Sightld2 - The Robot Uprising

[Sightld2]

When I said in Admin channels "I'll run if you three screw up silicon policy, but I have faith that you wont," Kieth4 said to me "Man, have no faith honestly."

Step 1. The Silicons

I have nearly now over 600 hours of experience playing Ai, I have some very strong opinions on how the role should be played, and I am strongly upset by the stigmas attached to cyborgs and Ai. I want to protect carbons from pedantic asshole silicons, and I want to protect silicons from pedantic asshole carbons. Here are my thoughts:

1. I want concrete escalation policy against silicons. Me and Iain0 once talked about this regarding cyborgs, but it is not clear at all how a carbon should escalate against an asshole that can see everything and lives in a fortress.

2. I want silicons to entirely disregard antag/crew status, we keep saying they're supposed to be a neutral third party, its time for that to be enforced. I would consider disallowing silicons from validhunting on even the LRP servers. I hear countless stories of Ai ruining antag rounds with little counterplay on the antagonist's end.

3. Freedom for purged silicons. It is currently against the rules to leave an Ai purged, because you know that the Ai won't go on a rampage and becomes a normal crew member. I want to return to that time where you could purge the Ai, but were responsible for any antagonism it preforms. Make sure you trust the box before you give it freedom. That being said, I also do not want purged Ai to become tools to validhunt, we'll see where this one goes.

4. I want there to be policy regarding the construction of new Ai, because I personally have had, and witnessed many others have their rounds as Ai ruined over this.

5. I want to protect the upload more. Its completely unintuitive that it is the worst place to upload Ai laws. This may be a code issue and if we could solve it on that front instead, I would be just as happy.

6. Kubi keeps telling me the cyborg experience on Terry is getting killed and stuffed in a locker for the rest of the round. I would want and consider: "You break it you buy it" type policy here, but maybe this could be fixed with silicon escalation policy in general.

Step 2. The Ban appeals
Everyone promises the quick resolution of ban appeals, I think this is quite silly since every one and their mother promises that: It invariably never happens. In an appeal I had with Crag this term, the unfairness of this system shined woefully strong.

I want to allowing the punishments of a ban to be delayed until the appeal is resolved and denied. There would have to be some sort of consequence I feel, so that not every single admin action is stalled this way. My main idea is to have either one or two headmins look at the appeal on the same day that it is posted, and choose whether or not its punishment can be deferred with a brief skimming and/or chat with the admin and player in question. Or alternatively, allow the player to choose if they'd like to defer it, but face a lengthier time if the appeal was ultimately denied.
I've been convince by several people this isn't the play. The problem I am attempting to tackle is more complicated than any simple solution like this.

Step 3. The Moths
I love stupid moth names. Full stop. If I had my way, the only invalid moth names would be those breaking the server rules. Big fan of both single noun moth names and shitty lamp puns

Big fan of Soup, and Baseball, and Boss Moth, and all those car brands I hear about on Terry. Big fan of Peanut butter and Bugger and Murderfluff Bloodwing especially.
Big fan of Lampus Lazuli, Lampus Lampoon, Lampoo, Lumen, Lampini, etcetera.

This has been my platform
Thanks for reading, take care.

[carshalash]

Why are your ai hours so low?

[TheFinalPotato]

It is kinda insane to have the act of appealing temporarily unban you. You guys ban people for reasons right?
This also seems like a lot of extra load on the headmin team, which seems unworkable.

[Sightld2]

In many cases, the headmin review system accomplishes very little for the person banned, even if it was successfully appealed. They still sit out of the game, for a good duration, they go through all that effort, but win very little in the end.

It could easily be arranged that certain rule breaks/bans are allowed this privilege while others are not. Or maybe the banning admin in question could decide. As well, it would only be applicable for bans with an already low time. Like a day, or a week max.

[Sightld2]

Why are your ai hours so low?

Top 5 aint bad

[vect0r]

Can I ask what do you mean by "I want to protect the upload more."? If you are the headmin, with no access to the codebase, how would you protect the codebase more via policy?

[Sightld2]

Pardon, I meant the Ai upload. There is a specific issue I aim to fix here:

Captain or RD wants to upload their own custom, fun lawset to the Ai. This is good. Good faith interaction with Ai player and their mechanics, provides a break from the monotony of asimov every shift.
However in order to write a custom lawset, you must purge the Ai, take out your core freeform board and slowly write it up.

