Arresting/accusing everyone because they might be an antagonist

[zaracka]

Extreme powergaming is against the rules even when the person being affected is an antagonist. However, in the case that Security or any individual holds someone who isn't an antagonist unprovoked and for a relatively long period of time, it's an IC issue. Worst case scenario, you ahelp and they're told to let you go.

I see a few problems with this. In the case that it's ahelped, admins are essentially telling players who is or isn't "the traitor." It's grief-level inconvenience when players are held indefinitely. It would be more logical if they were arrested, implanted, and then let go. What's happening is people are being arrested, tied to chairs, and ignored for the rest of the round. If they try to escape, they're killed or tied up again. The IC issue-ness is more present during revolution and cultist rounds, but exists on other rounds too, just less so. My reasoning isn't to punish people for "getting it wrong," rather to stop validhunters who are "getting everyone" and treating them like antagonists, even though nothing's happened to deserve it.

The proposition is to make this not an IC issue when it's extreme. Or make it completely legal precedent, so that Rule 1 isn't selectively pulled on someone who responds with "Yeah, I know it's being a dick, but it's how the game is played."

How can I objectify "extreme"? If someone is held for longer than 10 minutes (which is actually a long time by our standards, wouldn't be upset if this was reduced to 5), it's not an ahelp the person to let them go situation, but a time to note/ban them situation. Apparently there's some hidden rule where Security can kill everyone who's not confirmed loyal on high population cult/rev rounds, not sure how that ties in. Could that rule could be clarified? The proposition still stands for situations when the game mode isn't Cult or Revolution.

[oranges]

there's no need for clarification because only someone who is dumb or autistic would have trouble figuring out why security is allowed to murder people without recourse once they lose control of a rev or cult round, there's also no way to accurately define the case for when this will happen.


The rest of your post is a mess of intermixed rants about security arresting people who they think is an antag or long brig times, I can't figure out what you're upset about

[zaracka]

You probably don't play/observe enough to remember the times it has literally happened and the actual admins who have repeatedly stated it's an existing rule. It is a fact that different admins have entirely opposite interpretations of some rules, which is the reason policy discussion exists, right?

You shouldn't play the incompetence card (it's probably not incompetence, but the thrill to "win") when you pseudo-kill people randomly except you didn't kill them, you just kept them locked away with no escape. I'm not being emotional, I'm being logical.

The obvious solution is to ahelp it, the admin will tell them you're not a traitor, and let you go. This is literally what happens right now. I don't think admins should be crossing that line, rather deal with the source of the shittery.

[oranges]

again, not clear at all what you are trying to request or express.

Are you upset that security is locking people up for long periods of time, are you upset they're arresting people on suspicion of them being antagonist, are you upset that admins have to tell them if they're traitors or not?

[Denton]

The proposition is to make this not an IC issue when it's extreme.

I've already seen admins punish sec players for acting like the Gestapo.
For example, Polina got bwoink'd when she started flashing and dragging random people into the shuttle brig, on the off chance that they're traitors and might lose their greentext that way.

[zaracka]

For arrested players, timed sentences up to a total of 10 minutes, buckle-cuffing, and stripping, are considered IC issues and are not actionable by admins. Brig sentences totaling more than 10 minutes can be adminhelped, as can be gulag or perma sentences or a pattern of illegitimate punishment.

Note/ban them if it exceeds 10 minutes.

>Are you upset that security is locking people up for long periods of time
Yes, if it's unprovoked and prolonged, there should be incentive not to do it again.

>are you upset they're arresting people on suspicion of them being antagonist
No.

>are you upset that admins have to tell them if they're traitors or not
Yes, admins shouldn't give away information straightforwardly or in a way that implies it. It's confusing and can be abused.

Clarify the secret rule that applies to Cult and Revolution.

[Arianya]

I see a few problems with this. In the case that it's ahelped, admins are essentially telling players who is or isn't "the traitor." It's grief-level inconvenience when players are held indefinitely. It would be more logical if they were arrested, implanted, and then let go. What's happening is people are being arrested, tied to chairs, and ignored for the rest of the round. If they try to escape, they're killed or tied up again. The IC issue-ness is more present during revolution and cultist rounds, but exists on other rounds too, just less so. My reasoning isn't to punish people for "getting it wrong," rather to stop validhunters who are "getting everyone" and treating them like antagonists, even though nothing's happened to deserve it.

