"Entertaining the idea of a lynchmob"

chesquatt · Post by **chesquatt** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:21 pm #56934

Bottom post of the previous page:

Basically, Saegrimir or however you spell it made an OOC announcement that "Entertaining the idea of a lynchmob" is now bannable. I wans't sure totally what that meant, so I sought clarity.

/discuss.

Edit: I later mentioned there should be a thread made about this new rule, so at the very least people know who were not on or weren't paying attention when that rule was made.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 8:57 am #57137

It used to be an IC issue, and then it got to the point where every round was stupid shit like that.
Then for the longest time nobody ever played security because greytiding was so rampant. It wasn't worth it and nothing could be done short of literally killing all assistants who show up in the northern hallways.

So now we're at "END OF RINE" because it legit ruins multiple people's rounds because "I want to act like an antag without actually being one."

So no, if you want to murder, smash, and riot, you can go be Ferguson in some other server.

Loonikus · Post by **Loonikus** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 9:14 am #57142

I know how much of an issue greytiding used to be. I was here long before we took such a hardline stance against it.

The difference now is that now security has the authority to kill rioters if they get out of hand, or at least have a ton more freedom to drag them off to the gulag after beating them to a pulp. Before hand greytiders were safe in the fact that security couldn't arrest all of them. Now they don't want to be the one rioter who gets a laser gun emptied into their head and have an admin say "lolvalid".

All I'm saying is that if it doesn't kill half the station, let it play out. If security is loosing the fight, you have resources at your disposal to help them. I for one believe that whenever possible, IC situations should be solved IC; OOC methods should only be used when the issue is OOC. If theres proper IC escalation for a riot, than there is proper IC reason to riot. If its just the same people stirring shit up over and over for their own shits and giggles, you don't need any more rules than what we already have to ban them.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 9:26 am #57145

I'm already a big fan of the multiple ahelps that ALREADY come in of "SEC ARRESTING ME DIN DO NUFFIN I SWEAR".
I'd rather they not have to start opening up with the lasers on regular crewmembers that want to piss away the round by being shitters.

Loonikus · Post by **Loonikus** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 9:47 am #57149

Well, for what its worth, in my mind the whole IC escalation thing works both ways. Just as unrest, arrests, and a charismatic leader can all boil down to an IC escalation to a riot, a Red Alert, greytiding, and people banging on the brig windows can all boil down to an IC escalation of assistants getting their faces blown off.

Not that that makes the inevitable flood of adminhelps any easier. But at least you can drink shitter tears when you tell them that security lasering them to death was the result of IC escalation.

All in all, I guess I'd just prefer to see this new wave of riots/greytides dealt with on a case by case basis rather than sweeping, inflexible rules. If specific people are causing too much trouble than they should be dealt with, but in some cases perhaps a riot every once in a while would give a well staffed sec team a chance to flex their muscles and let you push a button or two.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:13 am #57154

Might have worked before the servers were regularly breaching 100 players, though it is nice to see it going back down to 70-80 at peak.

Post by **Vekter** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:21 am #57162

Don't be a dick.

It is, without a doubt, the easiest rule to understand. Is there anyone here that wants to argue that demonizing players who RP as lizards fnr isn't being a dick? Because I'd like to point out the multiple rounds we've had where things get out of hand and people get lynched.

Number of rounds I've seen anti-lizard be interesting and not end in bloodshed: 2.
Number of rounds where things got out of hand: 4-5.

Those numbers aren't confusing. The gimmick isn't fun anymore, it's played out, just like grey tide has been for the past two years. Find something new or, preferably stop looking for excuses to toe the line and just play the game.

Loonikus · Post by **Loonikus** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:43 am #57166

Its a well established part of lizard fluff that lizards are second class citizens in the eyes of Nanotrasen. The reason Smity is a dick to lizards is because he's a specist, as are many other Nanotrasen employees according to the fluff that went along with Lizards introduction to the code.

If I'm calling them names or writing anti-lizard books, thats well within acceptable boundries of IC dickishness. If I were to chuck lizards out airlocks for no reason, now I'm actually removing people from the round and have reached a whole new level of OOC dickishness. Its the latter that should be punished, not the former.

