S34N

The only reason they are built is to try and facilitate redtexting antags. There is a reason these areas have no cameras from a map design standpoint. The AI can already be overbearing as an antag, letting them see into maints is just pain.

:( Grug leave? Small grug sad and wish big grug safe passage to good feeding land. Small grug not much work with big grug but still respect big grug for work done. Small grug sad for loss.

As much as a I love mapping, I can tell you that it's not feasible to swap service and command on box. If you want this sort of layout you make or port a new map, not edit box. The amount of rework to get it fitting nicely just is not worth it.

Yeah, those are the worst. But at the end of they day you basically have to strip them naked to get them to stop.

That, and having their PDA taken off them is just a lame move overall. What harm are they possibly going to do with it?

moar art please

I really am not a fan of meta, IMO it's the weakest of all three current maps. Having said that, I do plan on giving it some attention when map freeze is over, so thanks for organising this stuff in a list!

Do you have a discord tag you are willing to share with me? This sort of project is one I definitely intend to undertake in the near future, and feedback + insight will go a long way to making it work.

Speaking as a player and mapper here, not as a staff member, but I've always been of the opinion that dorms should be the place for such RP interactions. Standing or lying on the floor outside what is essentially one of the most secure areas of the station has always seemed a bit funky to me. Now I can't say I've ever been a bridge hobo myself for more than a few moments, but I understand the appeal of being at an "in the know" area. And, especially on box, dorms is really quite lacking as a hangout spot. I think I'm going to add "look at reworking dorms" to the list of mapping projects I have in mind. I was not online at the time of this happening, so I don't have anything to say regarding the circumstances that lead to the response from staff.

Whoever told you this is having a laugh, this may just be me but you aren't some scary eldritch horror that will consume whoever PMs them. You are approachable to anyone that can take a straight answer in their stride. <3 Do we want these people in our community? If this happened in-game they would most likely face administrative action. While speaking out against staff should never be the sole reason for someone being restricted in the community, extreme toxicity very much should be dealt with. Hopefully the team will be able to more confidently deal with these then the repository code of conduct is merged. I think this here is a key point. The word harassment gets thrown about a lot, and it has become a little murky. What a lot of players want is to "change the opinion" of whoever objects. As you said its natural to want agreement. The issue is when everyone PMs regarding their PR, it's just one PM for the user but 173 for the maint/head. I personally feel that conversations regarding objections should always be held in public, say on the PR itself, as opposed to in DMs. This lets the community clearly see both sides of any discussion that does happen, and would reduce any cases of harassment as people on a public forum are much less likely to be toxic. Perhaps the heads/maints could have an "autoreply" template asking people to host discussions over objections in the PR comments? It's becoming clear that this topic as a whole is an extremely complicated one to resolve, and I appreciate the communication from staff to the community regarding it.

I really like the idea, more things that contribute to a horror element are great.

This thread is for discussing these issues, and it is a conversation we need to have, it is not a thread to attack people and bitch about the work that IS being done. Having said that, "Just wait" is the exact attitude that has contributed to this problem. It has gotten us to the point where we have an entire page and a half of PRs that are at least 6 months old. I don't quite understand where you have got this idea from, but not once have I implied or demanded that maints should just "do more work." Nor does this thread come about due to some self-entitled opinion that my PRs should be merged. On the contrary, this thread was made because of the concerns the entire contributor community have regarding the long-term state of the project. This thread isn't here to moan about things and throw a tantrum, it's here for a lasting public discussion that isn't buried in shitposts like you would get on discord. I would have pinged all the maints but I'm unsure if they use these forums, hence why AA got it. I'm sure he has or will discuss it with them regardless. Now I know from discord conversations with AA he does not think this situation will continue for much longer, but those posts are buried and lost. The forum is a much, much better place to have this sort of rational discussion about the issues at hand. To put the timescale of some of these PRs in context, some other codebases mark PRs as stale after a WEEK of no activity. Most of the open PRs on /TG/, for example, being from within the last month, with the oldest being from April. Our oldest is from February of last year, 2020.

Two rules broken

There are more, I've asked at least 4 or 5 within the past few months alone. I don't think I've used the word "variable" specifically mind you.

Okay, so since the headmins seemingly are approving PRs at a rate greater than I was lead to believe, that mitigates a lot of concerns surrounding the first of my known issues. Thanks to Kyet and Neca for your input and time looking at this issue. So, that leaves: "Stale" review requests. PR limbo. Stale PRs. (my definitions for these are in the original post) So next comes a ping for @AffectedArc07 since it seems these are more maint-oriented issues than headmin ones. Are there any current plans or ideas to deal with PRs that have long time review requests or objections that have not been resolved in months? Some examples of PRs in these categories for context: https://github.com/ParadiseSS13/Paradise/pull/14335 https://github.com/ParadiseSS13/Paradise/pull/15445

I LOVE this idea. You could even give atmos something to do by having them take pipe exported plasma and run it through some sort of new process to "purify" it or something before generating power for CC.