Most sec brigging related ahelps don't tend to lead to a "release them now" order, either because the brig sentence is over by the time we've done some cursory investigation or because events develop further in the meantime.

Sec is naturally more under fire and more embattled on cult/rev and so, depending on the state of the station (and the power balance between sec and the revs/cult) we can cut sec more slack when it would otherwise make the game inherently unfun for multiple sides. You have to remember that a revhead can convert a room of people in 5-10 seconds. In comparison the security main will have to spend a good 30-60 seconds, presuming he has access to enough implants and no one tries to fight back during the implant-time.

The proposition is to make this not an IC issue when it's extreme. Or make it completely legal precedent, so that Rule 1 isn't selectively pulled on someone who responds with "Yeah, I know it's being a dick, but it's how the game is played."

How can I objectify "extreme"? If someone is held for longer than 10 minutes (which is actually a long time by our standards, wouldn't be upset if this was reduced to 5), it's not an ahelp the person to let them go situation, but a time to note/ban them situation. Apparently there's some hidden rule where Security can kill everyone who's not confirmed loyal on high population cult/rev rounds, not sure how that ties in. Could that rule could be clarified? The proposition still stands for situations when the game mode isn't Cult or Revolution.

You're never going to get admins or players to agree to a "automatic note" rule, especially for something as muddy as brig time. Does the time start from the moment the person is arrested? Who is responsible, the security officer who put the cuffs on or the warden who they were handed off to? What if the warden is trying to fight off a space asshole trying to vent his armory? Etc etc.

The nature of a paranoia based game is that sometimes sec is going to make a wrong call. We can't punish them for this any more then we can punish miners for falling down chasms or roboticists for trusting the AI who was secretly malf all along. Understandably this is sometimes not very fun for the person on the receiving end of the paranoia, and if we think a situation is spiraling into stagnation we'll try to talk to security to get things moving along, but bear in mind that security is already one of the more heavily bwoinked roles on the station, purely due to their gameplay role of incarcerating and searching other players, they are by their role conflict creators.

The cult/rev "rule" has never been codified as such because it's the kind of thing sec should never be relying on or actively calling upon. We don't want Cult/Rev rounds to be TDM where sec immediately jumps to lethals as soon as they see a single deconvert message/bloody rune, but under extreme duress where sec is being overwhelmed, we tend to cut them a little slack given the high-speed action and tension of the situation.

[zaracka]

>once they lose control

Around winter last year, roughly the same time Bagil started getting 80 players instead of 40, the admins online decided that if it was "high pop" Security could kill everyone to stop the threat at hand (cult or revolution) because "high pop" meant they had already lost control from the start. It wasn't a last resort thing, it was literally "we can't keep track, neither can Sec, this is how it's gonna be" and players used the rule to immediately kill everyone, people complained, the admins did nothing, said it was the rule. I assumed people who didn't do it immediately didn't out of their own volition and respect for others, but the reality is probably new players don't know about it at all.

>Most sec brigging related ahelps don't tend to lead to a "release them now" order, either because the brig sentence is over by the time we've done some cursory investigation or because events develop further in the meantime.

This isn't most, this is one instance. It does lead to a "release them now" order. Investigation isn't required. It's not a timer thing, they haven't committed a crime. People think inconveniencing others randomly is okay because it's an IC issue. While it is, for the better probably, there's the 10 minute limitation. But that's considered an IC issue too apparently, which I'm saying it shouldn't be at that point. It's too extreme. Why? In a 30 minute round (quite common on /tg/), 10 minutes is one third, you might as well have killed them.

>You're never going to get admins or players to agree to a "automatic note" rule, especially for something as muddy as brig time. Does the time start from the moment the person is arrested? Who is responsible, the security officer who put the cuffs on or the warden who they were handed off to? What if the warden is trying to fight off a space asshole trying to vent his armory? Etc etc.

Except when it's obvious it was unwarranted, but it's okay because anything under 10 minutes no matter how ludicrous is an IC issue unless it's repeated (pattern of illegitimate punishment). If said case becomes obviously prolonged, assuming some (subjectively better) admins don't use Rule 0/1 discretion to mitigate it immediately, then there's no reason to think it's more complex than it is.

