Staff Complaint - Frances

[Susan]

BYOND Key: SueTheCake

Staff BYOND Key: ffrances

Reason for complaint: Undermining community decisions; baselessly overriding game mode results

Evidence/logs/etc:

Additional remarks:

Following a vote wherein extended won as the majority gamemode and someone broke the rules by calling a transfer early, Frances took it upon herself to call a vote asking if the server wanted antagonists. This is not the first instance where Frances has done this and I highly doubt unless this behavior is curbed it will be the last. I don't believe the premise of being able to change the entire game mode with a simple vote should be something admins can do, given the fact that there is already a vote where you can say if you want antagonists or not - the gamemode vote.

I take issue with several of Frances justifications and actions in this context, first and foremost the way she ended the argument; that being:

 

 

"It's been voted for, end of story."

Then why did you change the gamemode from extended to traitor? It was voted for. End of story.

Further expanding upon this point, Frances claimed the reason for the vote was due to the notion that 'half of the people on the server' wanted to get off; yet this is not a justification at all. Each player is given a vote with which they can pick the gamemode that they wish to play at the start of the round. People who come on and regularly bitch about extended then immediately vote for a transfer whenever it pops up are people that I feel need not be catered to. When it is nuclear, I don't adminhelp and request that admins change the gamemode to suit my tastes. I instead ensure that I perform a revolutionary concept; playing something else.

Trying to justify undermining half of the server to cater to the other half (the vote for traitors was 12 to 16, hardly enough to be considered a majority) when the people who don't like extended are well within their abilities to go somewhere else or play something else is folly to me. When I see a gamemode I don't like I more often than not go play something else; I don't call early votes, I don't ask admins to change the round type, and I certainly don't think Frances would start a vote in a changeling round to change it to extended. This fosters more hatred against the gamemode and people will start believing that any time it is voted it they can just get admin staff to arbitrarily change it.

As well as that, in this specific instance, I don't believe Frances was in the right given the numbers of votes - four people tipped the balance. That is hardly enough to call it a majority. It was highly contested both in votes and OOC. People that late join after seeing the round type and complain have no one but themselves to blame; I take great issue in the fact that Frances seems to find it acceptable to override gamemodes that are legitimately voted in with no respect to the way things normally work and I would like the ultimate outcome of this complaint to stop this nonsense all together. I do not believe it is healthy. I do not believe it is justifiable or fair, and I certainly don't find it okay to ruin the rounds of half of the people on the server arbitrarily.

[ZipZero]

As well as that, in this specific instance, I don't believe Frances was in the right given the numbers of votes - four people tipped the balance.

Yes, that's true - four more people voted for yes than no - but the same thing happened with the initial gamemode vote as well. Extended only got a few more votes than secret. In fact, I don't think extended even got half the votes (which is a big reason I think the system should be overhauled).

[Frances]

Let me try to explain why this happens.

Adding antags in extended is primarily a way to extend the gamemode. Relatively often, extended will get voted on during prime time, and transferred out of very quickly, as a lot of people get bored with it. By adding antags, we can cater both to players wishing to play them, and members of security and medical not engaging in chair-rp, who otherwise have nothing to do. Thus, the round usually lasts 3 hours or more, rather than a flat 2 + transfer, which imo doesn't give extended rpers enough time to roleplay. (And in my experience, there's nothing a character-rper hates more than an overly short round.)

I think another thing to consider is that admin-picked antags in extended are not the same thing as autotraitor. Autotraitor picks all kinds of people (which still isn't as bad as being stuck with, e.g., a shitty wizard,) while following a vote, we try to pick antags who we already know will favor heavy roleplaying, or are new players who seem decent and have no outstanding notes. And that is a big difference from "technically anybody who hasn't been so horrible we've antag-banned them yet."

In my experience, chair-roleplayers rarely run into antags anymore, and when they have to face them, it's usually because someone is running around blowing half the station, murdering at random, and being a terrible antag, which isn't what we're picking anyway. And with the removal of objectives, it's highly unlikely for you to run into an antag at random (and most players can find some time to roleplay uninterrupted or delegate tasks to other members in their departments, even on autotraitor).

 

---

---

 

So, that explained, onto other parts of the complaint.

