Security Policy

[Wolfmoy]

What are your views on the purpose of Security within standard rounds and what would you add/change about the current security policy?

[Chadley]

I was the person who proposed the Miranda Rights policy. I think it has put sec in a good spot. Sec can't really be wordless baton salesman anymore and require a level of RP to not get robusted by their grey counterparts.

As Kieth said, "I'm pogging out my gord"

[Pepper]

I think security players should be held to some semblance of standards (not using their authority in bad faith, picking fights with people FNR) which is all stuff that's covered under security policy. I detest the types of players who perfidiously consider any act of agression as 'attempted murder' to grind out a reason to kill anyone they're in an altercation with (this does not only apply to security players.) Sec should always use non-lethal means of control as a first option up until some sort of proof of an antagonistic threat to thwart is identified. Overall though I think security policy is functioning as intended quite well.

[iain0]

Security should generally lead the effort against antags, piece together the information and distribute it (on lrp anyway). They should also act like the local police force handling small disputes, but this isn't really something required of them (and on LRP requirements on jobs in general is largely a non thing), but ideally this, with some understanding that dealing with petty tiders all the time shouldn't be dominate their gameplay.

As a terry-min there's a lot of stuff involved in the delicate balance between crew and sec at times, I think current policy works well and is usually explainable to players in a way they can understand, I think more often than not when I get involved in situations people are typically aware they got carried away and all in all crew/sec is in a far far better place than it has been before. It needs an eye keeping on of course.