You guys have to calm down

[Susan]

So let me get this straight.

You admit to only interacting with my character under very specific circumstances where there is actually little roleplay outside of slapping bandages on things, but then presume that you've interacted with my character enough to recognize this almighty 'bigger problem'.

Right. Sure. Okay.

[Frances]

I never meant to imply that I believe the attacks against Sue are an organized conspiracy (in fact I tried to manifest my understanding that these are complaints by players disgruntled by her actions, not with her as a person). The only conspiracy I have referred to is the one some of you seem to believe is existing between Sue and the staff. If I have failed in making that clear, then I apologize for causing a misunderstanding.

I'd like us to step back for a bit here and look at what we know to be absolute facts. These are:

1. Several people have expressed discontent with Sue's actions, both presently and in the past

2. There is a discernible majority of people who currently oppose Sue

3. No action has currently been taken against Sue

There are all the facts we seem to be agreeing on. However, can we take these facts, alone, and immediately jump to the conclusion that people are defending Sue with full knowledge that her actions are unjust, simply because they all happen to be friends with her? (Or maybe, in a more believable argument, that they are blinded by this friendship, and refuse to accept the points presented from the other side of the issue?)

Because that seems wrong to me. Much like many of you are convinced that Sue is out to kill as many people as possible for not respecting her IC ideals, you seem to be believing that the administration itself is buddy-buddy with Sue and obfuscating the due processes of moderation as much as possible for the sake of... what, exactly?

Wouldn't it be much more reasonable to assume that the actions Sue (and by extent several other players) have engaged on are simply a hot and controversial topic, one that the community cannot agree on, and is not clearly stated into the rules, thus making it one that should be discussed but that no user should currently be held accountable against?

In fact, I am rather shocked to find most of you seem to be immediately assuming the worst out of this player, without trying to understand clearly the situation that has happened. For example, when Sue killed Katana as a Vox, some people accused her of "staying around [Oliver Stefan's body] in order to kill the next person who came to find it". These accusations are frankly unneeded and 100% counterproductive to proper conflict resolution. Assuming the worst out of a player without having a proper grasp of the situation is exactly what makes some SS13 servers so terrible because admins are constantly ready to jump the gun.

 

You make jokes, you make animal noises in teamspeak together, you're friends.

I have never been on teamspeak. Additionally, the fact that you seem to be under the impression that I will be promoted to headmin without a fault simply because I have manifested interest in modding for the server again shows your willingness to jump to conclusions.

[Frances]

You admit to only interacting with my character under very specific circumstances where there is actually little roleplay outside of slapping bandages on things, but then presume that you've interacted with my character enough to recognize this almighty 'bigger problem'.

Honestly, what I think Crescentise was referring to is something that can be relatively well understood by reading the previous complaints that were made yesterday, even without having known Ana beforehand.

All she seems to be saying is that a character ended up acting like a dick ICly, in a way that people found unfun OOCly, and that there are no clearly stated rules that dictate exactly how to face these situations. All of this is accurate.

[Loow]

So let me get this straight.

This is the issue that I see. Someone comes with something to say about the server and hopes to have some good discussion. People choose to see these as attacks on their character or themselves personally. This is an excellent example.

 

...then presume that you've interacted with my character enough to recognize this almighty 'bigger problem'.

Right. Sure. Okay.

Such phrases offer nothing to the conversation and only degrade the topic into defensive quips and other such comments.

Crescentise clearly stated her position, and she was attacked for it.

...there are, for certain, many others like me: those who are unbiased, generally stay away from posting in discussions like these, and yet believe there is indeed a larger issue here.

It is more than possible to have a conversation without being offended or unnecessarily defensive. I'd like to see some more of that.

And since I'm making myself out to be the next person to have offended someone, let me include a bit of truth. I enjoy Ana as a character. She is one of several detective/investigators who I actually enjoy seeing on this station. She gets results. She acts within a well established mentality ("no nonsense"). Everything Sue has ever made her do is something I can realistically see Ana as a character doing. I am not "attacking" anyone. I am not "out to get" anyone.

From an OOC standpoint, Ana brushes with one of the rules.

