ShankNinja

It should be a separate punishment that's more severe then failrp + ltap as leaving to avoid a raid or to stop your printers from being taken is a lot more of a severe crime then just generic failrp, such as running into spawn to avoid a hit, then leaving the game which is just failrp + ltap. This is where I disagree and think this could use some work. FailRP is when someone is known to be punished and decides to leave the game in attempt to try to avoid it. That's when a FailRP is escalated to FailRP+LTAP. FailRP+LTAP is already at a 1 day ban, which is not very severe but still a measurable ban coming from a Warn w/4-6 minute jail. Now we get into Raid Logging. Nobody likes Raid logging, it's the worst part of DarkRP, and I think anyone who's pulled off a raid has had this happen to them. It's not fun to pull off a raid, the player leaves, and you have nothing to show for your sweet success. However, I don't think we should be enforcing a ban more severe than 1 day for somebody who leaves the game because they're defeated. No Intent to RP? Well, that case could be made. They had no intent to roleplay losing defending a base, or otherwise were mad enough that they left the game. However, this would be difficult to implement. Sure, the logs show that someone was raided, and that they died, and then that they disconnected - but is there any way to prove that the person actually left to avoid their printers being stolen? Even a video of you raiding the base, killing someone, and then they leave the server would be a bit iffy if you didn't know if they even had printers or anything valuable inside. I think if we're honest about this and how we'd proceed with actually punishing this, it's clear that this is not something the staff team has in the past ever wanted to deal with and not something to easily define a rule around. Say I'm a player, I join, I get raided. Am I now supposed to remain on the server for 5 minutes after I was killed in the raid before I'm allowed to play something else? 10 minutes? Am I held hostage now in the GarnetGaming server as someone milks my printers? Am I only required to stay until someone decides to claim my prints (taking up to 10 minutes on their raid as allowed)? I think the community mostly agrees that it'd be nice to have a rule in place to either prevent or at least punish and curb this behavior from continuing. But I don't see a good suggestion on what the actual rule is, or any punishment that I can agree would be fair for the crime of leaving the server after you lost. Really, the best way in my opinion would be to have someone's entities remain on the server for ~2 minutes after they disconnect, giving anyone a chance to fight over remaining printers, get some claims in, etc. This would prevent there needing to be a rule followed or any stricter guidelines placed on players that won't get followed or consistently enforced anyways. But since I don't know how hard this would be to implement or any exploitation risks involved, I'll just leave my wall of text here for the next person bored enough to read my thoughts. Until the community can come up with a fair: Rule for this scenario and Punishment for this scenario, for this I will remain Neutral.

I can't tell if this is a prank or not but why did you take phone pictures of your console and cut them apart in paint? You could've just copy-pasted from console or taken a screenshot It's a bit difficult to read especially since only 10/27 lines are relevant My neurodivergent bitching aside, it is interesting that you're able to get over 100K in 8 runs. That equates to an average of 14K with the sample size, with ~11K low end and about 21K high end. This is really good information to give to new players that are seeking a quick way to get some starting guns.

+1 Why make someone reapply? The community has already spoken and stated that they want you as staff. You've already been staff. What is the purpose of further community feedback? In a scenario where someone doesn't pass the training, wouldn't that typically require a retraining of either the applicant or the trainer themselves? How hard can the current system be that a past staff can fail even after receiving an entire re-training? I'm with AJ that I think this is a silly requirement and that the training/onboarding process needs refined to prevent this from happening again. From a training and orientation perspective, it makes very little sense. TL;DR Computer's already been accepted and recently. No reason not to accept this one, even less a reason for it to be required.

Congratulations on all accumulators of points!

Damn, see you guys on the Ventrilo server

-1 Staff would use this power to sit inside of my base and fuck with me oh wait that already happens

+1 Hobo cities are great fun and usually rely on leniency in this regard. I've always enjoyed it and I know many others did too. I believe the fun this can cause far outweighs the "risk" of allowing conjoined huts.

+1 Every day we are closer to monkey

+1 Sounds cool and fun. Though, I'm sure the other CP won't enjoy my Combine soundboard nonsense into the radio as much as I will, so there's that.

-1 There is a noise already, it's the noise of your chat being spammed when your printer starts overheating.

+1 It's annoying when your hit can't be completed. Can't think of a very good reason not to allow hit cancellation honestly. Only thing I would think is that if you cancel a hit maybe make it so you can't re-accept it. I can imagine somebody spamming a hit placer this way. (____ has accepted your hit!) x100

+1 Tdizz am I right? Sounds like the gang is coming back together Tdizz is one of the kindest Veterans of GG. He has never been afraid to engage with the community and learn. I remember watching him catch cheaters on Rust back in the day... and I don't even play rust Any single person who played when Tdizz was staff will surely have great things to say about him, be it from SWRP, Rust, or DRP. I can say that I've at least never seen someone have issue with him.

-1 Lifespan of the mayor is too short to try and do any of this with a plugin. The mayor should be able to roleplay their own Referendums using the PD meeting room with the podium or any location really. Voting system sounds alright but when you consider the pop up would be appearing many many times a day as a dead Mayor tries to "re-elect" himself repeatedly or as other people join it. Especially considering your suggestion includes lowering the level cap, it goes from sounding alright to sounding awful. As a player, I don't really want to vote on the mayor at all. If I don't like the mayor, I'll put in a hit, raid their base, or do whatever it takes to end their life in roleplay. I don't think level 50 is hard to accomplish or get to, and believe that the level cap exists to ensure a prospective Mayor has at least played long enough to have tried several of the classes, seen other Mayors in action, and understand how the server works. It's not a job anybody should get to within an hour of joining the server - even the basic PD has a level cap (although this is more because they get a gun for free) The sortition doesn't make a lot of sense. Lotteries for free? Who's funding it? If you're wanting to gather people to come up with new laws and ideas, I don't think making an exception in the lottery system for a mayor for money to appear out of thin air should be something added to the game. If you're saying the Mayor should foot the bill, taxes, the PD vault, etc., then this information should be included in your suggestion. Either way, sounds like another thing to handle via RP. All around it sounds like the suggestion is asking for some plugin-enforced handholding to an already hard to roleplay scenario. If you start gathering people around the mayor on a server like this chances are he's just going to die anyways.