-Making a vote on this particular round: Somebody called a transfer vote an hour in, which was met with a 50/50 response before being cancelled. I decided to go with this antag vote because half of the people not wanting to play the roundtype after just an hour is never a good thing.

-Timing: Adding traitors at the 2-hour mark does nothing but bore people to death, because then they have to wait an hour or two more for traitors to actually take action. If traitors are to be added into a round, it must be done early.

-Changing the entire gamemode with a single vote: This is really not what happened here. Adding a few soft antags does not radically change the gamemode the way the addition of a wizard or nuke ops does. I think this simply cannot be compared to "changing a changeling round into extended". Additionally, for the reasons stated above, I do not think this undermined half of the server to cater to the other half - most players wishing to chair RP by all accounts will be able to continue on with their chair RP, especially since objectiveless, hand-picked antags ensure that nobody should come to blow up in their face.

-The number of votes: I find this argument irrelevant, given that the initial call of extended vs secret was decided by a single vote (and often is), and that once again, what was done did not constitute a majorly disruptive change for all.

-"It's been voted for, end of story.": I had to put an end to the conversation in OOC due to some people introducing their arguments in extremely offensive ways, such as

[20:01:16]OOC: SueTheCake/SueTheCake : so?

[20:01:21]OOC: SueTheCake/SueTheCake : they can blow it out their ass

[20:01:33]OOC: SueTheCake/SueTheCake : they knew what they signed up for and now they're whining like little pussy ass babies

[20:01:36]OOC: SueTheCake/SueTheCake : not my problem

The conversation would have continued had people proven able to discuss it properly. Additionally, it had already been mentioned several times that the argument could have been taken to the forums (which is what happened, which I appreciate.) So it's not like I was attempting to cut off all discussion on this.

I believe this covers the main points of your complaint. Feel free to argue or disagree with any of what I've said, and I'll do my best to address it as I have so far.

---

---

tl;dr High-pop extended is too peaceful, gets transferred easily, adding hand-picked antags adds some non-destructive fun which prevents the round from being transferred into nuke 2 hours in.

[duck]

Hi. Your screenshots are kind of broken.

I hate the people always whining when extended goes through so I almost exclusively vote for extended. And-- yes. People who call votes and whine really should not be catered to. I especially despise the self-righteous little shitheels who feel they have to cry, 'If you want to vote for X, go play on goon/hypatia.' You know who you are. I would love, love love. To do away with the whole bunch.

But, and as much as it pains me to share a side with them. There's a pretty big flaw in your argument. Things, y'know. change. Time passed and people did some stuff and if the majority wants some antags added, that's really pretty okay? Four people tipping the balance is 16/28, which is 57% per-cent of the voting population. That's a respectable margin and a respectable quantity of people. The game is cyclical in nature, and we all want change eventually. Hence why transfer votes exist and the station isn't just one big linear thing. It's been an hour and adding antags is pretty much perfectly reasonable.

To say it's ruining the rounds of half the people on the server is kind of an exaggeration, doncha think. Of the majority that voted against, most of them won't be interacting with the antags at all. Furthermore, with the average robustness of our average antag, it happens more often than not that no-one ends up dying. Plus, they're adminpicked so there's a quality offcut for the truly horrendous people.

It's voted for by a significant majority, appeases slightly-more-than-half the server and will in all likelihood not significantly affect the remaining half in any meaningful way, barring security, which now has an actual function. I just don't see anything wrong with that.

[Susan]

I think another thing to consider is that admin-picked antags in extended are not the same thing as autotraitor. Autotraitor picks all kinds of people (which still isn't as bad as being stuck with, e.g., a shitty wizard,) while following a vote, we try to pick antags who we already know will favor heavy roleplaying, or are new players who seem decent and have no outstanding notes. And that is a big difference from "technically anybody who hasn't been so horrible we've antag-banned them yet."

 

'Admin picked antags are not the same' is an entirely subjective viewpoint and one I've not seen much evidence to support. Admins have selected antagonists that continue the boring 'explode everything' mantra that seems to be plaguing the server recently and I as a player have very little reason to trust the judgement of some person that an admin thinks is an alright antagonist; the notion that the people picked by admins must be good isn't infallible. Someone you may believe to be a good antagonist I may detest.

