Arrow768

BYOND Key: XanderDox Game ID: Unable to provide. Player Byond Key: Arrow768 Staff involved: Synnono Reason for complaint: The character in question was involved in a canon incident where they detained (as a HoS) the rest of command on the illegitimate charge of mutinity. Said Character is now a captain. I find it highly unlikely that someone who was found guilty by ccia of detaining the other command members, seizing power of the station and effectively overthrowing command would be promoted to the position of captain anytime soon. I dont have any issues with any other captain characters they play, but that specific char becoming a captain is highly questionable. Those are the CCIA notes from the employment record of the char in question. Did you attempt to adminhelp the issue at the time? If so, what was the known action taken by administration/moderation? No, I believed it to be an IC issue, but was informed by Synnono that it is a ooc issue. Approximate Date/Time: Unable to provide.

Thats not how it works. Ignorantia juris non excusat or ignorantia legis neminem excusat (Standard principle almost everywhere rules/laws apply)

The idea of tying it into the news caster economy announcements is definitely interesting and I might follow up on that. But it is out of the score of the current implementation. I have already requested the LoreMaster to look over the bounties and tell me if there are some that have to be changed. Regarding: "The rest of the crew wont see it" There is a option on the console that allows you to print the list. Most QMs either print it and tape it to the front window And / Or post it on the newscaster to encourage crew to bring it in. Its up to cargo how they want to notify the rest of the crew about it. The options to do so are provided.

Well the features you requested in your OP: Are exactly what the protoWhatever offers. How you roleplay it is entirely up to you. You can stick to the papertargets because of moral concerns Or you can use the realistic version And shurg it off as: "Well, it has been explicitly produced for experimentation anyway. So if I dont use it, someone else would".

Voting for dismissal. It is already possible to order braindead proto$race from cargo. It doesnt get more realistic than that.

We had a very brief discussion about this on discord before the warning was applied. All developers present agreed that this is behaviour that we have no interest to entertain in the Projects Subforum. Our expectation for the Projects Subforum is constructive feedback to help the developers who post feedback threads there improve the PRs in question. Your post of "Lol System is broke sad days plz fix" does not contribute to that. It completely goes against the objectives of the Projects Subforum and sets a bad precedent for other people who might want to leave feedback. I would even go so far and say that it discourages getting feedback in the Projects Subforum, because why should you even post there, when you can expect a shitpost as answer ? An example for feedback that we would like to have there: The difference between that and what you posted is that this raises a issue that can be addressed and resolved by the developer. Where as the sentence that you posted does not give the developer any helpful feedback. In fact, it is so generic that it could be applied to every single pull request we ever made. As I explained above the provided feedback does not provide a developer with any helpful information. It sets a bad precedent and discourages posting Projects for Feedback. We have no time and interest to moderate and delete Shitposts from other people that will post them if they see that you can do so without any actual consequences. Therefore I believe that the warning should stay applied.

I ported the Bounties / Exports from tg and improved the cargo control application a bit. Centcom now pays for more than just phoron, platinum and creates (Use the export scanner to find out what they want Every round they need some special items shipped to them, use the bounty tab in the cargo control console to find out what they need. Invoices for orders / shipments can now be printed using the cargo control console https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/4998 If you notice any items that cant be acquired by the crew or items that need a different description, make a comment on GitHub If you want additional items to be available as bounty, comment here

And how has that anything to do with the OPs post ?

As with every role, there are good journalists and there are bad journalists. With certain players being absent the number of bad journalists has taken a slight dip in the last weeks.

https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/4992

Currently working on this

Moved it to the Projects subforum

[mention]Scheveningen[/mention], I am unsure about the reason for that suggestion. You are not part of the mod team anymore and we have admins saying that its not needed. Why do you believe that this suggestion is something that we need ? / Why do you want it ?

Well, at the moment credits don't matter ingame. That might change when / if we implement persistent economy. Therefore granting every player a very easy get-out-of-jail free card. This is also why I am opposed to this as it makes being caught by security become a non-factor as you can just buy your way out.

I like the idea of increasing the size of atmos, but that looks like overkill.

The PR has been merged

I somewhat concur with that. It is extremely annoying if you have a round without any engineers and no power. i am very tempted to just call the emergency shuttle if that drags on for too long. But the question is if they have to be outright removed or if engine setup could be added as a requirement to them. Where as a station engineer might know how to properly set it up and get a few MW out of it a Maint Tech or Electrician just has to know: Two phoron in cold, one phoron in hot and 12 shots.

The PR to change that is already up. https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/4894 You werent aware that they were talking to someone, because you rushed in without the full knowledge of the situation. The security members in question were buckled to the rollerbeds and being treated by your doctors. The ninja didnt attack them further. But that issue is already alleviated with the mechanic change above. The reason why I opened the staff complaint is because I do not think that satinspriest conducted a proper investigation into the matter and just pushed a narrative of "it fits your character". I believe it would be interesting to actually take a look at the other side of the ahelp.

Yes, but its not about the trust. IA Agents are supposed to be "impartial arbitrators of regulations". The moment they file a injunction against someone, they are no longer impartial. In addition, if I am a head of staff of a department, I do not want someone else to indirectly command that department through the use of injunctions without my oversight. If someone wishes to file a injunction against someone in my department, then they should have to go through me.

There are a few things to that suggestion that have some merit: IA should have the ability to make announcements via the console in their office. IA should have access to a announcements system via the request consoles. Now onto the more difficult part of the suggestion. The access changes. They were introduced by the Baymerge or the rebase from bay. In the original codebase they did not have command access while having simmilar responsibilities The question remains if there is a usecase that requires them to have it. With the bugs fixed that were outlined above, they have imho no reason to have access to the bridge as they can perform all their duties from their office. I would remove the bridge access and give them basic access to the departments as this would allow them to actually see if proper procedure is followed and report to the head of staff of the department if that is not the case. At the moment, they can just stand infront of the doors and look inside.

No, I definitly dont want them to have that power. They are welcome to suggest a injunction to command, which they will most likely follow through, but I dont want them operating and filing injunctions without command oversight.

Here´s a link to the PR in question: https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/4715

Moving to completed as it has been merged

Moving this to completes as it has been implemented in https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/4764

Moving this to completes as it has been implemented in https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/4764