More Manuel Questions

Moderator: oranges

Forum rules
Anyone can make a thread to ask all candidates a question.

ONLY CANDIDATES MAY REPLY TO A THREAD [details]
User avatar
vkalls
 
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:16 pm
Byond Username: Vincent Kallstrom

More Manuel Questions

Postby vkalls » Sun Feb 21, 2021 10:54 pm #592318

Do you support a basic RP standards rule (could be things like cracking down on meme talk or avoiding things like pain)? Do you have any thoughts on separating Manuel's policy through separate policymakers/forums/player polls? Do you think admins should be more restrictive in response to issues on Manuel or do you propose other solutions? Do you think Manuel should break off into a separate administration like TGMC?
Image



User avatar
iamgoofball
Github User
 
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:50 pm
Byond Username: Iamgoofball
Github Username: Iamgoofball

Re: More Manuel Questions

Postby iamgoofball » Sun Feb 21, 2021 11:04 pm #592321

Zoomers talk about memes all the time IRL. Meme talk is fine.

User avatar
Naloac
In-Game Head Admin
 
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:21 pm
Byond Username: Naloac

Re: More Manuel Questions

Postby Naloac » Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:20 am #592359

Ive already spoken about this in my thread. Although id fully support an MRP and LRP separation with their own headmins and admins so they can better deal with their own policy rather than have abunch of lrp admins dictate it for them
I Might Be an admin, You should leave me feedback: https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=24032
Image
The best goddamn Comment on my youtube videos.
Image

User avatar
Timberpoes
Code Maintainer
 
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: More Manuel Questions

Postby Timberpoes » Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:28 am #592362

vkalls wrote:Do you support a basic RP standards rule (could be things like cracking down on meme talk or avoiding things like pain)?


My platform includes granting admins that go to MRP broader powers to enforce MRP policy within the spirit of the rules as well as to the letter. Admins that frequent MRP will be in a better position to decide the server's pressing needs re: policy on a shift-to-shift basis. Admins who do not frequent MRP have the entire extended benefit of the entire administration team to talk to. This is as they have done for as long as I've been privy to the admin channels as a Maintainer and then Admin. More overarching policy considerations can always be shunted to the headmin team for discussion - Which if I become Headmin would include me, and I'm a longtime Manuel player.

I have no intent of enforcing minimum RP standards. Manuel shifts can be long and draining, having to stay perfectly in character 24/7 is tiring. Those who can are free to. Those who can't are not expected to *me every emote, type ~~ at the end of their sentence when they're begging for a Rule 8 ban or use /bayspeak/ to emphasise words. Taking steps like this is a bit too far.

MRP is not a no-fun-allowed server, but memes and references should be kept and phrased as IC as possible. A ban on memes would be silly. Sending "X person to Detroit/Brazil" is a meme some of MRP's top players have been guilty of joining in on in the past as a direct example. Banning this would end up detracting from the zany and often irreverant atmosphere of MRP that I feel is when the server is genuinely at its best. An overarching goal for the server's RP quality is less your Baycationers and more your Hates-The-Lizards. Like a Saturday morning cartoon.

vkalls wrote:Do you think admins should be more restrictive in response to issues on Manuel or do you propose other solutions?


Under a Timberpoes headminship, MRP admins would be granted a lot more autonomy to deal with pressing server issues. I see MRP as the home of a higher quality of RP - There doesn't have to be more moment-to-moment RP than the LRP servers, but what RP there is should be more involved with players genuinely interacting in some meaningful way - In the context of a Saturday Morning Cartoon. MRP doesn't need sweeping and restrictive policies, it needs a baseline set of rules that combine to form the spirit of playing on MRP - The restrictions and requirements necessary to make player interactions more than just a point-and-click adventure game where the only puzzle is "Use Gun on Valid".

vkalls wrote:Do you have any thoughts on separating Manuel's policy through separate policymakers/forums/player polls? Do you think Manuel should break off into a separate administration like TGMC?


Strap yourself in, because I'm about to dish out a whole bunch of paragraphs about this topic and the wider context of the Free Manuel Party and "Seperate LRP and MRP"

And you're going to read it. Because it's drama. Wrapped in the pastry of reality. With a topping of LRP hot salsa and MRP mustard.

This is not going to happen. The chances of MSO, the other headmins, the admins and the codebase all agreeing to a singular joint vision resulting in a split in administration, server, codebase etc. are genuinely so low that even this timeline isn't going to produce it. The people who are advocating for it are stamping the red square dead in the center of Arm's bingo card.

So let me address the elephant in the room - Your question seems very loaded and perhaps in reference to a combination of Lepi and Bindy platforms alongside the "Free Manuel Party". Proposals of splitting Manuel away from the LRP codebase or LRP administration are an incredibly flawed, shortsighted viewpoint that would signal the death of Manuel. I will explain why I feel this is the case.

If you think about this entire thing for even a picosecond, it all starts to fall apart. People who want to push for a separation of powers from LRP and MRP need to think of the consequences of such an act in a broader context.

