Disallow ghosts or those of the observer or in-lobby mob type from being able to vote for crew transfer

[Faris]

I actually quite like this new change, I've always felt that as an observer I should not really decide whether a round should end or not.

[SomeoneOutTher3]

This reminds me of the whole "NO VOTE INFLUENCE11111111111111" bullshit that we had last year. What a vote does is put the option of transfer on the table for the rest of the playerbase to judge, and the new voting system should be reverted soon.

And why do you think that?

 

The notion that ghosts that are observing the round should not be capable of starting a CT vote seems entirely arbitrary,just like the whole "Vote influencing" BS we had last year. Whenever a player starts a CT vote, he/she is presenting that option for others to judge. Since we have a 2/3rds majority rule encoded in the game mechanics, one single vote is not likely to sway the verdict of the vote. If a vote started by a ghost actually results in a CT, that means that the majority of people playing have decided that it is best for the round to end. The choice,ultimately, lies with the people playing or those that have played. Now, onto why I think that ghosts themselves should be able to vote or start votes,observer or not: Players observing the current round can, unless they toggle it in their preferences, see all of the dialogue that is going on at the time, and see anything that is currently happening. Thus, the ghosts of those who died in the game and those observing the round can, IMHO, make a better judgement about whether or not a round should end, as they have more information about the round at any given time (From being able to see anywhere they wish and seeing all dialogue that is currently happening) and serve as a (sorta) objective third party. Now, as for ghosts that joined a minute or so ago, those ghosts starting a CT vote will still only have 1 vote to cast for or against a reboot, and all it does is leave to option to initiate CT to the people currently playing or (Formerly) those ghosts that are observing and have more information about the round, AKA people that know more about the round. Again, that comes down to other people ultimately deciding whether or not to initiate CT. One vote by a ghost that booted up BYOND seconds ago is unlikely to influence the vote in any significant way, since the vote requires a 2/3 majority for CT to end the round. Not allowing ghosts to start CT votes,regardless of the time they have played for, would remove the ability of observers-most of which have more information about a round than any given character- to make a, IMHO, informed judgement regarding CT. If a ghost starts a CT vote after joining seconds ago,he/she is very unlikely to affect the round in any way unless others think that the round should end or continue. This is reminiscent of the "Vote influence" drama that we had last year: Both systems were implemented for arbitrary reasons under the pretense of preventing abuse. Ultimately, everyone still had his/her own opinion regarding the issue and could voice it in votes, and one person was not going to change it in any way.

[Scheveningen]

Observers have no say being able to participate in CT votes to end the round. This also extends to calling the vote in the first place because it adds peer pressure that someone wants to prematurely end the round for whatever reason. Especially when someone does this on deadhour extended by joining as a mouse, calling for a vote, ghosting again, and then bragging in deadchat about having found a loophole.

[SomeoneOutTher3]

Observers have no say being able to participate in CT votes to end the round.

And in this thread,I am saying why I think that should not be the case.

This also extends to calling the vote in the first place because it adds peer pressure that someone wants to prematurely end the round for whatever reason.

Sounds like the exact same pretense under which the "No vote influencing11111" rule was put into place last year (it did get removed, but still....). By your logic, non-ghosts calling CT votes also add peer pressure. If you took time to read what I wrote (Seemingly,you didn't), you would see that I am saying that ghosts should be able to call and vote for CT because they generally have the most information about the round, more so than any given character, even the AI.

Especially when someone does this on deadhour extended by joining as a mouse, calling for a vote, ghosting again, and then bragging in deadchat about having found a loophole.

Discussion about this is more suitable for the other thread. Nice use of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well .

[Scheveningen]

It is not "poisoning the well" to point out you have a specific stake and bias in maintaining the position you have because you were recently warned for intentionally seeking to exploit unintentional features in order to call a vote as an observer. It is very simple, you objectively broke very objective rules and you're upset about it because it doesn't fit your subjective viewpoint on how the rule should be enforced.

But I never attempted to discredit your character. I said very simply, you broke a rule recently on the subject, and there is a conflict of interest in relation to you entering this discussion because you perhaps feel you're a victim due to my impression that you were willfully crossing the line and exploiting vote mechanics. Did it not cross your mind that perhaps joining as a mouse within the first few minutes of logging on, calling a vote, ghosting and then going on to brag about you being so clever to work around a rather simple security measure based off of a very simple idea that was realized recently. I didn't really understand what it was worth bragging about, really.

