/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

Assistant shouldn't have maint access. There is a config setting to remove their maint access. Maint access is pretty big enabler for assistants to tide, since they have 0 responsibilities and get bored very quickly, I believe that there would be considerably less tiding if they didn't have this access. Below is a list of counter arguments that I have answers for, I have pondered over these for 150 hours. I have yet to see a single assistant use maint access for something other than a autism project or being a shitter and tiding armory or another department, I mean I can't really blame the fact that Assistants generally have nothing to do, but if you wanted to do something that bad, why didn't you get a actual job? There are probably some other counter arguments that I haven't thought of so feel free to show me how wrong my opinion is.

1: "I only like doing maint autism projects! I don't tide!" A: Go to the HOP and get it then
2: "There is no heads!" A: Don't tide during dead pop
3: "HOP said no!" A: Just hack the doors then
4: "I don't have insuls!" A: Stop being a pussy and hack that door
5: "Tiders will just go to other roles to tide!" A: Assistant isn't a containment role for shitters, stop treating it like it is
6: "I don't want to have any responsibilities!" A: Then play Assistant, hacking doors is still possible, and HOPs usually don't deny people access
7: "BUT ITS THE SOU-" A: Shut the fuck up
8: "X isn't doing their job! I need to break into fix it!" A: Why didn't you go that job if you know so much about it to be able to fix it?
9: "I didn't get the job I wanted and was auto assigned a random one." A: Ask the HOP for a job change
10: "I joined late and none of the jobs I want are available!" A: Try learning a new job or observing until the next round, or go assistant and ask for maint access from your local HOP
11: "I'm an antagonist Assistant and can't get into maint!" A: Hack, emag, ask HOP, etc
12: -Free Space-

Or maybe don't punish the whole by removing maint and instead deal with the bad actors with the current access levels intact

Takeguru wrote:Or maybe don't punish the whole by removing maint and instead deal with the bad actors with the current access levels intact

I think people are trying to punish the (probably low amount) of innocent asisstants because of the tiders.
Some people play asisstant because they know they have to leave in 50 minutes, for example, and that way
if the round goes on and he has to go, nothing valuable is lost.

Also, Asisstants are probably the best spies in the station: Any antag should always be worried of the random greyshirt
finding him in the middle of something highly illegal. That is supposed to be one of their main purposes.

The main thing removing maintenance access does is remove the ic shield from dropping and searching randos in the maintenance tunnels.

Alternatively, you could simply say that while Assistants have access to maint, they only have permission to enter maint if they have an order from a superior that involves entering maint, e.g. "Go fetch the toxin from abandoned medbay". If they don't have an order, they are trespassing and could be arrested. Obviously, the way it would go down is that the if an officer encounters an assistant in maint, the officer asks the assistant why he's there, and if the assistant can't answer convincingly, the officer is free to arrest him.

AI, law 2, make maint emergency access.

Every round, every day.

It would just serve as an inconvenience for shitty tiders, not a block. Ive seen plenty of decent assistants as well, no reason to screw them over for this. Should be kept as is.

don't make people steal my guaranteed janitor role when I put it on high, everyone will compete for the two assistant+ slots every round

HommandoSA wrote:AI, law 2, make maint emergency access.

Every round, every day.

Silicon policy update, ignore all commands from assistants. Problem fixed.

My first kill target as a job without maint access is almost always an assistant. Lets not pretend having maint access is an exclusively positive thing.

I would rather just have assistants changed to visitors and have the AI's laws changed to only work for employees of nanotrasen. It would make things for shitter assistants harder, and give borgs leeway to end them for being shitlords.

Dr_bee wrote:I would rather just have assistants changed to visitors and have the AI's laws changed to only work for employees of nanotrasen. It would make things for shitter assistants harder, and give borgs leeway to end them for being shitlords.

Forcing assistants to be non-human race only (opposite of heads) like I suggested in the other thread would be easier. Sadly neither solution will solve the issue of tiders just selecting another job to bypass whatever hardcoded restrictions you place on the role.

Grazyn wrote:

Dr_bee wrote:I would rather just have assistants changed to visitors and have the AI's laws changed to only work for employees of nanotrasen. It would make things for shitter assistants harder, and give borgs leeway to end them for being shitlords.

Forcing assistants to be non-human race only (opposite of heads) like I suggested in the other thread would be easier. Sadly neither solution will solve the issue of tiders just selecting another job to bypass whatever hardcoded restrictions you place on the role.

The solution to that minor problem would be to actually ban people for tiding as other jobs.

