Kubisopplay - DM me good titles

[Kubisopplay]

Hello.
As you may or may not know, I am a silly little admin on this silly little station. The realm that gets the misfortune of seeing me the most is Terry, and when I do play it's either silicon, or stupid anime music.
Since I am not gifted with the ability to essaypost, I'll do a very tldr version of my platform first, and hopefully expand on it in spoilers.
Main Platform

The problem
Separation between codebase and server is absolute. We all heard that, it's even written in one of pinned posts. What it means in practical terms for players and admins is that there is no hard way to influence the way code evolves from the standpoint of the server. After years of such a stance, we are in a situation where people who arguably have either the biggest, or second to biggest influence over the game may have last logged in years before. Is that good? I can't answer for everyone, but from my standpoint it's definitely unfavorable.
Proposed solution
Everyone loves elections, right? Therefore more elections means more good. I suggest we create a new election, for people whose job would be to oversee the balance of new features and changes.
Maintainers would still take care of code quality, there is nothing that requires you to have a sense of how the game looks in code quality.
Of course that would go against the "separation is absolute" dogma, which means it would require acceptance from headcoders... Or it would require someone to convince our dear overlord to finally make due of his threats, and fork the codebase.
As a headmin, I’d hopefully have a chance of helping the change come peacefully without any bad faith on any of the sides, but I am fully determined to use the nuclear option if there is no choice left. I’d do my best to manage the fallout, and reduce the transient negative effects it would probably have.


Smaller platform thingies
Tweaking silipol - I have a lot of experience as a cyborg and AI, and I think that the new policy that this term generates would profit from tweaks as issues show up
Encouraging admins to push buttons in response to antag actions - buff the antag that requires help, make it harder for a serial boner who deleted 1/3rd of the crew. It's already allowed to act, but I would want to empower admins to act more like DMs and not banbots
Killing striders - The benefits of that need no explanation
The list above may become longer when I find things that annoy me and need headmin capabilities to fix.
This platform is not the most well written one, but I swear to god if I get another ping asking me where is the post I’m gonna strangle someone, and as far as I know there are no computers in jails where I live.

PS. I hate BBcode

[oranges]

As a headmin, I’d hopefully have a chance of helping the change come peacefully without any bad faith on any of the sides, but I am fully determined to use the nuclear option if there is no choice left. I’d do my best to manage the fallout, and reduce the transient negative effects it would probably have.

why do you believe this is in anyway a survivable event for you?

[TheFinalPotato]

I hope you know "transient negative effects" is me leaving
I realize you think we're bad at making decisions, and you want you/people like you to make decisions instead, but I am not interested in working under you or someone like you. Fuck off.

[bobbahbrown]

good evening misled forum poster,

you state you feel that the (seemingly unsubstantiated) claim of people who have power over the codebase allegedly being disconnected from the game itself is, quote, unfavorable.

I can't answer for everyone, but from my standpoint it's definitely unfavorable

you then go on to say that because you feel this unfavorable situation exists you would like to, no, fully intend to perform an action which would significantly impact the community at large in a very negative way.

...but I am fully determined to use the nuclear option if there is no choice left

why do you feel the need to to suggest such a schism? and to downplay it as an event which should only have some transient negative effects? i really feel like a headmin should improve the community, not plan to rip it to shreds or sow conflict.

i do not support your animosity.

seasons greetings,
bobbah 'bee' brown

[Timberpoes]

Putting in another coder perspective: Silly idea to try and take over the codebase.

All that will happen is the coding team will ignore you. If you try the force the issue and somehow convince MSO to fork with your 2 co-headmins, you'll just end up with your own codebase with no maintainers, and have to find your own new team of contributors.

Also consider that after enough balance PRs are rejected for merging on your new snowflake codebase, you now need an entire new infrastructure to handle all the merge conflicts as your ancient code drifts away more from the main repo. Changes you do want will require manual mirroring if they're based on changes you've rejected. That's a lot of extra work for your council of balance experts.

Finally, after your hypothetical term ends where you've managed to push the nuclear button and force a fork, the 3 headmins that come after you are just going to reverse all your damage and re-align server and codebase.

