Faris

Should be exactly 24 hours since my first post. Tl;dr at the bottom as well but I do advise reading this all. Yes, this was a ruse. Yes it was an April fools. I'm a little surprised people didn't really touch on some major and apparent flaws I kept visible, flaws I'd generally not let go through a first draft of anything, especially since staff work is reviewed by other staffers for such issues. More on that later. Yes, I waited for the exact minute to tick at my own timezone. GMT +4 for reference. So yes, it is an April Fools thing. The moderators and administrators were in on it too, we engaged in forum, discord and server debates, arguing different points all under the pretense this was serious. We were also very quick on deleting anything that resembled a joke or a legitimate call out just to give it that "this is real" edge to it, which worked wonderfully. A lot of people thought this was real as a result, yes I know who you are, yes you're going to go "I never believed it." and no, I'm not going to release names. It was a joke, we found it funny, so did others. So, why did I do this? To put it bluntly. I've put a lot of hours for this server and so has every member of the Aurora team, a lot of effort. I've been promoted to secondary admin exactly a year ago. So for 364 days I've been at least in some shape or form around to help the staff and the community. I get a day to blow off steam and honestly I feel it helped a lot. Also did this. Credit goes to [mention]SirCatnip[/mention] for the idea. Now moving on to the serious side of things. I'd like to note I never clarified what the role of Community Manager would be other than stating the title. The reason this was not serious is because by extension, Moderators and Administrators are already "Community Managers", our presence is not limited to the server, it is present in every aspect of Aurora. Yes, not the whole team is present at every aspect, we are still spread out. Creating this role would mean cutting down on the responsibilities of other staff which right now isn't so overbearing to justify it. I would also like to note almost all staff positions are subject to community feedback. A straight up vote would become a popularity contest. It's far different to have people posting legitimate feedback, positive or negative to a person that just clicks a name and never speaks again. With that being said, I am still open to community suggestion on this mater. Moving on. Erotic RolePlay is most likely never going to ever be implemented. I cannot find any merit that outweighs the alienation of a sizable portion of the community. As far as I'm aware, a minimum age is required to be able to legally provide the service "this server" with the introduction of strong erotic elements. We'd need to deny this service to a portion of staff and the community which we already know are underage from before be it in chit chat or posts on the forums. Bottom line, unless we're willing to remove a portion of the community, ERP is never going to be added. As for mature themes, I honestly have very little with them, it's taboo to some, not taboo to others. We can properly discuss this another time. Vox. I'm unsure why this was also assumed as serious. There has been very little requests to have Vox added as crew. They're mechanically suited as an antagonist race and the lore in its present state doesn't really qualify them as a crew race. Reshuffle probabilities. I guess this does have its merit in a sense, but not in the form I presented it ever. What I presented is a method to chance round type chance at the players whims, anytime. I'm not sure how this would work out properly. The reality of this is, it's impossible to satisfy everyone with the voting mechanics. It's possible we'll find some method in the future, hopefully in the near future as I do want a system that is universally liked. Yet with that being said, this system is not it. Not sure why I'm posting it at this time? Check the spoiler out. Oh also, no one was punished or banned as a result of this. Here's a tl;dr version of this all.

There's a line we'll be setting. This example will result in bans being handed out, once the guidelines are implemented. Realistically, not happening. Discord is not a substitute to the forums for serious discussions. It's quite obvious with his remarks afterwards that he wasn't being completely serious.

The people providing private feedback have been encouraged and have been posting here. Furthermore, erotic roleplay doesn't have to be fully introduced to the server. There's always the fade premise in which the initial build up is done by the players until they hit a point where they "fade to black". As for the Vox. Mechanical and lore changes and advances will need to be made. I'll need to discuss the specific with other members of staff on what options we really have pertaining to this.

There's a line we'll be setting. This example will result in bans being handed out, once the guidelines are implemented.

Staff members are not eligible.

Possibly.

We'll add you to the list, we've had a few people come privately to nominate themselves which is fine. I'm also deleting off-topic posts.

