Test 4: General radio channel removal poll

[Luke Cox]

Since HG isn't attaching polls to his test threads anymore (I wonder why), I'm going to make one. HG wants to try removing the general radio channel for the purpose of "creating paranoia." Is this a good idea? Why or why not?

[Ikarrus]

Yes, let's base our decisions on kneejerk reactions instead of waiting a bit before starting the polls

[Luke Cox]

I think it's a good idea to determine if something is wildly unpopular before we fuck up the server for "an undetermined amount of time"

[TrustyGun]

Fuck no, part of the paranoia is slowly hearing less and less people as they all die.

[Ikarrus]

I think it's a good idea to determine if something is wildly unpopular before we fuck up the server for "an undetermined amount of time"

We'd still be stuck with the original shitty UI if this was the prevailing attitude.

There is nothing wrong with changing the rules temporarily to see if it improves the game.

[Zilenan91]

I think at the very beginning this test fails what it wants to do because paranoia doesn't exist if you get silently killed in maintenance because the only thing you feel is frustration at being forced to sit out for the round, may as well not play the game if you're forced to be the victim of silent murderbone every round. I expect the number of people on the server to decline drastically because of how boring the game is without common channel being there.

[Luke Cox]

I think it's a good idea to determine if something is wildly unpopular before we fuck up the server for "an undetermined amount of time"

We'd still be stuck with the original shitty UI if this was the prevailing attitude.

There is nothing wrong with changing the rules temporarily to see if it improves the game.

But at this point HG is just haphazardly flinging shit to see what sticks. We should be testing things, but we should be testing things that the community actually wants tested. I don't see how HG is some enlightened, wise ruler that knows better than everybody else.

[Zilenan91]

Testing things is fine. It lets us know what we want to turn the game into and the status of how it's been designed. If you agree to tests then you learn nothing because that means that nothing ever changes.

[Cheimon]

I vote for option 3: I don't know if it's a bad idea yet, I'd like to play it for about a week and make a proper decision.

I would rather base my decision on what actually happens than what I think might happen. I trust the headmins that a test will be fine: security cyborg tests were good, and saw it removed, while AI removal tests were less good, and saw it stay. That was fine, and this probably will be too.

[Luke Cox]

Zil brought up a good point in the other thread (what is the world coming to?). The idea is that department security officers will hear cries for help on the department channels and relay it on the sec channel. You guys know how often every department has an officer (spoiler alert it's never). Antags are simply going to silently murderbone in departments that don't have a dedicated security officer.

[oranges]

Goddamn it stop doing this you shit bird, make a strawpoll and post it in the other thread, you're just splitting feedback into multiple threads.

[Luke Cox]

Goddamn it stop doing this you shit bird, make a strawpoll and post it in the other thread, you're just splitting feedback into multiple threads.

Hadn't considered this, I'll do it in the future. Better yet, HG could simply stop trying to hide the fact that his tests are often extremely unpopular. He stopped adding polls after his no silicon policy test was BTFO.

[Ikarrus]

Put feedback in the actual feedback thread. Make a strawpoll if you want to be autistic about it