Saying smart-ass things sometimes can be cute because it's for the sake of banter, but carrying out a smart-ass action followed by a one-liner shockingly doesn't win you any points in the cool guy department. Does the opposite effect, actually.

We trust players to not go out of their way to abuse features. If they do, they're probably going to get spoken to and the value of trusting a specific individual to carry out actions in good faith is going to end up degrading steadily.

The only thing I am discrediting is whether your stake, in particular from practically anyone else who might have an opinion on this subject, is completely honest and not without its own malicious intent to countermand staff rulings on the server. You only started opposing this when you got warned over it, in case you're missing my point here.

[SomeoneOutTher3]

It is not "poisoning the well" to point out you have a specific stake and bias in maintaining the position you have because you were recently warned for intentionally seeking to exploit unintentional features in order to call a vote as an observer. It is very simple, you objectively broke very objective rules and you're upset about it because it doesn't fit your subjective viewpoint on how the rule should be enforced.

And is that relevant regarding the validity of the argument? I will gladly change my view regarding this if my argument is addressed instead of us trading blows back and forth.

 

Saying smart-ass things sometimes can be cute because it's for the sake of banter, but carrying out a smart-ass action followed by a one-liner shockingly doesn't win you any points in the cool guy department. Does the opposite effect, actually.

And this relates to the issue of whether or not the current voting system that got implemented a while ago should be reverted how,exactly?

This thread is getting derailed, as such,I would like to refer 1138 to my previous post so that this can be discussed without talking about things other than those within this thread.

The notion that ghosts that are observing the round should not be capable of starting a CT vote seems entirely arbitrary,just like the whole "Vote influencing" BS we had last year. Whenever a player starts a CT vote, he/she is presenting that option for others to judge. Since we have a 2/3rds majority rule encoded in the game mechanics, one single vote is not likely to sway the verdict of the vote. If a vote started by a ghost actually results in a CT, that means that the majority of people playing have decided that it is best for the round to end. The choice,ultimately, lies with the people playing or those that have played. Now, onto why I think that ghosts themselves should be able to vote or start votes,observer or not: Players observing the current round can, unless they toggle it in their preferences, see all of the dialogue that is going on at the time, and see anything that is currently happening. Thus, the ghosts of those who died in the game and those observing the round can, IMHO, make a better judgement about whether or not a round should end, as they have more information about the round at any given time (From being able to see anywhere they wish and seeing all dialogue that is currently happening) and serve as a (sorta) objective third party. Now, as for ghosts that joined a minute or so ago, those ghosts starting a CT vote will still only have 1 vote to cast for or against a reboot, and all it does is leave to option to initiate CT to the people currently playing or (Formerly) those ghosts that are observing and have more information about the round, AKA people that know more about the round. Again, that comes down to other people ultimately deciding whether or not to initiate CT. One vote by a ghost that booted up BYOND seconds ago is unlikely to influence the vote in any significant way, since the vote requires a 2/3 majority for CT to end the round. Not allowing ghosts to start CT votes,regardless of the time they have played for, would remove the ability of observers-most of which have more information about a round than any given character- to make a, IMHO, informed judgement regarding CT. If a ghost starts a CT vote after joining seconds ago,he/she is very unlikely to affect the round in any way unless others think that the round should end or continue. This is reminiscent of the "Vote influence" drama that we had last year: Both systems were implemented for arbitrary reasons under the pretense of preventing abuse. Ultimately, everyone still had his/her own opinion regarding the issue and could voice it in votes, and one person was not going to change it in any way.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

This is by far one of the worst features I've seen implemented, because it hosts a plethora of problems.

I should not be considered invalid to the round because I just died, or because I've come in as an observer. I should not have to wait 10 minutes to spawn back in just to propose a vote. I was involved in the round, I was a part of it, and I should be able to vote.

You should not shoehorn and disenfranchise players on something so technical just to try and squeeze out a few more minutes. This is a multiplayer game; if there are a large number of people observing as ghosts who aren't involved in the round who vote for a transfer it means they probably want to become involved in the round and play, so they're ending this one.

