[Deleted] MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Resolved.

Moderator: Board Moderators

User avatar
MortoSasye
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby MortoSasye » Sat Feb 23, 2019 12:35 am #477866

Hello, thanks for showing interest in this head admin candidate thread and clicking on it!

First of all I want to introduce myself to the people who haven’t meet me or talked with me in any sort of way. I go by Morto, but you can call me Bella (my character). I mostly play and admin on Bagil (Bagel, Basil), but appear on the other servers when help is requested as per my duty.

The reason why I choose to run for headmin:

I desire to give the players a voice to participate in final rulings concerning policy caused me eventually decide to run for head admin (janitor) as well as hope that I can do a good job in this position without burning out as quickly.

I want to make all decisions made having on mind what the community wants/needs instead of what three people decide it’s for the better.

The changes I desire to implement:

- If an ahelp from the previous round gets resolved in the next one, the person who ahelped gets a reply from the admins explaining if it got solved.

- After a decision is made by the headmins regarding a policy question, I will implement a vote to confirm this was something liked by the community as a whole instead of just the headmin team.

If a large a large amount of the community does not agree with it, a review of the decision would be done by me to look into something more suitable and with a general more positive view from the players. The only possible issue with this would be a further delay on replies.


Will my activity change when I become head admin? :

It won’t change unless real life shows up with more important things. I plan to be as active as I am currently or at least try to be as active as possible.

Compilations of questions and my replies below:

Escalation policy:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=21735&p=477913#p477913
Hi hi! Like the previous candidates have said, my ideas go for a similar route.

While keeping most things ic without admin intervention is something good, in this specific case a change needs to be done to stop indirectly protecting players who only desire is to cause conflict and headaches to the rest. Why should a person who decides to steal your id for the sake of it get away with it? This is a dick move and something that breaks our rule 1, so why should escalation policy protect them of admin intervention?

If I end up becoming a headmin I will talk with the other two headmins and edit the escalation policy to stop protecting people whose desire is to bother others. My wish is to avoid situations where a person gets wronged and be it due to lack of security staff, or the lack of possibility to recover the stolen object, their only choice is to attack the instigator with the possibility of ending up dead themselves without any chance to ahelp the person behavior. And if they ahelp without even starting the conflict, most of the time they will get told it’s an ic issue.
If you are the instigator in a conflict and end up killing or severely impairing the round of the person you are fighting, you should make a reasonable effort to return them to life at least once or make amends, only seeking round removal if they continue to pursue you. This protection doesn't apply to an instigator being killed.


This means that if a player out of boredom punches you constantly with the intention of starting a conflict and you defend yourself but end up losing, they can get away with killing someone for free as long as they clone you again. My desire is to avoid this from happening as much as possible.


Changing the rotation:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=477919#p477919
If the player base likes more a gamemode than others, i will run a general vote to get feedback and change the percentages according to the results.


Dealing with issues IC or OOC:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=477940#p477940
Hello, thanks for your question!

While what you desire is something noble and that I personally like, I don’t think it’s possible for most issues to be handled ic if we want things to be fair + we’re a low rp server. Like I said in the escalation policy thread, while I would love for most things to not require admin intervention, people breaking rule 1 shouldn’t get away with it being solved icly all the time since this only makes them think that what they’re doing is ok.

Where do you think the limit of in game solutions and admin intervention should be drawn?

When it becomes extremely obnoxious and it’s a behavior that the player repeats constantly just to bother others, OR it starts breaking the rules.

Do you think that the current level of admin rulings placed on individuals is fine, should be handed out more liberally, or should be scaled back and dealt with in a different manner?


Admin rulings change from case to case. If a player is new and commits a mistake they will usually get warned, if it’s someone with more experience but no previous bad behavior they will get a note, and so on. But, to keep it simple, I would say it’s fine the way it is now.

Should people be encouraged to ahelp every transgression that they feel is unfair, or do you think that a shift to requesting assistance from other departments or things like in game consoles and messaging should be promoted instead?

Unless it’s a player blatantly breaking the rules or being a dick to you for the sake of being a dick without any other purpose behind their actions, then I would encourage people to solve things icly when possible otherwise they should ahelp instead of staying quiet so admins can look into it.

Is this realistic?

In real life when you get something stolen you would report it to the police. But there are rounds in which the security staff does not exist, and if you end up trying to get the stolen object back you could end up dying. So no, I don’t think it’s realistic but admin intervention is a requirement for players to enjoy their round without other players ruining it.


How do you feel on running experiments/test weeks?
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478051#p478051

While it's a good idea, i'm not a fan of banning people during a test week when they're used already to our current rule set (and even have trouble following this one).

I would much prefer it if it would be a one day per week thing and would approve for the admin to do so as long as it was carefully planned.


The Admin recruiting Process
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478122#p478122

1. No, i would much prefer a forum based application

3. There are some players who even if they’re active and have a good reputation, are not that popular and due to that are hidden jewels. I would love for them to be able to participate if they wish to become an admin.

I would like to create a new thread where they could fill a form to offer themselves for the position if interested so admin trainers could pick them if they fulfill the requisites. Said requisites would be to be active, have a good reputation, good knowledge about the rules and not have a bad history (aka full of bad notes/bans on recent times)

4. Yes, since it means that if you want to become an admin you have to be noticed by one first.

5. Definitely, so they can get informed if they desire to become an admin.


What are your thoughts on the admin staff? :
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478180#p478180On the time I have spent with the admin team, I can say with security that If I get elected I can trust them to apply correctly our rules for the better of the community, even if there’s obviously discussions from time to time due to all of us thinking differently.


Ban Log Transparency:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=21757&p=478183#p478183

I don't think a public ban log would be possible without it bringing issues like the banned players getting shamed in public, harassment, etc. While it would give players the chance to better know which things get punished each day, i consider it would bring more issues than benefits.