"-Keep the round fun for everyone - your actions should always have the goal to add to others' fun, not detract from it."

But that's more or less the nature of the character. And as I have said, I don't dislike Ana.

 

All she seems to be saying is that a character ended up acting like a dick ICly, in a way that people found unfun OOCly, and that there are no clearly stated rules that dictate exactly how to face these situations. All of this is accurate.

 

To sum it all up.

Keep conversation constructive.

[Gollee]

'So many' is quite the long stretch. It's like 6 or 7 people. They've come out of the woodwork because they hold some kind of grudge for being arrested or something equally petty and this is an opportune time to start yelling to anyone who will listen and then pretend like there's a larger issue when there really isn't. A bunch of people screaming about something does not mean there actually is a problem. There are people who protest and yell about us eating animal meat. Is there a problem with humans eating animal meat?

 

 

I'm disinclined to believe there is a larger issue here. It's the same people every time - I didn't need a complaint to know who didn't like me and who I didn't like. It was fairly obvious Gollee, Chaz, and I were not going to get along for example, and it is not even the slightest bit surprising to find their involvement here. The same for Erik, and Rectum, considering his meltdown and furry accusations towards Aurora, as well as others. The amount of assumptions made here is staggering. Letting OOC rage filter in IC? There's no proof of that, and it certainly isn't the case, but my words fall on deaf ears because evidently people can't stand counterarguments and pick at me for calling someone an idiot. Okay I guess.

 

I have never been arrested or otherwise affected by Ana aggressively; though I have seen her interactions with others.

 

 

But the point must be made, that everyone must abide by the same rules. It doesn't matter if you're a regular who's been here since before the server was created, or a new person who just arrived, or if you're staff or not. The same rules should apply, and it should be fair in that respect. Someone who toes the line too often will have to be punished in accordance to the server rules that have been set forth and are supposed to be explicitly unbiased in their nature.

 

No rules have been broken.

 

This is where the disagreement stems from, a good section of the community believes that the EoR grief rule has been broken, as you initiated conflict, this includes Chaz and I.

Another section, containing Frances, among others, either believe that it was acceptable because it wasn't combat, even though it devolved to that, or that the other person was at fault for disarming the baton.

Please stop throwing around grudge accusations, I know that I do not hold a grudge against you, if I did, I would have opposed you in the other complaint thread, or here http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=1495&hilit=revolver, I would also have been much more unlikely to let you on the lore team, for example, considering I was the Loremaster when you joined.

And in return, Inverted and others, stop throwing accusations of Bias, that isn't what this is; as Cres said, this is a community issue, related to the direction of the server.

People like Frances and Sue want more emphasis towards action, whether conflict on the escape shuttle, or smoother interactions between security and antagonists.

The other side don't think this is right, and want the rules related to combat and conflict to be enforced fully.

[Skull132]

[...] as Cres said, this is a community issue, related to the direction of the server.

People like Frances and Sue want more emphasis towards action, whether conflict on the escape shuttle, or smoother interactions between security and antagonists.

The other side don't think this is right, and want the rules related to combat and conflict to be enforced fully.

 

This is pretty much my view on the matter. The staff meeting will gather the opinions and views of the staff on the matter. Once consolidated, those will be presented to the community for input and review.

[Erik Tiber]

There is clearly a problem, whether you want to deny it or not. There wouldn't be this many people complaining about it if there wasn't.

 

I am inclined to agree with this. I don't think it's something that can be resolved in one complaint. At least, not properly. But, I do want to keep poking this matter. The Mods and Admins are having a meeting on Saturday to discuss a few things. The incidents in question, and more precisely, how the complaints were handled will be discussed as well. I promise you, the staff are not seeing eye to eye on either account, and as such, we'll be addressing those concerns and problems that they raise. As per every meeting, minutes will be posted as a minimum.

I just hope that my move above isn't seen as empty. As I noted in my original post on this thread, at the top of the page, moves like this take planning. Because what's called into question is the modus operandi, and there are flaws pointed out with it. These are not things we are going to change on a whim, nor in the middle of a complaint. Changing this will go through public review, will go through public debate.

