Buford
-
Posts
183 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by Buford
-
-
This topic is still valid right? It was not invalidated or validated as something that would be implemented in the game.
Well ok, best thing to do in this circumstance is to remove civilian completely.
Remove the limited availability of the clown job.
Make clown the new citizen job with all it's privileges and items included.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
-
On 11/3/2017 at 3:27 AM, Vajra said:
So having played sec for quite some time now, both as warden and as an officer. Id have to say perma is one of the weakest, most shoddily built areas of the station. It's a nightmare to deal with as sec, and either very easy, or very boring for prisoners to deal with.
- Windows - They're gonna be broken, and everyone will break them. From the kung-fu space vox traitor clown, to the greytiding human thats doing it for laughs. I can understand giving prisoners a possible escape but these things are way WAY to easy to break. Electrified or otherwise the prisoners just throw shit at em till they bust. I cant even understand the point of them RP wise, what are the prisoners gonna look at? The empty black void of space!? The lax way most perma prisoners do it is what really gets to me to, ill check cams after locking a fella up and almost immediately afterwards he'll bust the cameras and start on the windows. These things either need to be stronger or just full on metal.
- Solitary Confinement - So a prisoner trys to break a window? No big deal right? Just throw em into solitary confinement. Ok but now we have two vox prisoners and a human. There's only ONE solitary confinement area, and at most you can throw another bed in there and hope the prisoners dont eat each other out of claustrophobic panic. This thing either needs to be bigger, or there needs to be more of em.
- APC for IPC's - This is the one that irks me the most. Perma an IPC? Well they're gonna starve if you dont come to feed em. And dont even try to bring em to the perma APC thats right outside the cells, they sure do love fucking the perma power over when they do that. IPC's need some way to feed themselves IN perma, without being given the ability to just blast open the doors through sheer hunger or robo fuckery.
- Chemical Implants - These things arent broken so much as they are typically useless. If the warden even bothers putting a chemical in them, they either wont know what to use or are just ineffective depending on the prisoners species. Id suggest making them some sort of implanted shocker/stunner that can be activated from the prisoner computer or a device that comes with them. Basically shock collars. Or at the very least have them come pre-filled with some kind of chemical that can at least down an organic for a small while.
Once again, I know perma is meant to give prisoners some chance of escape, but when it gets to point in a round where shits hit the fan, you can barely focus on whats going on all at once, and the prisoners can either just destroy or die from lack of food in the hellhouse that is perma, it almost becomes easier to just permanently lock them in the standard cells in the sec lobby area. Hell im not even sure if thats against the SOP, should I just keep perma folk in the front cells so they can actually be interacted with more?
Once again, I know perma is meant to give prisoners some chance of escape, but when it gets to point in a round where shits hit the fan, you can barely focus on whats going on all at once, and the prisoners can either just destroy or die from lack of food in the hellhouse that is perma, it almost becomes easier to just permanently lock them in the standard cells in the sec lobby area. Hell im not even sure if thats against the SOP, should I just keep perma folk in the front cells so they can actually be interacted with more?
Once again, I know perma is meant to give prisoners some chance of escape, but when it gets to point in a round where shits hit the fan, you can barely focus on whats going on all at once, and the prisoners can either just destroy or die from lack of food in the hellhouse that is perma, it almost becomes easier to just permanently lock them in the standard cells in the sec lobby area. Hell im not even sure if thats against the SOP, should I just keep perma folk in the front cells so they can actually be interacted with more?
---
W0w your a genius, you actually know what it's like! Prepare for your boink Mr.
-
Oh no I concur. You are wrong you can use an HIV/AIDS infected body and draw the blood to create a super aids virus that is air born.
My solution to the problem is to merge pathologist and virologist and just use the name Aids Spreader.
So you will have two title options for that job.
Aids Spreader and Microbiologist.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
-
On 5/10/2017 at 4:16 PM, TullyBBurnalot said:
Alright, what do we have for today... oh, great. Samples.
Sample VS Population
1. Put simply, a population represents the sum total of individuals/things that you want to study, be it people, mice, political movements, stars or pudding. Essentially, it is the global group that you want to make projections/predictions for.
2. Of course, because of the logistical impossibility of running studies on what might very well be millions or billions of people, you need to find a way to more feasibly extrapolate results.
3. Enter the sample. The sample is, quite simply, a segment of the population that you are actually studying, essentially a slice of the cake. Any results that you obtain in this sample will then be generalized/extrapolated to the population at large. And this is where we get into...