>The nature of a paranoia based game is that sometimes sec is going to make a wrong call. We can't punish them for this any more then we can punish miners for falling down chasms or roboticists for trusting the AI who was secretly malf all along. Understandably this is sometimes not very fun for the person on the receiving end of the paranoia, and if we think a situation is spiraling into stagnation we'll try to talk to security to get things moving along, but bear in mind that security is already one of the more heavily bwoinked roles on the station, purely due to their gameplay role of incarcerating and searching other players, they are by their role conflict creators.

Except you do punish people very harshly for making an innocent mistake if it involves a player death, even though the same effect can be acheived with malicious intent without being logged as "death." A codefied example is N2O brigging, but constantly stunning someone and tying them to a chair is basically the same thing but somehow different in admin eyes? The concept doesn't apply to Security exclusively, it applies to everyone because every role can act like Security, silicons not excluded.

[Nilons]

This isn't most, this is one instance. It does lead to a "release them now" order. Investigation isn't required. It's not a timer thing, they haven't committed a crime. People think inconveniencing others randomly is okay because it's an IC issue. While it is, for the better probably, there's the 10 minute limitation. But that's considered an IC issue too apparently, which I'm saying it shouldn't be at that point. It's too extreme. Why? In a 30 minute round (quite common on /tg/), 10 minutes is one third, you might as well have killed them.

stop acting like the one round where you got fucked and decided to make this thread is going to be identical to every situation involving the very broad rule you're proposing

Except when it's obvious it was unwarranted

its not going to be obvious it was unwarranted and multiple ways it wouldn't be feasible or easily administrated were provided to you in the post you're responding to which you ignored

Except you do punish people very harshly for making an innocent mistake if it involves a player death, even though the same effect can be acheived with malicious intent without being logged as "death."
A codefied example is N2O brigging, but constantly stunning someone and tying them to a chair is basically the same thing but somehow different in admin eyes? The concept doesn't apply to Security exclusively, it applies to everyone because every role can act like Security, silicons not excluded.

The fact that you think being buckle cuffed is the same as n2o brigging makes me think you don't actually know what n2o brigging is or that you're being intellectually dishonest. You can resist out of being bucklecuffed, theres no intent to keep you out of the round forever when you're buckle cuffed, you can talk while buckle cuffed, you can see while bucklecuffed.

[zaracka]

But it's not a one time thing and it doesn't happen to me exclusively, hence the policy discussion. Rules are meant to be broad. You don't have 1000 rules, you have <10.

As a Security Officer, remember that correlation does not equal causation. Someone may have just been at the wrong place at the wrong time!

Some people unironically don't understand this concept or refuse to abide by it. If you kill the person based on flimsy evidence, you get punished harshly. But if you repeatedly stun someone trying to escape cuffs for 10+ minutes, going as far as to make sure they have no possibility of escaping, how is that different from N2O brigging or killing them?

[Nilons]

how is that different from N2O brigging or killing them?

read my post again but slowly maybe sound out the words if youre having trouble

[zaracka]

The fact that you think being buckle cuffed is the same as n2o brigging makes me think you don't actually know what n2o brigging is or that you're being intellectually dishonest. You can resist out of being bucklecuffed, theres no intent to keep you out of the round forever when you're buckle cuffed, you can talk while buckle cuffed, you can see while bucklecuffed.

>buckle cuffed is the same as n2o brigging
buckle cuff is not the same as n2o brigging

>repeatedly stun someone trying to escape cuffs for 10+ minutes, going as far as to make sure they have no possibility of escaping
it's the same

[somerandomguy]

The fact that you think being buckle cuffed is the same as n2o brigging makes me think you don't actually know what n2o brigging is or that you're being intellectually dishonest. You can resist out of being bucklecuffed, theres no intent to keep you out of the round forever when you're buckle cuffed, you can talk while buckle cuffed, you can see while bucklecuffed.

>buckle cuffed is the same as n2o brigging
buckle cuff is not the same as n2o brigging

>repeatedly stun someone trying to escape cuffs for 10+ minutes, going as far as to make sure they have no possibility of escaping
it's the same

So you can't see, talk, or hear while bucklecuffed?

[zaracka]

So you can't see, talk, or hear while bucklecuffed?