 

-Making a vote on this particular round: Somebody called a transfer vote an hour in, which was met with a 50/50 response before being cancelled. I decided to go with this antag vote because half of the people not wanting to play the roundtype after just an hour is never a good thing.

 

I don't find this to be a justifiable reason. People regularly try to transfer out of extended because they're incapable of roleplay without a revolver being shoved down their throat; I wouldn't blame the gamemode for the shortcomings of the player base. Rather, I would say that people wanting out of an extended round an hour in should deal with their predicament because they as players: Knew what they were getting into, knew that 'no randumb explosions' were going to happen, knew that there'd be no antagonists, and knew that it would just be 'chair rp' so they had plenty of reason not to join. I reiterate, going and playing another game is something people should do instead of staying and complaining which accomplishes nothing.

 

-Timing: Adding traitors at the 2-hour mark does nothing but bore people to death, because then they have to wait an hour or two more for traitors to actually take action. If traitors are to be added into a round, it must be done early.

 

My complaint was never the time of adding antags; it was adding them at all.

 

-Changing the entire gamemode with a single vote: This is really not what happened here. Adding a few soft antags does not radically change the gamemode the way the addition of a wizard or nuke ops does. I think this simply cannot be compared to "changing a changeling round into extended". Additionally, for the reasons stated above, I do not think this undermined half of the server to cater to the other half - most players wishing to chair RP by all accounts will be able to continue on with their chair RP, especially since objectiveless, hand-picked antags ensure that nobody should come to blow up in their face.

 

This is the part where you're most incorrect. With no offense to you, you are far from an active admin and I only see you on near the end of the night if at all; thusly I feel that you appraisal of 'not changing anything drastically' is vastly incorrect. Had you been more active this past week you would have noticed the steady decline of both the quality of roleplay as well as players coupled with numerous nuclear, rev, and other mass-destruction rounds wherein the escalation of force is done entirely improperly and you have bombings twelve minutes into the round. This also ties in with a previous point; the people you believe to be good antagonists does not mean that they actually are, or have the potential to be. I realize that in auto traitor it picks from a hat and you're more than likely to get a bald idiot, but I would prefer that to preparing to join a round only to find that it has been entirely ruined by the addition of antagonists.

Speaking personally, I don't care how non-desruptive an antagonist is. It may be slightly metagamey, but when it's extended I know I can sit down and take a break and relax from code work or something else that's been taking up my time to play a peaceful round - though lately we have more people trying to 'make things interesting' - without knowing that somewhere down the line there's going to be a bomb that blows up half the station or something equally stressful. When I vote extended, I don't want antagonists at all. I want an opportunity to roleplay without disruption - something that is increasingly becoming harder to do - and just have fun for once.

 

-The number of votes: I find this argument irrelevant, given that the initial call of extended vs secret was decided by a single vote (and often is), and that once again, what was done did not constitute a majorly disruptive change for all.

 

This is legitimate problem with the voting system and I feel it needs to be changed. However, it is automatic. This does not justify your conduct.

 

-"It's been voted for, end of story.": I had to put an end to the conversation in OOC due to some people introducing their arguments in extremely offensive ways, such as

[20:01:16]OOC: SueTheCake/SueTheCake : so?

[20:01:21]OOC: SueTheCake/SueTheCake : they can blow it out their ass

[20:01:33]OOC: SueTheCake/SueTheCake : they knew what they signed up for and now they're whining like little pussy ass babies

[20:01:36]OOC: SueTheCake/SueTheCake : not my problem

The conversation would have continued had people proven able to discuss it properly. Additionally, it had already been mentioned several times that the argument could have been taken to the forums (which is what happened, which I appreciate.) So it's not like I was attempting to cut off all discussion on this.

 

I will not apologize for words that I believe needed to be said. As I stated previously, you have been highly inactive on the server save for drop off periods at night and you haven't witnessed the glaring amounts of stupidity that have occurred within the past week or so; so much so that it has driven several people I would consider good roleplayers to take breaks from the server altogether, and admittedly it has also made me question whether or not I want to sit out and take a break. From my perspective, I simply saw you, an inactive administrator waltz in and with no justification or ground to stand on radically change the gamemode to please this crowd of people and therefore deprive me of a round that I wished to take part in; I still feel this to be the case now, which has lead to this complaint.

