Removing the command whitelists of players that haven't played for a year or more.

[MattAtlas]

Just now, Garnascus said:

They passed the trial once. They should not have to prove anything to you.

When would you remove the whitelist of someone based on their conduct that did not result in a ban?

It seems like a lot of people in their heads have this idea that the sever "atmopshere" is changing such that a command player from a few years ago would be unable to perform their duties. I think a CMO would definitely need to re-learn medical since we switched to brainmed but every other job has stayed relatively the same. The gameplay loop has not fundamentally changed and the relevant changes to the lore can be explained to you in a paragraph. A head of security from 5 years ago would have no difficulty performing his job now. A CE could read a single paragraph on the phoron scarcity arc and understand it completely.... Its really not difficult and we are lying to ourselves if we think otherwise. 

1. No. They did not necessarily pass the trial. We didn't have trials before 2018-2019.

2. This is one of those occasions where you could justifiably remove the whitelist of someone without there being a ban in place.

3. It's correct, in my opinion, for me to say that antagonist, security and overall character culture has changed a lot even in the past four years. I in fact think that most captains and head of security from 2016 that don't actively play wouldn't be up to the standard without some bwoinking. I didn't mention lore arcs in my posts, I mention two main issues: character quality and competency. While it's true that yes, some roles like RD and CE haven't changed much, we don't whitelist for individual roles. Someone we give a command whitelist to is also trusted to play captain and head of security, and most of the players I outlined do in fact come back to play captain and head of security.

The latter two roles aren't the same now as they were that long ago. Not only because of changing expectations on security, but also because of changing expectations on how much leeway you're supposed to give antagonists. Not to mention that captains have immense power over the round and can often completely monopolize events as they see fit. This is also without mentioning how whitelist standards are tighter now in general.

[Ickysoup]

Thinking more on it, a whitelist removal for inactivity seems harsh. A notification for returning players to take some time to give everything a once over before playing would be preferable if something really needs to be done.

[Butterrobber202]

I'm not a big fan of people being permanently locked out of Command with no hope of redemption of a certain amount of strips, even if those strips were a domino effect from something unrelated to their Command play. 

But, I guess my question is, does this count towards being permanently locked out of Command?

[canon35]

Assuming that this does not count as one of those strikes that come with being banned, I think it is for the best. A command player can just join as another role and new character, play, show they are up to date, then re-apply and go through the application process again easily. Times change and people can still adapt if they need to. 

[MattAtlas]

4 minutes ago, Butterrobber202 said:

I'm not a big fan of people being permanently locked out of Command with no hope of redemption of a certain amount of strips, even if those strips were a domino effect from something unrelated to their Command play. 

But, I guess my question is, does this count towards being permanently locked out of Command?

It doesn't.

[Garnascus]

37 minutes ago, MattAtlas said:

2. Whitelists don't only get removed for misbehaviour and it has never been said that their removal only happens because of it. Removal is at the discretion of the whitelist team

You said this earlier in the thread. It is not currently a policy that you lose your whitelist after a year of inactivity. So you're proposing a new policy everyone would be bound by. Your original seemed to imply you would theoretically remove the whitelist of someone "At the discretion of the whitelist team" and not just because they misbehaved or failed to adhere to a particular policy. Would you ever remove the whitelist of someone who did not break any server rules and did not break any established whitelist policies?

[MattAtlas]

5 minutes ago, Garnascus said:

You said this earlier in the thread. It is not currently a policy that you lose your whitelist after a year of inactivity. So you're proposing a new policy everyone would be bound by. Your original seemed to imply you would theoretically remove the whitelist of someone "At the discretion of the whitelist team" and not just because they misbehaved or failed to adhere to a particular policy. Would you ever remove the whitelist of someone who did not break any server rules and did not break any established whitelist policies?

This isn't a new policy nor would it be one. This is what I said in the OP:

Quote

I'd like to strip the command whitelists of players that haven't played for a year or more, thus making sure that everyone is up to our current standards.