Sorry, but is this the pinnacle of policy discussion? On the off chance that you're serious, do you understand the no escape/lack of freedom aspect? You are implying that being able to ask for help somehow negates that, when in practice it doesn't. Can the AI lock you in a room unwarranted and indefinitely with no escape even though you can see, talk, and hear?

[Arianya]

Around winter last year, roughly the same time Bagil started getting 80 players instead of 40, the admins online decided that if it was "high pop" Security could kill everyone to stop the threat at hand (cult or revolution) because "high pop" meant they had already lost control from the start. It wasn't a last resort thing, it was literally "we can't keep track, neither can Sec, this is how it's gonna be" and players used the rule to immediately kill everyone, people complained, the admins did nothing, said it was the rule. I assumed people who didn't do it immediately didn't out of their own volition and respect for others, but the reality is probably new players don't know about it at all.

You're going to have to cite admin names at the very least, if not a specific policy thread/post for anyone to take this claim seriously. No admin I've spoken to, nor my own admin training, has ever even considered the idea that Security has carte blanche to purge everyone at the merest hint of cult/rev just because of high population.

>Most sec brigging related ahelps don't tend to lead to a "release them now" order, either because the brig sentence is over by the time we've done some cursory investigation or because events develop further in the meantime.

This isn't most, this is one instance. It does lead to a "release them now" order. Investigation isn't required. It's not a timer thing, they haven't committed a crime. People think inconveniencing others randomly is okay because it's an IC issue. While it is, for the better probably, there's the 10 minute limitation. But that's considered an IC issue too apparently, which I'm saying it shouldn't be at that point. It's too extreme. Why? In a 30 minute round (quite common on /tg/), 10 minutes is one third, you might as well have killed them.

You've clearly got a very one sided view of the issue, which is understandable, but do understand that security don't always have perfect information to operate off. Sometimes they have a tip off from a random crew member, or the say so of one borg or so on and so forth, and while hindsight 20/20 might have informed them that the person did nothing, we're not going to start acting as the Supereme Court who stomp on down and note/ban security players for not having perfect knowledge of the round.

If someone is arresting people FNR or you suspect they are, by all means ahelp it, or PM a headmin on the forums so that it can be considered whether they need to be watched for this behaviour, but we're not going to throw out the baby with the bathwater of making an already unpopular department/role even more heavily policed and thus scaring off what few players we do have with an automatic note if one of several scenarios occur where a prisoner can end up brigged for longer then 10 minutes.

>You're never going to get admins or players to agree to a "automatic note" rule, especially for something as muddy as brig time. Does the time start from the moment the person is arrested? Who is responsible, the security officer who put the cuffs on or the warden who they were handed off to? What if the warden is trying to fight off a space asshole trying to vent his armory? Etc etc.

Except when it's obvious it was unwarranted, but it's okay because anything under 10 minutes no matter how ludicrous is an IC issue unless it's repeated (pattern of illegitimate punishment). If said case becomes obviously prolonged, assuming some (subjectively better) admins don't use Rule 0/1 discretion to mitigate it immediately, then there's no reason to think it's more complex than it is.

It's all very well to say "it's obvious it was unwarranted", but there is a whole spectrum of circumstances under which people can be held for longer then seems fair or obvious to them which do require investigation. One of the founding aspects of /tg/ is that we don't ask our players to intentionally play dumb (barring a few very very specific examples like atmos tinkering to stop plasmafloods). This means it'd be unfair to ask security players to let people go at the 9 minute mark on the dot every time for fear of having a note put on them with 0 recourse or even discussion.

>The nature of a paranoia based game is that sometimes sec is going to make a wrong call. We can't punish them for this any more then we can punish miners for falling down chasms or roboticists for trusting the AI who was secretly malf all along. Understandably this is sometimes not very fun for the person on the receiving end of the paranoia, and if we think a situation is spiraling into stagnation we'll try to talk to security to get things moving along, but bear in mind that security is already one of the more heavily bwoinked roles on the station, purely due to their gameplay role of incarcerating and searching other players, they are by their role conflict creators.

Except you do punish people very harshly for making an innocent mistake if it involves a player death, even though the same effect can be acheived with malicious intent without being logged as "death." A codefied example is N2O brigging, but constantly stunning someone and tying them to a chair is basically the same thing but somehow different in admin eyes? The concept doesn't apply to Security exclusively, it applies to everyone because every role can act like Security, silicons not excluded.