Dr_bee wrote:

Grazyn wrote:

Dr_bee wrote:I would rather just have assistants changed to visitors and have the AI's laws changed to only work for employees of nanotrasen. It would make things for shitter assistants harder, and give borgs leeway to end them for being shitlords.

Forcing assistants to be non-human race only (opposite of heads) like I suggested in the other thread would be easier. Sadly neither solution will solve the issue of tiders just selecting another job to bypass whatever hardcoded restrictions you place on the role.

The solution to that minor problem would be to actually ban people for tiding as other jobs.

Greytiding as an assistant is already against the rules and if admins were banning for it we wouldn't be having this dicussion in the first place.

Dr_bee wrote:I would rather just have assistants changed to visitors and have the AI's laws changed to only work for employees of nanotrasen. It would make things for shitter assistants harder, and give borgs leeway to end them for being shitlords.

Having people you don't like being able to affect the station's AI with orders is like the whole purpose of using Asimov's laws. It's well known that they're actually pretty bad at doing what they're intended to do (keep robotics under control) and are only used in fiction because they makes for great stories and conflict. If you're making assistants not humans just to get them around the AI's asimov laws, you might as well just remove them and give the AI a pro-NT lawset. Y'know, throw out their conflicts with security and force AIs into being validhunters.

Grazyn wrote:

Dr_bee wrote:

Grazyn wrote:

Dr_bee wrote:I would rather just have assistants changed to visitors and have the AI's laws changed to only work for employees of nanotrasen. It would make things for shitter assistants harder, and give borgs leeway to end them for being shitlords.

Forcing assistants to be non-human race only (opposite of heads) like I suggested in the other thread would be easier. Sadly neither solution will solve the issue of tiders just selecting another job to bypass whatever hardcoded restrictions you place on the role.

The solution to that minor problem would be to actually ban people for tiding as other jobs.

Greytiding as an assistant is already against the rules and if admins were banning for it we wouldn't be having this dicussion in the first place.

Yes and no. This comes up every time there's a policy discussion regarding "greytiding." As the word was originally meant, 30+ assistants would spawn in a cluster in aux tool storage and "tide" from there out into the station stealing and smashing everything. Since random spawn, this ceased to be a thing and now "greytiding" means anything between "being a dick and stealing/breaking everything you can find just to grief" and "minor IC crimes."

So yeah, people get banned for being shitheads, but that's typically a Rule 1 or 0 violation and its in a very squishy grey area that almost always leads to obnoxious appeals. Especially if said tider is well-known or mae a lot of like-minded friends who want to prattle on about "TG Culture is norp/lowrp" and the like.

Assistants as a role with nothing specific to do become really hard to police for not doing the nothing they're meant to be doing. I can easily ban an engineer for instantly fucking off without setting up the engine or repairing things to go hack open every door to the brig instead, but if an assistant just runs around hacking doors, that's expected content. Roles with defined purposes are easier to police.

I still support the "Assistants are non-crew 'civilians' with AI set to default Crewsimov" plan without enforcing non-human roles. There's not much reason to tack on the non-human races thing when de-crewing them is good enough under Crewsimov.

I think that wouldn't be a bad idea; asissstants would bepressed to either have HoP recognize them as employees of nanotrasen
or remain off the grid with all its consequences. This would indirectly buff revs/cult, because Ai cannot call human harm
on an asisstant being converted/sacrificed; so station has to make choices out of that.

I think it's worth a try, anyways.

What if... assistants instead spawned in Maint and didn't have access to leave

Code it so assistants have to be nonhumans to get the role
Bam, AI problem solved
EDIT: for clarification I mean a not human race

cedarbridge wrote:Assistants as a role with nothing specific to do become really hard to police for not doing the nothing they're meant to be doing. I can easily ban an engineer for instantly fucking off without setting up the engine or repairing things to go hack open every door to the brig instead, but if an assistant just runs around hacking doors, that's expected content. Roles with defined purposes are easier to police.

It's only become "expected content" because of a lack of enforcement normalizing it. If people are constantly committing "minor" grief like that, slap them with a note. Ban them if they already have notes for it.

Assistants aren't supposed to be doing "nothing", they're supposed to be assisting people with their jobs. Not acting like petty criminals and vigilantes.

Well we must also take care not to push too much in the other direction. Assistants occupy an important niche in the station ecosystem, they provide minor conflict and distractions for sec. If you crack down on it too much, it gets to the point where anyone breaking space law can be automatically metagamed as an antag.

