Addressing "IC Issues" and Removing Rule Restrictions

Discussion in 'Announcements' started by WellingtonTheThird, Sep 17, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. WellingtonTheThird

    WellingtonTheThird Well-Known Member

    Greetings, LLA.

    We've taken into consideration many complaints with the administrative response "IC Issue" to players adminhelps and complaints of borderline grief beyond the rule and this is our official response to it all.

    What does this quote mean?

    This means when you adminhelp something you will no longer get the message "IC issue". Administrators are instead encouraged to be more engaging with the players and offer more insight and explanation, but without revealing metaknowledge.

    What is "Removing Rule Restrictions?"

    This means that administrators are being encouraged to handle issues of "Grief within the rules" without fear of being caught up by the wording of the rules we're currently working to fix.

    If you feel like someone has ruined your ability to enjoy the game even if its not breaking the rules you are encouraged to make an adminhelp and the administrator will look into it. Even if rules are not being broken the administrator will investigate the issue to see if there is an actual problem that affects the playerbase or server negatively and take action if it is.

    We want you to know that your feedback and concerns are taken very seriously. We are here for the players.

    An 'Admin Memo' (something admins see when they log on) has been made to inform all of our administrators of this change in policy.

    Q: Does that mean that every adminhelp made will receive action?
    A: No. It means that when there is a problem regardless of if a rule is expressly being broken or not an administrator will seek to correct it.

    Q: Does this mean players will be getting in trouble for things that aren't in the rules?
    A: Not necessarily. This would be an unfair way of conducting administration, but if we have talked to a player over something being an issue and the negative behavior persists then they will be held accountable for this.

    Q: Why is this happening?
    Q: Taicho and I are currently rewriting the rules and we're trying to transition into a style of administration that focuses more highly on engaging the players, creating a positive atmosphere, and gauging intention rather than action.

    If you have any further concern you may voice them in the thread or bring them straight to Don Zombie, Taicho, or me.
  2. IMVader

    IMVader Well-Known Member

    Thank you, Wellington. I hope you take feedback from the other announcement and from the "Rule editing" thread in General, while re-writing the rules.
  3. PepsiBlueFan

    PepsiBlueFan Active Member

    Wait, wasn't this in the rules anyways?

    it is the duty of the admin to assess any given situation to figure out if there is in fact fault and where that fault lies if it does exist.

    How is this policy really that much different from this one already in the rules? Is it the same thing but more encouraged?

    So administrators work has just increased by ten fold. What do the other administrators think of this new policy?
  4. daddysds1

    daddysds1 Well-Known Member

    Pepsi how much of the current rules was even followed by anyone includeing the Admin team i mean come on man.
    kadingir likes this.
  5. IMVader

    IMVader Well-Known Member

    For example?
  6. daddysds1

    daddysds1 Well-Known Member

    I don't have the list with me.

    But The head rule and secuirty rule was one of them that never got enforced atleast if i get ahold of the list will let you know of the others.

    Edit : To clear this up by list i mean the List of Server Rules.
  7. WellingtonTheThird

    WellingtonTheThird Well-Known Member

    I've never received a single formal complaint from you regarding this nor seen it within the channels where these matters are handled. Not in the time of my new position at Taicho's side nor whenever Taicho and I were worked under Adam.

    It is worth noting the Taicho is the new Head Administrator and I am newly appointed his Deputy Head Administrator so in essence the administrative team is under new management. This means that we have a new power over previous matters which were allegedly not being handled nor brought forth to my current knowledge.

    Furthermore we can not handle incidents that are never brought to our attention so I suggest you send this list to Don Zombie, Taicho, or me in a private P.M. as I've repeatedly instructed at this point.

    Pepsi this was in the rules, but it seems to have been ignored or unenforced and the principle behind the matter was not clearly explained or outlined for players who didn't receive the behind the scenes context that an administrator would receive through our extensive Skype network.
  8. daddysds1

    daddysds1 Well-Known Member

    Willington it never got reported by me because it was allways considerd.

    Wait for it.

    " A IC issue"

    And it was left at that.

    Even though sec/heads of staff broke the head of staff /sec rule.
    QuantumWings likes this.
  9. WellingtonTheThird

    WellingtonTheThird Well-Known Member

    And again for those who missed the previous times that we've made this announcement:

    We will review anything no matter what any administrator has said in the past on an issue. Bring it to Taicho or me and if you feel that we're still in error take it to DZ or vice versa.

    We cannot fix the problems that are not brought to our attention no matter how many times we say that we will.
  10. Legato_frio

    Legato_frio Public Relations

    I love this they are making it so that there is a bit more transparency within reason. This way players can get a feel for the process that has taken into thought before they are responded. Now as he states, just because someone did something that earned them being spoken to us about it doesn't mean its a punishment. Its just a way to help remind a player that what they are doing is disrupting another players game.