With all MRP policymaking split from the rest of tg's servers, there will now be two sets of policymakers to consult for the codebase. When both parties disagree on a code change who, if anyone, will the Maintainer team listen to the opinions of? Do you think the Host himself will allow for a situation where MRP and LRP are competing against eachother over policy-based PRs - Or is he likely to veto this as scenario from every happening? Will the Head Coders accept anything to do with this? Do you believe the maintainer team as a whole would support two unique codebases if push came to shove - Or would they block this proposal and tell Manuel players if they wanted their own codebase, they had to make it themselves?

If a person thinks Manuel is better off splintered from the tg administration as a whole, then they better be prepared to accept the consequences that come with it. Their own policymakers. Their own codebase. Their own coders. Their own maintainers. And unless the Host is willing to accomodate them, their own infrastructure too. Otherwise, you will be left with MRPmins making MRP policy for MRP, on a codebase dictated exclusively by LRPmins with no input from MRP as a whole.

Candidates who have advocated for the separation of MRP from LRP lack the important context and nuance that comes with Manuel sharing a codebase with tg as a whole. The Free Manuel Party is even worse - an echo chamber of the Manuelcord and its associated sub-splinter-meta-meta-Discords where fools argue with mirrors about who is the greatest Court Jester of them all, it has absolutely no bearing on the reality of the codebase, the reality of making policy and the reality of separation of powers and the implicit agreements between the Host, Admins, Policymakers and codebase that keep our administrative structure functioning.

If somehow this does all work perfectly and you manage to separate MRP administration and policy from LRP? You take the MRP policymakers out of the LRP-based headmin team, and you end up with all voices advocating on your behalf being lost and players with no vested interest in MRP whose remits come from triple of MRP's playerbase fighting you over how policy interacts with code and the realities of the game. And you will not like the consequences. You will have all the power to make decisions and none of the power to enact or enforce them or promote change that doesn't also align with the interests of LRP.

As for you LRP players lapping this all up, how'd you guys feel if MRP had a veto over codebase changes that required policy oversight because they had a their own administration looking out for MRP's best interests and not wanting the inclusion of things intended for an LRP audience that didn't also align with MRP interests? Exactly. You better hope if you vote one of "Split LRP and MRP administration" candidates to power that the end result isn't general codebase neutrality between the two administrations. Because the Headmins you vote have 0 influence over what the codebase does when it comes to policy decisions made by the split LRP and MRP administrations and the Headmins you vote have 0 influence over what MSO decides as the Host if he feels this is getting out of hand and steps in to tidy it up.

A second issue is that the "Split MRP" platform is a clearly pandering to LRP. Not to MRP. MRP players are by-and-large happy with MRP. They're just quietly playing on it. They're not part of the Manuelcord or sub-Manuelcords. They're not part of the Free Manuel Party. They're just playing and having fun on a tg server with more antag restrictions and less powergaming. LRP just wants to support the meme of kicking MRP off the tg servers because they know it'll be the end of MRP. Meanwhile both MRP and LRP should be careful what they genuinely wish for, because their Headmin candidates have no way of influencing what the final outcome will be in the 0.1% chance that MSO and all other branches of the administration and codebase agree to do it and can agree on what the final picture will be.

This isn't even a comprehensive answer to your question. This is the kind of issue that would take multiple terms to discuss, debate and decide on.#

It sure is fun to talk about though.
Last edited by Timberpoes on Tue Feb 23, 2021 12:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Admin: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship.

User avatar
Gogodapogostick
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2020 4:23 am
Byond Username: Gogo9001

Re: More Manuel Questions

Postby Gogodapogostick » Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:00 am #592420

I am not a manuel player or admin, so I would defer the point of the "basic RP standards rule" to them as a basis to form my opinion of the issue on. I do not plan on separating the policy much more than we already do, as long as the policy threads made for MRP are marked as such.

If we continue as we are now, there should be no need for official separation between LRP and MRP, as policy threads have already split into full server and MRP specific ones. I feel as though having these manuel specific threads is the key to keeping both LRP and MRP happy while in the same sphere. This way, manuel policy no longer will be directly affecting the LRP policy, which is the major issue that is generally brought up. Also, it would end up likely just being extra work splitting the two as almost all LRP rulings apply to MRP as well, or are already not allowed as per the MRP rules.

I do not believe that admins need to be any more restrictive than they are currently on Manuel, but take this with a grain of salt as I do not play Manuel at all. Like I stated before, I do not think Manuel really needs to split into a separate codebase or administration as long as we keep these same positive trends that we are working with currently.

User avatar
RaveRadbury
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2019 3:41 am
Location: BK ChatZone
Byond Username: RaveRadbury
Github Username: RaveRadbury

Re: More Manuel Questions

Postby RaveRadbury » Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:56 am #592483

MRP-exclusive policy is already suggested in the policy discussion sub-forum. I welcome community members to open threads to suggest changes to MRP, which can include what they consider to be basic RP standards.