In essence, the logical argument is that a gamemode was voted and during no other mode but extended will admins make a vote to entirely change how the round operates. I do not buy the justifications of 'admin picked antags are better' nor do I buy 'they won't disrupt anything' because it is simply your word up against what I have experienced on the server. Moreover, I feel that it is particularly unfair to entirely undo a legitimately voted round (whether or not an antag is overt is irrelevant; extended is a mode without antags, and you are adding them. You are changing the mode regardless of how you wish to justify it) to cater to people that are within their capacity to go SSD and play something else. Everyone else who despises nuke, changeling, traitor, rev, cult (especially cult, since your server seems to hate it very much) doesn't sit around and call votes early or bitch constantly in OOC; they play another game or do something else entirely. I fail to see any justification for not giving the people who like extended this same common courtesy but instead deprive them of it.

It also disturbs me that you would ever use 'too peaceful' as a justification for anything. I was unaware that the baseline example for a round must be one including repeated murders and explosions, and thus by extension any round where these do not take place deserves to have antags added to it to 'add fun'. I feel that I don't need you to add fun, as I am perfectly capable of making it myself. And I also feel that adding antagonists is counter-productive especially for people - such as myself - who like to join a round and know what they're getting into. When I see extended I know I can take a break and just roleplay. Adding antagonists means that not only do I have to deal with your standard fare of dummies but now antagonists as well, and that isn't what I or others may have originally signed on to deal with. You are basically telling everyone who has been there from he start that wants extended that their vote was invalid and that antags are now being added, instead catering to the people who join extended knowing exactly what choice they made and what they've gotten into that complain and cry when nothing happens to distract them for ten seconds.

[Guest]

I feel this subject relates to this kind of situation:

Bartlbee rolls over dead

DCHAT: Bartlebee "Oh noes, I iz dead, time to do vote!"

Bartlebee has called a crew transfer vote.

When people die, aka, been taken out of the round for 30 minutes, and decide to call transfers, its just like people being:

OCC:

Blurt: I can't RP unless bombz and guns boom boom, add tators fo fight.

Intelligent Person: Why, when there is perfectly good, non-murderous conflict going on right now!

Blurt: Nuuu, ChairRP (apparently any RP not involving violent crimes now) is not RP its boring

Intelligent Person: This is a heavy RP server, get used to it

StaffMember Blurt: Ooo, I gree' with Blurt, station workplace should have bombers and murderers and kidnappers!

Add Boomers? Custom Vote called by StaffMember Blurt!

Intelligent Person: Can we just take Extended out of the vote rotation, if you know, its NEVER going to stay extended pass an hour?

So, look at it this way, lets be realistic, the NSS Aurora is a workplace, a place where civilians go to make money. An extended round is supposed to represent a NORMAL workday. Then all of a sudden, half way through the round, shit just starts blowing up because a vote, yeah, not realistic.

Imagine if you worked with Martha the Walmart Lady your entire life in Customer Service and then all of a sudden one day, she just pulled out a bomb and blew up Eisle 5?

Okay, thats my say.

[Frances]

'Admin picked antags are not the same' is an entirely subjective viewpoint and one I've not seen much evidence to support. Admins have selected antagonists that continue the boring 'explode everything' mantra that seems to be plaguing the server recently and I as a player have very little reason to trust the judgement of some person that an admin thinks is an alright antagonist; the notion that the people picked by admins must be good isn't infallible. Someone you may believe to be a good antagonist I may detest.

I'm not saying we have a 100% good selection rate, but I'd like to think we're able to do a significantly better job than random selection, and I actually have evidence for this. 1. We try to pick people who are generally appreciated, or cause the least commotion, among regular antags. People that basically roleplay in their own little antag world, not set up a bunch of bombs. 2. We ignore people who are kill-happy, or poor rpers, something random selection does not. 3. We favor new players, or players who have not antagged, but seem reasonable, thus giving them a better chance to show off. While not directly related to this argument, I think that's something worth mentioning. 4. We actually engage in communication with all the people we antag, something the automated system does not. Having a clear line of communication between antags and staff does reduce the amount of "I'm gonna blow errything up without asking permission" dramatically.