Ahammer18 · Post by **Ahammer18** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 1:31 pm #57182

Okay, let's get this straight. When you form/support a graytide OR a lynchmob, you have to accept that innocent, non-antag players will probably be killed.

This is an example of being a dick OOC because you are removing players from the game FNR.

I'm other words, Dont be a dick.

Spacemanspark · Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:21 pm

Hrm... what about antags doing this to cause some chaos? Would the antag get in trouble? Would the participants get in trouble (Most likely.)?

Ahammer18 · Post by **Ahammer18** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:33 pm #57193

Sorry, allow me to amend my statement. Antags wouldnt be punished. Non antags who decide to join in because "lol so random" will be.

Spacemanspark · Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:06 pm

Noted, thanks.

Timbrewolf · Post by **Timbrewolf** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 5:08 pm #57218

Delicious wrote:
An0n3 wrote:We actually don't need to clearly define this because it just gives people something to toe around.
This is shit. You need clearly defined rules so people know how to act. Punishing people when they don't know they're breaking a rule is shit.

An0n3 wrote:What EXACTLY is okay to say and not okay to say? We can't spell it out for sure, but you'll know (and we'll know) when you've screwed up.
What a load of shit. People aren't telepathic.

Saying "greytide worldwide" over the radio doesn't make you a grey tider. Once again Saegrimr is advocating banning people for words instead of actions.

If it's too difficult for you to think about what you say and do IC before you do it don't play here.

We have banned people for shouting "greytide" over the radio. We've banned people for shouting "rogue borgs" over the radio. We've banned people for shouting "nations!" over the radio.

Because these all lead to things that really fuck up rounds. This ruling is not new at all. "I WAS JUST DOING IT FOR A JOKE HA HA"? Well tough shit it's not funny and we've told you not to do it. You're gonna get warned and if you keep doing it you're going to get banned.

Timbrewolf · Post by **Timbrewolf** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 5:11 pm #57220

Loonikus wrote:Well, for what its worth, in my mind the whole IC escalation thing works both ways. Just as unrest, arrests, and a charismatic leader can all boil down to an IC escalation to a riot, a Red Alert, greytiding, and people banging on the brig windows can all boil down to an IC escalation of assistants getting their faces blown off.

Not that that makes the inevitable flood of adminhelps any easier. But at least you can drink shitter tears when you tell them that security lasering them to death was the result of IC escalation.

All in all, I guess I'd just prefer to see this new wave of riots/greytides dealt with on a case by case basis rather than sweeping, inflexible rules. If specific people are causing too much trouble than they should be dealt with, but in some cases perhaps a riot every once in a while would give a well staffed sec team a chance to flex their muscles and let you push a button or two.

The problem with this is that if we allow it under the justification of valid escalation every round turns into people fucking around hoping to cause widescale panic and destruction because they didn't roll antag. People will keep trying and trying and trying hoping to land in that grey area of "well it's okay THIS TIME".

bandit · Post by **bandit** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 5:39 pm #57223

I find the "if players know what the rules are, then they'll try to toe the line!" mentality extremely disturbing. Imagine this: maybe players want to know what the rules are so they can know what not to do, and so they can avoid getting banned or otherwise punished for things they didn't know about? Maybe they want to know the rules so that they can be reassured there is some set policy and accountability, rather than worrying that they will be punished or not based solely on whichever of the dozens of admins is on and how they feel about that player / whether they ever gave them notes saying they are "incredibly toxic" for no reason. Maybe they want to know the rules because they actually care about following the rules. What a fucking concept.

Timbrewolf · Post by **Timbrewolf** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 5:46 pm #57225

It's not just "knowing what the rules are". If that was all it was, we could just say:

Don't say stuff over the radio that inspires people to go commit random violence and chaos FNR.

And that would be the end of discussion. You would keep that in mind and, like the smart player who cares about contributing to the server that you're trying to portray, you would think about that before you said stuff over the radio.

To go further and say you need to be told exactly what is or is not against the rules is a setup for line toe'ing. You're pretending your own judgement is so piss poor you wont be able to follow that rule unless it's more clearly defined when the intent is pretty obvious. What further definition does is allow people to try to find ways to get away with doing the same thing but, since it's not specified in these micro rules, argue that it wasn't against them in the first place.