Forcing a round to continue when over 2/3 want it to end, just because these 2/3 are not physical living mobs, is incredibly harmful to the long term health and playability of the server. Stripping our ability to call a CT is one thing, outright stripping our entire voice in the round is another thing entirely. My own play time has plummeted because I prefer to join the station before the 1 hour mark because that's when most storylines have kicked in. I am also very frustrated about being stripped of my ability to call a CT. This frustration can and will be shared by more and more observers. Over 2/3 of the players want a CT, and this is coming off like a petty means to force them to watch your current roleplay, irregardless of how boring it is. We do not all have time to play 4 hour rounds, nor do we all want to join in 3 hours into one.

Finally, this is incredibly frustrating and will continue to frustrate players. It is apparently against the rules to trigger a vote as a mouse or drone, which means that these mobs are not considered a part of the round. This has lead to problems already and it will just lead to more problems down the line. We will need to throw in so many more rules.

1) Is spawning into a role, calling a CT, then immediately going cryo a punishable offense? Why?

2) Iss playing the round, calling a CT, failing, then going cryo a punishable offense? Why?

3) Is a player joining then immediately ghosting to vote a punishable offense? Why?

Are all of these problems really, genuinely worth it? They're not. We are shoehorning in an incredibly obtuse new mechanic and it has immense baggage in terms of administration and mechanics.

Imagine what this is in essence, to everyone else. Imagine we hardcode rounds to last 5 hours with an automatic CT vote every hour after that, but only a small group of people have the privilege of voting.

[Ron]

in response to jackboot, I'd just like to put out there that if you die or are in the round the cyro with the ghost verb you can vote still. It's just lobby sitters or ppl or click the observe button instead of joining that can't. I'm kind of indifferent to this, but mostly not in favor of this. I like being able to vote as an observer because if I want the round to end, I'm a player, I have a right to vote and have a say in whether it should end or not.

[ariever]

Seems good and reasonable to me.

[Scheveningen]

I should not be considered invalid to the round because I just died, or because I've come in as an observer. I should not have to wait 10 minutes to spawn back in just to propose a vote. I was involved in the round, I was a part of it, and I should be able to vote.

 

As it stands, those who died in the round after joining as any job may participate in and start votes.

 

You should not shoehorn and disenfranchise players on something so technical just to try and squeeze out a few more minutes. This is a multiplayer game; if there are a large number of people observing as ghosts who aren't involved in the round who vote for a transfer it means they probably want to become involved in the round and play, so they're ending this one.

 

They can wait their turn. The game centers around the people actually playing, not the ones who aren't playing.

 

Forcing a round to continue when over 2/3 want it to end, just because these 2/3 are not physical living mobs, is incredibly harmful to the long term health and playability of the server. Stripping our ability to call a CT is one thing, outright stripping our entire voice in the round is another thing entirely. My own play time has plummeted because I prefer to join the station before the 1 hour mark because that's when most storylines have kicked in. I am also very frustrated about being stripped of my ability to call a CT. This frustration can and will be shared by more and more observers. Over 2/3 of the players want a CT, and this is coming off like a petty means to force them to watch your current roleplay, irregardless of how boring it is. We do not all have time to play 4 hour rounds, nor do we all want to join in 3 hours into one.

 

How is it harmful to the "long term health and playability", exactly?

No one is forcing you to play on the server. If you wish to quit at any given time you can simply close the window to the game and come back later when the serverstatus bot has updated with the round ending.

I honestly find your frustration at a very simple OOC mechanic absurd and this is not what I expected the next Aurora Moral Forum Outrage to be about.

 

1) Is spawning into a role, calling a CT, then immediately going cryo a punishable offense? Why?

2) Iss playing the round, calling a CT, failing, then going cryo a punishable offense? Why?

3) Is a player joining then immediately ghosting to vote a punishable offense? Why?

 

Yes, all for the same answer. They're willfully seeking ways to abuse a system rather than use it properly as it is intended. It is wrong. There has only been one instance so far of someone getting caught for abusing it. They were severely warned and told to cut it out, especially considering breaking the rules is not a good way to protest in-game features.

 

Are all of these problems really, genuinely worth it? They're not. We are shoehorning in an incredibly obtuse new mechanic and it has immense baggage in terms of administration and mechanics.

 

We kind of signed up to deal with situations like this. Not explicitly, but it comes with the job, and this is rarely something that admins complain about openly because the entire job is focused around dealing with people causing problems. So far it's been working fine and the only two openly complaining about the system in-place is yourself and someone who recently got a disciplinary measure for intentionally seeking to break the intended use of the voting mechanic.