This wouldn't be a recurring thing, it'd be a one time strip, and I specified it in the comments too. I wouldn't strip the whitelist of someone that doesn't break any server rules or whitelist policies, no. If what you're hinting at is that I'm going to strip people's whitelists for arbitrary reasons, that's not going to happen.

[Garnascus]

Ok great. I am still against this for reasons stated but you have adequately answered my questions. 

[Boggle08]

It's hard to say something that already has been said in this thread, but I support this policy, especially since I now see it's going to be a one time check specifically for the NBT.

Besides the expectations for command changing over time, our repo also has changed. It's glaringly obvious now when you get an ancient CMO attempting to use pointmed, and you have to reinstruct them on how to do their job like they're a medical intern. This isn't as much of an issue in other departments, where we haven't had as many major mechanical overhauls. However it's still significant, and it will compound once we transition to a whole new ship with new rules, expectations, and mechanics.

[Nikov]

2 hours ago, Garnascus said:

Command whitelists arent a lore check. They exist only as a commitment check. If you're the type of person who passed it once and stopped playing here for a few years there is no reason to remove it from you. Changing mechanics and standards dont matter that much. 

I agree. The command whitelist I faced wasn't on the question of if I knew the lore but if I knew the role mechanically, could roleplay, was going to build roleplay for my department, and wasn't going to be a fuckhead. Punishing a ton of returning players who had met that criteria previously will only make them less likely to rejoin you. Those whitelisted players were previously some of your best, you don't want their first experience coming back to be negative.

[Faye <3]

A good and necessary change. We already have an issue on canon events where people who haven't played since the American Prohibition show up to play their Captains etc at the demerit of other, consistently active Command players. This issue will simply be compounded come NBT.

The Whitelist process really isn't that difficult. If this influx of inactive players are, as they say, competent and good with Command, they won't have any trouble getting it back.

Edited January 18, 2022 by Faye <3

[SatinsPristOTD]

Okay, before I answer. I need this put in very dumb words (Because I am a very dumb person)

This would be a ONE TIME thing to prepare us for the NBT, right?

It's not a "Oh, it's December, so time for the Culling!" vote, right?

Mom brain is your brain on drugs, kids. Don't do kids. 🤣

[MattAtlas]

1 minute ago, SatinsPristOTD said:

This would be a ONE TIME thing to prepare us for the NBT, right?

Yes, it's a one time thing for the NBT.

[Fortelian]

I'll be honest, I don't play a lot of Aurora, but I will give some advice in this matter as we did it to the hunter and CO whitelists over on Colonial Marines. We in the synth council refrained from purging inactive synthetics because we believe that it's possible to be brought up to speed and avoid the whole reapplication process. Synthetic is a role that requires a lot of knowledge, but whenever an old synth comes back, they aren't afraid to ask about new mechanics, or rules. When an old command player comes back, I think it's simple. Go and tell them that there are new rules and lore standards. If they ignore you and break em, then yeet them. If they listen to you, and check them out, then there's no reason to remove them. Basically, treat em like you would any member of the whitelist.

Now, like I said, I don't play Aurora a lot, so I don't know if you're command players are as smart as our synths, but I think the point still stands. However, this isn't a hill I'm gonna die on, because I can see how new comprehensive lore may require more time to understand. These are just Salvador's ten cents.

[Kintsugi]

I think my reply was removed for reasons unknown. I can only assume it was because it was "too short" but other people have given replies that were essentially the exact same. Maybe my message didn't go through - either way, I think someone should probably be notified if their message is deleted, even if it doesn't result in a warning. With that in mind, let me be less brief:

I think this is a good idea. I see absolutely no reason to let people who have no present investment with the server and the community come back after years(!) of not being present and then play command roles. Even from when I first started playing Aurora towards the end of 2019, the server has changed massively - the lore is more different than it is the same in regards to content, the server map will be wholly different, mechanics vary wildly... With the potential for a mass return of players who have been gone for a while, I think the NBT necessitates a wipe such as this. It isn't fair for the playerbase of the now to have to deal with people who don't even know what the SCC *is* or other countless changes to what Aurora is as a server coming back to Aurora and taking up very important slots that usually dictate the direction of a round, especially taking those slots from players who *are* invested in the server and active in the community. 