Transparency as a whole:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478190#p478190

Transparency is something that always gets promised and while it would be beautiful if we could achieve it… it simply isn't possible for a number of circumstances. For example, delicate subjects that can’t be spoken out of privacy (doxxing, harassment, suicidal behavior from a player, etc).

I would like to promise transparency, but I don’t like making promises I know I can’t fulfill.


level of cooperation with coders:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478194#p478194

I would simply like it if we could work together deciding via vote which features players like and dislike and negotiate removing them in the case they strongly dislike it, when possible.


what is your ideal tg?:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478201#p478201

Describing something ideal is difficult when such thing can’t be achieved most of the time; I really strongly desire making a community where the players feel their opinions are important and have an impact. That instead of flinging shit at each other we sat down and discussed the issues at hand.

My ideal tg would be one where all players could enjoy playing in the server without being harassed over how robust they are or not, where the valid hunting mentality got reduced and rp was something that more players would practice instead of searching for antags to kill. Doxxing would not exist and neither harassment; we all would simply log in to chill and have fun being our characters on a station in space.

However I know most of this is not possible to achieve; so my desire is to at least be able to give players a stronger voice on final decisions.


are SJWs welcome in your tg headmin anon:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478206#p478206

Yes, everyone is welcome. However rule 1 should be applied with care; we won’t ban Pepito because he told you Nigga once, neither we will ban Tom for saying all woman are idiots. It would be handled case by case.


RP standards:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478548#p478548

Personally, I would like if players interacted more between each other and rped their characters instead of self inserts. But what I like doesn’t matter in this case since the general player base enjoys more the current level of roleplay we have and i respect that.

Therefore, I don’t have any plan to execute the ideas I have and enforce something that will be disliked.


Flipping the config switches:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478550#p478550

I don't have any plan to change config options unless it's a controversial one that is disliked by a large amount of the community.


what is your greatest strength?:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478555#p478555

I hope to be humble with the following, but I consider my greatest strength would be my determination for things to get carried out properly taking always into account what people want. For better or worse, I always put what people need before what I personally desire, unless if it’s obviously concerning my personal life.

My desire, like I have been saying, is to give the community a stronger voice in decisions taken by the head admins whenever it is possible. If I get elected I will put what I personally want aside to instead give the community opinion on the subject when talking with the other two headmins (In case the subject has been talked by the community of course).


Will you bring back :salt: ban requests :salt: in your term, explain your reasoning for yes or no:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478567#p478567

Part 1:

I don’t plan to bring back ban requests because while we all love us some drama fests to put some spice in our lives, I dislike them for precisely being drama fests. I also don’t consider they’re needed anymore, we have a good admin coverage and in any case if something extremely bad happens in a time in which no admin was on we can always investigate it and ban the culprit.

Part 2:
elyina wrote:
MortoSasye wrote:I don’t plan to bring back ban requests because while we all love us some drama fests to put some spice in our lives, I dislike them for precisely being drama fests. I also don’t consider they’re needed anymore, we have a good admin coverage and in any case if something extremely bad happens in a time in which no admin was on we can always investigate it and ban the culprit.

What exactly is your basis for ban requests being a drama fest? This is a line I see parroted a lot by people who weren't actually here when they were a thing, simply because it's the "agreeable line" on the matter. I was personally in charge of ban requests for over a year and saw very little drama erupting from them.


The answer is quite simple. While I obviously won’t be a hypocrite claiming it was ''x '' when I wasn’t around, I did read most of the ban requests out of curiosity and they seemed like a good idea. However when put in practice it’s easy to see how they can turn quickly into drama fests and carefully planned lies. We have access to logs which are one of our most powerful tools but there are cases that don’t require them because it’s a ''he said, she said'' case in which lying is easy and it would end up evolving into a mess.

The fact that they are public also brings the general public eye to this, which is good for transparency, but could once again create situations in which a player gets harassed for something they didn’t even do at the end.

I think there are more cons than pros to ban requests, therefore, my opinion that they’re drama fests or a subject that brings too much attention to a personal issue between two players.


what is your greatest weakness?:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478584#p478584

My greatest weakness and the issue I have been working with myself since I have memory is how highly sensitive I am to people opinions of me. I want to appeal to people and make them happy but that’s something that can’t be achieved because there will always be someone that dislikes you and that’s perfectly fine.

After I became an admin the position helped me greatly to separate myself from the admin and I will always aspire to be polite and kind, even if the person is insulting me back. However I consider this a weakness when aspiring for the head admin position since it could make me be too soft to people who don’t deserve it. I’ll try to avoid this from happening like I have been doing since I became an admin.


community meetings:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478586#p478586

I consider the community meetings are important and would love to continue them. It would be good if it was ran twice per month with the issues the community have being presented on the discussion.


How would your friends describe you?:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=21792&p=478589#p478589

If it was possible for them to post here I would invite them to do so as well as strangers, be it a negative review or a positive one. However, as it is not possible, I can't really offer a reply without it being vague and not supported with proof.


how much /time/ do you have headmin uwu:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478592#p478592

Probably more than 7 hours considering I’m currently unemployed and not studying either. I would dedicate most of my time to the position, but leave some for recreation purposes in order to not end up burning due to overwork.


whats your favourite station map:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=21805&p=478878#p478878

I, unironically, like Pubby station a lot due to how pretty it is. If it's not Pubby then Meta.




Question 1 by subject217:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=477899#p477899
subject217 wrote:
MortoSasye wrote:If an ahelp from the previous round gets resolved in the next one, the person who ahelped gets a reply from the admins explaining if it got solved.