Hello everyone, hope you’re all doing wonderful. It’s been awhile since we’ve addressed the community as a whole regarding our progression with the server and its standards. Consider this part of our April updates. So, first of all, as we all know, democracy is the proper form of management of any establishment, it's why we request and at times require community input and voting on a lot of proceedings. We’ve decided to introduce a community manager role in the near future, elected by the community itself. No present member of staff can apply for said position. We will be looking for the most vocal and opinionated members of this community. Do note that applications are NOT open yet as we need to draw certain guidelines. With that being said, you CAN nominate yourself or others for this position in this thread, to give us an idea. Secondly, with our push towards a believable atmosphere, we’ve as you’ve noticed been making strides towards improving this atmosphere, permitting more immersive and believable interactions by the crew. We’re going to continue on by gradually permitting more adult themes into the roleplaying atmosphere of Aurora. As you’ve all known already, romance and affection have been permitted but on the downlow. In our legitimization thread which should hopefully be released in two weeks time, we’ll discuss how we’ll return Erotic RolePlay back into Aurora. This is a response to a lot of private feedback sent to us as staff. The guidelines will establish when it’s alright and when it is not. Note that this does not mean ERP is permitted yet. Thirdly, per our trial in which we added Vox as possible station goers in the form of merchant. We decided to further advance the lore by the slow addition of adding Vox element to the crew similar in which the fashion of Vaurca being introduced. It may be possible for us to introduce them for the new month but no guarantees just yet. Fourth of all. For April fools itself, the development team is going to introduce a few neat things for the community to mess around in. My lips are sealed unless they themselves decide to divulge it all. Fifthly, in response to the plethora of threads regarding game modes, probabilities and revoting. We’ve decided to work on a reshuffle voting/probability mechanic for the secret rotation. Essentially instead of us modifying the probability every now and then, the players can vote whenever they want for a reshuffle, permitting them to change the probability. So in theory, you could make a round of Infiltration have a chance of 20%. Though disclaimer, extended cannot be lower than 7% or 5% depending on the population. You can review our other posts on why we’re doing this for extended. Concerns? Thoughts? Go ahead and post them. I’m very interested in the opinion of the community at large. Don’t forget to nominate your proposed Community Manager, even if it's yourself!

Deeming this fully resolved. Locking and archiving.

Not part of the complaint reason itself, but JAIS feels more human than a robot. Remove their name from the interactions, and from an OOC perspective, it's very possible you won't realize they're a shell.

Sorry for the delay, it's taken me a while to get to this. This complaint is arguably the hardest one I've had to handle, it's quite straight forward, the facts are all there, it's just the decision took me a few days to go over. I've went through a lot of evidence presented here, evidence I've acquire. I've questioned more people than I ever had before. The allegations here were quite serious so I treated them seriously. This complaint revolves around three people. Alberyk BSA SovietCyanide I'll start with [mention]SovietCyanide[/mention]. Them revealing administrative PM's about the nature of BSA's stance and pressing an issue they're asked not to. Inflaming the people on discord at the time and causing a mess. What was revealed to Soviet was revealed as a courtesy due to their adminhelp, other members of the community are entitled to ask about the outcome of their ahelps and we sometimes oblige depending on the circumstance. Due to this, I'm applying a warning. That being said, people witnessing the round informed me that Soviet did not follow BSA for the whole time, so hardly looking for errors. Yes he ahelped it but he wasn't the first to report it to us. As for [mention]Alberyk[/mention]. A lot of things were brought to question. Overall, I've found no issue with the punishment put in place, more on that later. There were however a few issues which I'll address now. They dismissed the first ahelp regarding the arrest without notifying BSA of the outcome. With the addition of tickets, this should be more of an incentive to properly finish up tickets. They were able and allowed to inform Soviet certain details pertaining to the matter. The issue from this stems that if they obliged Soviet, they should have also obliged BSA. So what does this mean? Per my investigation, I've found no evidence that Alberyk really had any ill-intent with this. The only frustration from Alberyk I see here is the frustration of having to deal with a long term player having recurring issues. BSA in comparison to the community at large, even when compared to long term players that frequent security has an abnormally large amount of negative staff entries. There was proper escalation in punishment, with 3 active warnings at the time of this post not counting the previous ones. 2/3rd of your entries happen over a course of a year, which is where most of your warnings and bans are from. In fact, only 2 of your 12 warnings really happened over a year ago. Now, you could argue that there was a lack in proper escalation of punishment, which in reality is false. 3 active warnings, other notes and a 3 day ban from myself recently warrants on the minimum a week ban. A permanent ban in my view is justified considering the situation. Yes, it may seem this particular incident is minor but things build up. This incident alone would have just gotten them a note, but it was not alone. I also feel like I adequately explained that Hammerstein, another character of yours that should have more IT skills than Noir does not have the know how to do RnD. This includes both progressing through the RnD levels and printing things. So if Hammerstein could not, I'm not sure why you assumed Noir could. The topic of [mention]Exia[/mention] was also brought up. After reviewing the logs and speaking to them, they concur there was an error on their end where they neglected to read the entries. Alberyk did not really overstep his bounds here, he spotted an error, he intervened. So in summary. [mention]SovietCyanide[/mention] is receiving a warning. [mention]Alberyk[/mention] will be informed of the issues I've found along with briefing the moderator and administrator team on proper communication, especially with our new system. The ban on [mention]Bath Salts Addict[/mention] will remain as is. They are encouraged to appeal in the future.