Like I said. Of all of the things one can have a moral outrage about I'm really surprised this is one of them.

 

Imagine what this is in essence, to everyone else. Imagine we hardcode rounds to last 5 hours with an automatic CT vote every hour after that, but only a small group of people have the privilege of voting.

 

Over-exaggeration and false equivalency.

Round durations have probably increased on average by about a half hour depending if the round has interest and not many over the 2/3rds margin want to leave.

[Dreviore]

I can understand why people are voting for a crew transfer after dying or late joining.

Personally if I see a rounds been going on for more than 30 minutes, and the Captains role is filled I see no reason for me to latejoin.

It's hard to join in RP once the rounds already been established, and having to wait upwards to two hours for a new round makes me not want to join the next round because I'm not gonna sit there for the next two hours unless I'm actively being engaged as CCIA.

Mind you I've never called an actual CT, but this is just my opinion on the matter.

Edited March 27, 2017 by Guest

[Arrow768]

I quite like the new voting restrictions.

[Haveatya]

I think if you played then you can vote. If half the station dies in a plasma firestorm but mining is enjoying their RP on the asteroid, they could just keep playing. If you are just observing then you shouldn't vote, I agree with that.

[whiterabit]

I don't see an issue with the new system, rounds seem to be somewhat extended but it's nothing severe. People actually in the round are enjoying it and want an extra hour? That seems to be about as long as most active rounds will get out of it anyway and all the better for them, having the round dictated by people who aren't involved is silly.

 

Personally if I see a rounds been going on for more than 30 minutes, and the Captains role is filled I see no reason for me to latejoin.

 

30 minutes is hardly enough time for the round to get established, most antags don't even fully start kicking off until the first hour mark. Most departmental work will only even be to its basic level at this point so job wise there should still be plenty.

Worst case if the round is too far in for someone, there's a game_status channel for a reason. It'll notify you on round restarts so long as you're subscribed. You don't have to sit in as a ghost the entire time waiting which is something it seems like people are forgetting.

[Dreviore]

I don't see an issue with the new system, rounds seem to be somewhat extended but it's nothing severe. People actually in the round are enjoying it and want an extra hour? That seems to be about as long as most active rounds will get out of it anyway and all the better for them, having the round dictated by people who aren't involved is silly.

 

Personally if I see a rounds been going on for more than 30 minutes, and the Captains role is filled I see no reason for me to latejoin.

 

30 minutes is hardly enough time for the round to get established, most antags don't even fully start kicking off until the first hour mark. Most departmental work will only even be to its basic level at this point so job wise there should still be plenty.

Worst case if the round is too far in for someone, there's a game_status channel for a reason. It'll notify you on round restarts so long as you're subscribed. You don't have to sit in as a ghost the entire time waiting which is something it seems like people are forgetting.

 

I find the pecking order of each department is determined within the first hour.

After that late arrivals are not treated the same as if they started with the round.

[whiterabit]

I don't see an issue with the new system, rounds seem to be somewhat extended but it's nothing severe. People actually in the round are enjoying it and want an extra hour? That seems to be about as long as most active rounds will get out of it anyway and all the better for them, having the round dictated by people who aren't involved is silly.

 

Personally if I see a rounds been going on for more than 30 minutes, and the Captains role is filled I see no reason for me to latejoin.

 

30 minutes is hardly enough time for the round to get established, most antags don't even fully start kicking off until the first hour mark. Most departmental work will only even be to its basic level at this point so job wise there should still be plenty.

Worst case if the round is too far in for someone, there's a game_status channel for a reason. It'll notify you on round restarts so long as you're subscribed. You don't have to sit in as a ghost the entire time waiting which is something it seems like people are forgetting.

 

I find the pecking order of each department is determined within the first hour.

After that late arrivals are not treated the same as if they started with the round.

 

Maybe it depends on the department but I've never noticed that myself. Though I mainly stick to engi, sec and occasionally cargo with jewcat.

[Scheveningen]

Sounds more like a personal problem of not being able to adjust in being a latejoining crewmember rather than everyone else's fault in having roundstart joining. Wishful thinking.

[SomeoneOutTher3]

And my opening argument for why the system should be reverted has been neatly let slide and ignored, wew.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Delta you are being very patronizing and sidelining our actual arguments. Just because we disagree with you doesn't mean you can belittle us. "I disagree" is not a moral panic.

