Leaderboard

Simply remove supplier roles from people after they rename/CK their character. I have seen a particular staff member with weapon supplier role on 3 different characters. Every time he renames/CKs his char, his supplier role stays there. Why do you require people to write their character's background story when applying for the supplier role if the role can be freely transferred to a new character? Would be nice to see at least a bit of transparency from this "great" IFM team and same ground rules for everyone. No wonder we rarely get any new weapon suppliers when IFM just transfers the supplier roles to the same people every time they CK.

I'm getting really, really tired of seeing players receiving only warnings for inflicting so much disruption on other players roleplay. It's simply not enough; here's an example of what I mean; This player willingly and maliciously deleted an entire properties mapping, which would've taken the mapper hours and hours and refused to admit they even did anything wrong and what's worse, this wasn't even their first offence but for all this they only receive a warning and money removed from their account. Is that really justifiable to the person who's time and effort was entirely lost? Granted this isn't entirely Wuhtah's fault, I know he works his ass off but it's more due to a culture the community has adopted since I was an admin and has been engrained in admin doctrine ever since. That being that it's easier to be too lenient to avoid issues and staff reports than it is to be too harsh and have to remove a punishment from someone's record. In my opinion, it just isn't working anymore. Whilst yes, there's only so long a troublesome player will get away with goofy shit but you also have to look at it from the perspective of the player who's roleplay or project their behavior has negatively effected. Does the punishment really reflect what this person has done to the reporting party? In this case it's hours worth of mapping, which they may not be able to replicate again. A player like this isn't going to learn from a warming, stern though it may be. In my opinion it's time to reevaluate how and when punishments are handed out, ie they should fairly reflect the damage caused to the reporting party regardless whether someone has a clean record or not. Warnings just don't cut it for such disruptive behavior.

Y’all didn’t know this was happening? im extremely fearful to speak on this but I will anyway… Atleast two(2) members in the community with close connections to IFM have been silently able to keep their supplier role upon CKing for 5-6 months now, most likely going on even longer then that. I don’t think this is with ill intention. This is most likely so they can keep people they trust in the possession of large amounts of guns instead of forming new relationships with aspiring members of the community looking to supply, developing their characters and what-not. Because most of the characters these people with supplier keep making are the same shit with a different name and face... with all shit aside, its a good idea to keep suppliers around on paper to avoid OOC dealing and weapons falling the wrong hands, but at some point you need to allow new people to enter these roles or stop your same one person getting 80 guns a month from namechanging every week. People with supplier, which now hold more responsibility then average players, should be committed to their concept entirely. A three time confusion in what you want to portray is baffling, give that benefit to somebody else that will actually use it for the benefit of the community they roleplay around instead. even though I’ve only witnessed two so far, who knows if there are more then that…or if more will be allowed to keep their supplier upon death 🤷🏽‍♂️ +1

-

I'm in agreement - for these powershifts, I have been frontline in expressing a required "handicap", or forced powershift when an individual is in power holding the supplier position and removed. One of these suppliers was axed more than half when the primary individual was removed and restrictions were applied. They are treated harsher than others, my point was more so, if we completely cut them off it's a bit of a "????". If there was evidence of an actual in-character handover being present, these may be lessened. Again, it comes back to that treating situations as individuals rather than treating them as tickboxes and straight edge situations. It hasn't always been perfect and I agree to that wholeheartedly but they were handled how "best" it seemed at the time. Hopefully that clarifies what I meant by mentioning the big three. My above answer to Morrigan somewhat covers a little bit of this. I am planning to make a more "structured" faction vs individual supplier system once this weapon overhaul and drug overhaul is complete. Personally I do not care if someone is a staff member when making a consideration that may involve one, however if doubts are there that any supplier is not performing to standards, staff position or not, it will be investigated. Again, players that I have reviewed sometimes do get binned if they did not do what was required of them. The last example I gave were for AR12s to be specific as to why it was coocoo - sometimes stories can be simple. Honestly tip for melee/tobacco/electronics suppliers, you don't need an international cartel or mafia connect to get fucking knives. However, some players I truly trust to continue on being a supplier WHEN it makes sense for their character. So to an extent I agree, but I will always take the extra time to review any application as an individual rather than a subjective view of strict guidelines. I said this in IFM Public today: "This will be a thing, I've always said we will implement a way of it. Right now we have so much work that I simply cannot also facilitate implementing feedback without sacrificing a large portion of our work and setting priorities. 8 of us and 4 currently on LOA & hiring for more internally. I'm hoping once the weapon overhaul is live and drug overhaul has been forwarded to developers, we can set a date and process for feedback. It will happen but when we're able to give actual constructive feedback" I do not want to implement feedback that is half-assed, it's not fair to individuals that put effort in. Although neither is the current system, but when we do it, I want to do it right. In regards to the here and there comments, if there are issues / concerns with a specific supplier the best place to air them is in a PM to myself and Shanks. I will not discuss specific individuals on a public forum as it concerns both them and those concerned in the decision making out of respect.

Not The Ones Stagnant Issue / Politics

My partner actually gave me that terminology. There is no strict rules set in place and it did leave a bad taste in my mouth. I did have to follow the guidelines for punishments and that was what it was lead to. I absolutely hated that the mappers time got wasted and all that was given was a warning, but that's all I could have done. Stricter punishment would have been a staff report and honestly, I would have advised them to do so. I was trying not to be biased within this report because I support mappers very much. We don't know if the player will learn or not. The admin record did not reflect it. If he had done it before, sure, they would have copped a permanent ban from me. If they do it again, they'll get one and they know and understand this. It was their first offense with mapping, previous time was nothing to do with it. I'll ask staff management/perhaps even Frezemis if I went too lenient as well, I do appreciate the constructive criticism as that's how I learn for future occurrences.

JOSEPH HARLAN, aged 29. DISCORD NUKED 59 PAGES OF SS IM NOT REUPLOADING ALL THAT

After further review, the ruling on the field stands, YOU ARE A LIAR AND NEED SOMETHING BETTER TO DO WITH YOUR FREE TIME!

To get supplier: Be liked OOC by admins. To keep transferring supplier: Be admin. To get supplier & leadership of a faction despite being banned recently: Work with the police. It hasn't been about roleplay skills in a minute, sad truth. lol.