[SatinsPristOTD]

24 minutes ago, MattAtlas said:

Yes, it's a one time thing for the NBT.

Oh, shoot, go for it. It's a one time thing. NBT is a HUGE deal for Aurora and we need Command to be primped and proper for it to go smoothly ICly.

 

[WickedCybs]

People that are gone for a very long time tend to be very bad at following guidelines and rules. I can only agree with this. Getting a command WL again is not that hard anyway and should give time to get used to Aurora again.

[Peppermint]

Agree with it. Far too many people throw themselves right back into command roles, and it's incredibly selfish in my opinion. It very often disrupts rounds and makes life harder for other people - folks prove over and over again they do not put effort in to catch up on their own. It's not like getting the WL is difficult either, so the standards really aren't that high. 

Still distinctively remember the finale of the old tajara arc where someone who'd not been on in years took the hos spot, burning someone else out who had also queued. Upon finding out how much things had changed, they then went straight to cryo. Things like this are too common and I do not feel those people commenting here who have not played, and have shown no real interest in playing, for upwards of a year have a leg to stand on. Just play a round here and there if you think you might want to keep it - you have 365 days and all.

if anything, I'd want this to be a semi-regular purge, and this is from a gal who takes lengthy breaks every few months.

[SleepyWolf]

absolutely. i stopped playing for a few months and then came back and played command - and i can't imagine what a year or twos time would feel like. it was such a different game with a completely different vibe and movement of crew to it. if someone remembers the game once a year they'll be fine probably.

[Scheveningen]

I think this is a completely terrible idea. I'm personally on extended leave from playing Aurora until the NBT arrives, and even then I would not expect to massively dedicate my time playing on Aurora because my motivation for joining a round largely depends on the players connected to the server. If I see names I recognize, I'd be inclined to join, if I don't, I will most likely not, because there is definitely that impression people won't take you seriously if they don't recognize your character, etc etc.

But likewise, stripping whitelists for something inoffensive as choosing not to play the game is itself, well, offensive. It actually gives me and likely other potential returning players more reason to not return if we're otherwise unable to play the same characters in their respective roles again, because job-hopping is not tolerated here, and playing visitor can be horrifically boring in a roster of job-focused characters. This decision would be extremely isolating and would work against the idea of getting any returning former regulars back.

I would simply not return to play here if this decision was made. And while anyone is entitled to think, "Well, good" to however many exceptional cases that involve specific players, this decision would still end up coming off as intensely elitist and catering only to the in-group of current regulars' desires for quality control at the direct cost of risking that returning players will not be playing a majority of their characters on server, if at all.

I'd argue it's the command whitelist's team to account for returning players playing command and doing a terrible job of it to then moderate those players if they screw up, and escalate especially so on account of the typical, "Hey, did you read the rules, or did you literally just return to ruin rounds and chucklefuck?" -- in which case that's very open and shut, and it's fair, because it's case-by-case basis, and no one is to blame but that player. The idea in the title isn't fair and isn't open-and-shut. There are many awesome people who, while rusty if they returned, would still be amazing leaders, if not better after spending time outside this game to learn new life lessons. This idea really doesn't save you a lot more trouble than you think it would. Terrible command players, once they lose their whitelist, are unlikely to get it back barring an incredibly unique circumstance. But it's your job as volunteers to moderate and deal with that when it arises on a case-by-case basis, right? 