Hi Morto, I had a question regarding this point. What you've described here is something that happens on a regular basis already, with the caveat of admin discretion on how they'd like to handle it. It's something we teach new trialmins too, once the round is over and it's not sharing IC info you can discuss what happened and why in greater detail. How would you change the way that this already plays out? Would it be a rule for admins? Would it be complaint-able?


I would like to enforce it to happen more often and be part of admin conduct aka a rule, as i have been informed by players that some admins don't do this. This causes the player who ahelped to feel ignored and not know if their issue got resolved or not which is something severe in my opinion. Thanks for asking!


Question 2 by Dorsidwarf:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478042#p478042

Not-Dorsidarf wrote:You’ve stated that you’re unhapppy with the current escalation policy. What will you change the escalation policy to if you are elected, in concrete wording. Everyone has been making vague noises about escalation policy being bad in their candidate threadsfor years, but it has only materially changed once. What can you offer to prove that this is not just meaningless buzztopic-ism


Hi, thanks for your question. If elected i would like to change the escalation policy to the following, but it can obviously change from what i wrote here or not even be implemented if the other two headmins disagree with me:

If a player wrongs you(theft, attacks, etc), you should first resolve it by reporting it to security staff in case of petty crimes (they stole your id, punched you once and then ran away, etc). In the case there’s a lack of security staff or they did an extremely bad action towards you (killed you for no reason, decided to lock you in a room for more than 10 minutes, etc), report the behavior to the admins to decide if it’s breaking rule 1 or not. You may also choose to retaliate with violence, but it should always be a last resort action. If you choose this route, do not expect admins to help you out, even if you were not the original instigator.

You may instigate conflict with another player with a valid ic reason (you can't completely destroy their department, kill them unprovoked, or otherwise take them out of the round for long periods of time) but they are entitled to respond with violence. You can’t break rule 1 either by deciding to instigate conflict with another player just because you were bored (Example: Stealing someone id as a ‘’joke’’)

If you are the instigator in a conflict and end up killing or severely impairing the round of the person you are fighting, you should make a reasonable effort to return them to life at least once or make amends, only seeking round removal if they continue to pursue you. This protection doesn't apply to an instigator being killed.

Exceptions: 1. Security is expected not to retaliate with random abuse or violence unless the person in question is otherwise eligible for execution. You can't kill or maim security for trying to arrest you for legitimate reasons.

2. Do not space or cremate someone unless their actions are extremely bad (hiding your body after killing you, putting people on permabrig for minor crimes or non at all, etc.) or they constantly seek to spark conflict with you again and there are no admins available to report it too. If there are admins online, always ahelp before deciding to do such an action.


This is an edit of the current policy with some key parts. It adds a suggestion to report it to security first for petty crimes so it can be solved icly, and adds also the option to ahelp it to the admins for them to decide if the other player actions are breaking rule 1 or not. Also, for the people who like solving their issues with violence, the current option of retaliating with it is still available but it should be a last resort.

Question 3 by TribeOfBeavers:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478053#p478053
TribeOfBeavers wrote:
After a decision is made by the headmins regarding a policy question, I will implement a vote to confirm this was something liked by the community as a whole instead of just the headmin team.


Headmins make a lot of policy decisions. Do you intend to create a vote for each one?
If so, how do you intend to combat voter fatigue?
If not, how will you decide which decision is "worthy" of a vote or not?


How will you handle it if a vote is negative? Will the policy be reversed? What if it's a policy you feel is for the good of the server/game but will be somewhat unpopular?


Hello, thanks for your questions!

Do you intend to create a vote for each one? If not, how will you decide which decision is "worthy" of a vote or not?

Yes, if possible. In case this ends up back firing with a greater delay on final rulings, then voting would be enabled for the policy discussions that would be controversial. I will decide which discussions meet this requirement with the other two headmins if i get elected.

If so, how do you intend to combat voter fatigue?

If there's a decrease on the quantity of players voting i would enable voting only for policy discussions that are controversial.

How will you handle it if a vote is negative? Will the policy be reversed?

In the case a ruling gets more than 65% negative votes the next step would be to rework the ruling to appeal to the players. The policy would most probably be reversed in the case it can't get reworked without keeping the original essence.

What if it's a policy you feel is for the good of the server/game but will be somewhat unpopular?

The player base should decide what's good for the server regardless of what i personally like, unless it's obviously something awful like enabling doxxing or anything of the like.


Question 4 by bman:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=478134#p478134

bman wrote:
You can’t break rule 1 either by deciding to instigate conflict with another player just because you were bored (Example: Stealing someone id as a ‘’joke’’)


So, in your own wording, this means doing things like stealing IDs for the sake of it (as clowns sometimes do) is banned, how does this apply to other situations, can you steal someone's ID so you can enter a department, can you not rob someone of their weapon in order to use it? Where does the line of acceptability start and end, and what does it cover?

In fact, what DO YOU mean by being bored, does that mean I can give ANY REASON such as "i stole that guy's ID so i can enter science and do x and x" will free you of responsibility, an admin can argue that someone who steals an ID for a given reason is doing it out of boredom.


Hello, thanks for your question!

If you rob someone ID to enter a department because for example someone is dying inside that would be enough ic reasoning as i also stated:
You may instigate conflict with another player with a valid ic reason

If you just do it because you want more access fnr then it would be frowned upon. If you rob someone weapon then you would need a reason like you needing it to kill x monster, not just because you wanted a shiny laser gun.

In the third example you gave me, if the scientist isn’t doing their job at all (not due to being new but out of boredom) and refuses to let you in then you should inform that to a higher up like the RD or captain. If not possible, then yes, you could try stealing their id to do the work for yourself.

Deciding if a player action was done out of boredom or for the sake of being a dick would be up to the admin judging the situation.

Basically, if your action that harms another player wasn’t performed out of need and it was only because of something you would like then it would be punishable. I know this can create some loopholes, or remove freedom, but i consider it would be better for everyone if this sort of behavior got toned down. Everyone is here to have fun after all.


