Faris

Not related, but, if you ahelp next time you're around, you can get some help to set up a macro. Which will basically mean you can send an ahelp with prepared text with a single press of a button.

It's 51.4%

Hello, hope you're doing well. I'd like to open this by thanking everyone that submitted their response, this post is a bit late and I apologize for that, so credit to [mention]Scheveningen[/mention] for bullying me into submission into finalizing this. Furthermore, I would like to give credit and gratitude to the staff team for all the hard work they've done. I can safely say the server is going on an upward spiral in many fields. While I do understand there are some frustrations on certain things, we do try and improve on them. This is a hobby for all of us as well and we want to enjoy it with the rest of you. I will state one thing before I begin revealing the results. Aboshehab and Alberyk, we are not the same person. We are not Albo, though admittedly it was funny, it's important I clear this up. Another thing to note is that some people present feedback to the wrong sections, so I took the liberty to adjust it when combing through the findings, partially my fault as I should have clarified things better. I've split the post into parts depending on sections, so you can just avoid the parts you aren't interested in. If you feel I missed something important in my post, feel free to contact me. Head Administrators and Head Developer/Host Results of this section were actually pretty good. I'm personally extremely pleased about it. We all got a lot of positive feedback. Wishful thinking is to get 100% in the agree fields, but the truth of the matter we'll never be popular with everyone, but even then, this is a major majority with both questions. When it came to the written feedback, we got a lot of good things said, which I'm glad that is what people think. I won't go into detail on the specifics unless requested, but you can basically fill in the blanks. As for the negatives, there weren't actually a lot said, but if I were to sum it up, it would boil to the activity of some of us and adherence to rules. I personally think the activity of us three is the best that can be provided given our real life obligations. And as for adherence to rules, we have and will continue to do our best to this, don't be shy of reporting us for it, we just like everyone else do make mistakes, and it is important we are told, even by proxy, these mistakes. There were some more specific critiques which has been relayed, but I won't specifically share here to preserve the identity of the person submitting. Moderators and Administrators Results of this section was also pretty good, aside from one which I feel can go through a major improvement. And to clarify, this section covers moderators, secondary administrators and primary administrators. Head Administrators were covered in the previous. I do want to improve the results of all of the above, but for the first three, the results were still overall very good. My only issue would be the They are properly handled when they step out of line question. The majority agree this happens, but another sizable majority are people neutral to this. I'm not sure if to interpret this as simply unaware of that side of the server or they are fairly indifferent, or even split on the middle due to different incidents. To clarify, we take a very similar approach to that of reprimanding players, in that we don't want to shame staff either. Mistakes happen, we deal with it as best we can based on what we are given. A major component on all this is trust. We take a similar stance to staff applications, at times you'll note that we are very vague about incidents or denial that isn't pressed by the player, which is mostly due to the fact we do not want to start the equivalent of a witch hunt by revealing some information. Staff and players are entitled to a level of privacy to help maintain their enjoyment of the server and community. Personally, when it comes to the staff team, and especially the Moderators and Administrators, given the time, I try my best to do some form of monthly audits. I review tickets they take, I review statistics, I review how they handle complaints and how they present themselves to community. Perhaps I can be more transparent, I'll give it a go and so will the others hopefully. As for the written feedback, I'll outline a few broad things written. Staff coverage, this thing in particular has improved recently, we'll keep monitoring for issues but it seems improved now. Tone of conversation, I do understand where this comes from, I don't think it's inherently malicious by most people as it boils down to people being from different backgrounds and culture, what you may view as hostile or lacking of enthusiasm, might just be indifferent. We handle a lot of issues every day, so when a staff member may seem uncaring, it may not entirely be malicious, but rather a product of you perhaps being the tenth person they've spoken to about a similar problem. I'm not saying abrasive and hostility doesn't exist, I have seen it before and I have addressed it, either by being informed or seeing it, I will continue to personally do so and I trust other staff to also step in when they see it. I do promise to put more effort into this as well. CCIA The results of this were to be expected, the majority of answers have been in a positive light but that being said, a good portion was fairly neutral about it, which I interpret as a result of a lack of interaction or seeing them at work, which is to be expected considering what they do. The feedback for this is more clear cut. Again, a lot of good things said about a lot of people, but I'm sure people can fill in the blank on whats good. Negative feedback here tends to be lack of coverage, lack of interaction with faxes/ebs's and activity issues. Per my observation and some work with CCIA recently, there's been a major push about all these issues by [mention]Synnono[/mention]. There's some more specific things again which I've relayed to Syn, but I'll avoid posting here to preserve privacy. Wiki Wiki team is the newest part of our staff team, while they aren't really new anymore, people seem to be somewhat unfamiliar with their workings. So yes, we do have a wiki team, yes they we not always in existence so some may not know about them, yes they are actively working on what they know needs work. The issue here seems to be exposure, they even have a thread up where people suggest things and they work on it in regards to the wiki. I can safetly say the Wiki we have now is much superior to the one we used to have a year ago, all thanks to their work. https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=8566&start=70#p101570 Lore Overall, results are pretty good. The major issue with the results I see is how they handle feedback, something we can most certainly work on. I think these results most stem from the fact the lore team in its core while not fully autonomous in their work, they are very much still free to pursue a lot. So different interactions with different people with different platforms with different content, and so on. Even when it came to the written feedback, there was a lot of issues pertaining to accepting feedback. The other major gripe would be inconsistency with lore, which is something being worked on, but like all things in life, could be better. Developers I don't have much to personally say about the developer team. Only thing I can really note is the feedback question. I'll leave talk about these results to Skull. Edit: If you want any clarifications, ask. Edit 2: We had quite a bit joke answers, and honestly, if people keep doing those, these community feedback opportunities are going to get rarer, as it took a lot of my time.