I would also like to see concrete examples of admin-selected antags who have done a terrible job, if not to provide your argument better basis, at least so we can talk to them and make sure incidents like this don't repeat themselves.

 

I don't find this to be a justifiable reason. People regularly try to transfer out of extended because they're incapable of roleplay without a revolver being shoved down their throat; I wouldn't blame the gamemode for the shortcomings of the player base. Rather, I would say that people wanting out of an extended round an hour in should deal with their predicament because they as players: Knew what they were getting into, knew that 'no randumb explosions' were going to happen, knew that there'd be no antagonists, and knew that it would just be 'chair rp' so they had plenty of reason not to join. I reiterate, going and playing another game is something people should do instead of staying and complaining which accomplishes nothing.

I sincerely believe you're failing at understand the desires of the community, and may be antagonizing it. We are not interested in catering to people who want "randumb explosions"; this is a heavy-rp server, after all. But a majority of people who support antags being added simply want /events/ to happen during their shift, because a regular workshift, if you're not chatting it up with your friends (which most people afaik don't do constantly), is pretty damn boring.

As for telling people to fuck off because they don't like the gamemode, that's a no. If we can agree that antags being added in this case was not majorly disruptive to chair-rpers (which should bring us to the other arguments), this one gets solved, because it seems like refusing to give half of the playerbase what they want so that the other half can chair-rp slightly better seems much more like pampering than what I've done.

 

This is the part where you're most incorrect. With no offense to you, you are far from an active admin and I only see you on near the end of the night if at all; thusly I feel that you appraisal of 'not changing anything drastically' is vastly incorrect. Had you been more active this past week you would have noticed the steady decline of both the quality of roleplay as well as players coupled with numerous nuclear, rev, and other mass-destruction rounds wherein the escalation of force is done entirely improperly and you have bombings twelve minutes into the round. This also ties in with a previous point; the people you believe to be good antagonists does not mean that they actually are, or have the potential to be. I realize that in auto traitor it picks from a hat and you're more than likely to get a bald idiot, but I would prefer that to preparing to join a round only to find that it has been entirely ruined by the addition of antagonists.

I have played several rounds every day for the past week, which several people on the staff can attest to. I won't try to address the reason why you think otherwise, though I can say I don't understand where it comes from. (You bring up the point again later in your post, so I'll address it more fully there.)

Furthermore, this feels irrelevant to me, because traitor is not nuke or rev. People have complained consistently about rev and nuke (and cult) for months, this is nothing new. They're not the same gamemode, and have very different dynamics at play.

 

Speaking personally, I don't care how non-desruptive an antagonist is. It may be slightly metagamey, but when it's extended I know I can sit down and take a break and relax from code work or something else that's been taking up my time to play a peaceful round - though lately we have more people trying to 'make things interesting' - without knowing that somewhere down the line there's going to be a bomb that blows up half the station or something equally stressful. When I vote extended, I don't want antagonists at all. I want an opportunity to roleplay without disruption - something that is increasingly becoming harder to do - and just have fun for once.

I'm not saying our choices will always have the advantage of making everyone happy. But when a majority of the server is being bored to death, these are other people who are not having fun, and I think their opinions should be taken into consideration too.

 

This is legitimate problem with the voting system and I feel it needs to be changed. However, it is automatic. This does not justify your conduct.

It would not, if nearly all of our votes weren't taken on 50% +1 situations. In this case, I had no qualms (and do not believe was at fault for) choosing the option which seemed the least impactful for the most people (the occasional, arguably low risk of a few people's chair-rp being broken up, for providing a modicum of entertainment to the rest of the station, as opposed to leaving a majority of people with nothing to do, with the round ending early.)

 

I will not apologize for words that I believe needed to be said.

There is a way to present things. This was not it, and you rescind the rights to your argument the moment you resort to calling people "pussy ass babies", when I can think of a million different ways you could have said things without needing to be offensive as fuck.

 

As I stated previously, you have been highly inactive on the server save for drop off periods at night and you haven't witnessed the glaring amounts of stupidity that have occurred within the past week or so; so much so that it has driven several people I would consider good roleplayers to take breaks from the server altogether, and admittedly it has also made me question whether or not I want to sit out and take a break. From my perspective, I simply saw you, an inactive administrator waltz in and with no justification or ground to stand on radically change the gamemode to please this crowd of people and therefore deprive me of a round that I wished to take part in; I still feel this to be the case now, which has lead to this complaint.