Broader, easier to follow rules > millions of subclauses.

This thread is full of people giving examples of what could constitute "inciting a lynchmob". I just gave you three in the post preceeding your own. If you use your head you'll answer your own question and this imagined need for further definition will disappear.

bandit · Post by **bandit** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 5:54 pm #57226

The problem with that is that players are unpredictable, and the onus should therefore be on the people who actually commit random acts of violence FNR. If someone wants to grief and/or commit violence/chaos/mutiny/etc, they will probably latch onto whatever reason they can find, whether or not that "reason" was intentional.

As for "pretending your judgment is piss poor" in the other thread I just talked about getting BWOINK!ed for spamming (a similarly subjective, unclearly defined "rule") when I was in fact taking pains to not come off as spamming, so it's not unheard of for there to be geuine confusion.

Aurx · Post by **Aurx** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 6:44 pm #57237

bandit wrote:The problem with that is that players are unpredictable, and the onus should therefore be on the people who actually commit random acts of violence FNR. If someone wants to grief and/or commit violence/chaos/mutiny/etc, they will probably latch onto whatever reason they can find, whether or not that "reason" was intentional.

But it's well known that people will latch onto stupid reasons, and will turn a joking "GAS THE VOX, RACE WAR NOW" into an excuse to grief.
Given that the Vox getting gassed is a reasonably foreseeable outcome of saying to gas the Vox, we treat it as an attempt to cause grief.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 7:39 pm #57253

bandit wrote:The problem with that is that players are unpredictable,

Which is why it is nearly impossible to actually codify rules for ever possibly situation in a very open-ended game like SS13.
Seriously, try it sometime. We had nearly this same argument when Drones first came out and people kept bitching BUT "BEINGS" ARE TOO VAGUE! I NEED A CODIFIED LIST OF WHAT I CAN AND CANNOT BREAK BECAUSE I CAN'T UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF A MINDLESS REPAIR BOT.

chesquatt · Post by **chesquatt** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 8:49 pm #57283

Vekter wrote: Those numbers aren't confusing. The gimmick isn't fun anymore, it's played out, just like grey tide has been for the past two years. Find something new or, preferably stop looking for excuses to toe the line and just play the game.

This would be a great post if we were talking about an anti-lizard gimmick. I'm not trying to find a line to toe, I am trying to seek clarity on a rule and a policy, sincerely like every one of these other posts.
I am hoping for a rule to be clear enough that it is easy to follow. BEcause like I mentioned, and if you have been on the station any amount of time you know very well that lynchings are often the way justice plays out when a character is good enough at being a shitler. The problem comes in that an admin could decide that someone's actions caused a riot, even though the lynchmob's anger was directed at them. This rule is open ended enough that you will probably see ban reasons like "was "punishing" dead bodies, creeped out the crew and made the bar get wrecked"
You are moving a lot of IC justice that caused something exciting to happen on the station to an OOC punishment.

And no, this is not about MY bloodlust. Most of the instances I am referring to talk about times I was killed by a lynchmob and thought "that was fun, I totally deserved that, its probably good that happened," after me reading some new raunchy book, or doing something weird with human'd monkeys in the holodeck. even though I was violating no server rules, I got lynched. It was an IC form of emergent gameplay that I find fun even though I am usually the "victim." But what this effectively does is make actions like that, punishable because they cause lynchmobs, and that generally what you have been saying is that "all things that are handled by lynchmobs will be handled by Ahelp."
It's a shitty policy that makes characters scared to do much of anything. This rule is one you would find on Yog.

Timbrewolf · Post by **Timbrewolf** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 8:59 pm #57289

It's easy to follow:

Stop heralding events that bring groups of players together to harass/attack others. Stop ringing the dinner bell of griff. Police yourself or get out.

This isn't a new rule. We've yelled at people for doing this or similar before. Don't be a dick.

Post by **lumipharon** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:37 pm #57310

Speaking of Ian and lynch mobs, it wasn't so long ago that the hop asked for a dog walker to walk ian. Me and another person fought over him, both trying to drag him away. I ended up hiding in a dorm room with the dog. The other guy called a lynch mob on me, and about 8 guys stormed the dorm room, Where I was threatning to kill the dog if they broke in. They broke in, I killed the dog. They welded me into a locker and spaced me.