Question 5 by bman:
Spoiler:
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=479156#p479156

bman wrote:
If you just do it because you want more access fnr then it would be frowned upon. If you rob someone weapon then you would need a reason like you needing it to kill x monster, not just because you wanted a shiny laser gun.

In the third example you gave me, if the scientist isn’t doing their job at all (not due to being new but out of boredom) and refuses to let you in then you should inform that to a higher up like the RD or captain. If not possible, then yes, you could try stealing their id to do the work for yourself.

Deciding if a player action was done out of boredom or for the sake of being a dick would be up to the admin judging the situation.

Basically, if your action that harms another player wasn’t performed out of need and it was only because of something you would like then it would be punishable. I know this can create some loopholes, or remove freedom, but i consider it would be better for everyone if this sort of behavior got toned down. Everyone is here to have fun after all.


What are the criteria for you robbing someone to be considered a "out of need", this seems to be like it's impossible to pin down, and because of how broad the spectrum of things you can define as "need-based" is, would result in bans ranging from you disarming food out of someone to eat to the aforementioned ID-robbing.

In fact, why would you even try to regulate things like robbing someone's ID for the sake of it? Thievery and similar kinds of conflict that currently do not fall under rule 1 are a fact of life on TG and the entire reason why security exists (if you even choose to rely on sec, which most players don't!) That kind of ruleset would fit on somewhere more like paradise or something, but expect receiving about seven hundred adminhelps per round if you try to gate petty thievery and random harassment like disarming someone repeatedly or slipping them around at every turn to a vague umbrella term that can easily be stretched to cover almost every case, and even easier to make up a reason for since no one but you knows why you stole that ID.


The main thing to consider in this escalation policy would be if the person is acting like a dick to the other player who they are affecting for no reason whatsoever which is easy to pinpoint. A person who disarmed another to eat their food has a reason why they did so; they were hungry.

My desire is not to regulate this things from happening, but to prevent them from occurring for the purpose of being a dick to someone. I do understand security is there to handle this sort of events and that’s why minor conflicts should be solved with them instead of with admins. Not expecting an increase in influx of ahelps would be naïve from me, hence why I would first test it before making it official.

I promise this won’t be the final version since it’s still a prototype hence why it still has loopholes as well as vague definitions.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, I kindly thank anyone who took the time to read all of this. Please do leave your questions below or if you want to be anonymous to discord (My username there is MortoSasye#9750), I will answer all of them as quickly and as clearly as possible.
Last edited by MortoSasye on Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:17 pm, edited 15 times in total.
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
Image
Give sweet feedback here or go ''admin man bad'', pick your poison: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=20661&view=unread#unread
NSFW:
Image



User avatar
Catamus
 
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: Catamus

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby Catamus » Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:14 am #477885

Play Sybil more! ;D

You'll def be high in my vote ranking. I like the concept about confirming changes with the community.
Смърт На Камунизма

User avatar
MortoSasye
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby MortoSasye » Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:25 am #477890

Catamus wrote:Play Sybil more! ;D

You'll def be high in my vote ranking. I like the concept about confirming changes with the community.


Thanks for your kind review! I'll try to get around there more when bagil is full with admemes.
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
Image
Give sweet feedback here or go ''admin man bad'', pick your poison: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=20661&view=unread#unread
NSFW:
Image

User avatar
subject217
Github User
 
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 11:27 pm
Byond Username: Subject217
Github Username: subject217

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby subject217 » Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:36 am #477899

MortoSasye wrote:If an ahelp from the previous round gets resolved in the next one, the person who ahelped gets a reply from the admins explaining if it got solved.

Hi Morto, I had a question regarding this point. What you've described here is something that happens on a regular basis already, with the caveat of admin discretion on how they'd like to handle it. It's something we teach new trialmins too, once the round is over and it's not sharing IC info you can discuss what happened and why in greater detail. How would you change the way that this already plays out? Would it be a rule for admins? Would it be complaint-able?
thankfully former admin
viewtopic.php?f=27&t=20553

User avatar
MortoSasye
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby MortoSasye » Sat Feb 23, 2019 2:05 am #477921

subject217 wrote:
MortoSasye wrote:If an ahelp from the previous round gets resolved in the next one, the person who ahelped gets a reply from the admins explaining if it got solved.

Hi Morto, I had a question regarding this point. What you've described here is something that happens on a regular basis already, with the caveat of admin discretion on how they'd like to handle it. It's something we teach new trialmins too, once the round is over and it's not sharing IC info you can discuss what happened and why in greater detail. How would you change the way that this already plays out? Would it be a rule for admins? Would it be complaint-able?


I would like to enforce it to happen more often and be part of admin conduct aka a rule, as i have been informed by players that some admins don't do this. This causes the player who ahelped to feel ignored and not know if their issue got resolved or not which is something severe in my opinion. Thanks for asking!
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
Image
Give sweet feedback here or go ''admin man bad'', pick your poison: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=20661&view=unread#unread
NSFW:
Image

User avatar
Not-Dorsidarf
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:14 pm
Location: Space outside the Brig
Byond Username: Dorsidwarf

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby Not-Dorsidarf » Sat Feb 23, 2019 3:10 am #477987

You’ve stated that you’re unhapppy with the current escalation policy. What will you change the escalation policy to if you are elected, in concrete wording. Everyone has been making vague noises about escalation policy being bad in their candidate threadsfor years, but it has only materially changed once. What can you offer to prove that this is not just meaningless buzztopic-ism
Image
Still, my support will always go towards the rightful Lord of Yurop, God-Emperor Donald Trump the Trumpst. Trumpingrad for life. He'll make an indiscriminate number of countries great again.