Then, examples. Because right now, we're stuck in an impasse, where you tell me: "Shit's been happening", and I retort, "I've seen no such shit." I have, however, been on the server, likely on different time slots, but as is, this is an incomplete argument (and don't bring up rp-rev or nuke rounds to justify getting rid of traitors, they are /not/ comparable).

 

In essence, the logical argument is that a gamemode was voted and during no other mode but extended will admins make a vote to entirely change how the round operates. I do not buy the justifications of 'admin picked antags are better' nor do I buy 'they won't disrupt anything' because it is simply your word up against what I have experienced on the server. Moreover, I feel that it is particularly unfair to entirely undo a legitimately voted round (whether or not an antag is overt is irrelevant; extended is a mode without antags, and you are adding them. You are changing the mode regardless of how you wish to justify it) to cater to people that are within their capacity to go SSD and play something else. Everyone else who despises nuke, changeling, traitor, rev, cult (especially cult, since your server seems to hate it very much) doesn't sit around and call votes early or bitch constantly in OOC; they play another game or do something else entirely. I fail to see any justification for not giving the people who like extended this same common courtesy but instead deprive them of it.

It seems to me like you are completely ignoring my initial explanation, which was that these kind of votes are not disruptive. If you believe they are a problem, it is your responsibility to bring up examples as to how they are, which I believe should be the main argument of your next reply.

 

It also disturbs me that you would ever use 'too peaceful' as a justification for anything. I was unaware that the baseline example for a round must be one including repeated murders and explosions, and thus by extension any round where these do not take place deserves to have antags added to it to 'add fun'. I feel that I don't need you to add fun, as I am perfectly capable of making it myself. And I also feel that adding antagonists is counter-productive especially for people - such as myself - who like to join a round and know what they're getting into. When I see extended I know I can take a break and just roleplay. Adding antagonists means that not only do I have to deal with your standard fare of dummies but now antagonists as well, and that isn't what I or others may have originally signed on to deal with. You are basically telling everyone who has been there from he start that wants extended that their vote was invalid and that antags are now being added, instead catering to the people who join extended knowing exactly what choice they made and what they've gotten into that complain and cry when nothing happens to distract them for ten seconds.

This is pretty much the only valid point I see in this; calling these kind of votes does change people's expectations of the round. However, once again, back to my main point: if more people join during the round (or if a majority of people who want action split their votes between different gamemodes, letting extended win), it seems perfectly reasonable to throw them a bone, coming to what I think is a very reasonable agreement between extended players and players who would rather play something other than extended, instead of simply letting people transfer out after a 2-hour round.

One last thing I will say, about "peacefulness", is that we're essentially a SS13 server with a heavy-RP twist, not a job simulator in the SS13 universe. People come on to have fun, and playing most of these jobs with nothing to do but talk to your coworkers (something which most people find they cannot do constantly) is a harrowing experience. For example, security guards. No one wants to be a security guard IRL because it's fun. You stand around for eight hours with (hopefully) nothing to do (if your job goes well), and people do it for the pay. But since our players don't get paid for playing roles, they play them because they expect them to result in fun events. And yes, fun can come from sitting around and discussing backstories with someone else. But since most players do not do that constantly, and we cannot expect them to, I think we have a duty to provide something to them. As such, the whole excuse that our server should be peaceful as an ideal is something I want to dismiss.

[Frances]

An extended round is supposed to represent a NORMAL workday.

Again, I addressed most of this in the post I just made, though I'll pull it aside here to point out why I can't agree with it.

An extended round is not supposed to represent a normal workday. Extended is supposed to be a gamemode with relatively little conflict (because yeah, there's always going to be the average troll, IC fight, etc etc), but as I said, we are not a job simulator. Having some time to talk with your friends is something perfectly reasonable to ask for (having a completely uneventful round of a four hour patrol with no incidents is not, and that would be closer to a normal workday). But you can't expect the rest of the world to stop completely so you can do your chair RP. We haven't added any vampires. We haven't added any mass bombers, or syndie ops, or revolutionaries. We've added a few antags, hopefully with mild, rp-oriented objectives, who we cannot guarantee, but are likely to not impact the round as a whole (again, examples of when extended/autotraitors turned to shit because of that, please), which feels like a much better situation than leaving half of the server to twiddle their thumbs until they get pissed at a gamemode that we do our best to make fun for everyone.