Preface: This is not really a "suggestion" as of such, more a problem the community is concerned about. Since there is no real place for such a public discussion about this specific topic, I have stolen the suggestion forum for it. I want to make it crystal clear right here that this is NOT intended to bring up any ill-will towards the staff team, and we all agree that the work they do as volunteers is massively appreciated. Everyone has a life, we don't expect you to full-time care for Paradise. However, some of these points do involve asking hard questions to staff, and we want a civil but open discussion about them. The issue at hand: So, what's this all about? Why am I reading this forum thread? Well, if you mosey on over to the Paradise github, you will notice we are sat at about 200 active PRs. This number has been slowly climbing over the past few months and is starting to reach an unmanageable backlog. Why is this a problem? Surely 200 PRs is good since people are actively contributing! Well, yes and no. It's great to see active development and people taking part, but unfortunately we currently have more active development going on than staff are handling, leading to the increase in PRs that are sat there stale. We have a LARGE number of PRs that have been sat stale (or unmerged) for many months, and a handful over a year old! This puts people off contributing, it makes it stressful to have to maintain months old PRs with no feedback on where/why they are not moving anywhere, and quite franlky means the game is not getting as much love as it should from a coding standpoint. What is the cause of the problem? Well, quite frankly, this is what this thread is here to discuss. It's not entirely clear why things are the way they are, or why they are not being resolved. Factors we are aware of: Heads of Staff currently have to actively approve any non-fix/refactor PR. If a PR gets overlooked or no votes, it just sits there forever. (See: https://github.com/ParadiseSS13/Paradise/pull/15139) Unfortunately, it has become clear that heads are not really able to give the time to sort through our massive PR backlog, with approvals being sporadic at best. Now yes, headmins are busy and we appreciate all the work they do in other sections, but with this issue ongoing for over 6 months, it's clear the situation is NOT going to resolve itself by being left as-is. "Stale" review requests. These happen when a code change is suggested by a maintainer, implemented, but the maintainer does not re-review the code. This issue sort of ties into the lack of active maintainers, with @AffectedArc07 literally carrying the maint role singlehandedly for all intents and purposes. (See: https://github.com/ParadiseSS13/Paradise/pull/15404) PR limbo. PR limbo happens when a PR is objected to by one person, but does not get any further approvals. This is also linked to both above issues. PRs like this just drift towards the back page and are not tackled or looked at. So they just sit there. (See: https://github.com/ParadiseSS13/Paradise/pull/15445) Stale PRs. Stale PRs are ones that have not been updated in a long time, and are just sat there. Other codebases handle these by allowing maints to close them at their discresion, however we seem to just let them sit there forever. (See: https://github.com/ParadiseSS13/Paradise/pull/15442) So, how do we fix it? Well, this is the difficult part. It requires a lot of change somewhere, and I'm not sure where to start tackling it. This is why an open discussion with the community regarding WHY these issues have been allowed to creep up, and HOW the staff heads are planning to resolve the issues. Things I can think of that might alleviate the issues somewhat: More ACTIVE maintainers. We appreciate the work put in by all our maintainers, and we don't want them to feel this is an attack. But currently, AA is the only maint actually doing anything remotely maint-like. He is doing everything and it is, no offense to him, too much for one person to stay sane and handle. Allow heads to object, but remove the requirement for their explicit approval on feature PRs. Let the good judgement of the maintainers (people who are familiar with the game and have a good sense of what will help or not) carry the code, and the heads can step in if they feel something is going to cause issues. Be more aggressive in closing stale PRs. Add a time-limit to review requests, if someone has been requested for a review and has not done so in months, their review should no longer be a hard requirement. Be more active in discussions regarding PRs in PR limbo, try to actively resolve them instead of just sweeping it under the rug and letting them accumulate in the background. These are just a few solutions I can think of. Please, community, share anything you feel is relevant. Lastly, we just need MORE involvement from the heads in the current system, and we should not let stale reviews/objections hold up the whole PR system. @Kyet @necaladun @Dumbdumn5 I'm pinging you three here specifically, because I want each of you to please share with us your thoughts on why things have gone the way they have, and how you feel we can solve the issues.

Help I followed the guide but it was really hard to get the disk with only a crowbar, hardsuit, and bulldog

I get what you mean with uniforms being themed, as opposed to just hardsuits, the issue is how frequently you see said uniforms. 90% of the time, ERT have their hardsuit on.

This sounds like dynamic, and I like it ;)

One problem I can see with this is players "metagaming" the fact that its now an extended round. I think most of sec would cryo, players might start doing silly stuff knowing they wont get mistaken for an antag, etc.

Now this is cool as hell, amazing work lad. Anyway, im off to get culted, see ya.

Me and bubs made a monstrosity (it was bubblegum himself). There was also a monkey that was the inverse of this and it sacred me.

To be fair, Esseno, ban statuses (for anyone with a linked forum/discord account) and appeal history are public. If it serves as a cautionary tale against powergaming geneticists being a 'gateway dug' into bannable behaviour, what's the problem? I don't remember how it was worded in the original post, but if it was intended as a warning to future geneticists, I think that's fair enough. Edit: Sorry if this is off-topic, feel free to hide the post if you think it is :)

Man, no S rating for chav, or mention of chav at all? Sad :(