When I ahelped it, admins literally "you killed ian, what did you expect?"

And they weren't antags that called the mob, or killed and spaced me.

bandit · Post by **bandit** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:39 pm #57311

The Rules wrote:If you kill station pets unprompted and get dunked for it, you have only yourself to blame.

chesquatt · Post by **chesquatt** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 10:55 pm #57315

bandit wrote:
The Rules wrote:If you kill station pets unprompted and get dunked for it, you have only yourself to blame.

Usually via lynchmob. This is my point. Lynching is a legitimate form of justice, often. So to say "Don't entertain the idea" is weird.

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:14 pm #57317

chesquatt wrote:
paprika wrote:This new policy is bullshit. I think we should riot about it.
Very productive thanks.

That's called a joke there sport.

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:22 pm #57322

Loonikus wrote:Its a well established part of lizard fluff that lizards are second class citizens in the eyes of Nanotrasen. The reason Smity is a dick to lizards is because he's a specist, as are many other Nanotrasen employees according to the fluff that went along with Lizards introduction to the code.

For a server with no established canon, this gets brought up as canon an awful lot.

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:28 pm #57325

cedarbridge wrote:
chesquatt wrote:
paprika wrote:This new policy is bullshit. I think we should riot about it.
Very productive thanks.
That's called a joke there sport.

Delicious wrote:"Don't be a dick" has always been a terrible rule due to how vague and subjective it is. Rules like this leave players confused as to what they're allowed to do, and are easily exploited by admins to do what they like and justify it. It's not fair on the players and it's incredibly biased in favour of the admins. This is self-evident, but I don't see it getting changed anytime soon because it suits the only people with the power to change it.

Also, calling people line toers because they want clear and objective boundaries instead of arbitrary and subjective ones is just a way of shifting blame from yourselves and an excuse for not doing your job properly.

What you're asking for here is a list. A list of things you specifically cannot do. As stated, players are unpredictable, but those new things are probably violations of Rule 1 from the get go. We as the administration should not have to predict and codify every possible invention and artifice of grief so that you know in advance what is and is not shitty behavior. We're all (by rules required to be) adults here. If you can't realize that what you're doing is shitty behavior, you should probably hand in any paperwork entitling you to life as an adult.

Post by **Vekter** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:37 pm #57327

Okay, let me try and simplify this as much as possible.

Back a few years ago, there was a glitch for a while in the job system that forced people into Assistant for whatever reason. It didn't last long, but it resulted in some moderately fun rounds centered around assistants trying to overthrow sec. It wasn't admin sponsored, but it just kinda happened. Then, like everything else remotely fun and player based, it got out of control when people started signing up as Assistant specifically to start greytide rounds. It go SO BAD that you'd hear "Welcome to the station crew, enjoy your sta-GREY TIDE WORLD WIDE", then Sec reflexively clenched their assholes.

Eventually the admins gave sec carte blanche to kill assistants who were greytiding (read: wrecking the brig, harming sec officers, etc.) as a general threat to the station. Finally the activity just plain got banned, and even mentioning it was grounds for a 10 minute ban for a while.

FINALLY the fad died off, but then everyone used every last thing as an excuse to greytide. I still remember having to ban a librarian for making a bluetide manifesto and thinking I'LL BE CLEVER, ADMINS WON'T SUSPECT A THING.

The unofficial rule (and my view on the subject) is that, as long as the mob doesn't get out of control, admins don't have a problem with it. That being said, it almost always gets out of control, we end up having to ban 3-4 people for lynching someone and assistant banning the person who started the whole damn thing. I'm starting to think it might just be worth it to have Scaredy turn off lizards.

As a player, I'm sick of seeing the race wars thing because it's played out. It isn't funny or interesting anymore, it's the same gimmick we've seen 10-12 times now that was interesting maybe the first 2. I know the playerbase loves running shit into the ground (ayy lmao, nations, ick in ock, cargonia, etc.) but holy shit, if it's getting to where adminbus is telling you to fucking stop every time it happens, you probably shouldn't fucking do it anymore.

On a more personal note, why is the entire playerbase scared to death of getting an admin PM? It doesn't mean you're going to get banned, usually with things like this it means we might tell you to knock it off. You won't get a note unless you do this every last round.

