Why are whitelists necessary?

[Failcakes]

 

So let's take a look at this list.

Notice something?

That's right! AI is not behind a whitelist.

AI is a role that could quite easily screw up a player's round, incredibly easily, even more so than any incompetent head. The same can be said for cyborgs.

They have the access, they have the capability, they have the power.

The station AI is the one the players go to when there's no head onboard, to help them deal with issues that otherwise only a head could solve, so, why is it that AI isn't behind a roadblock, while the department head is?

I can't tell you how many rounds I've played, where due to a lack of a chief engineer, I had to get the AI to open up secure storage for me, and this isn't just on Aurora, this is on every station.

I mean yeah, I get that there's supposedly a heavy roleplay element to this server, but, that quite simply only exists when the players allow it, and last night I saw someone dragging an unathi around the floors, with the unathi claiming they were a mop.

Granted, one of the catbeasts would have made a much better floor cleaning implement, but I DIGRESS, there's a level of silliness to this station, that just, quite simply, doesn't really demand the level of oversight that you have.

There's constantly, multiple secondary admins on, several fullmins, you have enough moderation that the stopgap of "We need to whitelist the important bits" isn't really necessary, because if someone's a bad head? Well, there's in character ways to go about dealing with them, internal affairs, security, faxing central to figure out if they're acting outside their boundaries, the whole nine yards.

As a community, I kind of feel like this server doesn't really need the whitelist system, at least for heads of staff.

Now, for the alien roles? Yeah, makes sense, you want people to have read the lore in place for those, and you want to make sure they're at least vaguely within the boundaries of such, I mean everyone knows that the unathi are from a proud race of janitor snails that live in lockers, yeah?

But seriously, you have enough moderation on staff to handle people being shits with their advanced roles. And the players can dunk the rest.

If you're going to have the keys to the castle open to John Q. Public and his merry band of misfits for the station AI, the thing that can release the singularity, shock every door, flood the station with plasma, bolt people into arrivals, herd the crew like cats into a tiny room and then suck all the air out, slowly, or just in general be an absolute round ruiner the moment someone even so much as thinks about touching their laws, it doesn't make sense to me that the job types that exist to have the access and the authority to be the counter to that are restricted.

[Guest]

Title changed to reflect the suggestion

[Eliot Clef]

-snip

AI is a role that could quite easily screw up a player's round, incredibly easily, even more so than any incompetent head. The same can be said for cyborgs.

They have the access, they have the capability, they have the power.

-snip-

 

 

The answer for why this is that people play AI and Cyborg much more rarely than they do, or WOULD do, everything else on that list. The people who know how to be truly DANGEROUS with AI and Cyborg are even less likely to be problem players than random chucklefucks who might decide to be a godawful Head of Security.

AI is generally, for whatever reason, regarded as an extremely difficult role even by random newmans, and I just don't see bad ones very often. I see poorly-behaved Heads of Security WITH the whitelist more than I see actual bad AIs or Cyborgs, and that's across my total time with Aurora, not just this last couple of weeks.

AI is a role that is often difficult to fill, and usually is not abused.

Cyborg is somewhat less difficult, not too difficult to fill, and also usually is not abused.

When they ARE abused, I see synth-bans handed out with a click of the fingers.

"Normal" player mobs misbehaving? I see that a lot, a LOT more often. I see members of Security join who decide they don't like the Head of Security telling them they can't break into the bar and serve drinks after a high-tension situation. And then, decide to beat said Head of Security to death along with the Captain and another Officer.

I see them failing to apprehend a single guy because they keep rushing him single file in a narrow corridor.

I see them cuffing up a suspected antag, taking him into the crime lab, shooting him, and beating him to death with a crowbar.

For whatever reason, this kind of incompetence and rule-breaking simply doesn't happen as often with AI/Borgs, when it does it is resolved far more rapidly, and for that reason alone it makes complete sense to whitelist "regular" player roles, and not whitelist AI/Borgs.

[Failcakes]

Title changed to reflect the suggestion

That's not the suggestion at all though.

[Guest]

Please state your suggestion on one line and I'll edit the title.

The original title was a general statement about your thoughts on the current whitelisted roles.

[Failcakes]

Please state your suggestion on one line and I'll edit the title.

The original title was a general statement about your thoughts on the current whitelisted roles.

"Why are whitelists necessary?"

[Frances]

"Why are whitelists necessary?"

Here's my personal take on it. Might just be ramblings, take it however you will.

Whitelists allow staff a greater control over what goes on in each department.

I'm sure you all have a few players/characters you find sub-par on the server (whoever they might be). Whether they be incompetent, belligerent, or simply seem to lack respect for roleplay as a whole. (And I'm not talking about characters we love to hate, I'm talking about those people dislike OOCly.)