This change has done nothing but add an average of 30 minutes to rounds while stripping voting privileges from players for an arbitrary reason. If 2/3 of people online want the round to end then it should end. That is why we added the 2/3 majority requirement for CT. Many rounds go on longer than 2 hours even when 50% of the players online want a CT. You are just slowly eroding this further and further. Now only 2/3 of playing characters can vote. In a few months, will we need a whitelist to vote? We are continuously eroding voting privileges for the sake of arbitrarily increasing round length.

[Scheveningen]

It's a slippery slope to assume player rights relating to voting are suddenly going to be steadily stripped one-by-one off of your dislike of how the distinction of "2/3rds of server pop actually playing" versus "2/3rds of the entire server pop including observers" is being divided so that only the former case will allow folks to vote on whether they think the round is worth prolonging.

This is probably only the second adjustment made to the voting system for awhile. This is not indicative of any malevolent-intentioned pattern you're harping on about.

 

In a few months, will we need a whitelist to vote? We are continuously eroding voting privileges for the sake of arbitrarily increasing round length.

 

You and SOT are the only ones claiming this is an infringement on player rights. If anyone is led to believe this is part of a grand admin conspiracy they also would've said so by now, so you're sort of alone in this regard. Relax. It is not as big of a deal as you are making it out to be.

Besides, you had every chance prior to complain about the 2/3rds requirement decision when the thread so long ago was put up. If you said anything then it was overwhelmingly drowned out because people wanted a chance for longer rounds. Given a shift to more action-centric playstyles folks decided to key up at 2 hours every round if nothing happens. Especially prevalent with observers or anyone with attention-deficit issues.

[SomeoneOutTher3]

You and SOT are the only ones claiming this is an infringement on player rights. If anyone is led to believe this is part of a grand admin conspiracy they also would've said so by now, so you're sort of alone in this regard.

 

Yes, now please stop derailing the thread. We are not claiming that the admins are conspiring against the playerbase.

[LordFowl]

Preventing observers from voting is not the same as the "no vote influencing" mandate of a year ago. While the latter is a dubious claim the former is proven - a large portion of players online at any time are observers, lobby-sitters and etc,. If we really want to discuss the idea of ""player rights"" we need to define a player. Is it an observer, or someone in the round?

I say it's actual players. We design the game to service participants, not lobbysitters. If you are unable to play the game at all because your role is occupied, then that is a seperate issue.

[Kaed]

I don't really agree with this change. Sure, you're increasing the length of rounds, but they were already increased before when you added the 2/3 majority vote mechanic was introduced, like Jackboot says. I don't really agree with his slippery slope argument, but I do want to say something about this idea that rounds should be lengthened as much as possible.

The absolute minimum that a round can take is roughly 2 hours and 20 minutes, including the shuttle transfer time before round end. This means that in a theoretical day where everyone calls the shuttle at 2 hours, you would get around 10 rounds in that entire day. But you almost never have rounds that last only the absolute minimum. Most rounds actually seem to have an average of 3 hours, from what I can see. That cuts down the number of games that can be played down to less than 8, and while I'm sure that's a fine thing, if you keep doing things to increase the length of the round, there's going to be a lot less to actually DO in your server.

Regardless of how many people talk about how extended is the best round type, a lot of people come here to play rounds with antagonists. They want to BE antagonists, or they want to BEAT them. The roleplay is there to make things more interesting than running around shooting everyone constantly, but the roleplay should really facilitate the gameplay, not the roleplay be the entire point why people keep the round going. Even in extended rounds, it's the activities you can do in your position and the occasional conflict that happens that drives people to want to stay in the round - everyone doesn't just sit around and talk all day.

This is why encouraging long rounds is a bad thing. The longer a round goes on, the less there is to do. Almost every antagonist is picked at round start, and except for a few types, more are not really added. With antagonist rounds the flow of the round escalates gradually, then comes to a head - the antagonists die, or they win, or the station is destroyed, or something happens. In extended rounds, people do their job stuff, but eventually, chemists run out of medicines to make, science finishes all the research, engineering has finished remodeling the station, and so on.

As such, I can understand why someone might feel that the people who did all these things should be the only ones who make determinations on whether the round keeps going or not. But I think that's a fairly selfish mindset to take. There is only so much time in the day to play this very time-sinky game, and if all the people on the server have done all the things are are now just sitting around roleplaying with each other, cutting out the new people who didn't join the round earlier is just a form of exclusionism.