"Don't be a dick" has always been a terrible rule due to how vague and subjective it is. Rules like this leave players confused as to what they're allowed to do, and are easily exploited by admins to do what they like and justify it. It's not fair on the players and it's incredibly biased in favour of the admins. This is self-evident, but I don't see it getting changed anytime soon because it suits the only people with the power to change it.

Also, calling people line toers because they want clear and objective boundaries instead of arbitrary and subjective ones is just a way of shifting blame from yourselves and an excuse for not doing your job properly.

Rule 1 is meant to be a catch-all for anything that's deemed being a general asshole. As more qualified people have said in this thread, we don't have distinct rules for a lot of things because the rules page would read like War & Peace if we did. There's just too much bullshit for us to have a dedicated list of everything you can and cannot do.

As far as the line toeing problem, if you gave me a day I could probably give you a list of the 10-12 people we've had to perma for toeing the line one too many times. We don't appreciate it because it shows little respect for the rules and makes our lives a pain in the ass. If you do something and get bwoinked for it, don't do it again. If you don't know if you should do it or not...

adminhelp before doing it.

I promise, we will very quickly let you know whether or not it's acceptable.

Loonikus · Post by **Loonikus** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:39 pm #57328

The problem is that some people think that being a dick in character is fine so long as your not actually robbing someone of their ability to participate in the round.

Meanwhile other people think that unless you have some explicit reason to do otherwise, all our characters should be sitting in drum circles singing kumbaya together until we can get our valids.

Post by **Vekter** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 11:45 pm #57330

Loonikus wrote:The problem is that some people think that being a dick in character is fine so long as your not actually robbing someone of their ability to participate in the round.

Meanwhile other people think that unless you have some explicit reason to do otherwise, all our characters should be sitting in drum circles singing kumbaya together until we can get our valids.

To a degree, being a general jerk in character won't get you banned. Hell, it usually won't get you bwoinked unless you take it too far.

And no, we don't expect everyone to be all hippie hunky-dory with one another. We know there's going to be some conflict, and that's okay as long as you don't take it too far. Example: Clown steals Janitor's mop, Janitor calls Sec, Sec brigs Clown. Handled IC, no problem. Slow escalation of violence isn't even usually handled outside of game unless someone dies. It's only when someone gets killed or does something super dickish (welds someone in a locker with internals and spaces them, tries to do surgery without consent, etc.) that we get involved.

So at the end of the day the easy way to say all of that is DON'T BE A DICK

chesquatt · Post by **chesquatt** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:50 am #57344

Vekter wrote: Back a few years ago, there was a glitch for a while in the job system that forced people into Assistant for whatever reason. It didn't last long, but it resulted in some moderately fun rounds centered around assistants trying to overthrow sec. It wasn't admin sponsored, but it just kinda happened. Then, like everything else remotely fun and player based, it got out of control when people started signing up as Assistant specifically to start greytide rounds. It go SO BAD that you'd hear "Welcome to the station crew, enjoy your sta-GREY TIDE WORLD WIDE", then Sec reflexively clenched their assholes.

"Act like an antag, get treated like an antag" rule ended with the same 7 people every round picking fights with security and saying "greytide" actually. You make it sound like some mystical bullshit.

Jaimon · Post by **Jaimon** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 12:54 am #57345

You guys better not be having fun without admin consent. Let the players produce content. There is no need to play the same round over and over again. Small character quirks and random events are what make this game fun. We dont need to have our hands held every round by some over zealous admin who is mad that you took his mime hat.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:59 am #57367

Jaimon wrote:You guys better not be having fun without admin consent. Let the players produce content. There is no need to play the same round over and over again. Small character quirks and random events are what make this game fun. We dont need to have our hands held every round by some over zealous admin who is mad that you took his mime hat.

How nice of you to join us, now take a moment to read a couple of the previous pages where "b-but its just a small even we did to spice up the round!" ended up being every other round full of griefy bullshit.

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:49 am #57388

Jaimon wrote:Let the players produce content. There is no need to play the same round over and over again.

I'm glad we're on the same page about the "gas the lizards" lynch mob thing needing to stop.