And in any case, even if a particular person who was whitelisted applies, and their app quality is fine and their behavior is fine, they would still be screwed if the whitelist team suddenly decides, "Actually, we're not going to re-whitelist you." And their whitelist removal isn't even for something punishable, you just arbitrarily decided they would be de-whitelisted for inactivity (not against the server rules nor is it a thing not mentioned in the rules that could be considered against the spirit of the rules, so therefore it's ridiculous) and that you would not re-whitelist them because you don't feel like they should be. The decision is already arbitrary, so it doesn't matter if you just said "I would not strip them for any arbitrary reason", because this is an already arbitrary decision. QED, this is bad.

That being said, the staff can do what they want with their server - fairness and honor are social constructs - but it strikes me as odd that the command whitelist team even considers this idea while saying that bringing back the old regulars with the promise of a different experience is important. The potential action that would isolate a lot of people from playing doesn't match up with the words promoting inclusivity. Tell me to cope if I'm getting the wrong idea here but the hypocrisy just sticks out like a sore thumb. If you value quality control more than the quantity of returning players than just say that and do the quality control thing, forget democracy.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Scheveningen
Added some points, corrected grammar

[Tequilajoe]

I see the logic behind such a decision, but I always feel like decisions like this are unplayer-friendly.

Also, I don't appreciate how Aurora seems to go to great lengths to prevent players from playing heads of staff, which too often results in consistently vacant positions or worse, the same tired faces in those critical positions over and over.

Give your returning heads a chance, it's not worth dropping the hatchet on so many of them when we sorely need player variety in the command department. The NBT wave will not last forever.

6 hours ago, DriedMilk said:

I agree.

 

I agree even more that you did this just a couple of days before NBT. Twist that blade!!!!

"Twist the blade." Yikes. This is how some players actually feel.

 

[Promanguy1223]

I'm not sure how I feel about this. I mean the I was active as of October time frame, however due to military reasons (deployment) I will not be active for 10 months or more. Will players in the future, that passed a year without playing command have their whitelists stripped as well? Is this an annual thing now? 

[Faye <3]

8 minutes ago, Promanguy1223 said:

Is this an annual thing now? 

Itt's not an annual thing. Matt has answered this before.

[witchbells]

It's not a bad change, but I'm getting a kneejerk reaction because I'm one of several people who took a long, long break from Aurora before returning. I see that there are other people in the thread who feel the same way. Losing your whitelist, despite how easy they can be to get, is a daunting thing for some of us who just stop playing SS13 every so often. While I've always agreed that we should handle command whitelists with more care, I can't help but worry that it might discourage some people from returning.

 

I would wholeheartedly agree with this if it was combined with additional criteria, or if you hadn't used your whitelist in longer a year.

[Marlon P.]

1 hour ago, Tequilajoe said:

Also, I don't appreciate how Aurora seems to go to great lengths to prevent players from playing heads of staff, which too often results in consistently vacant positions or worse, the same tired faces in those critical positions over and over.

Give your returning heads a chance, it's not worth dropping the hatchet on so many of them when we sorely need player variety in the command department. The NBT wave will not last forever.

This is something I've noticed and I'm working to get data on seeing how severe this downward trend in the amount of command players is.

This thread is part of a longterm trend that is what this post says. Incrementally increasing the standards applied to Command which leads to a decrease in the number of command players. This suggestion in particular is a step that will overtly lead to negative outcomes. Others have already posted reasons why it would make them feel unwelcome. We'd be punishing people out on deployment, or who are dealing with life situations that bring them away from this videogame.

4 hours ago, SatinsPristOTD said:

Oh, shoot, go for it. It's a one time thing. NBT is a HUGE deal for Aurora and we need Command to be primped and proper for it to go smoothly ICly.

You are just as capable of piloting the ship as someone who has been gone for a year, because both of your net experiences in being Command during the NBT is 0. If this is a criteria, shouldn't every single player be stripped our command whitelists?

Someone doesn't need to prove themselves through a weeks long application and trial process just to play CMO, CE, or Captain, unless they've proven that they should be put through the process again. Not pre-emptively. It is, as I've said before, infantilizing and aggressive.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Marlon P.