Man, I look at threads like this and wonder how many of these people suggesting various ways to punish assistants are only doing so because they were inconvenienced, got in a fight and lost, or had their imaginary authority challenged time and time again by them. If your suggestions are only emotionally charged, especially in relation to policies and rules, perhaps you need to step back from things for a bit.

That said, I can identify three people in this thread who fit the criteria of "let's remove (x) because it aids a person or group of people that challenge my authority" that being Dr_Bee, Xero, and Isto.
You can look at past suggestions on the ideas sub forum, various peanuts on FNR threads, and how they generally act in game towards people they deem lesser to get an idea of why you should take any suggestion with a grain of salt if it comes from them. Feel free and comb my history too if need be, but all I'm saying is that the issue doesn't exist because of the role because that's been tested a tiresomely large amount of times already and it's always inconclusive. The problem comes from various attitudes clashing regardless of role, some unwarranted, some a product of people acting superior over others trying to bait conflicts to demonstrate authority.

Removing maintenance access hasn't worked prior, and even recently when the doors were effectively broken to the point you couldn't hack them, it still didn't stop people from breaking the doors down to get access to areas otherwise inaccessible.

TL;DR Stop salt posting, if there is a problem that requires a new policy that isn't just from personal sleights, then make a policy on it.

Can somebody enlighten me how access to maintenance enables the anti christs in grey?

The only thing I can think of is one less airlock to hack to get into engineering/atmos. Other areas are either unimportant, easy to get into or not connected to maintenance.
I read about denying gamer gear in maint... which I assume are the sunglasses? Phat loot.

Nothing that's been said in this thread explains how maint access enables bad behavior... it's just assumed that it does and that we should remove it, because ASISTANTS BAD and they profit from it and we don't like them.

Access to maintnence is NOT the problem. at all

In fact, Some people, glorious bastards, all of them, Use maint as a canvas to do stuff for fun instead of tiding like a twat.

If you're worried about the tide, enforcement is the issue, not them having access to maintnence.

Reyn wrote:Access to maintnence is NOT the problem. at all

In fact, Some people, glorious bastards, all of them, Use maint as a canvas to do stuff for fun instead of tiding like a twat.

If you're worried about the tide, enforcement is the issue, not them having access to maintnence.

seriously. i dont get how people think maint access -> greytide. where do the two things even meet

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Reyn wrote:Access to maintnence is NOT the problem. at all

In fact, Some people, glorious bastards, all of them, Use maint as a canvas to do stuff for fun instead of tiding like a twat.

If you're worried about the tide, enforcement is the issue, not them having access to maintnence.

seriously. i dont get how people think maint access -> greytide. where do the two things even meet

If you make it more difficult for entitled shitters to get their hands on gamer gear, that will discourage them from doing so. Even if it's slight, it'll still have an effect.

Yeah tools are one of the reasons maint is useful for assistants, at least on meta. On mid-highpop public toolboxes will be emptied 20 seconds after roundstart, and tools from the vendor are out of question (they'd cost more than you can earn in an entire shift), so you have to scavenge them from the random drops in maint. No maint, no tools, and an assistant without tools is like a male without his dick.

Grazyn wrote:Yeah tools are one of the reasons maint is useful for assistants, at least on meta. On mid-highpop public toolboxes will be emptied 20 seconds after roundstart, and tools from the vendor are out of question (they'd cost more than you can earn in an entire shift), so you have to scavenge them from the random drops in maint. No maint, no tools, and an assistant without tools is like a male without his dick.

break window
break grille
make cablecuffs
throw spear at tools machine for a while
enjoy free tools when it breaks

Grazyn wrote:Yeah tools are one of the reasons maint is useful for assistants, at least on meta. On mid-highpop public toolboxes will be emptied 20 seconds after roundstart, and tools from the vendor are out of question (they'd cost more than you can earn in an entire shift), so you have to scavenge them from the random drops in maint. No maint, no tools, and an assistant without tools is like a male without his dick.

Get wrench. Wrench ORM. Get metal. Use lathe to make tools. Get into a fight with cargo.
Denying easy access to tools won't stop a determined shitter from acquiring them.
Even worse, it makes tiding more likely if it's the only route available.

deedubya wrote: If you make it more difficult for entitled shitters to get their hands on gamer gear, that will discourage them from doing so. Even if it's slight, it'll still have an effect.

What gamer gear?

