Looking at the faction status reports that came in... I have to ask some things here that I am sure it is not only me that is wondering...
(02-02-2016, 03:12 PM)Laura C. Wrote: [ -> ]Are there any outstanding requests linked to your faction?
1. Inquiry over possible new perks which stays unreplied for 29 weeks now...
(02-01-2016, 12:18 PM)Karst Wrote: [ -> ]Are there any outstanding requests linked to your faction?
Yes, we've been waiting for a base upgrade request for three weeks.
And well ofc others...
For bases I have noticed that the pattern is 3-6 weeks wait time for the blueprints to be accepted. Even when they are accepted there are instances when the person has to poke the admin to get them the stuff. I guess you're all forgetful?
PP
What I am wondering is that was the intention for this question so that we can have a list of all the things needed to do? Or is this more of an insightful thing rather than something the admins can work with?
For myself even, I am wondering about these requests and faction perk system and how long it needs to take for us to get a response back. Even when it does happen and there is a yes, we still need to wait for it to be implemented when i know for a fact that it can be done for the next day or even an hour.
And example of this is that i got a response for the AFC ID, but I do not see that the changes are there yet. I've been waiting a while for it too and i know that ID corrections can be done rather quickly. Correct me if I am wrong but I am asking what is behind all of this?
Curiosity killed the cat, I suppose.
edit: Also this
http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread...pid1738881
Plz dont use admin powers to grave dig a locked thread that was for the purpose of saying that i am away.
it is annoying and it is making people confused.
Thx
"Core: Omega restart: Denied. System design decisions were not deemed a determining factor in the creation of a second restart point for the same faction. See with devs for connection adjustments instead"
What does this even mean? The post that explained restart perks outlined that one of the reasons why the perk would be beneficial to factions is because of system design issues and a factions lack of ability to access all do it's ZoI. In that case, isn't this a bit contradictory? Arguably I'm not even requesting a perk or bonus per se, but a bandage to place over a currently exposed wound in my factions composition. Other factions have multiple restarts to ease character creation and fully reach their ZoI, I don't understand why the same cannot be done here.
Looking over to the devs to fix this would be a far more time consuming and low prioity job in their work flow. I did ask about getting a O-41 connection in Rho to fix the problem but, as you can imagine, I was told "not now". And given that the Omicron update changes from having a set date for release to TBC every ten seconds, I'm not faithful a fix would come promptly. There are plans for a Core omega base to also remedy the issue, but for that I need to do roleplay which will also be time consuming when it I urgent that we get easy access to the Omegas (or if the devs would be kind enough they could do what they did for HF and sneakily place a base without need for RP ;) ).
Although the request becomes somewhat moot since I submitted it for the restarts overhaul as well, but I guess I can conclude that it means that will be turned down too?
(01-24-2016, 11:46 PM)Thyrzul Wrote: [ -> ]Does/Will the Administration Team continue to review the sanction and take the audiovisual evidence provided by Spazzy into account (which, in my opinion, as a video portraying the entire context, is more accurate than the counter evidence, a mere screenshot of a single moment out of the whole context) or can we consider the case - with the asymmetric consdieration of provided evidence - closed?
I can't really recall any response to this ever since then, in case there was one I just missed, I'd like to ask for a PM with the link to it. Else I guess I'll have to interpret silence as the case is permanently done, creating the precedent in Admin conduct, and the uncertainity, things which I am not really in favor of.
Hi, I would like to ask if the activity check for January was made according to old activity rules and requirements (5 active members required, hardship program still applied and so on) or according to new ones (3 active members required, hardship program no longer exist etc.).
I am very disappointed (if not outright upset) at the way the administrastion team ordered me and my brother-in-arms to change our ships, the ethnicity of our characters and roleplay just because we represented a minority that certain people hate due to a very small percentage of them are involved in terrorism. We were breaking no rules.
I always supported the fair representation of minorities and ethnicities instead of the homogeneous nation state approach, which is what everyone who lives in the Western world should be doing in my opinion.
I believe in equal opportunity and equal representation of ethnicity, religion and gender, I am disappointed to see that the stance of (some of) the community and (some of?) the administration team is the opposite and are willing to sacrifice fair treatment for the sake of a few whiners. If people can play catgirls (which I don't mind), I don't see why people can't play arab characters.
I also believe that the administration team is supposed to set the rules and keep to them instead of using individual opinion to impose sanctions while referring to non-written rules. Rules are not meant to be flexible and open to interpretation, sanctioning for non-existing rules is even worse than that.
As a returning player, I find that such issues hinder the gameplay much more severely than anything else. A roleplay server is supposed to be creative, open and colorful instead of homogeneous, boring and full of clichés and the administration team should be doing their part to support such an environment instead of destroying it.
So you see absolutely no reason why using "Allah akbar" as an engagement notice is of questionable judgement?
No. It is a fundamental part of Islam and has nothing to do with terrorism. Besides, neither of us used the phrase since the first time were told not to, so I dont see your point.
So, there goes my roleplay idea - based onto Yusuf Reis (the original inspiration for Jack Sparrow) - I suppose, if we cannot create actual corsair-inspired characters...
Yep. Terrible idea indeed. There are plenty of people fighting for ISIS called Yusuf. You would offend a lot of people.
(02-12-2016, 05:26 PM)Sturmwind Wrote: [ -> ]I am very disappointed (if not outright upset) at the way the administrastion team ordered me and my brother-in-arms to change our ships, the ethnicity of our characters and roleplay just because we represented a minority that certain people hate due to a very small percentage of them are involved in terrorism. We were breaking no rules.
I always supported the fair representation of minorities and ethnicities instead of the homogeneous nation state approach, which is what everyone who lives in the Western world should be doing in my opinion.
I believe in equal opportunity and equal representation of ethnicity, religion and gender, I am disappointed to see that the stance of (some of) the community and (some of?) the administration team is the opposite and are willing to sacrifice fair treatment for the sake of a few whiners. If people can play catgirls (which I don't mind), I don't see why people can't play arab characters.
I also believe that the administration team is supposed to set the rules and keep to them instead of using individual opinion to impose sanctions while referring to non-written rules. Rules are not meant to be flexible and open to interpretation, sanctioning for non-existing rules is even worse than that.
As a returning player, I find that such issues hinder the gameplay much more severely than anything else. A roleplay server is supposed to be creative, open and colorful instead of homogeneous, boring and full of clichés and the administration team should be doing their part to support such an environment instead of destroying it.
You can play arab based players all the way you want and people will not have an issue with it. It becomes an issue as soon as you use this kind of roleplay to bring real life politics and references onto the server. These references include but are not limited to certain refugee issues, to global terrorism and to general religion/heritage based stereotypes of the aforementioned. But apparently thats our fault for interpreting your completely innocent roleplay completely wrong, because we like to abuse our powers, right?