Step Two: Sample Size
1. This is the next step in determining the validity of a study's results. Before any sampling method is chosen, one needs to consider what the size of the sample is. Unless you're going for a complete sample (see below), you're going to have to define the size of the sample you'll want to use. And a good rule of thumb is:
"Less is more, except for sample size"
2. What this means is that, while you should try to keep your investigation simple and straightforward, you should always try and achieve the biggest possible sample size, as the bigger the sample, the more representative it becomes. Smaller samples also come with a gigantic host of problems when the number-crunching begins, as even a small difference can be immensely magnified.
For example, let's imagine Sample A, with 10 people, and Sample B, with 10000 people. The goal of the study is to determine the incidence of Disease X. Through sheer random luck, one person in Sample A has Disease X. This would indicate 10% of the sample (and population) has that same Disease X. Whereas, in Sample B, that singular person would represent 0,01% of the sample.
Size matters, after all.
There isn't a real consensus on what the "bar" is for the minimum size of any sample, with the accepted consensus simply being to get as big a sample as you can work with. The theoretical lowest possible limit would be a sample of 30, and that's already pushing it, even with a 100% representative sample.
3. In scientific studies, sample size is marked as "N". So a sample size of, say, 657 hamsters would be marked as "N=657". As such, always beware of a small value of N, as the lower you go, the less representative you become of your population, and the more you have small, insignificant effects be magnified artificially.
To provide an example, remember the Wakefield study? It had a sample of 12 people, which made it laughably unrepresentative of even the autistic population. To it's credit, it "merely" heavily suggested a link, as opposed to outright claiming it was absolutely there.
In essence, if you see a low N, always beware of any "definitive" conclusions that aren't clearly marked as "more research required".
But wait, you may be thinking, how can a piece of something represent the full something? Glad you asked.
Samples: Representative or Not
1. In order for the results obtained in a sample to be generalized to a population, this sample needs to be representative of the population at large. To pick up on the cake metaphor, this essentially means that if you want to determine how tasty a chocolate/vanilla cake is, you need to pick a slice that has both flavors, not simply chocolate, not simply vanilla. In other words, the sample must account for the randomness, variety and idiosyncrasies of the population it is representing.
There are several sampling methods to accomplish this, as you can read here, not to mention a host of potential sampling biases that can compromise your sampling, available here in a simplified form.
As a quick rule of thumb, you should always beware of studies that don't tell you how they acquired their sample, as it essentially leaves you blind to what method they used and how vulnerable they were to any biases or outright manipulation. If they do show you how the sample was acquired, always beware of convenience sampling, as it can very easily call into question the validity of the results. To provide an example, imagine a study of a "new" homeopathic "medication" having its sample be entirely populated by individuals who already regularly use homeopathic "medication", because they're the most convenient and easy to get. You've set yourself up for immense amounts of skewed results from the start, as that sample will be much more inclined to believe in the effectiveness of said medication than others, magnifying the already prevalent placebo effect.
So, quick rule of thumb is:
"The bigger, and more randomized, the sample, the better"
This is actually really good. Forgive me if my writing skills aren't as par as yours but I'd like to state some of my thoughts on it. Correct me if I'm wrong but perhaps you have a professional degree in a science in which the scientific method is applied? In the field of sociology and statistics a large chunk of the studies aren't from small to moderate samples and it doesn't go through the scientific method to obtain the results.
I have numbered the points I am commenting on at the head of the paragraph in the quote and in my commentary.
--------------------------------
Sample vs Population
1. Population representative definition I completely agree with.
2. There are flaws in statistical studies and it isn't 100% correct most of the time but it's way more accurate then you think and I believe you are trying to communicate. For instance Stanford tests and major school tests they ask you what race you are to calculate statistics on a race or schools GPA compared to others. The flaw in it is you always have those few people who mark down a race that they aren't because it's funny. This can add up to a very small portion maybe thousands out of the millions of people that marked a race down. This can lead to slightly faulty statistics such as this school had a GPA of 2.8 while Asians had the highest average GPA in the school being 3.2. The ones that lied about there race could slightly budge the results.
3. False not all statistics come from samples. For instance police records of crimes charged on a person are usually solid because it's been proven and logged in court that this person of this area of this race has been charged with this certain crime and it's logged and put on file which is then mass gathered into statistics on crime rates on race and area. Such as this race commits this amount of crime in the US and this state or city has this amount of crime and crime has increased or decreased by a % during a certain amount of years.