Actionb wrote:

Grazyn wrote:Yeah tools are one of the reasons maint is useful for assistants, at least on meta. On mid-highpop public toolboxes will be emptied 20 seconds after roundstart, and tools from the vendor are out of question (they'd cost more than you can earn in an entire shift), so you have to scavenge them from the random drops in maint. No maint, no tools, and an assistant without tools is like a male without his dick.

Get wrench. Wrench ORM. Get metal. Use lathe to make tools. Get into a fight with cargo.
Denying easy access to tools won't stop a determined shitter from acquiring them.
Even worse, it makes tiding more likely if it's the only route available.

deedubya wrote: If you make it more difficult for entitled shitters to get their hands on gamer gear, that will discourage them from doing so. Even if it's slight, it'll still have an effect.

What gamer gear?

No matter how many of their points anyone smacks down (as the points are generally dumb) they're going to keep rephrasing them for eternity because they have to be right, ActionB. I've said all there is to be said, PK's said it too, you've said it, Coconut has said it, Hommando has said it, Takeguru has said it, and in the past more people than I want to list here have said it as well. All of this has been tried and tested in the past, and it has literally zero relation to the role "assistant". They want it to be related to "assistant", but given empirical evidence it never has been. The fact this thread hasn't been closed already for the stupid pile of shit it is, is genuinely surprising because it's the same thread that always keeps appearing and always subsequently keeps getting closed because it is founded by zero legitimate claim, but more so a reactionary/salt post.

The main issue is that greytiding IS somewhat against the rules, the rule is just not enforced.

Rule 1, Precedent 2.

Unprovoked grief (occasionally known as greytiding), repeated cases of minor unprovoked grief, and unprovoked grief targeted towards specific players or groups (i.e. metagrudging) fall under rule 1. Admins may follow up on grief with allowing the affected parties to ignore normal escalation policy or measures such as warnings or bans.

Shittler tier greytiding can, and should, result in admin intervention.

Additionally, Removing maint access may remove some power from the worse assistant memes, But it'll also compel any nonshitler assistants to fucking break into places or harass the HOP to get something to do. If the HOP does their bloody job, great, problem solved. If they don't, Expect tiding to get worse.
Honestly, It's more than just maint which the tide uses.

Plus, the tide also often uses the Ai as a personal doorknob to go into engineering, and they'll likely do so more often if they can't go into maint.

This thread is an example of bad deductive reasoning: greytide bad -> assistants are grey -> assistants have maint -> maint bad

Removing maint access may remove some power from the worse assistant memes

How? I am an idiot. Please explain.

Reyn wrote:The main issue is that greytiding IS somewhat against the rules

No the main issue is assistants having maintenance access.
But nobody is explaining how exactly that has anything to do with greytiding.

Something I wanted to know but was afraid to ask was what do you actually mean by greytiding? Back in the day it meant attacking the brig and nullifying security's ability to do their jobs (stealing their gear, stripping/cuffing officers, breaking open brig cell). Then it took on a more generic meaning of attacking security personnel. Now it seems to just mean entering a department as an assistant where you aren't wanted.

When/where/how is this happening and what is the effect of it?

And I posted this on the last page but people didn't seem to take it into account so here it is again: maintenance access was removed from Assistants years back. I forget why and I forget what the effects were but ultimately it was reverted. It's an experiment that's been tried and it failed.

cacogen wrote:Something I wanted to know but was afraid to ask was what do you actually mean by greytiding?

I am somewhat of a newbie, but as far as I've seen ehre, greytiding represent agroup of people who play asisstant (and if they can, janitor/Engineer/CT because better stuff),
and cause grief by getting into areas they shouldn't (Brig, cap's office, armory), vandalising the station, baiting people into conflict whether for fighting
or for ahelping later and get people banned, stealing people's stuff and basically acting like an antag when they are not. Some include validhunting in that definition, too, even though without
validunting antags would pretty much do as they please.

In general, people don't like greytiders because they interrupt whatever other players are trying to do. and they do so by doing things thatrange
from borderline illegal to downright illegal. Some say people just hate greytiders because they screw with their personal projects and "disrespect"
them, and that they are whiny saltposters. I don't know myself, I'm too new to make a judgement on it. Maybe others are better for that.

cacogen wrote:Something I wanted to know but was afraid to ask was what do you actually mean by greytiding?

No no, it's a good question. Always ask for people to define what they mean.

cedarbridge wrote: This comes up every time there's a policy discussion regarding "greytiding." As the word was originally meant, 30+ assistants would spawn in a cluster in aux tool storage and "tide" from there out into the station stealing and smashing everything. Since random spawn, this ceased to be a thing and now "greytiding" means anything between "being a dick and stealing/breaking everything you can find just to grief" and "minor IC crimes."