Generally speaking, we don't punish people for honest mistakes. The only time this becomes an issue is when we start seeing a pattern of behaviour, or a mistake is so egregiously unlikely that an admin doesn't believe a player is acting in good faith.

N2O brigging and constant stunning/bucklecuffing are entirely different things because of the element of agency and investment. If I hook you up to N2O I can walk off and leave you there with absolute certainty that you're not escaping without outside interference. If I stand over you for 5 minutes stunning you repeatedly and ensuring you don't resist out of your cuffs, I'm unable pretty much to do anything else. You still have agency to escape, and if I'm murdered/distracted/called elsewhere you will absolutely be able to do so without outside interference, at the cost of some time to resist out.

I'm sorry but I don't buy "being brigged for 6 minutes is basically like being dead for 6 minutes", and if you try to escape your sentence, justified or not you shouldn't be surprised that sec decide to extend your stay.

I do understand your frustration, it's not fun to be made powerless by being arrested and its even less fun when less experienced players lose your gear or drag you around too long, but you can't solve this problem by trying to apply broad, unthinking rules that punish players without any consideration for context. I'm not sure what incident(s) in particular have made you lose faith in ahelping these affairs when they grow untenable, but believe me when I say that we don't want you to be having any less fun then you have to.

[Dax Dupont]

I don't want to read all of this text so I am just gonna state the following.

1. You can't arrest people for no reason.
2. Things going out of hand because of revs can be a reason if there's sufficient entropy on the station. Mass implanting if the round drags on too long or things are dire is acceptable.
You can't formulate when the latter applies since there's a bunch of factors playing into the decision.

Please be mindful that revs and cult can be EXTREMELY stressful and this generally bends the rules if things are going really, really out of hand.

Also, sometimes you will end up bucklecuffed for a while, it's just how it is. Implants are in endless supply in certain situation. The other day I was arrested for trying to heal sec, because I was unimplanted, and it even led to my death(not by sec) while I was waiting for implants. It's not fun, but it's part of the game. Sometimes you just lose, sometimes paranoia gets you in a bad spot.

[zaracka]

My proposition isn't for all cases where the timer hits 10+, only the cases where said person's reasoning is non-existent or flimsy. The implication is that technically it should be actionable right off the bat, but we don't want to control every encounter, so as long as it's not severely impactful (more than 10 minutes), it doesn't matter. Apparently Dax does though, maybe a headmin can confirm whether this should remain discretion or need a strict policy.

Also note, not saying this applies to Security only. This applies to anyone who restrains someone. Sure, Security may be potentially """""escapable""""" but being locked down as a borg for flimsy reasoning or bolted into a room by the AI is worse. Situations clearly induced by a validhunting mentality that doesn't bother to check/search you, but get you of the way because MAYBE you're an antagonist. It's /tg/, I don't mind the validhunting, unless it consumes a good portion of the round/severely wastes your time.

Security definitely should and does get some slack, especially during stressful situations, that's fair. However, have you observed rounds where instead of everyone being holywatered/implanted, they're being holywatered let go, repeat several times because of lack of organization? Is it too much to be responsible for the player you willingly restrained, complete the task you restrained them for yourself, and let them go? Essentially, go through with your plan/have a plan instead of not my problem anymore/apathy, but I can do the arresting part because it's fun to be shitcurity, the being a decent person part is too difficult.

[Lazengann]

I don't think you're advocating anything that isn't currently policy. It sounds like you're mad about a specific mishandled situation which might have been been better off as an admin complaint.

[zaracka]

I can't put the admin at fault when it's clearly up to discretion/interpretation. I'm looking for strict policy. Either Dax's any random arrest is actionable right off the bat, my proposition of actionable after 10 minutes, or simply being an IC issue where admins interfere minimally. It's definitely not fun when one admin says it's okay for people to do a thing to you, but another admin threatens to punish you for doing the same thing to someone else.

[Dax Dupont]

Random arrests for no reason whatsoever can be an issue, justified arrests with excessive punishment can be an issue.

[oranges]

also you're not going to get a strict policy, we don't usually do that here, we just let admins decide if something is bad based on context

[Gigapuddi420]

Have you tried not acting like a antagonist?

Spoiler:

Maybe don't start shit?