A lot of these characters aren't terrible enough to warrant OOC punishment. Yes, some players have gotten in trouble, some are getting talked to, but at the bottom of the line, banning/jobbanning a lot of these people would cause ethical debates over what constitutes playing/roleplaying properly, and tbh make us way too strict of a community.

However, most of the actions people dislike from these players/characters are not actions that would fly as a head of staff. Thus, heads of staff can remain relatively sane and reasonable characters, whose jobs are to enforce standards (both IC and OOC ones) among their departments.

And yes, you could just say, "just jobban the people who are terrible heads", but the process of establishing an appropriate response/punishment for a problematic player who isn't an outright griefer can often be a complex and lengthy one. There would be more bad heads if heads weren't whitelisted, and it would be difficult to control/deal with them all. Imo, it's easier to ensure players are good for these positions than to ensure they aren't bad.

[Saintsbury]

Ehem, we /do/ need this as stated by Eliot Chief.

And I see another point in the whitelist system:

• There are several questions you have to answer in a satisfactory way to get your application approved. /IF/ you fuck up too often and get off the whitelist, you'll 99% now why and if not then someone fucked up evaluating your application.
• If it's free for all and get jobbanned you'll hear: Eh, I didn't know, I'll do better, I'll read the rules, etc.
• And if you let yourself look like an angel but sin reality you're just a dick to others, users have a chance to state their opinion.

 

Overall the whitelist system is much more efficient because users have to proof that they are good enough.

Free for all means, admins have to ban for every chucklefuck /and/ have to discuss /and/ have to deal with unban requests

tl;dr : If it's either whitelist AI or undo all whitelists, I'm for option Nr.1

BUTT, never fix a running system. IT rule number one.

//Edit my final argument is the same one as Frances' (Brofist) what clearly shows why in perticular the community needs and wants the whitelist

[jackfractal]

For whatever reason, this kind of incompetence and rule-breaking simply doesn't happen as often with AI/Borgs, when it does it is resolved far more rapidly, and for that reason alone it makes complete sense to whitelist "regular" player roles, and not whitelist AI/Borgs.

 

As someone who mains synthetics, I have an idea of why this might be the case.

Synthetics have laws.

When you agree to play as them, you're already agreeing to limitations on your behavior. The laws are (fairly) simple, both for the player and for the admins. There isn't a lot of wiggle room on this server.

With Azimov laws, things are a lot hazier, but Aurora's laws are designed to limit ambiguity. When you break them, it's pretty obvious.

Limitations on your behavior are something that rule-breakers, by definition, don't accept. This makes playing synthetics pretty unattractive.

[Carver]

Limitations on your behavior are something that rule-breakers, by definition, don't accept. This makes playing synthetics pretty unattractive.

I imagine they don't care either way, it's just that synthetics are generally round-start roles and the rounds go on so long that the average Griffon McShitlorde can't be assed to wait 2-4 hours to get his hands on them.

[Dea Tacita]

To be honest, as someone who handled the applications. They're not that hard to get, staff will give you feedback if denied anyway, you fix the issue and you'll likely get accepted. So it's not like it's a massive barrier to RP, and while all heads of staff aren't perfect, from experience I can say we have better staff on average with this system than we would without it

[jackfractal]

Limitations on your behavior are something that rule-breakers, by definition, don't accept. This makes playing synthetics pretty unattractive.

I imagine they don't care either way, it's just that synthetics are generally round-start roles and the rounds go on so long that the average Griffon McShitlorde can't be assed to wait 2-4 hours to get his hands on them.

 

That is also a very good point.

[Skull132]

A whitelist application is, in essence, a contract. "I will agree to fulfill staff's vision of being a head of staff to the best of my abilities." And it's a contract that we can very easily track, by the virtue of the whitelist.txt and forum archives. It allows us very easy and very good control over that specific role-set.

If we were to lose the contract, then we would have a lot more clashes between wouldbe heads of staff and administration. We would also have a lot more calls about command staff roleplay. Which has and will always be a curious topic, but losing the contract means that we lose something that, effectively, puts you in your place (I wish there was a better way to say it, but there really isn't). The process by which you attain an item inevitably changes your view on it. And while more difficulty doesn't necessarily mean more valuable, the whitelist process probably, hopefully has some positive impact on the players.

As for the AI not being whitelisted?

• Role has amazingly clear limitations that heads of staff do not
• Role is accessible only at a very specific time, once per round
  
• Grief/Chucklefucking as said role is very easy to spot (as opposed to with a head of staff, where you can attempt to argue for days about being a dick roleplay)
  
• Ultimately, role has less strict roleplay requirements that a head of staff, once the laws are acknowledged and followed

[Jakers457]

I'm probably repeating the same point as everyone else.

But it's to stop random chucklefucks joining a round and choosing a role that has access to weapons or something just as destructive. The heads are what the departments depend on at times, and we don't need a bald illiterate dismantling the singularity containment field.