Deadcomic

User avatar
MortoSasye
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby MortoSasye » Sat Feb 23, 2019 3:57 am #478042

Not-Dorsidarf wrote:You’ve stated that you’re unhapppy with the current escalation policy. What will you change the escalation policy to if you are elected, in concrete wording. Everyone has been making vague noises about escalation policy being bad in their candidate threadsfor years, but it has only materially changed once. What can you offer to prove that this is not just meaningless buzztopic-ism


Hi, thanks for your question. If elected i would like to change the escalation policy to the following, but it can obviously change from what i wrote here or not even be implemented if the other two headmins disagree with me:

If a player wrongs you(theft, attacks, etc), you should first resolve it by reporting it to security staff in case of petty crimes (they stole your id, punched you once and then ran away, etc). In the case there’s a lack of security staff or they did an extremely bad action towards you (killed you for no reason, decided to lock you in a room for more than 10 minutes, etc), report the behavior to the admins to decide if it’s breaking rule 1 or not. You may also choose to retaliate with violence, but it should always be a last resort action. If you choose this route, do not expect admins to help you out, even if you were not the original instigator.

You may instigate conflict with another player with a valid ic reason (you can't completely destroy their department, kill them unprovoked, or otherwise take them out of the round for long periods of time) but they are entitled to respond with violence. You can’t break rule 1 either by deciding to instigate conflict with another player just because you were bored (Example: Stealing someone id as a ‘’joke’’)

If you are the instigator in a conflict and end up killing or severely impairing the round of the person you are fighting, you should make a reasonable effort to return them to life at least once or make amends, only seeking round removal if they continue to pursue you. This protection doesn't apply to an instigator being killed.

Exceptions: 1. Security is expected not to retaliate with random abuse or violence unless the person in question is otherwise eligible for execution. You can't kill or maim security for trying to arrest you for legitimate reasons.

2. Do not space or cremate someone unless their actions are extremely bad (hiding your body after killing you, putting people on permabrig for minor crimes or non at all, etc.) or they constantly seek to spark conflict with you again and there are no admins available to report it too. If there are admins online, always ahelp before deciding to do such an action.


This is an edit of the current policy with some key parts. It adds a suggestion to report it to security first for petty crimes so it can be solved icly, and adds also the option to ahelp it to the admins for them to decide if the other player actions are breaking rule 1 or not. Also, for the people who like solving their issues with violence, the current option of retaliating with it is still available but it should be a last resort.
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
Image
Give sweet feedback here or go ''admin man bad'', pick your poison: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=20661&view=unread#unread
NSFW:
Image

User avatar
TribeOfBeavers
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:54 pm
Location: Canada
Byond Username: TribeOfBeavers

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby TribeOfBeavers » Sat Feb 23, 2019 4:12 am #478053

After a decision is made by the headmins regarding a policy question, I will implement a vote to confirm this was something liked by the community as a whole instead of just the headmin team.


Headmins make a lot of policy decisions. Do you intend to create a vote for each one?
If so, how do you intend to combat voter fatigue?
If not, how will you decide which decision is "worthy" of a vote or not?


How will you handle it if a vote is negative? Will the policy be reversed? What if it's a policy you feel is for the good of the server/game but will be somewhat unpopular?

User avatar
MortoSasye
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby MortoSasye » Sat Feb 23, 2019 4:29 am #478070

TribeOfBeavers wrote:
After a decision is made by the headmins regarding a policy question, I will implement a vote to confirm this was something liked by the community as a whole instead of just the headmin team.


Headmins make a lot of policy decisions. Do you intend to create a vote for each one?
If so, how do you intend to combat voter fatigue?
If not, how will you decide which decision is "worthy" of a vote or not?


How will you handle it if a vote is negative? Will the policy be reversed? What if it's a policy you feel is for the good of the server/game but will be somewhat unpopular?


Hello, thanks for your questions!

Do you intend to create a vote for each one? If not, how will you decide which decision is "worthy" of a vote or not?

Yes, if possible. In case this ends up back firing with a greater delay on final rulings, then voting would be enabled for the policy discussions that would be controversial. I will decide which discussions meet this requirement with the other two headmins if i get elected.

If so, how do you intend to combat voter fatigue?

If there's a decrease on the quantity of players voting i would enable voting only for policy discussions that are controversial.

How will you handle it if a vote is negative? Will the policy be reversed?

In the case a ruling gets more than 65% negative votes the next step would be to rework the ruling to appeal to the players. The policy would most probably be reversed in the case it can't get reworked without keeping the original essence.

What if it's a policy you feel is for the good of the server/game but will be somewhat unpopular?

The player base should decide what's good for the server regardless of what i personally like, unless it's obviously something awful like enabling doxxing or anything of the like.
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
Image
Give sweet feedback here or go ''admin man bad'', pick your poison: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=20661&view=unread#unread
NSFW:
Image

User avatar
bman
Github User
 
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 4:55 pm
Byond Username: Basilman
Github Username: Militaires

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby bman » Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:32 am #478134

You can’t break rule 1 either by deciding to instigate conflict with another player just because you were bored (Example: Stealing someone id as a ‘’joke’’)


So, in your own wording, this means doing things like stealing IDs for the sake of it (as clowns sometimes do) is banned, how does this apply to other situations, can you steal someone's ID so you can enter a department, can you not rob someone of their weapon in order to use it? Where does the line of acceptability start and end, and what does it cover?

In fact, what DO YOU mean by being bored, does that mean I can give ANY REASON such as "i stole that guy's ID so i can enter science and do x and x" will free you of responsibility, an admin can argue that someone who steals an ID for a given reason is doing it out of boredom.
pryce bax.
Image
Image

User avatar
MortoSasye
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby MortoSasye » Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:47 am #478144

bman wrote:
You can’t break rule 1 either by deciding to instigate conflict with another player just because you were bored (Example: Stealing someone id as a ‘’joke’’)


So, in your own wording, this means doing things like stealing IDs for the sake of it (as clowns sometimes do) is banned, how does this apply to other situations, can you steal someone's ID so you can enter a department, can you not rob someone of their weapon in order to use it? Where does the line of acceptability start and end, and what does it cover?