[Archie700]

In the hypothetical scenario where you successfully forked the codebase with the other two headmins and MSO's approval, who will be in charge of the new codebase as the new headcoder?

Are you truly sure you will be qualified as a maintainer, let alone a headcoder, to take charge of the new codebase? Or find one that will listen to what you say is what the playerbase wants?

[Kubisopplay]

In the hypothetical scenario where you successfully forked the codebase with the other two headmins and MSO's approval, who will be in charge of the new codebase as the new headcoder?

Are you truly sure you will be qualified as a maintainer, let alone a headcoder, to take charge of the new codebase? Or find one that will listen to what you say is what the playerbase wants?

Nope, I don't intend to take any roles involved with keeping code quality up, and I don't intend to push myself into any balance roles either. I'd be content with setting up a system that promotes impartiality and creativity as much as possible, and then letting democracy speak. Even if the people chosen don't agree with me, which is likely, I will still be satisfied since if they do a bad job they will likely get changed. Currently it's an "agree or don't bother to contribute" situation where code team just goes their own merry way, while my solution would tie them back to the tgstation in its entirety.

To everyone else, I urge you to remember that the same way oranges said that there are always more contributors and players, coders with experience aren't irreplaceable nor extremely rare. Some of them might have reasons to not contribute currently

[LEDDDriver]

From my understanding, you don't intend to replace people, but just create a team of people that actually play the game and have first hand experience of what needs to absolutely change gameplay wise? Can you perhaps give us some examples of what you think needs to change but remains stale and is negatively impacting your game? You don't have to propose a solution to the problem, but point to a problem that you think is being neglected despite being (from your perspective) detrimental to the player and the gaming experience. I feel like your idea isn't bonkers insane and it can work but in order for this to work both sides will have to operate in good faith. How will you ensure that one side is talking and the other side is listening? What happens if there is no progress on what that "team" suggested the coderbus to focus on? A bit more details on your vision would be great!

Tweaking silipol - I have a lot of experience as a cyborg and AI, and I think that the new policy that this term generates would profit from tweaks as issues show up

How do you intend to further tweak silylpol? What are the current sillicon policies weak points? I am not an AI player.

Encouraging admins to push buttons in response to antag actions - buff the antag that requires help, make it harder for a serial boner who deleted 1/3rd of the crew. It's already allowed to act, but I would want to empower admins to act more like DMs and not banbots

What does encourage mean in this case? Will you update admin conduct or whatever affiliated policy?

Thanks a lot if you choose to read and respond!

[Kubisopplay]

From my understanding, you don't intend to replace people, but just create a team of people that actually play the game and have first hand experience of what needs to absolutely change gameplay wise? Can you perhaps give us some examples of what you think needs to change but remains stale and is negatively impacting your game? You don't have to propose a solution to the problem, but point to a problem that you think is being neglected despite being (from your perspective) detrimental to the player and the gaming experience. I feel like your idea isn't bonkers insane and it can work but in order for this to work both sides will have to operate in good faith. How will you ensure that one side is talking and the other side is listening? What happens if there is no progress on what that "team" suggested the coderbus to focus on? A bit more details on your vision would be great!

How do you intend to further tweak silylpol? What are the current sillicon policies weak points? I am not an AI player.

What does encourage mean in this case? Will you update admin conduct or whatever affiliated policy?

Thanks a lot if you choose to read and respond!

So in order:
The vision has two variants, nuclear and good faith. Good faith variant looks increasingly unlikely considering the declarations we already had in this and bugstep's thread, but in general it would encompass creating new team of people whose responsibility would be entirely in the subject of balance and vision for the game future, and asking maintainers to stick to keeping code quality and mechanisms of the game working.
The nuclear option would mean forkening, and recruiting a new maintainer team that would be willing to work within the system, in addition to the new balance and feature team. Ofc anyone from the old team who would be willing to work for the good of the game would be welcome in the new maintainer team, and they would mostly work like they always did, with the exception of slightly reduced responsibility.