    I love this keep up the good work Taicho and Wellington things look great.
    daddysds1 likes this.
  11. Mindtrixx

    Mindtrixx Well-Known Member


    -Pictures courtesy of Zyphon Alen, a very upset individual.

    It gets enforced, two people were jobbanned today from head roles that were made public in ooc by themselves.

    Daddysds1, the information you're working on is months old. I don't see how you would have an accurate image of the server considering your ban. So please keep that in mind when posting.

    Wellington should keep that in mind as well when considering Daddysds1's feedback, if hes not already.
    AncientV25 and Flatoftheblade like this.
  12. Flavo

    Flavo Well-Known Member

    the uh "killed by admin" thing is a common misconception whenever anyone gets a PM. if this image was by a disgruntled player, take it with a grain of salt.

    @Daddysds: You have not been able to log on in a few months, these are *NEW* changes.
  13. Jariahtoadsage

    Jariahtoadsage LS13 Admin

    I made a post in the Rule Rewrite thread. It should be taken into account here as well. However wellington has already more clearly covered my post here, and as such i wont direct-quote it. Im glad this is happening, and would like to remind players of one of the key points made here several times, as its ALREADY becoming an issue players are getting ..... *Clearly aggravated sarcastic tone* "Clever" With.

    This does NOT mean "Help, i broke into an area, Tried to steal shit, and got beat up and tossed in disposals, He kept my Rainbow crayon when this happened! OMG ROUND RUINED" is going to get you anything but an aggrivated admin telling you you clearly earned the treatment. Do us a favour guys, were here to help all of YOU, The more times you use this new policy to ahelp shit you already know was deserved the less willing admins are going to be to follow it.

    You'll also find that the admin team is willing to do a SHITTON of work to make sure that we're making the right moves. And we're more apt to do more work for the betterment of your gameplay if you give us a break. when someone seems to have deliberately ruined your round (And i do mean Ruined [Unable to do job, Permenantly incarcerated, Key Job item removed, etc.]) Thats when you use this policy. When you slipped someone, Tried to rob them, Get outrobusted, Cuffed and counter robbed. Youve entered into a situation where you have IC brought a situation onto yourself.

    To summarize what i intended to say in the second part of this post: Happy Employees work better than Whipped Slaves.
    IMVader and QuantumWings like this.
  14. daddysds1

    daddysds1 Well-Known Member

    I can only go off what i knew before i was banned and months old or not there still issues that need to be fixed.

    If they have allready been fixed good job to the people who fixed it.
  15. Jester5093

    Jester5093 Member

    I just wanted some clarification. It seems that "I dont want to ever see anyone say "that an IC issue" ever again" really means "There are no more IC issues". It's a subtle change, but a big one. This definitely seems to be the case lately. If killing someone for ANY reason, including IC reasons, is not allowed, that needs to be clearly stated. If the rule currently is, no one can be killed unless the captain says so (and apparently that does not include the ACTING captain (hop when no captain exists)), that needs to be clearly stated. Right now we have a mess. The rules rewrite cannot come soon enough, because for me, as a new person, every day is a contradiction and very confusing to know how to act.
  16. Legato_frio

    Legato_frio Public Relations

    This is about Transparency. There are still IC issues, its just we are suppose to explain in greater detail what that means to the players/Customers. That way they understand the process that happened in working their case so they can have a understanding of what we did for them.

    This is done so that there can be a building relationship between the admins and the players so its not a us vs them feeling. When someone has a good reason we need to explain that because of the events that accrued and the intent that was behind the reason is why this action happened. Now we must be careful to not give away too much information to prohibit meta-knowledge.
    daddysds1 likes this.
  17. IMVader

    IMVader Well-Known Member

    I'd like some feedback on this as well. In my proposed version of the rules RP is no longer an excuse to break the rules. Are there now IC reasons to break them or not?

    This is wrong. You can kill confirmed antags, animals, and in self-defense, as per the rules.

    Acting captain is equal to captain in every right and responsibility. Including execution.
  18. Jester5093

    Jester5093 Member

    Can I get an admin to backup IMVader, only antags animals and in self defense, never any IC reason to kill someone? Please state it clearly.
  19. Black Jack

    Black Jack LS13 Admin

    We take a broader look when someone ahelps something that used to be deemed as an IC issue. It could be speaking to the person who was ahelp'd about and explaining how their actions are negatively effecting others, and give them ideas about other ways to go about doing said actions so that they do not negatively effect other people.

    Confirmed antags can be killed, but you must make sure they are confirmed. This is indeed true, you can kill animals (Ian, Runtime, Ect.) You can kill someone in self defense, but the damage they have done must be in proportion to your life. If someone hits you once with a toolbox that doesn't mean you pull out a fireaxe and murder them. The same can be said for confirmed antags, someone hitting you once with a non-traitor weapon cannot be confirmed as antag.
    This is true.
  20. Jester5093

    Jester5093 Member

    Now I know, and I won't bother to rp or deal with IC issues then.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page