In fact, what DO YOU mean by being bored, does that mean I can give ANY REASON such as "i stole that guy's ID so i can enter science and do x and x" will free you of responsibility, an admin can argue that someone who steals an ID for a given reason is doing it out of boredom.


Hello, thanks for your question!

If you rob someone ID to enter a department because for example someone is dying inside that would be enough ic reasoning as i also stated:
You may instigate conflict with another player with a valid ic reason

If you just do it because you want more access fnr then it would be frowned upon. If you rob someone weapon then you would need a reason like you needing it to kill x monster, not just because you wanted a shiny laser gun.

In the third example you gave me, if the scientist isn’t doing their job at all (not due to being new but out of boredom) and refuses to let you in then you should inform that to a higher up like the RD or captain. If not possible, then yes, you could try stealing their id to do the work for yourself.

Deciding if a player action was done out of boredom or for the sake of being a dick would be up to the admin judging the situation.

Basically, if your action that harms another player wasn’t performed out of need and it was only because of something you would like then it would be punishable. I know this can create some loopholes, or remove freedom, but i consider it would be better for everyone if this sort of behavior got toned down. Everyone is here to have fun after all.
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
Image
Give sweet feedback here or go ''admin man bad'', pick your poison: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=20661&view=unread#unread
NSFW:
Image

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby Shadowflame909 » Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:50 am #478146

If escalation policy does change in a way. I hope we see some leeway for the first couple of weeks when its in effect.


Breaking old habits is quite tough.

Spoiler:
Image

ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
MortoSasye
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby MortoSasye » Sat Feb 23, 2019 6:52 am #478148

Shadowflame909 wrote:If escalation policy does change in a way. I hope we see some leeway for the first couple of weeks when its in effect.


Breaking old habits is quite tough.


I will take this into account if i get elected and the other two headmins agree to changing escalation policy. My wish is that it will improve the players enjoyment while playing!
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
Image
Give sweet feedback here or go ''admin man bad'', pick your poison: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=20661&view=unread#unread
NSFW:
Image

User avatar
lmwevil
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 3:09 pm
Byond Username: Lmwevil

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby lmwevil » Sat Feb 23, 2019 7:34 am #478165

has a good heart, think she could do real good if she stopped speaking in demonic tongues

User avatar
MortoSasye
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby MortoSasye » Sat Feb 23, 2019 7:36 am #478168

lmwevil wrote:has a good heart, think she could do real good if she stopped speaking in demonic tongues


Hola que hace? Thanks for your kind comment!
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
Image
Give sweet feedback here or go ''admin man bad'', pick your poison: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=20661&view=unread#unread
NSFW:
Image

User avatar
Malkraz
 
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 3:20 am
Byond Username: Malkraz

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby Malkraz » Sat Feb 23, 2019 9:21 am #478230

MortoSasye wrote:While keeping most things ic without admin intervention is something good, in this specific case a change needs to be done to stop indirectly protecting players who only desire is to cause conflict and headaches to the rest. Why should a person who decides to steal your id for the sake of it get away with it? This is a dick move and something that breaks our rule 1, so why should escalation policy protect them of admin intervention?
If I end up becoming a headmin I will talk with the other two headmins and edit the escalation policy to stop protecting people whose desire is to bother others. My wish is to avoid situations where a person gets wronged and be it due to lack of security staff, or the lack of possibility to recover the stolen object, their only choice is to attack the instigator with the possibility of ending up dead themselves without any chance to ahelp the person behavior. And if they ahelp without even starting the conflict, most of the time they will get told it’s an ic issue.
If you are the instigator in a conflict and end up killing or severely impairing the round of the person you are fighting, you should make a reasonable effort to return them to life at least once or make amends, only seeking round removal if they continue to pursue you. This protection doesn't apply to an instigator being killed.
This means that if a player out of boredom punches you constantly with the intention of starting a conflict and you defend yourself but end up losing, they can get away with killing someone for free as long as they clone you again. My desire is to avoid this from happening as much as possible.

These changes to escalation go too far in policing and railroading player behavior when simpler solutions targeted at different areas of the policy would be more beneficial. Protecting players from conflicts at the instigation of another that don't carry a threat of removal from the round (temporary or permanent) or significantly stunted play (e.g stripped and welded into a locker in maint) isn't something that admins need to be bothering with. Conflicts are a central part of the gameplay on tg and while some can be pushed too far FNR, being inconvenienced shouldn't fall under admin protection.
MortoSasye wrote:My wish is to avoid situations where a person gets wronged and be it due to lack of security staff, or the lack of possibility to recover the stolen object, their only choice is to attack the instigator with the possibility of ending up dead themselves without any chance to ahelp the person behavior.

The intentions are good here but the execution is flawed. A better alternative would be targeted toward's policing an instigator's options within a conflict rather than policing the instigation itself. Focusing on capacity for harm and repetition of offenses should lead us to a better policy than ensuring players don't get annoyed.
Example:
Spoiler:
Rock Steel breaks into engineering to steal some insulated gloves. The Engineer attempts to throw Rock Steel out but he's too slick. The Engineer begins attacking Rock Steel. Rock Steel responds in turn with violence.
Current Policy: Rock Steel can kill the Engineer, but is required to ensure he gets cloned. The Engineer can kill Rock Steel and is not required to clone him (but cannot prevent his cloning). This event can repeat itself with the same expectation on Rock Steel, but the Engineer can fully remove him from the round if Rock Steel instigated the conflict again.
Hypothetical Policy: Rock Steel can crit the Engineer, but is required to ensure he gets healed. The Engineer can kill Rock Steel as before. If Rock Steel returns for round 2, he cannot harm the Engineer to a point beyond slowing his movement, and can only do so in response to violence. The Engineer can still yeet Rock Steel out the airlock if he instigated a 2nd time.