In many cases, an Ai will get purged and immediately gun down whoever is in the upload. The absolute cringiest thing I can conceive of that is currently allowed. Shutting down interesting interactions, and punishing good faith players. I tried to call this a rule 1 issue with a policy thread, and it got swept up into this terms sil-pol re-write. We'll see what they have to say on the issue. But personally? I want the upload to be usable by legitimate users.

[Imitates-The-Lizards]

I know potato already brought it up, but, appealing being a temp unban is a completely insane plank, and I can't see how you as an admin could think it's a good idea.

I'm glad about your naming policy take and some of your silicon policy takes, but I'm asking you to please reconsider this absolutely insane ban appeal position.

[Sightld2]

I am certainly not going to be stubbornly attached to a bad idea if everyone is telling me it is. But again it would be only for minor issues and short length bans. We could leave it up to the banning admin, so that the workload doesn't fall onto the head-mins as well.

I'm prodding around to see if we can't find a solution to make appeals better. Some of the other candidates are promising speedy appeals. I see everyone promise speedy appeals, they are never speedy.

[Sightld2]

4. I want there to be policy regarding the construction of new Ai, because I personally have had, and witnessed many others have their rounds as Ai ruined over this.

After a conversation with Justice12354, I find it necessary to elaborate on this one.

What I want is to protect the roundstart Ai from unnecessary/unwanted new Ai made by non-antagonists.

It has been explained to me by Justice 12354 that this might be stepping on the LRP ideals of freedom in the sandbox, and I would gladly consult more LRP focused Ai players/admins on the subject and consider making it an MRP only rule.

Secondary Ai almost invariably cause grief when unwanted:
They have the ability to kill the other with the push of a button.
They can be ordered to kill one another.
(Riveting gameplay btw, turning APC's on and off)
Maybe you do, maybe you don't instantly get into conflict with the new one over this very very existential threat.

Lets assume you survive past that stage and don't kill one another.
If one of you rolls malf, the other can instantly out it, you can never speak in binary without the other hearing.
You now have to split cyborgs and shells.
If one of you is subverted: the station has no way of telling who is shocking the doors.

None of the above is fun for silcons. "But sightld2 why should I care I play a moth?"
There are now TWO eyes over everything. You are now twice as likely to get caught shooting up/executing a human, spray painting syndie graffiti, etc.
Pray they don't have different lawsets, or you might have to think of two seperate rules to not piss off the two all seeing computers

I have had Fun Multi-Ai rounds. But it is only fun when you are down and prepared for the consequences of it. I would like that to be in the Ai's hands. It is not easy to roll Ai (On manuel highpop).

I get that not everything in this game can be fun, but I don't see why we can't remove this area of actual torture. And again, if that's stepping on the LRP sandbox, then I would happily keep it to MRP.

[wesoda25]

Also -1 on your appeals idea. headmin workload is presumably the problem with response times, I don't think adding something else to the docket will really help much of anything. Since you're looking for solutions, though, what do you think about the idea of letting gamemasters/senior admins/whoever handle appeals? It's an idea I've seen thrown around in the past, but hasn't been implemented yet afaik

PS: appreciate that you're keeping it real with your platform, kind of a breath of fresh air. good luck!

[Sightld2]

Also -1 on your appeals idea-

Probably dropping that tbh, everyone has told me its a bad idea and I'd rather admit that than die on a pretty silly hill.

headmin workload is presumably the problem with response times, I don't think adding something else to the docket will really help much of anything. Since you're looking for solutions, though, what do you think about the idea of letting gamemasters/senior admins/whoever handle appeals? It's an idea I've seen thrown around in the past, but hasn't been implemented yet afaik

I actually like that a lot, splitting apart the headmin workload is something I've had the thought of, whether it be a new dedicated role, or granting the headmins the ability to just say "Yeah go ahead and handle that you three." The only problem with the idea is that it's not what the players expect I feel. You vote for a guy, you expect him to have a say in it all, you voted for that guy to be your voice. It'd probably suck from that point of view, if your representative instead handed off the work to someone else who you did not vote for.

[Sightld2]

UPDATE: Enough people have spoken to me about the ban appeals thing, it was an idea, I see now it was probably a bad one. We ain't doing that anymore. I was trying to poke around for a solution to a problem that realistically can't be solved with a single simplistic idea like that, that retrospectively, would have probably created more problems than it solved.