It's not seen as empty by me, don't worry.

yeah i expect my comment(s) to be deleted

but all that does is promote the behaviour that gives aurora a bad rep

all i'm doing is addressing specific problems with specific players, albeit bluntly

There is a reason why the comments like the one you posted above get deleted.

They're not conductive to dialogue because of the way you present them. This goes past tone policing - the simple fact is that you won't get a straight answer out of a person by riling them up. Thus snide remarks end up being removed, because they do little more than start flame wars.

And yes, you can say that people need to toughen up, and accept what you have to say at face value, no matter how rude you might be while saying it. But the truth is they simply won't, and you can't do anything about that. So you are the one that needs to adapt, in the end.

If you don't, you're simply posting here to hear yourself speak.

Do note that as one of the people most concerned regarding tone policing, I'm seconding your post here.

Ffrances, you're the previous headmin and soon-to-be headmin.

 

Let me clarify one thing. And understand my intention is not to discredit your post nor to poke holes in it. I just want to make sure that this point is not misunderstood.

FFrances is not in the running for Head Administrator position. No person who is not actively a member of staff will ever be considered for Head Administrator. As it stands, she is an applicant to become Moderator, and the previous Head Administrator.

Also, the animal noises on TS are made by me and ChrisCa usually <.< >.>

Also thanks for clarifying this, and I totally think you're handling this very well given the circumstances.

[Cassie]

Eighty-two posts?

All because Susan can't face the community and say "Hey guys, you know what. I admit the mistakes I have made. Sorry about the p2w silly things I've done. I'm going to play this game in a way that provides mutual roleplay for both myself and others. I'm also going to work on making my character less of a self-insert and keep my OOC and IC emotions separate, possibly work on taking the game as a game and looking to find fun with myself and other members of community! Now let's put this in the past and work together."

There's nothing wrong with the complainers. Just because Susan is nice to you doesn't mean you can let her get away with being hostile in-game and powertripping in the game. I realize all individuals are unique, complex, and have more than what appears on the surface, I am sure Susan has a lovely side to her - talented, maybe a good sense of humor? Does that mean she can walk over people IC'ly? No. I have an issue with her philosophy which is the root of this problem, and I do think she's robust but she doesn't provide good antag/arrest/security roleplay for people (and in many cases, dampens it) she is arresting who are RP'ers as well.

Frances I love you to bits, I really do even now. But please, the lawyering of Susan has to stop, she is not a victim, if anything she is a victim to her victims which isn't really victimhood at all. Granted, I don't think the thread of Susan wouldn't be severe in my eyes if I just met Susan and no one had bad interactions with her, your defense of her would be logical in that sense. However, this is not the case. Susan has done similar things over and over again. Even people on reddit (not mentioning the LRP'ers who grief and do stupid shit) have encountered Susan and officers similar to her and thinks this represents Aurora. When I was new, I remember having nothing but bad experience with sec officers pulling powergamey shit , that has left a stain on my impression of Aurora even now but I've told myself and others there's hope on this. This is not a grudge, that is a valid reason to show upset and be concerned.

I do believe Susan shouldn't be singled out because this behaviour on server is not unique to her, but now the topic's come out I think that it just needs to be dealt with, over and done - as harsh as it may be, just make her an example. There's players on Aurora who are like Susan and need to see this situation unfold so they know this is unacceptable. As for the people complaining about the forum hostility but are opposing this; I ask, chronic in-game hostility or forum bluntness during a serious scenario, which is actually worse here?

[Frances]

Frances I love you to bits, I really do even now. But please, the lawyering of Susan has to stop, she is not a victim, if anything she is a victim to her victims which isn't really victimhood at all.

Just to clarify this, I am not defending Sue as much as I am defending certain injustices which I believe are being committed against her. From people resorting to fallacious arguments, to ignoring completely the points she attempts to bring up, or trying to blame things on her that she has never actually been held accountable for.

I do not agree with everything Sue says (as you can see even in this thread - the recent attack against Crescentise was uncalled for imo), but my current stance on the big underlying issue of "what should people like Sue be doing or not" is "I don't fukken know anymore".