While this policy doesn't prevent bad things from happening to the Engineer (it shouldn't), it hinders how much the instigator is capable of damaging the victim's round. Unless the "instigation" was something too minor to warrant the threat of violence or death (slipped and dabbed on), there's no circumstance where the instigator can seek to kill the other player. "Killing" does not include the person succumbing in deep crit or dying on the way to medbay (unless there's no access to defibs or cloning).
wesoda24: malkrax you're a loser because your forum signature is people talking about you

User avatar
Malkraz
 
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 3:20 am
Byond Username: Malkraz

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby Malkraz » Sat Feb 23, 2019 9:38 am #478237

MortoSasye wrote:If a player wrongs you(theft, attacks, etc), you should first resolve it by reporting it to security staff in case of petty crimes (they stole your id, punched you once and then ran away, etc). In the case there’s a lack of security staff or they did an extremely bad action towards you (killed you for no reason, decided to lock you in a room for more than 10 minutes, etc), report the behavior to the admins to decide if it’s breaking rule 1 or not.

Running up and straight murdering a dude or locking them up with no real means of escape are already Rule 1.
MortoSasye wrote:You may also choose to retaliate with violence, but it should always be a last resort action. If you choose this route, do not expect admins to help you out, even if you were not the original instigator.

While the extent of the violent response should obviously take the crime into consideration, there's no need to mandate how the victim gets his ID back. I do believe the "expect to get killed if you try to fight back" portion of escalation needs to go when dealing with more serious instigation as detailed in my previous post.
MortoSasye wrote:You may instigate conflict with another player with a valid ic reason (you can't completely destroy their department, kill them unprovoked, or otherwise take them out of the round for long periods of time) but they are entitled to respond with violence. You can’t break rule 1 either by deciding to instigate conflict with another player just because you were bored (Example: Stealing someone id as a ‘’joke’’)

I don't see a reason to limit conflict to "valid ic reason" (very subjective) so long as it does not escalate to a point where the instigator is threatening the victim's ability to be in the round. There's plenty of ways to recover from an ID theft barring the server being super-low pop or the round being right in the middle of war ops/wizard, but that ID is probably the least of your concerns.
MortoSasye wrote:If you are the instigator in a conflict and end up killing or severely impairing the round of the person you are fighting, you should make a reasonable effort to return them to life at least once or make amends, only seeking round removal if they continue to pursue you. This protection doesn't apply to an instigator being killed.

This is one of the only points where I take it a step further than you. I don't believe an instigator should ever be killing the other player unless the instigation isn't threatening enough to warrant a lethal response. There can be situations where the instigator kills the other player only to find there's no way to revive them.
MortoSasye wrote:Exceptions: 1. Security is expected not to retaliate with random abuse or violence unless the person in question is otherwise eligible for execution. You can't kill or maim security for trying to arrest you for legitimate reasons.
2. Do not space or cremate someone unless their actions are extremely bad (hiding your body after killing you, putting people on permabrig for minor crimes or non at all, etc.) or they constantly seek to spark conflict with you again and there are no admins available to report it too. If there are admins online, always ahelp before deciding to do such an action.

Agreed on these points.
wesoda24: malkrax you're a loser because your forum signature is people talking about you

User avatar
MortoSasye
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby MortoSasye » Sat Feb 23, 2019 3:07 pm #478294

Thanks for your input Malkraz! I do believe you have some important feedback regarding my proposed escalation policy and will take them on mind if I get elected. I was going to go more in depth trying to discuss each point with you, but I don’t think that should be talked about in depth unless this policy ends up becoming real and not just a proposal.

In the case I become a headmin I will seek approval of players before making it official. This is, after all, done for the players and not for us!
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
Image
Give sweet feedback here or go ''admin man bad'', pick your poison: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=20661&view=unread#unread
NSFW:
Image

User avatar
bman
Github User
 
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 4:55 pm
Byond Username: Basilman
Github Username: Militaires

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby bman » Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:55 am #479156

If you just do it because you want more access fnr then it would be frowned upon. If you rob someone weapon then you would need a reason like you needing it to kill x monster, not just because you wanted a shiny laser gun.

In the third example you gave me, if the scientist isn’t doing their job at all (not due to being new but out of boredom) and refuses to let you in then you should inform that to a higher up like the RD or captain. If not possible, then yes, you could try stealing their id to do the work for yourself.

Deciding if a player action was done out of boredom or for the sake of being a dick would be up to the admin judging the situation.

Basically, if your action that harms another player wasn’t performed out of need and it was only because of something you would like then it would be punishable. I know this can create some loopholes, or remove freedom, but i consider it would be better for everyone if this sort of behavior got toned down. Everyone is here to have fun after all.


What are the criteria for you robbing someone to be considered a "out of need", this seems to be like it's impossible to pin down, and because of how broad the spectrum of things you can define as "need-based" is, would result in bans ranging from you disarming food out of someone to eat to the aforementioned ID-robbing.

In fact, why would you even try to regulate things like robbing someone's ID for the sake of it? Thievery and similar kinds of conflict that currently do not fall under rule 1 are a fact of life on TG and the entire reason why security exists (if you even choose to rely on sec, which most players don't!) That kind of ruleset would fit on somewhere more like paradise or something, but expect receiving about seven hundred adminhelps per round if you try to gate petty thievery and random harassment like disarming someone repeatedly or slipping them around at every turn to a vague umbrella term that can easily be stretched to cover almost every case, and even easier to make up a reason for since no one but you knows why you stole that ID.
pryce bax.
Image
Image

User avatar
MortoSasye
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby MortoSasye » Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:15 pm #479215

bman wrote:
If you just do it because you want more access fnr then it would be frowned upon. If you rob someone weapon then you would need a reason like you needing it to kill x monster, not just because you wanted a shiny laser gun.

