Atmos Modifications

Ask and discuss policy about game conduct and rules.

Moderator: In-Game Head Admins

User avatar
Code Maintainer
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 3:12 am
Byond Username: ShizCalev
Github Username: ShizCalev

Re: Atmos Modifications

Postby ShizCalev » Fri Mar 31, 2017 6:24 pm #274899

Years later;

I've seen a recent rise again in people doing this at roundstart to (verbatim) "Make it so the station doesn't get flooded with anything in case of antagonists"


Is this still considered no bueno meta?

>Be ling
>Spread misinformation about how SM works to sabotage it
OOC: ChemicalRascal: Lying about game mechanics in relation to an engine that is poorly understood by most isn't cool, though

User avatar
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 2:11 pm
Byond Username: Atlanta-ned

Re: Atmos Modifications

Postby Atlanta-Ned » Fri Mar 31, 2017 6:47 pm #274908

ShizCalev wrote:
Is this still considered no bueno meta?

Yup. Ahelp it if you see it and there's no reason for it to be that way.

EDIT: This thread can be closed.
Feedback pls (Don't bother though, because I am perfect)
### ListVarEdit by Atlanta-ned: /datum/reagents reagent_list: Water=/obj/item/weapon/gun/energy/alien
IcePacks wrote:>all you have is a taser and the cold realization that you're a haphazard bandaid over a problem that may or may not exist, applied by someone who doesn't know or care enough about their job to do it properly

OOC: Pizzatiger: God damn Atlanta, how are you so fucking smart and charming. It fucking pisses me off how perfect you are

User avatar
Global Moderator
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:31 am
Location: Pennsylvania
Byond Username: TehSteveo

Re: Atmos Modifications

Postby TehSteveo » Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:15 pm #275000

Wow, this thread is old as dirt. So many old admins and opinions on the matter before the current status was decided. Needless to say, the rules still say this is not allowed under Rule 2 Precedents. (Honestly, it's not much fun to just totally prevent it as it is to make it possible but more challenging). Anyway, I'm going to lock this. If a headmin feels somehow this does need to be discussed I suppose they can reopen, though I'd advise making a new thread as being this thread is nearly three years old it is somewhat out of connection.


Return to Policy Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arianya