However some "samples" are gathered just for sociological insight on a culture of an organization or group of people. The results they elaborate in a very broad way and is usually implemented as a form of an opinion in an article.
---------------------------------
Step 2 sample size
1. Agreed and pretty much easily understood and thought of (common sense).
2. Applies to answer 1.
3. I am unsure of statistics and sociology would be considered in a technical sense a science. However I know in a sense that when people think of science it is not. However when it comes to medical research and scientific research that involve experiment it functions on a different level in the realm of science.
When people do research in the field of science involving 10-20 people especially when it comes to mental illness or the effects of medication or vaccines they try to calculate the mental and physical effects of the medication/vaccine which usually are the same for common side effects but differ between people on rare side effects. Because it was common as the majority of the 12 subjects they assumed it was a cause or a side effect. They didn't just take it and multiply 12 and take those 8 and used it as the percentage of the whole population that has taken the vaccine has autism.
To comment on what you said "But wait, you may be thinking, how can a piece of something represent the full something?" That question is irrelevant because most of the time it isn't done that way. Once again, let's say 8 out of 10 people tested positive with autism from the vaccine. They won't say 80% of the "representative" population that took the vaccine has autism. They may say there is an 80% chance of getting autism from the vaccine but it in no way shape or form represents the population of people who took the vaccine.
------------------------------------
Samples representatives or not
1. Pretty much all true but only applies to scientific statistical analyses.
------------------------------------------
-
-
Well reading that opinions will be allowed. I couldn't see myself working with a mute HoS. I mean security comms and all that. To get a reply from security comms we'd have to check our PDAs which could turn out really bad.
-
When prisoners cause a ruckus over a 5 minute sentence.
When God doesn't answer prayers.
When ERP isn't allowed.
-
1
-
2
-
-
Welcome.
-
Well I have been permabanned with the option to appeal in a month. Was a legit one though I made a joke on discord about an animal validhunting through voice. It slipped out didn't know admin things were metagame but yea I'll appeal in a month. Hopefully that would be enough time to get unbanned from security as well was doctor at the time.
Edit: I'm going to take my chance at an appeal.
-
Updated with being fired by nanotransen from security positions and his walk with the light bearer as a chaplain. Extended the story basically.
-
His byond key: Marcelluspye
This is my ban reason I told him I was posting this and was not rude about it. I also when I got this job ban out of honor for his decision resigned from my job that same round though he said I didn't have to.
I did not insist they were incorrect I said maybe they were incorrect? I only stated this one time as well because 4 people were arrested that involved me and I processed 3 of them and gave out there charges. in total there were 5-7 people arrested it was pretty chaotic. I did not know which prisoner he was talking about;. First he lectured me on the bartender in Cell 1 then after he reaiized I was right then began to question about the one in cell 5.
His accusations were also a bit shifty you might want to check the logs but I believe he said the last log I had on an arrest was cell 5 but my last one was cell 1.
If he checked the logs thoroughly he would have known that I did not arrest an IAA agent it was a station engineer. So he might of missed a lot of logs that caused this judgement.
Check the logs on this too I NEVER shifted the blame on others. I simply stated that I was the one that cuffed him and processed him he was already tazed by another officer but someone jumped in to defend him so I had to cuff him while he took care of the other. This was the bartender in cell 1 of course which he didn't penalize me but questioned me on and I assume I was right on it.
Another statement I made that might of lead to this conclusion is that I said there was a lot of arrests made by me and other officers at the bar it was a borderline riot so I said it was a mess can't remember everything. Also I do not blame him for misreading logs or not reading all of it there must of been a ton of damage logs.
Him saying it was John Lazar
John Lazar's manifest showing him as a station engineer.
Last but not least if you check the logs that I did not care to screenshot he said it was about my decisions as HoS. If this were the case then I should just be job banned from HoS? (Up to you guys) I cannot prove myself to be a good officer let alone a good HoS if I cannot join anything in security. Including brig physician. Was job-banned from that though I can't play it anyways I never spend my karma points.
Basically I'm not mad it's just I like to play the game as security doesn't matter if he get's penalized or not.
I even told him the decision was up to him I would accept whatever out of respect for him.
He did apologize for the mistake and I did tell him that I made a mistake so we both made mistakes.
I never intentionally break the rules it's usually by accident.