I have a general idea of what I would like to see or not see as player behavior (and, spoiler alert, it does favor IC aggressors and troublemakers), but I realize that the issue is such an unclear and undiscussed one at the moment that I'd rather wait for a full debate to come along before making up my mind for good. I'm also not looking to shove my views down anyone's throat.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

I'm going to ask everyone getting genuinely emotional over these issues to take a deep breathe, get up, and go pet a friendly dog or cat for awhile. There are 10 pages of controversy and argument that I have little interest in reading because oh my god.

I will say that in order for anything constructive to happen you need to fulfill the obligation of mutual understanding when you enter into a debate. If you are dismissive and hostile, then you don't seek dialogue but the fulfillment of dogma. I mean come on. 10 pages of arguing, has anything constructive gotten done? I'm going to estimate from the continued hostile tone of posts that nope.

http://i.imgur.com/OOA8QzF.jpg

[Cassie]

Ayeye... You see, it's not really even the tone of the posts that's doing the issue, people have acknowledged what each others problems are and such - it's just that they've made their mind up and are waiting for the other side to cave in or something; did you know people can even do that with a nice tone? If I see another point repeated, or have to repeat myself, or another niceness mediator from Equestria I will chop off my braids and donate them to the server as a good luck token.

I consider myself having the highest tolerance for forum conflict but even I realize it's no longer productive (the back and forthness), I only tolerate drama when it gets somewhere. Someone who has staff power just needs to stop the wishy-washiness and make a forum decision: "Yes or no." and announce it.

Problem solved.

[Guest]

I'm going to ask everyone getting genuinely emotional over these issues to take a deep breathe, get up, and go pet a friendly dog or cat for awhile. There are 10 pages of controversy and argument that I have little interest in reading because oh my god.

I will say that in order for anything constructive to happen you need to fulfill the obligation of mutual understanding when you enter into a debate. If you are dismissive and hostile, then you don't seek dialogue but the fulfillment of dogma. I mean come on. 10 pages of arguing, has anything constructive gotten done? I'm going to estimate from the continued hostile tone of posts that nope.

http://i.imgur.com/OOA8QzF.jpg

 

I needed this link.

Thread is now about cats. Post cats.

 

[Tenenza]

Tenenza can into Cats

[Cassie]

:3 I too, can derail threads with kitties.

[Guest]

Less of the off topic posts, if you have nothing more to say about the topic then please do not post.

[PoZe]

Well, people are going at the internet to complain about something. Every complain discussion could eventually turn into more personal opinion about another person. Just don't forget that this is still a Game and we have 1 rule about 'don't be a dick' that means in every matter.

I would personal think that doing multiple complaints about one player/character at the same time is just trying to siege them. Because I saw a lot of times when someone made complaint about so X, complaint failed so another guy made the same complaint about that X. It's called 'Rushing'. Don't try to have justice by pushing straight in number on the person.

[Guest]

I'll just laugh and say that most people don't even see the dots on how long this has been brewing. The We Should Have a Talk of the Current State of Aurora and recent security discussions kinda pointed where the issues lie. I really hope they can be dealt with now that they've finally surfaced.

I can empathize with Sue, I've been in a similar situation. Albeit hard to swallow, which can be seen by my reaction, I've accepted the criticism and took note of what bothers people. I'm attempting to make an improvement on it. Maybe Sue should just try making a new character to freshen her perspective. It helps.

Edit:

I'll just give kudos to Tainavaa for pointing out that improvement has to start from the individual, but I disagree that we should not attempt to change the server. The improvement has to be extensive. We shouldn't blame only certain people or staff indicision for the problems.

[Nik]

BY THE SNOWY TESTICLE GODS.

Ten fucking pages.

Ten pages of you people yelling about how /we should stop yelling about things/

Whilst I agree that we have entered a time where people seem more fond of Character and player complaints then just sucking up the loss and not eating salt, It's not like we don't all get salty.

But this. this is a maze of salt, atop a mountain made of salt-rock, with the very sky raining down sea-salt and bath-salts.

I'd recommend that everyone remember that we are meant to be a community, not a mosh pit. Think before you leap.

[Cassie]

You know, we might as well scrap the player complaints board and never complain again amirite guys?