I do support standardizing a form of education to be universal for all players without forcing characters to undergo major changes in their backstory. That being said, I don't think I'll be approving the max ceiling aspect of this reform.

Just posting to say I'll be taking this. I will also heavily enforce these rules. This is the bwoink logs of the first interaction in full. This is the bwoink logs of the second interaction in full. Edit 1: I added the full bwoink logs of the second interaction. Edit 2: I've added the logs for the first interaction to the main post. Will also include them here.

Name: Khaled Al-Bastaki Species: Human Age: 40 Date of Hire: 10/09/2458 Job Title: Head of Security Preferred Contact Info: K.Bastaki.58@NTMail.com

Resolved. Locking and archiving.

Just going to say this to avoid confusion. The complaints will go through either two routes. Either a mutual agreement between you two is hashed out or the handling administrator will post their verdict. So even if he just says no, it's not the end of the road. [mention]Jennalele[/mention] I do sympathize with your frustration here and regardless of the outcome here, will see about a way to improve this, to avoid certain things from repeating.

This does seem a lot. I'll have someone look into this independently of the complaint.

I think a good way to draw the line is artificially extending the round when a crew transfer occurs. Blowing a path to departures and holding the shuttle for twenty minutes is different. The former inconveniences characters/players while not necessarily delaying the round while the other extends the round beyond the standard crew transfer time.

This is an interesting suggestion policy. I honest felt that our rules were sufficient in this matter but it seems it's not. We had a brief discussion about this on staff discord and the opinion shifted that this wasn't really valid as it extended the round beyond reason. A minute or two is acceptable. Twenty is not. I'll link this to staff and hopefully this'll get a discussion going. I'm very partial to this notion.

A week has passed, binning. Locking and archiving.

Warning is being expunged. Deeming this resolved. An error in enforcement, hopefully it won't happen again.

I've decided to incorporate a list of rules and guidelines independent of the main suggestion subforum. They'll mainly be the same with the difference being addressed here. Rules: One Suggestion per Topic Make sure your suggestion has not been suggested before. (Search the Suggestions Sub-Forum) Please don't title the topic in all capitals. Don't respond to idea's with only gif's or pictures. Provide reasoning behind your stance. Do not derail the topic Read the whole topic before you post in it. (Yes, that means all of it) The usual forum rules still apply here. Staff will delete all posts that violate any of these rules or are not contributing to the discussion in a suggestion. The reasoning behind a suggestion should be elaborated upon in the initial post to a reasonable extent. Guidelines: All policy suggestions will be looked at regularly and can be dismissed if two relevant staff members vote for dismissal. Suggestions need two dismissals and a one week grace period before being binned. If a similar suggestion of the same nature has been dismissed in a period of three months, it will be binned. All suggestions can be dismissed by Head Administrators and Head Developers Suggestions pertaining to regulations and protocols can be dismissed by CCIA Lead and CCIA Liasion. Suggestions pertaining to out-of-character matters can be dismissed by Primary Administrators. Administrators in the whitelist team can dismiss suggestions relevant to them. Suggestions pertaining to lore can be dismissed by the relevant lore developers and lore master. Certain suggestions may be discussed by a team as a whole over a long period of time. A suggestion can be approved or denied depending on the consensus.

Two dismissals, over a week has passed from thread creation. Locking and archiving.

Two dismissals, over a week has passed from thread creation. Locking and archiving.

Not adding this as a rule. Kyres cited that the synth lore team is working on reforming this aspect of the lore to be more fitting and I won't overrule them in this case by adding a rule that would more or less infringe on their work. Voting for dismissal.