I haven't seen the real tide in years ("rarely plays"). I have witnessed some 'orchestrated' riots, but that isn't quite the same.
With that, I'm guilty of using the term to exaggerate an issue to give my arguments weight. Woops mea culpa.

cacogen wrote: And I posted this on the last page but people didn't seem to take it into account so here it is again: maintenance access was removed from Assistants years back. I forget why and I forget what the effects were but ultimately it was reverted. It's an experiment that's been tried and it failed.

It's not good enough to point out that it's been tried and it failed without giving reasons why it failed.
I tried to find threads about that attempt - but the search advanced form search is just awfully inconvenient.

PKPenguin321 wrote:If a shitter who's upset Assistant has no maint access wants maint access, they'll just pick engineer and fuck off. Happened last time we did this and engines not being set up was an issue on multiple occasions. It's a pain in the ass.

cedarbridge wrote: That said, we've done this in the past and those same bad actors with maint access removed just roamed around hacking open every maint door and leaving them open. It didn't really solve anything because assistaint mains are a blight.

TheMythicGhost wrote:No matter how many of their points anyone smacks down (as the points are generally dumb) they're going to keep rephrasing them for eternity because they have to be right, ActionB. I've said all there is to be said, PK's said it too, you've said it, Coconut has said it, Hommando has said it, Takeguru has said it, and in the past more people than I want to list here have said it as well. All of this has been tried and tested in the past, and it has literally zero relation to the role "assistant". They want it to be related to "assistant", but given empirical evidence it never has been. The fact this thread hasn't been closed already for the stupid pile of shit it is, is genuinely surprising because it's the same thread that always keeps appearing and always subsequently keeps getting closed because it is founded by zero legitimate claim, but more so a reactionary/salt post.

Posts you don't like aren't illegitimate. Points you don't agree with aren't disproven just because you post a disagreement. Points of view that can negatively affect you(a greyshirt main) aren't automatically negative as a whole.

The sooner you learn things like this, the sooner you can actually participate in fair and open discourse, instead of just screeching like a child when someone wants to take away the toys you use that have been abused constantly.

Points you don't agree with aren't disproven just because you post a disagreement.

Nor are points you agree with automatically right.
If you are so interested in fair and open discourse, start improving the state of this one by answering these questions:

Actionb wrote:

deedubya wrote: If you make it more difficult for entitled shitters to get their hands on gamer gear, that will discourage them from doing so. Even if it's slight, it'll still have an effect.

What gamer gear?

PKPenguin321 wrote:i dont get how people think maint access -> greytide. where do the two things even meet

Maybe it's about the fact that there is an absolute refusal to take away assistants maint, perhaps, and you can see the rearing of this ugly head as people bend over backwards to not take away airlock maintenance for a role that does nothing.

Go ahead and keep putting your heads in the ground then.

deedubya wrote:

TheMythicGhost wrote:No matter how many of their points anyone smacks down (as the points are generally dumb) they're going to keep rephrasing them for eternity because they have to be right, ActionB. I've said all there is to be said, PK's said it too, you've said it, Coconut has said it, Hommando has said it, Takeguru has said it, and in the past more people than I want to list here have said it as well. All of this has been tried and tested in the past, and it has literally zero relation to the role "assistant". They want it to be related to "assistant", but given empirical evidence it never has been. The fact this thread hasn't been closed already for the stupid pile of shit it is, is genuinely surprising because it's the same thread that always keeps appearing and always subsequently keeps getting closed because it is founded by zero legitimate claim, but more so a reactionary/salt post.

Posts you don't like aren't illegitimate. Points you don't agree with aren't disproven just because you post a disagreement. Points of view that can negatively affect you(a greyshirt main) aren't automatically negative as a whole.

The sooner you learn things like this, the sooner you can actually participate in fair and open discourse, instead of just screeching like a child when someone wants to take away the toys you use that have been abused constantly.

May I have permission to put this quote in my signature? It's hilariously ironic.

PLEASE GOD NOT THIS THREAD AGAIN

Stickymayhem wrote:PLEASE GOD NOT THIS THREAD AGAIN

How many times would this be now?

If all the suggestions to fix assistants boil down to "remove everything that makes them able to interact with the round in a meaningful way" well, the problem lies in the assistant role itself. So, just remove the job. "B-but new players need it to learn to play the game!". Easy solution: lock it after the player has logged a reasonable number of hours on the server, basically the opposite of head roles. "B-but greyshitters will just take other jobs and fuck off anyway!" That was my concern as well but apparently admins are already banning for it so that's not an issue.