The ban was a result of (according to him) my actions as HoS. Though that was one out of maybe two times I got boinked in around 8 hours of playing. (Check logs to verify).
So I don't get why I was job banned from all of them including brig physician, I play a bit heartless but not like a complete dick and it might be a turnoff for other people but I don't intentionally break the rules to roleplay this way.
His apology:
Compliment I got after resigning.
Anyways this is a duo unjobban request and an admin complaint but I could care less what happens about the admin complaint I just want to play the game.
Mistakes happen and we both made mistakes the difference is I was penalized for my mistakes and I was polite and told him that any decision he makes is fine.
I would also be okay with being job-banned from HoS and appealing for an unban from that position after a week (The time he said after I asked when I should post an unban request)
So I think we may be able to compromise for both wrongs done. I would rather be unbanned from sec in general. But if a compromise is needed to satisfy both sides somewhat. A job-ban from HoS and an unban from everything else? Maybe post an unban request in a week as it would be his wish for me to be job-banned that long?
Anyways I'll make an unban request as well and just link to this thread. Thank you for reading this and no hard feelings to you Marcel I told you I was posting this not as a threat but to give you a chance to start defending yourself when it's posted.
-
Updated with more qualifications.
-
Yea I've known about this for quite some time. Just didn't care to express my opinion. Law is something that is imposed off of how much you piss off security and what crimes you actually committed.
-
Ok you forgot one thing. You gotta copy paste your ahelp and send it at least three times or more for maximum effectiveness.
-
13 hours ago, Ziiro said:
So in theory this is true, but with how many people join and leave security (as well as Chaplains that just stand in processing to force feed water), the simple truth is it's going to keep happening. And when it happens and that person gets ahelped/bwoinked (and learns their lesson for next time), the vampire's round is still ruined even if they were careful in not using their powers or being discovered.
First thought: I'm totally on board for brain damage, if it's high enough to cause some of my favorite hilarious effects. (I will never forget the first time I saw someone bucklecuffed in processing being forcefed holy water and screaming "CAN U GIVE ME HALK?!")
Secondly: I was thinking on this, and I feel like it should be a numbers adjustment, so that using holywater should be a careful process, as opposed to CHUG CHUG CHUG CHUG.
Holy Water should be just toxic enough that 50u kills someone. 30u/40u should deconvert and put them at death's door, but not kill them. I mean this also gives the opportunity for smart security to keep carefully measured stock of 40u holy water pills on hand.
Every round of cult I've been security as, there have been massive amounts of holy water used and no one get's boinked. However I have seen it less common during vampire rounds because vampires do a pretty good job at being obvious.
Yea I'm sure making the gap between death and dying 10-20u apart would cause over half of security to be permabrigged along with the only chaplain for manslaugher. Sounds like a pain in the ass.
Don't think holy water should have negative effects on anyone because it's just like water and salt mixed together with prayers and shit said over it.
If anything it should slightly heal people by like 2-3% oxygen and burn damage per 50u as that would make a lot more sense but I also think that shouldn't be added either I'm just speaking from a realistic perspective.
It's kinda fail-rpish and a lore-killer if drinking holy water can put you in crit. Can also cause a lot of greytiding from chaplains killing people by feeding them the water randomly.
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, SomeGuy9283 said:
I spend hours each week being a red-shirted space-fascist on a franken-coded 2d space-person server with more redundant species than the Mos Eisely cantina, all running on an engine that would have otherwise gone defunct long ago.
Your quotes on your sig are so legit haha. That explains it!
-
1 hour ago, Rumiluntti said:
Every powergamer would have a wheelchair at that point, just unbuckle if someone tries to pull you like that.
Otherwise it would just mean slip immunityYea I retract my statement. No OP wheelchairs haha. Good point Rumiluntti.
-
1
-
-
On 8/25/2017 at 5:53 PM, James5734 said:
I am way to quick to becoming a pissy asshat even though I was the one who started being a shitter in the first place.
I swear too much hoping that it'll make me cool.
I probably have Aspergers(Assburgers Huehuehuehue)
I have depression.
I whine about my life on forums for spess people.
Same ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Except no depression my character in game has depression though.