Essentially this. Ben has consistently applied for staff positions, asking for feedback and engaged people. I think it is worth a trial.

Your activity is very wishy washy. You play for a bit, leave, rinse and repeat. What's different this time?

I need to bring up the fact you have 3 active warnings presently, 2 of which show a disregard of the rules. I do not think I can support this application due to that.

This player, is a player I'd call as a role model and a pleasure to have as part of this community. He's been around for years, 1057 days old specifically as the time of the post, yes there have been breaks of activity, but he's always a common fixture that I see when he's around, not to mention he is a pleasure to play with in my experiences. Lancer only has 2 notes, which cannot be viewed as malicious incidents, but more as simple mistakes, confirmed by the fact he learned and don't have any repetition entries. He has my endorsement as a Head Administrators and find no grounds to be against this application.

I'm just going to say this. The next post that violates forum rules isn't being met with a warning, but a forum ban, temporary or permanent.

Reason: Continued agression in OOC channels, despite being spoken to by staff on the matter less than a week ago. Take a day to cool off, if you have legitimate complaints about a character or player take it to the forums, not OOC. - This will be removed in 1440 minutes. Banned from Warden, Detective, Security Officer, Security Cadet - Ramboed into a malfunctioning AI's upload+core room, failing to obey orders from two heads of staff on cleanly taking out the murderous robot. Instead, primed an EMP grenade in the presence of the IPC chief engineer and got them killed. Collateral damage is never acceptable as security. Reason: AI siphoned his department, he goes out and screams, quote, (Sean Richter (follow) exclaims, "I BLAME THE JEWS!"). Been spoken to before about this breaking roleplay sense and being entirely outlandish and inappropriate even for IC. This is a heavy roleplay server. Take roleplay seriously and please stop injecting Nazi memes wherever you go. - This will be removed in 2880 minutes. These are your bans. I feel it's also necessary to add the fact you have a total of 41 staff entries, now if I removed ones that aren't bad, the count drops to 39, which is still an extreme amount. It's also necessary to include the fact that I had to strip your command whitelist, which prompted a complaint against me, which I'll include a quote of what you said when things didn't go your way. I don't really where you went with this, this just gives me vibes of mentality that a person cannot accept being wrong. When facts were pointed, you claimed that staff were doing something wrong by defending their actions. Not to mention going on about how I don't care. Now, I'm not saying this from a personal basis, but rather how this displays certain qualities that you have. You're stubborn, and not in the good way, since you can't seem to accept being wrong. This is further reinforced by the fact you disappear every time you find something to go on an outrage over. The fact it's been a while since your last entry is mostly due to the fact you say you quit, disappear for a long while and then come back. I bring the bolded part to question, due to your outbursts. As a Head Administrators, I cannot trust you to be impartial as you take things personal so often. Your outbursts happen often to the point that it has become normal to community members that have been here since you've started. So I cannot fully trust you with the capability of being impartial. If this is the case, I've simply not seen it. Perhaps you are usually like this, but there have been too many outbursts where you quit the community for you to return, not to mention aggressive/hostile attitude to others. Again, while it has been a long time, you've only recently returned, so it is not a very strong basis on how clear your record has been, considering the volume you've already attained. My verdict, is that I cannot support this application as a Head Administrator.