[Gamarr]

As a Security Officer, remember that correlation does not equal causation. Someone may have just been at the wrong place at the wrong time!

The Law and Safety of Security supersedes bystanders priorities. This is why you shouldn't run towards the murder or hang around a crime scene but people like to do it anyway for a variety of reasons.
One example of a good way to handle this was in, unsurprisingly, Dredd. After the car crash happens you hear the bike yapping about just getting close to the scene or interfering as automatic sentences. Until the game here is changed differently, security has effectively had to work as Judges for a long time (and those that don't just tend to die off/burn out imo).
Don't fuck around near crime scenes and you won't get pulled in for standing over a dead body.

[Anonmare]

I once got somebody executed by security just by saying they were a traitor and they didn't even check to see if I was lying

[Gamarr]

I once got somebody executed by security just by saying they were a traitor and they didn't even check to see if I was lying

Applies to the general stations population more than simple security however, making it a wholly separate issue honestly that has been around since seemingly-forever.

[zaracka]

I'm probably looking for consistency. Yeah, not absolute policy, because there's Rule 0, but stricter policy. I feel it would be beneficial for the current playerbase, feel free to disagree. In the very least, maybe some admins get together and talk about it, getting them on the same page somewhat.

The Law and Safety of Security supersedes bystanders priorities. This is why you shouldn't run towards the murder or hang around a crime scene but people like to do it anyway for a variety of reasons.
One example of a good way to handle this was in, unsurprisingly, Dredd. After the car crash happens you hear the bike yapping about just getting close to the scene or interfering as automatic sentences. Until the game here is changed differently, security has effectively had to work as Judges for a long time (and those that don't just tend to die off/burn out imo).
Don't fuck around near crime scenes and you won't get pulled in for standing over a dead body.

Don't think greytider messing with security for no reason. Think "That guy's standing there AFK, maybe he has a cult dagger in his backpack." The arresting part isn't the issue because it's VERY grey, however there should be no reason to keep someone for a long period of time (10 minutes) for reasons like "he was cuffed" (why aren't you assuming he was kidnapped? security isn't the only one who can cuff people) or "he was brought in by an officer, so he must remain here until we figure out why" (despite the arresting officer not responding). I have been bwoinked for treating someone wearing a syndicate hardsuit like an antag, because you can get those """"legitimately"""" (ruins etc). If you fail to find a reason, you don't get to ruin someone's round until you find that non-existent reason. There's been times when this happens and real antag muderboner with double esword comes in and kills all of them, while they're """"interrogating"""" random people. Again, fine if it's under 10 minutes, creates variety that way. More than 10 minutes is ANNOYING.

I have seen times during rev/cult where it has been okay for the HoS to organize to keep "civillians" in perma to keep them safe/prevent them from being converted. Obviously extent and round context matters too, so not strict policy, but stricter policy, if you get what I mean. It is not hard to use common sense as a human being, hopefully. Maybe admins shouldn't be afraid to step over the Rule 0 line more often. Example: X person is being shitty, but it doesn't break the rules because """"IC issue"""". But wait, they're literally validhunting and have no reason to be treating people the way they are in lore, decency, or non-powergamey context.

Validhunting is okay on /tg/, fair. Full-stripping them and throwing them into maintenance? Gets you banned if you did it for no reason, even if you mitigated it within 6 minutes (gave them their stuff back and let them go). I understand Security is scrutinized as you say, maybe that should be fixed too. Maybe admins should confirm an accusation with logs before PMing someone about an issue, so as to not waste their time or "scrutinize" them. People legitimately use this to their advantage ICly (they're busy typing/answering ahelps, I can do whatever now). Discussion for another thread though.

Maybe I should be making admin complaints for every time this happens, but that's honestly exhausting and breeds drama or maybe it doesn't. I feel like policy discussion is a better way to shed light on issues, which can more thoroughly considered/discussed. Woah, it's in the name.

[Lumbermancer]

I was bwoinked for using Magic 8 Ball to make judgement calls on random searches.

[Grazyn]

As a Security Officer, remember that correlation does not equal causation. Someone may have just been at the wrong place at the wrong time!

