Arrow768

That sums up pretty nicely why the escape shuttle exists and why only a very limited number of people is told about it. In case of a vessel/space station it might be an expectation. However we currently have a asteroid setting, which by its nature prevents a lot of the reasons why such a self-destruct might exist in the first place. (i.e. breaking up a ship/station in case it accidentally de-orbits, ...) That can also be handled quite easily by writing somewhere down: "Protect the disk/SAT at all costs and do not allow unauthorized personell access to it under any circumstances." With that sentence we have given the HoS everything they need to know about the Disk/SAT. Therefore I dont see the need to change the current situation regarding the self-destruct. One thing that could be beneficial would be to add a "fake ui" that is shown unless the disk is inserted to conceal the true function of the terminal. And maybe a resprite of the terminal itself. But other than that I am voting for dismissal.

Not needed. Station Procedure can easily be interpreted as standing orders from central command. Just use failure to execute an order and failure to execute an order with serious consequences. Voting for dismissal.

Access has been restored. However theres a very good chance that if your brother tries to ban-evade he pulls you with him. And at that point it will become much more difficult (maybe even impossible) to enable you to keep playing while keeping him banned. Player informed via discord and access to the server verified by them. Archiving.

Looks like I forgot to close that. Application accepted. Moving to the archive.

Trial started.

The polling system got fixed and the poll is now available on the server via the "Polls" option in the main menu.

We have discussed this application within the development team. One of the main concerns is that you have not created a single PR that has been merged within the last 5 months. There were other reasons at play, however this will not be shared publicly. I will contact you via DM shortly to discuss them. Therefore this application is rejected.

Very well. Appeal denied.

Voting for dismissal due to the reasons stated above. Susan and Shodan are pretty much on point here. I also believe that either command needs to be more responsible when it comes to calling a ERT or we need to enforce that mechanically so command only gets a "gimped" ERT if they are called without sufficient "escalation".

Can you give us some details about your Internet Connection please. Who is your ISP? What type of Internet Connection are you using? (Cable, Fiber, 3G/4G, ...)

Voting for dismissal. If there is a situation on the Aurora that warrants a crew transfer on blue alert or even a emergency shutter it makes sense to lock down the dock and send someone to figure out what is going on. Given that this can be avoided quite simply, by changing the alert level to one that does not trigger the lockdown I do not see the need to change it. If there are any admin tickets that take longer, admins can easily enable the spawner for the odin protection teams to make use of the checkpoint. It should also be noted that the odin protection team has a 50% / 80% chance to occur if the checkpoint is locked down, so people will get cycled though most of the time. Sometimes you are just out of luck tough.

Here are the logs for reference: After which the whitelist has been stripped.

Will be handled by the Loremaster / Deputy Loremaster as this complaint is regarding the conduct / decisions of a Lore Writer. You also posted a incorrect gameid. The correct one is: b9C-aOvt

If the server is part of the host chat, then they can ask there and we will provide them with a high level summary

I’m somewhat late to the party. Migrating a byond account is easy and fast as long as you contact either skull or myself before you connect the first time with the new account. It is still possible if you have connected, but it’s more effort.

Voting for dismissal due to these reasons.

Has been merged. Moving to completed Projects.

The disruptor pistol and the ammo display have been added

The AI mech has been removed until it can be reimplement with some changes to prevent/discourage valid hunting. (As that’s what it is at the end of the day)

While I dislike the antag mo of “rush the spare and get the access”, there are legitimate situations where the additional access the spare provides is needed. ie no command members online / no hop online / ... Therefore I have to vote for dismissal. That said, I might explore other options in the future to discourage the use of the spare id by antagonists and encourage them to acquire the access via other means.

Additional music is pretty much a no go due to licensing restrictions and the fact that every player would have to download that upon joining via the rsc file.

Having a unlimited number of bounties can quickly become a balance issue due to the cash influx provided by them

By incident reports, do you mean the actions applied due to ccia or do you mean the security incidents that are created when someone is charged via the sentencing console In either case that’s a policy suggestion so I’m moving that to the policy suggestion forum.

I don’t see the need to change that as I don’t see the problem with being unable to fulfill every bount every time.

Indeed. You are quite correct as long as they are not constructs, but even in that case the avoid damage law alone would lead to a law conflict, as any engagement with hostile has the potential to damage the mech. We are currently investigating a alternative approach to the AI mech situation. It should be relatively simple to log crawl and find instances where the AI mech has been used to attack other players.