Sorry for this delay. This can be considered now accepted and will begin the process of implementation.

You shouldn't clone people that you can't effectively maintain treatment of. There are already regulations put in place to deter this. Is it really such an issue that medical tunnel visions cloning people without regard to the present circumstances?

A notification I'll be handling this complaint with [mention]Doc[/mention] and [mention]Datamatt[/mention] Edit: I've effectively let them handle the complaint on their own.

I'm not partial to handing out a weapon that is capable of lethal force from the getgo? I am how ever open to the idea of having 4 of these pistols in the armory for handout. Though even then, I'm not sure of the balance. Would it be too much?

Locking and archiving as resolved.

Warning has been expunged per the investigation. I conferred with multiple people. Reviewing the logs and what was posted here revealed that the warning itself does not appear to be valid given the context of the round and what culminated in the punished action. I'll keep this open for another 24 hours unless anything new of relevance is added.

Locking and archiving.

I'd leave the releasing of cloned individuals to work dependent on the Doctors discretion. If any issues can be handled by proper doses of medication, why not? However, if a person has some trauma that can't be treated and say makes it dangerous for them to EVA. Maybe just have them reassigned to something on station. I don't see why HoP/Captain wouldn't facilitate Doctors orders. I'm going to get some last minute feedback from others and see about implementing this in 24 hours.

How were they involved?

At first, I was considering just denying this request, it's only been two months since the permanent ban, and that's a punishment I try to avoid giving out in most cases. so it's not something light. I'll however accept it, but I need to note that considering this is your second permaban being removed, not to mention the other reprimands you've received, that any further rule violations, will result in harsher punishments, which may be your next rule violation, since you've broken a plethora of rules. My advice is you sit down, read over the rules. If you're unsure about a thing, send adminhelp, and avoid rushing things without thinking it over. Appeal accepted, ban lifted. Waiting 24 hours before archiving it.

We have implemented this suggestion. Instead of giving it two forms, we added IAA to the present one, modified it to fit and moved it to the command section of forms. I'll leave this open for a bit to point at any issues of the implementation.

I don't understand the point of the toggle mode? This feels like it just adds more steps to do things when it's unnecessary. Theme wise, in this setting, I don't see how glasses cannot be both tinted to provide protection and at the same time provide a HUD? Considering presently we have glasses that tint in their own depending on sunlight. I'm fine with giving more variety and customization as long as we don't enforce a singular look. I'm however not really a fan of this toggle mode.

I frankly didn't care about it existing until it impacted a staff member's decision to secban me. I have found 90% of my warnings invalid, and I've appealed very few. My decision to appeal is up to me, is it not? There is no rule here about appealing within a certain amount of time. There's no explicit rule on appealing/contesting as to provide people that take a hiatus unbeknownst of some punishment, or in the odd case, a staff entry tags them due to some shared address. I do however reserve the right to close this complaint if I find a lack of merit to. That being said. I'll give this a look. Any/all information you can provide in addition helps. I cannot guarantee any major results of this, since testimony is a major part of this, the time frame makes it more unreliable, as the logs do not provide everything.

Why couldn't you have written it after exam time?

I still need to know why this specific warning took 3 months to challenge. You realize the amount of work this will specifically take due to this increased delay? I know for a fact I was present in this round, most likely observing. But I have little to no recollection to these events due the time frame from the warning until now. Avery also stated they barely recall any of this, so any witness testimony from the staff side is going to be severely impaired.

First of all. List me the servers you've been playing on. Second of all. You have 27 staff entries. 2 of which are perma bans. The longest gap between any entry from what I see, has been around two weeks. It's been two months since your ban. I need you to show me some merit, hopefully by providing good examples to the first question before I can really consider lifting this.