Security understands that, the problem is that everyone else doesn't. How are you supposed to find out who did what if you don't bring them in for questioning or at the very least search them? But as soon as you try do that, those who are innocent immediately think "Well -I- know I am innocent, therefore this officer is unlawfully arresting me, therefore I am fully allowed to resist and avoid arrest in any way possible, because fuck me if I'm going to lose 5 minutes answering questions in the brig"
which leads to sec thinking that the guy is actually guilty since he's resisting and going on a run, which leads to the guy defending himself from the unlawful arrest until it escalates into lethal and someone dies. Which then leads to bwoinks and policy threads.

I'm not making things up, there are precedents for all of this, and consensus was reached that basically said "From a player's POV there is no difference between a random greyshirt silently trying to stun and cuff them for no apparent reason and a sec officer doing the same. You are allowed to react to both situations in the same way"

[zaracka]

If someone doesn't want to be questioned and they run away, I don't think that gives you the right to kill them. It would be other factors aka "behaviours that may make you valid" which would allow them to do that.

[Grazyn]

If someone doesn't want to be questioned and they run away, I don't think that gives you the right to kill them. It would be other factors aka "behaviours that may make you valid" which would allow them to do that.

But it doesn't end at them running away. Sec will hunt for them, then it escalates when the guy disarms/steals a taser from sec (keep in mind, he's allowed to do that per escalation rules since he's still defending himself, so it shouldn't make them valid), or stuns and strips an officer and sec starts to go brutal on the fugitive. Someone will die eventually, either an officer or the guy.

[zaracka]

He chose to escalate it. If he didn't run away and was treated the same way, that's an issue. But if it wasn't unwarranted, then what's the issue? I suppose running away is resisting arrest, so that's a timed sentence. Acting like an antag gets you treated like an antag.

[Grazyn]

I suppose running away is resisting arrest, so that's a timed sentence. Acting like an antag gets you treated like an antag.

This is where it gets iffy, it's the old "arrest innocent person, when he resists give him jail time for resisting arrest, if he still doesn't comply valid him like an antag"

What I'm saying is that running away and resisting when innocent ISN'T acting like an antag because past sec policy threads basically said that you're allowed to resist if sec comes after you and you know you did nothing, just like you would if someone other than sec was coming after you. But this inevitably happens when sec has incomplete information and it's not sec's fault, it's the players' fault who know they're allowed to do that and they make sec life a living hell by resisting the slightest attempt at a search and leading sec to a wild goose chase, going as far as stunning/stripping and eventually even killing (after sec inevitably escalates to lethals) any officer that comes after them, all under the protection of escalation rules.

So that's why saying "well sec should know that someone may have been at the wrong place at the wrong time" is dumb because how can they know it other searching/questioning them, and how can sec do that if they ALL resist and run away every time sec tries to sort them out. Just play a bit of sec and you'll notice that almost everyone always resists, innocent or not.

[zaracka]

You are allowed, but that doesn't mean there won't be consequences proportional to how crazy you acted. Despite it being dumb that an officer can give you a 10 minute sentence without evidence, it's how it is, probably because 10 minutes isn't worth arguing over. If 10 minutes is too long, reduce it to 5.

If they escalate, you can escalate. Is anyone at fault? No. The problem is when you use probable cause to treat a suspect like a criminal.

[Cobby]

If you’re giving someone ten minutes outside another officer telling you what they did or you saw them do it is shitty

[zaracka]

I'd like to add some clarification. This isn't JUST security, it's anyone acting like security. And it's not specifically a 10 minute SENTENCE, but restraining someone for that long.

[Dax Dupont]

90% of these cases happen during chaotic rev/cult rounds. When there's a massive influx of baddies on the station security can get overly stressed, lose sight over the whole situation and sadly sometimes you get restrained for a while as they are struggling to keep their brig in order.

After all, security is only human and having anywhere between 1 to 6? sec officers vs say 60 other players is hell and the reason why you generally don't see the sec players from that round in the next.

[Shezza]

This thread kind of reminds me of that one time i disarmed a officer and flushed him down with his stunbaton.

After that he took me out of my cell from brig and spaced me.
He didn't even get noted for that.

Current escalation rules for sec officers are shit and allow them to kill more people than antags in most rounds.

[DemonFiren]

stupid games, stupid prizes

[zaracka]

I suppose we've all said our take on the topic. I assume none of it is official unless it's a headmin's post, so maybe a headmin can post their take now, even if it's literally "this thread is dumb lol."