I support removing assistant maint because lol fuck you

Grazyn wrote:If all the suggestions to fix assistants boil down to "remove everything that makes them able to interact with the round in a meaningful way" well, the problem lies in the assistant role itself. So, just remove the job. "B-but new players need it to learn to play the game!". Easy solution: lock it after the player has logged a reasonable number of hours on the server, basically the opposite of head roles. "B-but greyshitters will just take other jobs and fuck off anyway!" That was my concern as well but apparently admins are already banning for it so that's not an issue.

I've suggested an "Intern" role with some basic accesses for baby new players that then timelocks and opens "Assistant" with no access before

Grazyn wrote:If all the suggestions to fix assistants boil down to "remove everything that makes them able to interact with the round in a meaningful way" well, the problem lies in the assistant role itself. So, just remove the job. "B-but new players need it to learn to play the game!". Easy solution: lock it after the player has logged a reasonable number of hours on the server, basically the opposite of head roles. "B-but greyshitters will just take other jobs and fuck off anyway!" That was my concern as well but apparently admins are already banning for it so that's not an issue.

This was an idea I was thinking about as well. Say after 10 hours logged in roles besides ghost, you get locked out of assistant. With one exception: If all the job slots are filled, assistant slots will be available to latejoins. Combine this with punishing players for deliberate incompetence/dereliction of duty, and the problem would solve itself.

deedubya wrote:

Grazyn wrote:If all the suggestions to fix assistants boil down to "remove everything that makes them able to interact with the round in a meaningful way" well, the problem lies in the assistant role itself. So, just remove the job. "B-but new players need it to learn to play the game!". Easy solution: lock it after the player has logged a reasonable number of hours on the server, basically the opposite of head roles. "B-but greyshitters will just take other jobs and fuck off anyway!" That was my concern as well but apparently admins are already banning for it so that's not an issue.

This was an idea I was thinking about as well. Say after 10 hours logged in roles besides ghost, you get locked out of assistant. With one exception: If all the job slots are filled, assistant slots will be available to latejoins. Combine this with punishing players for deliberate incompetence/dereliction of duty, and the problem would solve itself.

This but have the suggested Visitor job unlock when all slots are filled instead of regular assistant. With no access and the AI on crewsimov. The classic assistant job will be available to newbs only.

Are we witnessing the emergence of the FINAL SOLUTION to the ASSISTANTS QUESTION here?
Oh boy! Better get my attic tidied up!

Who would have thought that this was the true aim of a thread discussing maintenance access!

I am starting to get confused. I thought people didn't like asisstant because of greytiding, a-k-a people breaking into stuff and
generally being disruptive to other people doing their jobs.

Why would you not want these people in maint tunnels, where they don't interact with any department?
If the problem is access to tools, those could be removed.
if the problem is people breaking the rules, just ahelp it.

I will admit that I find the crewsimov Ai interesting; assistants become this giant grey area that antags can exploit,
but the asisstants themselves lose a lot of power because Ai will not help them. I don't see the point of maint access removal,
it eliminates one od the asisstants' main roles (Being witnesses to antag activity) and will not help against griefing.

Calomel wrote:I am starting to get confused. I thought people didn't like asisstant because of greytiding, a-k-a people breaking into stuff and
generally being disruptive to other people doing their jobs.

Can't be a shitter assistant, if there is no assistant job.
[insert Eddie Murphy meme here]

I mean we all know this policy thread will be closed with some unsubstantial "headmin ruling" that won't actually change anything, may as well suggest radical solutions so next time the same thread pops up it will be easier to dredge them up again.

I'd rather not see the assistant role get cut but they definitely should be clumsy or have some flat debuff that makes them fail at any task due to incompetence or lack of training. If that's not possible then removing them might sadly be the best option.

Removing assmaint is the litmus test to changing them for the better.
If they cannot, for some reason, even bring themselves to removing the maintenance and giving a good reason why the assistants Need it for the job, well then there you go.
I'm all for removing/changing the role overall too. Or locking the assistants into separate ghettos of maint. Just fucking do something.

Gamarr wrote:Removing assmaint is the litmus test to changing them for the better.
If they cannot, for some reason, even bring themselves to removing the maintenance and giving a good reason why the assistants Need it for the job, well then there you go.

Ah yes, random statements with no reasoning. Another fine tg boondoggle