[Guest]

An extended round is supposed to represent a NORMAL workday.

Again, I addressed most of this in the post I just made, though I'll pull it aside here to point out why I can't agree with it.

An extended round is not supposed to represent a normal workday. Extended is supposed to be a gamemode with relatively little conflict (because yeah, there's always going to be the average troll, IC fight, etc etc), but as I said, we are not a job simulator. Having some time to talk with your friends is something perfectly reasonable to ask for (having a completely uneventful round of a four hour patrol with no incidents is not, and that would be closer to a normal workday). But you can't expect the rest of the world to stop completely so you can do your chair RP. We haven't added any vampires. We haven't added any mass bombers, or syndie ops, or revolutionaries. We've added a few antags, hopefully with mild, rp-oriented objectives, who we cannot guarantee, but are likely to not impact the round as a whole (again, examples of when extended/autotraitors turned to shit because of that, please), which feels like a much better situation than leaving half of the server to twiddle their thumbs until they get pissed at a gamemode that we do our best to make fun for everyone.

 

Oh, I have another point of order, there is a gamemode, called, oh, wait for it!!!! EXTEND- a-TRAITORmongus for a reason. If you plan on having antags in an extended round, people should vote for that gamemode. Also, Extended, you know, Extended RP, is called extended because its supposed to be relatively longer than the others, so 4 hours, of minor crimes and such.

[Frances]

Oh, I have another point of order, there is a gamemode, called, oh, wait for it!!!! EXTEND- a-TRAITORmongus for a reason. If you plan on having antags in an extended round, people should vote for that gamemode. Also, Extended, you know, Extended RP, is called extended because its supposed to be relatively longer than the others, so 4 hours, of minor crimes and such.

Again, not what ends up happening. Despite people picking it, last round's extended (the one this complaint originated from) ended up lasting around 2 hours, before people transferred out of boredom.

One argument people will certainly bring up is that at that point, we might as well not add any antags, and let people enjoy their two hours of peace before a transfer vote gets inevitably forced. This is something I'm trying to figure out, and if trying to spice up extended rounds to avoid immediate transfer does end up being a complete failure, I'll stop attempting to do so. But in my recent experience, there have been a few extended rounds that successfully turned into semi-traitor rounds, letting people who had begun chair RP pursue it as they wanted, while giving the rest of the crew something to do.

[Guest]

Oh, I have another point of order, there is a gamemode, called, oh, wait for it!!!! EXTEND- a-TRAITORmongus for a reason. If you plan on having antags in an extended round, people should vote for that gamemode. Also, Extended, you know, Extended RP, is called extended because its supposed to be relatively longer than the others, so 4 hours, of minor crimes and such.

Again, not what ends up happening. Despite people picking it, last round's extended (the one this complaint originated from) ended up lasting around 2 hours, before people transferred out of boredom.

One argument people will certainly bring up is that at that point, we might as well not add any antags, and let people enjoy their two hours of peace before a transfer vote gets inevitably forced. This is something I'm trying to figure out, and if trying to spice up extended rounds to avoid immediate transfer does end up being a complete failure, I'll stop attempting to do so. But in my recent experience, there have been a few extended rounds that successfully turned into semi-traitor rounds, letting people who had begun chair RP pursue it as they wanted, while giving the rest of the crew something to do.

 

I dont know what server it is, but it has something like a pseudo-antag, basically they are just given the job of causing trouble.

Instead of full on adding antags, you could like announce: Ahelp for Misbehaviour Role, and then select some, SM them :You've been working for too long, time to cause some trouble, or like, I want to break something, or beat someone up, or break in somewhere.

Basically, give this "Misbehaviours something that may keep the major departments occupied, without the Syndicate support and without all the killing.

[Frances]

I dont know what server it is, but it has something like a pseudo-antag, basically they are just given the job of causing trouble.