In terms of silipol I mostly meant tweaking whatever this term would leave as their creation, since they are reworking silicon policy in its entirety, I'm assuming some tweaks will be needed when it encounters reality

In terms of encouraging I mostly meant internal announcements, and maybe little tweak to complaint policy, something along the lines of outright stating that as long as an admin does their action not to break the antagonist round but to let people who got removed back in they aren't liable for complaints. Currently it is allowed, but it's not stated as a precedent, so I think fleshing that out would be a good move.

Thanks for questions!

[LEDDDriver]

Let's assume for a second that you get elected. You are still part of a team that consists 2 other headmins. If your main platform of creating a council/committee/team does not get through due to being blocked by your own team,nor does your forkening push go through, what should we then be expecting from you?

Since you have kept your initial post relatively open-ended i want to ask about your opinion on the LRP/MRP split. I very recently read that LRP needs more MRP admins telling them how to RP. Does LRP need more RP nudges? Perhaps rule reworkings? Are you perfectly content with how LRP works? Are there issues? The same question but for MRP; Do you think MRP needs rework? Disclaimer; i don't play MRP, i am trying to gauge your visions of the community as a whole because i understand (and you hopefully) that there is no LRP/MRP exclusive headmin and you will most probably get forced to voice an opinion about a part of the community you may or may have not ever interacted with.

Give us more details on how this process will go down;

The nuclear option would mean forkening, and recruiting a new maintainer team that would be willing to work within the system, in addition to the new balance and feature team.

[Kubisopplay]

If other two headmins and/or MSO say flat no the nuclear option has no way of working, and we already heard the declarations about how would persuasion go. In that case I'd probe the community's opinion in general, and try making groundwork so if someone in the future realises it is a good path it would be easier to execute.

In terms of LRP/MRP split I have mixed opinions. I haven't played Manuel in nearly any capacity, but Terry is a bit too LRP in my honest opinion. LRP does absolutely benefit immensely from RP nudges.
The issue with current LRP in my opinion is less of an RP level, or rather with people's choices of actions. There is almost no issue with someone running around the station instead of staying in their job, although if you join in one job only for the access and tools and completely ignore your basic responsibility (engineers not fixing wires or starting SM) you should still get bonked. Issue lies in people picking killing over any other interaction. The issue is complex, and I don't have any clear cut plan how to entice people into talking instead of murdering as their first choice. Ideas that I have might be extending IC protections for certain actions, for instance arrests and demotions for murder, and in exchange making some sort of an "ass day" where few rounds a week would be dedicated to letting the murder impulses out.
Sorry for a convoluted way of explaining, I'd need to work on the specifics of that a bit.

In terms of exact way nuclear process would go, I have no specifics ready yet, sorry. It's all gonna evolve into a complete project if I get to a top of INTERNAL DISCUSSIONS tower, and with the involvement of other headmins and the host

[Striders13]

Kubi is one of the highly based individuals that plays silicon on Terry, which, speaking from personal experience, can be frustrating at times. I trust them to make playing silicon more pleasant through policy. The idea with additional elections for balancers sounds very convoluted though, and I'm not sure what to make of it. The idea with killing me is great, worth implementing.

[Jacquerel]

What does a role responsible for “maintaining game vision” entail in terms of codebase responsibility?
You are aware that the development process is contributor led rather than top-down and essentially has no direction, no? Would this simply be some kind of immediate PR vetoer for things which do not fit a specific current design aim or do you have something else in mind?

[Kubisopplay]

What does a role responsible for “maintaining game vision” entail in terms of codebase responsibility?
You are aware that the development process is contributor led rather than top-down and essentially has no direction, no? Would this simply be some kind of immediate PR vetoer for things which do not fit a specific current design aim or do you have something else in mind?

They would take over the maintainer responsibility of blocking stupid, overpowered, and generally bad for the game prs, or pointing out what needs to be changed in order to let them pass. This way people who are good at coding would be responsible only for code quality, and people who are in touch in community and how the game feels would be responsible for the fluff.

[Shaps-cloud]

Your plans and solutions aren't workable, and it's unclear why you want to become a headmin other than to try and punish coders you dislike