On serious note. My only complaint isn't the contents of the thread, it's the fact that no lines are drawn about acceptable behaviour/ethos of the server, and players are being left to brawl-to-the-death over who is right because it hasn't been defined by authority. Like what the fuck.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

You know, we might as well scrap the player complaints board and never complain again amirite guys?

On serious note. My only complaint isn't the contents of the thread, it's the fact that no lines are drawn about acceptable behaviour/ethos of the server, and players are being left to brawl-to-the-death over who is right because it hasn't been defined by authority. Like what the fuck.

 

Stop belittling what people say with slippery slope arguments you baguette eating frenchie

Your second point is tru but: they argue it ooc and absolutely nothing gets done because we can't do anything ic about the character complaint. like literally pointless to only complain ooc sometimes if not molst of the time.

[Valkrae]

Allow me to state my point of view on the entire situation.

I have never been on the receiving or sending end of the unrelenting security machine that is Ana. I have never even been in Security whilst Ana has been in. I have only ever watched from afar, and listened to testimonies from other people. That being said; What is the big issue, on all sides?

One side believes that Ana is bad, and that the character should be looked at, etc.

While the other side believes that side one is just hating on Sue and Ana as a character.

Let's look at something I think we all should pay more attention to.

Rule 1. Don't be a dick.

Now, is this directly relatable to the topic at hand? Yes, yes it is.

While the rule may seem that is meant for OOC, it's intended meaning is as an ambiguous umbrella rule for all mediums of the server, and it's community. Before you post something, before you say something, before you do something, you have to stop and ask yourself "Am I being a dick?"

Now, some of you may already be asking questions along the track of "Well, my character is a dick in RP!"

While that may be true, that doesn't mean that you have to be a dick ICly. What I mean by that is that if your action is overly dickish, mean, or could possibly piss someone off to the point where they would write a complaint about you; You may need to rethink your actions.

That also relates to the flipside. If someone does something to you that could be considered mean, that doesn't give you a free pass to go full rage phase 7 and be a dick right back. Again, you have to stop and think about your actions as a person, and as a part in a larger community.

I'll let you all take this post as you well.

[Frances]

While the other side believes that side one is just hating on Sue and Ana as a character.

There is more complexity to that side than this. While I do think Sue is receiving undue hate (from people that are not fact-checking their accusations, for example), the core of the issue is that I believe Ana has the right to act that way as a character, while others disagree.

 

While that may be true, that doesn't mean that you have to be a dick ICly. What I mean by that is that if your action is overly dickish, mean, or could possibly piss someone off to the point where they would write a complaint about you; You may need to rethink your actions.

The problem here is that what will offend someone or not is very subjective. This is the reason why the rule was left as vague as possible, though people seem to be disagreeing on how to enforce it.

[Valkrae]

While the other side believes that side one is just hating on Sue and Ana as a character.

There is more complexity to that side than this. While I do think Sue is receiving undue hate (from people that are not fact-checking their accusations, for example), the core of the issue is that I believe Ana has the right to act that way as a character, while others disagree.

 

While that may be true, that doesn't mean that you have to be a dick ICly. What I mean by that is that if your action is overly dickish, mean, or could possibly piss someone off to the point where they would write a complaint about you; You may need to rethink your actions.

The problem here is that what will offend someone or not is very subjective. This is the reason why the rule was left as vague as possible, though people seem to be disagreeing on how to enforce it.

 

While I do agree that the hate that Sue has been receiving has been ridiculous, it is not coming from thin air. While I personally do not have an issue with the character, I know that many members of the community do. That has to mean something. If a thread like this can explode, then something of tangible evidence has to be there.

It's something to be examined and debated calmly and civilly, not argued and fought with tooth and nail like a bunch of savages.

[Frances]

If a thread like this can explode, then something of tangible evidence has to be there.

Because A happens, does not necessarily mean B will happen as well.

A large thread like this is an indicating factor there likely is tangible evidence. However, we cannot simply assume there is without verifying, because it's a player's reputation and ability to play that's at stake here.

[Valkrae]

When I said tangible evidence, I meant for both sides. Sorry for the confusion.