Instead of full on adding antags, you could like announce: Ahelp for Misbehaviour Role, and then select some, SM them :You've been working for too long, time to cause some trouble, or like, I want to break something, or beat someone up, or break in somewhere.

Basically, give this "Misbehaviours something that may keep the major departments occupied, without the Syndicate support and without all the killing.

Except that sounds more like inciting people to be major annoyances for others (remember that guy who keeps getting into petty fights over dumb things and needs to be brigged every 20 minutes), and this is exactly what we don't want.

[hivefleetchicken]

Well, Frances, I thought that you've already previously stated that you have the ability to select what players you want, so... What you've pointed out doesn't seem to be an actual issue.

Anything is better than handing out deadly weaponry to traitorous personnel, even if you can select who receives it.

And I think Xander's idea seems fine, because like you have already stated, you can't really make shitty antags on an extended round because you have control over who plays them.

[Frances]

Well, Frances, I thought that you've already previously stated that you have the ability to select what players you want, so... What you've pointed out doesn't seem to be an actual issue.

Anything is better than handing out deadly weaponry to traitorous personnel, even if you can select who receives it.

And I think Xander's idea seems fine, because like you have already stated, you can't really make shitty antags on an extended round because you have control over who plays them.

Except we don't want to restrict players or constrain them in what they want to do. If we tell them specifically to go be annoying or cause mischief, that's giving them restrictions that don't necessarily end in roleplay that's more interesting than traditional antagging. I'll be fair in admitting I don't always understand what antags want to do (a lot of them seem to sit around and not do anything), but I can think of a lot more interesting things to do than simple rabble-rousing.

(I'm not saying rabble-rousing is bad. People are invited to do it, if they wish. But I don't want to constrain them to it. Makes sense?)

[Gollee]

I am going to side with Frances here, as a person who prefers chair RP.

Antags generally still leave plenty of people free for chair RP, unless they are Nuke, or Rev.

In an extended round, if an admin calls a vote for antags, and over 50% of the server votes yes, then the server obviously wants antags. If it really that much of an issue to you, then you could try Ahelping the admins to ask the antag to avoid you if possible, if everyone who votes no does that, that still leaves half the server available.

And the moment you have to start throwing insults, your argument is lost, whether it is correct or not; you are ignoring the rules of proper conduct because you believe you are better than the person you are talking to; which is wrong.

[Witt]

Alright, I also need to agree with frances here.

1. She called a vote she did not just add antags, meaning that you could still vote no and keep your extended round.

2. I highly doubt that telling Johny McNub to go steal and RCD or some such interrupted your chair (e)rp.

On another note, the option to pick the round is infact broken and in need of an overhaul.

A. Certain players, will vote extended (or other rounds) and ghost and not play

B. If you have five players for example and one votes wizard, one votes nuke, one goes tator and two go extended. that is not a majority win, all it is is another reason for player 1-3 to go play somewhere else.

The only way that a round should win outright is if it has over fifty percent majority, otherwise, we either remove the losing mode from the option list and vote again or we assign it to Secret and let fate decide what type of round it will be.

[Frances]

I would like to formally apologize for my actions.

It appears standard procedure for these cases is to leave extended untouched on the first round, and offer to add antags once a second continuous extended vote goes through, something I was not aware of.

Having (now) been informed, I take full responsibility for this, and recognize my mistake here.

[Susan]

I am capable of understanding the reasoning for adding antagonists after consecutive extended rounds, and that, I will not contest.

Given that Frances was unaware of this, I am willing to accept her apology and consider the complaint concluded now that I am assured this will not occur again.

[Frances]

I am capable of understanding the reasoning for adding antagonists after consecutive extended rounds, and that, I will not contest.

Given that Frances was unaware of this, I am willing to accept her apology and consider the complaint concluded now that I am assured this will not occur again.

I will also add that I believe this is a point you should have mentioned at some point during your original post.

[Chaznoodles]

I don't see a problem with this. The majority wanted antagonistic roles added.

[Erik Tiber]

I don't see a problem with this. The majority wanted antagonistic roles added.

Same. It's something like a runoff election, or whatever.

[Frances]

Archiving this complaint as it's been inactive for a while.

Since it concerns myself, I'll add that you should feel free to reopen the topic (by starting a new thread) should you feel the need to.