibitively. You can order multiples, and they will be placed in the same crate. And that has also been added.
  5. As there have been no further replies I am closing this complaint and moving it to the archive.
  6. This is not a reason for a staff complaint. Every PR has to go through a review process and be merged by a maintainer. To advance the current gameplay loop new things have to be tried out from time to time. As such things that might be outside of the established gameplay loop will be merged from time to time. Such changes are expected, and it is also expected that the author continues to tweak problematic PRs in coordination with the maintainers (which is happening in case of the cult PR) until these PRs fit into the standard gameplay loop (or are removed). The maintainers monitor this process and do reserve the right to take actions themselves if a PR author is unwilling/unable to tweak a problematic PR (which does not seem to be the case here). As you have been part of the community for a while, I believe it to be likely that you do know about the "no revert for 1 month" on new/controversial PRs-Ruling (from quite a few years ago). With that in mind I can see how Dreamy came to the conclusion that this was a kneejerk reaction to a PR that was just merged in an attempt to bypass the "no revert for 1 month" ruling. (Especially when considering that the PR has been up for almost 2 months). It could have been worded better, but ultimately, they are calling it out the way it appears to them. The only thing I can fault dreamy for is the attempt to vote for dismissal on that policy suggestion (which developers are unable to do according to the established rules for that sub-forum) I have discussed that with dreamy and advised them that: They should be more considerate when choosing how to word their response They cannot vote for dismissal on policy suggestions. The vote for dismissal on the policy suggestion by dreamy will be removed.
  7. I’ll handle that complaint. At a first glance it seems relatively simple so I should have a update within a few days.
  8. Well, during lowpop time there aren't a lot of people online. So, there's a good chance no one is going to be there to set up power if they join as off-duty crew. And with that power will run out in ~~45min or so.
  9. From the title I expected this to be a revive of one of the more controversial camera suggestions. But this is actually pretty reasonable and could be interesting to try out.
  10. Arrow768

    Crew Memorial

    Given the posts below, this is going to be implemented at some point in the future when we have figured out how to best implement it (mechanically)
  11. I have re-read parts of this thread, and I would like to point out a few things: There were two things that have been shot down when that claim was made: (see this post) Xeno XOs with any sort of elevated power Another vote regarding the 2IC XO. Everything else was up for (a reasonable) debate. Some things mentioned in this topic are answered/addressed quite easily, those are the things I got to first. (Large) Posts that raise larger issues generally take more time to answer, so that is something where I have to take the time to think about the issue presented and then create a reply that properly represents my thoughts on those matters. (In some cases, I also have to check in with the rest of the people involved in creating the directive; Especially if this is something that wasn't discussed already) This is time I usually do not have during the week, so I left (most of) those for later. However, I do not have infinite time, so when it became obvious that certain people engaged in this discussion have no interest in an actual productive discussion, any effort put into a discussion like that is wasted. As such, the discussion has been ended prematurely. I also noticed that I never posted the results of the poll. A total of 134 ckeys voted for an option that wasn't "I dont care". Out of those 107 votes, 94 (70%) were for the change and 40(30%) against. (When removing inactive ckeys the ratio sinks to ~63%; depends how "inactive" is defined) As usual, it needs to be pointed out that the polls are opinion polls to gauge the opinion of the larger player base about a specific topic but are not binding. If someone has questions (about the planned implementation) or is interested in a reasonable discussion, I am available via Discord DM. (If I do not reply, there is a good chance I just didn't see the message / forgot about it; Feel free to just message me again after a while.) The creation of additional topics on the forum about the 2IC XO is not wanted.
  12. You are again choosing to ignore a key part of what I wrote in the initial response. And then you wonder why I choose not to waste my time on individuals such as yourself, who try to intentionally misinterpret things I write. There is absolutely no point in continuing this discussion at this time. My interest to discuss these changes has been severely hampered when people started coming up with alternative facts and then continued to perform mental gymnastics to create a narrative that just isnt there. After a brief discussion with the rest of the present head staff we will proceed as follows: The changes will be implemented as described in my original post. There might be some IC news/events to accompany the implementation. There might be additional changes to other directives or regulations to support the new XO reg After sufficient time (as determined by the headmins/devs) these changes will be reviewed and possibly altered. This will be a private review process at first. We might open up this (or another) topic at that time to get input from the larger community.
  13. Standard procedures, 1.1: "During standard operation, all Departmental Heads of Staff are equal, under the command of the Captain present onboard the vessel. Should a department find itself lacking a Head of Staff, the Captain is able to either assume direct supervision of the department or otherwise appoint a senior crew member to fill the missing role. During non-standard operation, a specific Departmental Head of Staff may be elevated above others, should the crisis situation fall under the responsibility of their department. At that point, other departments should act in a supporting role." It is impressive how hard you are trying to misinterpret things. My statement was made in regard to this: You are trying to imply here that if a XO approaches a head of staff and claims that they got an order from the captain to pass along to the head of staff, that XO is somehow the acting captain. I do not see how you can interpret my response (where I point out that we do not have a regulation that would force heads of staff to comply with XOs orders that were given by a captain to the XO if the XO has no solid documentation of those orders) in a way where this is somehow covered by a the acting captainship regulation. It simply does not apply here, as a captain giving a XO an order to pass along requires that there is already a (acting) captain, so by definition the ship cannot be without an acting captain. As it takes some quite impressive mental gymnastics to come to your conclusion, I believe you are arguing in bad faith and do not see any point in continuing this argument with you. (And I have stopped reading your post at that point)
  14. No I don’t expect people who want to be the person in command to make a character for those „10-20% of games when there is a captain present“. That is not purpose of the XO. To re-iterate it again: If someone wants to be the captain in „80-90% of the rounds“, they can make a captain character. We don’t need a XO for that. I expect people who wish to play a character that works together with the person in command to make/use a XO character. And I do expect some of the people who are planning to make a new captain character to make use of the XO Position for a time (to introduce their char to the setting). I also expect people who want to be in command of the ship to make a captain character.
×
×
  • Create New...