-
1
-
-
YESSSSSS. I remember seeing a security guard being roleplayed as an old lady in a wheelchair with grey hair and near sighted vision (Was wearing eye glasses) that was my biggest laugh ever in SS13.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, SkeletalElite said:
This is mostly in regards to vampires. Cultist wont be affected much as theres almost never a time when a cultist is fed holy water and theyre not sure whether theyre a cultist is not and thats on the rare occasions cultists are fed holy water because half the time you just valid them becuase you they get teleported away if you dont
Playing security almost all the time with the occasional civilian/assistant I see holy water being used heavily. Like a hella lot of holy water. Honestly I don't see how we would be able to stand a chance against cultists if holy water was severely nerfed or made so it harms everyone.
Also yes there is a downside because unlike cult rounds there is a risk of feeding a vampire holy water and it requires fire extinguishers and burn kits. If you manage to kill the vampire with holy water you could be charged with manslaughter or murder (Depending on who the heads are some dgaf since they are EoC) but I've seen someone get charged with battery for breaking a bottle of holy water over a vampire.
-
1
-
-
Harmbaton people to death as there would be no admins to interfere in RL SS13.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, SkeletalElite said:
Maybe make holy water have a negative affect when drank by someone who isn't a cultist/vampire/chaplain drink it. It doesnt make much sense lore wise but sometimes you gotta look at things from a game balance perspective.
Considering with cultists rounds it's either no one wins (Cultists don't summon there god because shuttle is called early) or cultists completely win, on vampire rounds it's usually a stalemate some sec guards die some vamps die the difference is the number dead on either side. So yea there is no balance needed for holy water.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Da Dman234 said:
The inability gather accurate statistics doesn't give justification to make up vague ones that seemingly support your argument. Doing so means you lose all credibility, atleast in my eyes.
It honestly seems to me that you chose a hot-button issue and threw out some buzz statistics to sensationalize things.
Also, I'll take the bait here. The statistics your provided in your most recent post in no way implies causality. Quoting random statistics doesn't make your argument stronger, you'd need a very specific study that examines all variables that could have increased police casualty rates. You'd also need to examine a much larger time-period for police casualty ratings to determine if there's a constant trend, and that's just off the top of my head.
There hasn't been an increase like that in police casualties since the Italian Mob's uprising from 1920-1930.
Also read the entire thread.
"I said under 50% of the country isn't racist (I would say the ratio is far less then 50% but cannot be proven) and I used the NBA, black history month, and all the other positive mentions specifically for black people to validate this considering that you cannot gain accurate statistics on who's racist or not because being "Racist" is a largely opinionated matter. For instance if someone has a lot of black friends but constantly and generally talks bad about black people using negative racial terms. There is a dilemma on whether that person is racist or not. If this person was to enter a national poll on how many racists there are in the country he'd most likely vote not racist along with the majority of the country leading to inaccurate statistics."
The KKK is a dying faction loosing 1/3 of there members in one year from 2009-2010 there numbers are severely depleting.
The Arian Nation is suffering the same fate with police ALSO cracking down on them, it's not just black people that they have been accused of going after.
Yep a lot of them are serving life sentences.
With the reality that we have BET black entertainment television, the majority of the NBA being black, black only scholarships and clubs, the massive BLM movement along with numerous other anti-racist activists. Combined with those statistics I've stated above it's safe to assume that the number of racists is bellow 50% faaar bellow 50%.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Da Dman234 said:
I got to here before I just stopped. I don't know how you expect anyone to take you seriously when you very clearly just pulled this number from where the sun don't shine.
Read the whole thing, you can't get accurate statistics on racism due to being coined on being a racist is based entirely by opinion. Also I guess I can give you some real statistics since the BLM movement formed in 2013 there have been an increased rate in police fatalities due to getting shot (Not including stabbings, vehicle accidents by cop chases, etc) by 56% there has been an increase in overall police fatalities by 20% from 2016-2017.
Hundreds of cops die per year along with thousands critically injured that's a real statistic.
These statistics are gathered by records of cops being reported as dead in the ODMP or Officer Down Memorial Page.
EDIT: WHY DO SO MANY PEOPLE IN A LOT OF MY POSTS PUT STUNSTICKS ON THEM LOL.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, tzo said:
Halt, Citizen!
The Judge will decide your case now:
I am the law.
A Few Suggestions Relating to Game Balance and the gamemode rotation
in Suggestions
Posted · Edited by Buford
1. Yep nerf them, shadowling rounds are boring and it ends up just being a conversion war in which shadowlings can convert easily where every single person who is a shadowling has to be put on a table in which there are only two and deconverted at a rate based on the skill of the doctor.
Edit: Just replace that round it's boring and dumb to be honest.
2. have u no sec b4