Don't get me wrong, long rounds can and should happen, and it's nice for them to happen once and a while. But they should occur because the round itself is interesting enough that everyone playing has decided by consensus it should keep going and the amount of approval by people in the round is significantly exceeding the people who just want to start their own new adventure. It should be a rare, special occasion, not something you encourage by trying to make the previously joined in-game players basically become a clique and everyone else who just came in can fuck right off.

[Chada1]

I don't really agree with this change. Sure, you're increasing the length of rounds, but they were already increased before when you added the 2/3 majority vote mechanic was introduced, like Jackboot says. I don't really agree with his slippery slope argument, but I do want to say something about this idea that rounds should be lengthened as much as possible.

The absolute minimum that a round can take is roughly 2 hours and 20 minutes, including the shuttle transfer time before round end. This means that in a theoretical day where everyone calls the shuttle at 2 hours, you would get around 10 rounds in that entire day. But you almost never have rounds that last only the absolute minimum. Most rounds actually seem to have an average of 3 hours, from what I can see. That cuts down the number of games that can be played down to less than 8, and while I'm sure that's a fine thing, if you keep doing things to increase the length of the round, there's going to be a lot less to actually DO in your server.

Regardless of how many people talk about how extended is the best round type, a lot of people come here to play rounds with antagonists. They want to BE antagonists, or they want to BEAT them. The roleplay is there to make things more interesting than running around shooting everyone constantly, but the roleplay should really facilitate the gameplay, not the roleplay be the entire point why people keep the round going. Even in extended rounds, it's the activities you can do in your position and the occasional conflict that happens that drives people to want to stay in the round - everyone doesn't just sit around and talk all day.

This is why encouraging long rounds is a bad thing. The longer a round goes on, the less there is to do. Almost every antagonist is picked at round start, and except for a few types, more are not really added. With antagonist rounds the flow of the round escalates gradually, then comes to a head - the antagonists die, or they win, or the station is destroyed, or something happens. In extended rounds, people do their job stuff, but eventually, chemists run out of medicines to make, science finishes all the research, engineering has finished remodeling the station, and so on.

As such, I can understand why someone might feel that the people who did all these things should be the only ones who make determinations on whether the round keeps going or not. But I think that's a fairly selfish mindset to take. There is only so much time in the day to play this very time-sinky game, and if all the people on the server have done all the things are are now just sitting around roleplaying with each other, cutting out the new people who didn't join the round earlier is just a form of exclusionism.

Don't get me wrong, long rounds can and should happen, and it's nice for them to happen once and a while. But they should occur because the round itself is interesting enough that everyone playing has decided by consensus it should keep going and the amount of approval by people in the round is significantly exceeding the people who just want to start their own new adventure. It should be a rare, special occasion, not something you encourage by trying to make the previously joined in-game players basically become a clique and everyone else who just came in can fuck right off.

 

Calm down for a minute, the voting is restricted to currently ingame players, as in, people who join in later still count. The restrictions only apply to Ghosts, and people in the Lobby. If you join in, you get a vote. That means paragraph 4/5 aren't actually right. Also, some Antagonists have mechanics that literally depend on a round being longer than 2 hours. What are you saying to them? that they're shit out of luck? (Do take this as polite as possible, because you seem to have said this from the heart and I respect that.)

I'm in favor of this change, it's not about longer rounds so much as making the option of transferring up to the actual players and not the observers who don't want to take part in the round. You chose not to take part, so it's unfair if you get to have a say in whether or not to transfer, this is my opinion. However, that does change if you join into the round, IE: Using the Respawn function, joining as a Diona Nymph or Positronic Brain, etc. Going Mouse and Drone specifically to circumvent this restriction is obviously bad, but they also allow it ATM.

[Felkvir]

They can wait their turn. The game centers around the people actually playing, not the ones who aren't playing.

 

1138 do you know why this argument is making you seem so distant and dismissive? Observers/ghosts are a part of the game, they are 'playing' too just not in the same manner. People already wait hours for antags to do something because they are given so much time in the first place. Who in the everloving shit says you can't do a lot in this game in 3 hours? You want to get technical over something like that, even though it isn't a technical issue to begin with...

The game doesn't 'center' around you, me or anyone. It should include every player on the server.