I don't like to think of policy makers as positions that need to be appointed, because any player can open up a policy thread, and I think that's a really neat thing about our community.

Separating MRP into its own administration is not something that I am supportive of, as MRP is just as much a part of /tg/station as LRP is. I would like to strengthen the community, not divide it.

We saw the return of an RP channel in the discord, the idea of providing an MRP sub-forum could be interesting, if players show an interest in using it.

As for MRP-specific player polls, the idea sounds nice, if a coder would be willing to make player polls able to be server-specific I would support that. It would have made feedback for Mothblock's Dynamic 2021 easier to collect.
How's my administrating? Call 1-800-RADBURY
ImageImageImage
Heart Emoji ~ Winter Ball Queen 2019

User avatar
Coconutwarrior97
In-Game Head Admin
 
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:14 am
Byond Username: Coconutwarrior97

Re: More Manuel Questions

Postby Coconutwarrior97 » Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:19 pm #592530

I don't have any desire for a basic RP standards rule to avoid meme talk or the like, if that kind of thing gets excessive during a round I expect administrators to handle it. Seperate player polls for MRP would be the only thing I support in regards to separation of things. I have no interest in MRP breaking off into a seperate administration and will fight against that if other headmins push for it. As far as, "Do you think admins should be more restrictive in response to issues on Manuel or do you propose other solutions?" , that's a broad sentence and I find it hard to answer. I think there needs to be less policy responses which answer extremely specific policy questions, and more delegation given to MRP admins to discuss and handle it based on the context of the round.

User avatar
Stickymayhem
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Re: More Manuel Questions

Postby Stickymayhem » Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:57 pm #592540

I think there are servers that cater to a stricter form of RP with a minimum "skill" standard for roleplaying. I don't think manual wants to be that or needs to be that. The incidence rate of someone being so genuinely poor at roleplaying as to ruin the server is going to be as common as people who are genuinely stupid enough to fail the supermatter ten times in a row. It's not as rare as people griefing and doesn't require specific policy to cover. If they don't work out they don't work out.
Image

Image

Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be

User avatar
iamgoofball
Github User
 
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:50 pm
Byond Username: Iamgoofball
Github Username: Iamgoofball

Re: More Manuel Questions

Postby iamgoofball » Tue Feb 23, 2021 12:42 am #592682

Timberpoes wrote: Lepi, Bindy and Goof's platforms alongside the "Free Manuel Party". Proposals of splitting Manuel away from the LRP codebase or LRP administration are an incredibly flawed, shortsighted viewpoint that would signal the death of Manuel. I will explain why I feel this is the case.


hi, just wanna clarify, i don't wanna split manuel off into it's own thing as that's stupid and would be its death immediately, i want to find compromise to fix the problems causing the people to want a split int he first place

User avatar
Timberpoes
Code Maintainer
 
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: More Manuel Questions

Postby Timberpoes » Tue Feb 23, 2021 12:58 am #592689

iamgoofball wrote:
Timberpoes wrote: Lepi, Bindy and Goof's platforms alongside the "Free Manuel Party". Proposals of splitting Manuel away from the LRP codebase or LRP administration are an incredibly flawed, shortsighted viewpoint that would signal the death of Manuel. I will explain why I feel this is the case.


hi, just wanna clarify, i don't wanna split manuel off into it's own thing as that's stupid and would be its death immediately, i want to find compromise to fix the problems causing the people to want a split int he first place


Understood, I will modify that part of my post.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Admin: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship.

User avatar
mrmelbert
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2020 6:26 pm
Byond Username: Mr Melbert

Re: More Manuel Questions

Postby mrmelbert » Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:44 am #592919

Do you support a basic RP standards rule (could be things like cracking down on meme talk or avoiding things like pain)?


I'd love to crack down on the borderline NRP behavior that goes down occasionally like spouting memes IC, but I don't think enforcing a flat RP standard is a wise idea, as everyone's idea of what an "MRP standard" is, is different. I'd rather some players just RP at the level they're comfortable at - some will be higher than others, and that's fine.

Do you have any thoughts on separating Manuel's policy through separate policymakers/forums/player polls?


We have a decent amount of MRP policy threads already and I think as it stands they're in a good place. Players or admins come forward when they have specific questions about MRP that are answered in a separate way compared to the LRP servers.

Separate policymakers doesn't seem necessary as MRP policy threads are already started by MRP players and admins.

Separate MRP forums would be interesting but I have doubts that they would be used / they would likely see hostile or off-topic comments by their LRP rival players in them.

In my thread I mentioned I want to run more player polls across all the servers for policy and such changes and MRP is not an exception.

Do you think admins should be more restrictive in response to issues on Manuel or do you propose other solutions?


I'm not sure what 'restrictive' implies but I believe they're fine as they are currently.

Do you think Manuel should break off into a separate administration like TGMC?


No, I don't think so.


Return to Candidate Debates

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users