Besides the heads role is quite demanding, because you're actually expected to do shit opposed to other servers where you have as much responsibility as a monkey shitting in his play pen. With the AI and Borgs? They can get carded/remotely shut down and are much more easier to deal with.

[Carver]

-- we don't need a bald illiterate dismantling the singularity containment field.

But literally any Engineer can do that, regardless of CE status or not.

[Guest]

-- we don't need a bald illiterate dismantling the singularity containment field.

But literally any Engineer can do that, regardless of CE status or not.

 

Yes but a station engineer would have no excuse for it. A Chief Engineer can have an excuse for it as its their department and their equipment.

Those of you that have head whitelists may also wish to be reminded that we have a separate subforum for those with head whitelists, a subcommunity, if you will. In the subforum, discussions relating certain issues regarding head of staff play gets brought up, and decisions are often made accordingly dependent on the consensus.

If we did not have head whitelists, we would not have a community of heads that communicated with each other regarding these issues. People would just do fuck-all and never care about the consequences of their actions, and there would never be organization regarding what should or shouldn't be done given X Y or Z situations.

Is it a super cool kids club? Possibly, but it has a purpose. It is to better facilitate a more productive environment in which heads of staff aren't at each others throats every ten in-game minutes because those people are crossing lines and spitting on procedure, as well as undermining the entire purpose of the chain of command and how departments operate.

Unlike most other roles that rarely have an impact on the rest of the round, there is no acceptable room for abuse in a command staff role.

[Jamini]

Ultimately they are not necessary. Other servers get by just fine without a head of staff whitelist, some even quite successfully. That said, they do serve a purpose.

Whitelists serve to increase player quality in a specific role at the expense of population. This means the role will be done poorly rarely, but it will also be filled far less. A balancing act that is quite visible some times (The number of rounds I have seen with no command all shift is quite staggering).

[Rusty Shackleford]

Ultimately they are not necessary. Other servers get by just fine without a head of staff whitelist, some even quite successfully.

 

Yeah, but we're not trying to be Goon here.

Whitelists are fine the way they are. They're relatively easy to get, and so long as you don't screw up too badly/repeatedly, you won't have it taken away from you willy-nilly.

Since we're a heavy roleplay server, the whitelists are necessary to vet the players and characters allowed to be in those roles.

[Jamini]

Ultimately they are not necessary. Other servers get by just fine without a head of staff whitelist, some even quite successfully.

 

Yeah, but we're not trying to be Goon here.

Whitelists are fine the way they are. They're relatively easy to get, and so long as you don't screw up too badly/repeatedly, you won't have it taken away from you willy-nilly.

Since we're a heavy roleplay server, the whitelists are necessary to vet the players and characters allowed to be in those roles.

 

I've seen plenty of high RP servers (three, to memory) that get by just fine without a head of staff whitelist.

It's not necessary at all. It's simply a choice, with both advantages and disadvantages.

[Guest]

Were you on the staff team of any of these servers? Do you know how much more we would have to act because of it as Skull said.

[Jamini]

Were you on the staff team of any of these servers? Do you know how much more we would have to act because of it as Skull said.

 

One, yes (Unity). We eventually removed whitelists for command and security due to the difficulties of keeping command filled.

Again, it's a choice Aurora made. I'm not judging if it's a good or bad choice. I'm simply stating whitelists are not completely necessary for a heavy roleplay server. I am not saying the wrong choice was made here.

 

Ultimately they are not necessary. Other servers get by just fine without a head of staff whitelist, some even quite successfully. That said, they do serve a purpose.

 

I stated some of the advantages (higher quality players in command. A subsection on the forums for command players to discuss and align their policies)

I stated some of the disadvantages(fewer heads overall, some elitism, sometimes the station ends up utterly crippled due to inability to call ERT, code red, or reassign people)

I don't say either is better than the other. I'm simply stating it's not a necessity. Please do not blow what I said out of proportion.

[TMOC]

To be honest, at the minimum you guys should at least remove some of the requirements on the head of staff applications. I mean seriously, two paragraph minimum for a backstory? I've been roleplaying and writing ever since Diablo 2 came out, EVEN I struggled with that process of creating a back story. It's a really big ask and it's not as easy as you might think when you have to create a back story as well as canon to a universe, with essentially no storyline.

If you made it less daunting for people to apply, maybe more people WOULD apply. I actually avoided applying for quite a while simply because it was asking me to put down more then two paragraphs about a character, that I really don't know about - in a universe, that has no solid lore to follow. I really have to agree with people here, I get really - really sick of a lack of command staff and I get even more sick of getting on security every day to find no HoS(The Captain essentially is the HoS every shift.). I also very rarely see a CMO and I think RD's are about as common as cortical borers.