In the third example you gave me, if the scientist isn’t doing their job at all (not due to being new but out of boredom) and refuses to let you in then you should inform that to a higher up like the RD or captain. If not possible, then yes, you could try stealing their id to do the work for yourself.

Deciding if a player action was done out of boredom or for the sake of being a dick would be up to the admin judging the situation.

Basically, if your action that harms another player wasn’t performed out of need and it was only because of something you would like then it would be punishable. I know this can create some loopholes, or remove freedom, but i consider it would be better for everyone if this sort of behavior got toned down. Everyone is here to have fun after all.


What are the criteria for you robbing someone to be considered a "out of need", this seems to be like it's impossible to pin down, and because of how broad the spectrum of things you can define as "need-based" is, would result in bans ranging from you disarming food out of someone to eat to the aforementioned ID-robbing.

In fact, why would you even try to regulate things like robbing someone's ID for the sake of it? Thievery and similar kinds of conflict that currently do not fall under rule 1 are a fact of life on TG and the entire reason why security exists (if you even choose to rely on sec, which most players don't!) That kind of ruleset would fit on somewhere more like paradise or something, but expect receiving about seven hundred adminhelps per round if you try to gate petty thievery and random harassment like disarming someone repeatedly or slipping them around at every turn to a vague umbrella term that can easily be stretched to cover almost every case, and even easier to make up a reason for since no one but you knows why you stole that ID.


The main thing to consider in this escalation policy would be if the person is acting like a dick to the other player who they are affecting for no reason whatsoever which is easy to pinpoint. A person who disarmed another to eat their food has a reason why they did so; they were hungry.

My desire is not to regulate this things from happening, but to prevent them from occurring for the purpose of being a dick to someone. I do understand security is there to handle this sort of events and that’s why minor conflicts should be solved with them instead of with admins. Not expecting an increase in influx of ahelps would be naïve from me, hence why I would first test it before making it official.

I promise this won’t be the final version since it’s still a prototype hence why it still has loopholes as well as vague definitions.
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
Image
Give sweet feedback here or go ''admin man bad'', pick your poison: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=20661&view=unread#unread
NSFW:
Image

User avatar
Lazengann
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:26 pm
Byond Username: Lazengann

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby Lazengann » Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:20 pm #479292

Morto is a very friendly, extremely active admin who has more engagement with the community than most. Very pleasant and easy to talk to and takes other people's input to heart.

User avatar
MortoSasye
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby MortoSasye » Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:00 am #479491

Lazengann wrote:Morto is a very friendly, extremely active admin who has more engagement with the community than most. Very pleasant and easy to talk to and takes other people's input to heart.


Thanks for your kind comment and support to my campaign! I appreciate it <3

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Just wanted to update this by informing i will be a bit absent until this saturday due to irl circumstances. Sorry about the delay in replies!
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
Image
Give sweet feedback here or go ''admin man bad'', pick your poison: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=20661&view=unread#unread
NSFW:
Image

User avatar
CitrusGender
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 8:34 pm
Byond Username: CitrusGender
Github Username: CitrusGender

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby CitrusGender » Tue Feb 26, 2019 10:40 pm #479665

My own candidate (not wubli's).

I think they'd do great as headmin tbh. Although they started off a bit rocky with their trial getting a few complaints: I wouldn't see any problems with them becoming headmin. My only concern is that they're still a little bit new to the game since they just got off of their trial but I would definitely not have a problem with them being headmin.
Code: Select all
You can't eat the orange, and throw the peel away - a man is not a piece of fruit.

Zarniwoop
 
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 7:47 pm
Byond Username: Dagum

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby Zarniwoop » Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:28 am #480344

Seems like they’d be a safe choice. I like the polling stuff.

User avatar
bman
Github User
 
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 4:55 pm
Byond Username: Basilman
Github Username: Militaires

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby bman » Fri Mar 01, 2019 5:28 pm #480463

I think what I should really be saying is: why disallow "something from occurring for the purpose of being a dick to someone", when just about everyone does that, all the time, during any given round. People being dicks to each other has always been an IC issue, don't you agree?
pryce bax.
Image
Image

User avatar
Kingtrin
 
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2018 12:29 am
Byond Username: Kingtrin

Re: MortoSasye [Going In Half-Cockatieled]

Postby Kingtrin » Fri Mar 08, 2019 9:10 am #481774

subject217 wrote:
MortoSasye wrote:If an ahelp from the previous round gets resolved in the next one, the person who ahelped gets a reply from the admins explaining if it got solved.

Hi Morto, I had a question regarding this point. What you've described here is something that happens on a regular basis already, with the caveat of admin discretion on how they'd like to handle it. It's something we teach new trialmins too, once the round is over and it's not sharing IC info you can discuss what happened and why in greater detail. How would you change the way that this already plays out? Would it be a rule for admins? Would it be complaint-able?


This is not regular enough as of right now. One of the most frustrating things I deal with when ahelping is not receiving closure. Was I correct to ahelp? Did I miss something important? Did I ask for too much information, and if so how what response can I be given? Often times the response seems to be deafening silence If I ask something that really deserves a "no" or "too sensitive". It's fucking aggravating just tell me my question was dumb so I know not to ask it again instead of ignoring me.

A lot of us at TGMC felt the same way playing on TG and CM, and it's what led to us implementing our own closure protocol for ahelps.


Return to Archived/Deleted

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users