Timbrewolf · Post by **Timbrewolf** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 4:34 am #57417

What a lot of people don't understand is that you can roleplay being a jerk without actually disrupting someone else's round.

It's totally possible to disrespect someone, berate someone, inconvenience someone, whatever, without stealing from them, assaulting them, kidnapping them, etc. etc. etc.

People lack wit and creativity. That's why we need blanket rules like "Don't be a dick" because when you try to drum up ideas of "well my character hates lizards how can I express that in game?" all their pea-brain's can come up with is physical violence.

I would sooner answer a prayer for a crate of anti-lizard league suit accessories and condone you guys playing some kind of conspiracy while someone fills the newscaster with anti-lizard propaganda and photos of "known scale-consorters" etc. etc. etc.

I'm continually disappointed and frustrated with how pathetic and short-sighted people are in trying to "roleplay" shit out via their fists.

Try harder. Be smarter. If you can't do those things stop making shitty attempts at it. Watching you fail is shameful.

You can hate someone's guts and roleplay all kinds of crazy shit if you actually stop and try roleplaying. The problem isn't that you guys want to have racial tension and shit, it's that you assholes keep escalating things to riots.

Aurx · Post by **Aurx** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:31 am #57442

The problem is also that the sadcases who think racism == violence also think violence == attacking.

chesquatt · Post by **chesquatt** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 7:40 am #57455

Aurx wrote:The problem is also that the sadcases who think racism == violence also think violence == attacking.

please elaborate.

Aurx · Post by **Aurx** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 7:48 am #57458

chesquatt wrote:
Aurx wrote:The problem is also that the sadcases who think racism == violence also think violence == attacking.
please elaborate.

Custom emotes are wonderful.

Trognar · Post by **Trognar** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 8:58 am #57465

An0n3 wrote:What a lot of people don't understand is that you can roleplay being a jerk without actually disrupting someone else's round.

It's totally possible to disrespect someone, berate someone, inconvenience someone, whatever, without stealing from them, assaulting them, kidnapping them, etc. etc. etc.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner folks. While I wholeheartedly agree, who gets in trouble if it gets violent? I suppose it would change on a case by case basis but I personally would like to know the general standing on this in particular.

chesquatt wrote:
Aurx wrote:The problem is also that the sadcases who think racism == violence also think violence == attacking.
please elaborate.

People who think that in order to be /insert any pro or anti gimmick here/ you need to become violent or escalate it to violence FNR, which is the core of the problem.

chesquatt · Post by **chesquatt** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 9:06 am #57468

An0n3 wrote: I would sooner answer a prayer for a crate of anti-lizard league suit accessories and condone you guys playing some kind of conspiracy while someone fills the newscaster with anti-lizard propaganda and photos of "known scale-consorters" etc. etc. etc.

This is my whole point. Others here would consider that as "entertaining the idea of a lynchmob." Saying "gas the lizards" on the newscaster can get you banned with this ruling by Saeg. So I TOTALLY agree with you, that RP should be creative and not be violent. I see the problem there, now especially. But who is to blame when things get violent? The Anti-lizard league for filling the airwaves with hate? Or the guy who took that RP and used it as an excuse to firebomb science?
Individual accountability might be important here. But what forbidding "entertaining the idea of a lynchmob" entails is people getting banned for "Shitty unfun gimmick that enticed some people into lynching a lizard" even though that person was only roleplaying at that point, and had nothing to do with the actual act of violence, or even ordering the violence.

But if people want to and have the ability to form an IG crew association of some kind, that could lead to some conspiracy-coup, or some other secret society stuff, but they are afraid their message (against NT, Lizards, Sec, Borgs, A Head of staff, whatever) is going to "entice a mob" even if they themselves have no intention to do so, then that can leave actual emergent gameplay in the cold.

If someone is delivering a fiery hatespeech about lizards, and some player gets riled up and goes off and torches a lizard, it shouldn't be the person giving the speech's fault.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 9:08 am #57469

I think you're assuming I wouldn't ban everybody involved instead of just the initial screamer.

chesquatt · Post by **chesquatt** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 9:16 am #57471

Saegrimr wrote:I think you're assuming I wouldn't ban everybody involved instead of just the initial screamer.

chesquatt wrote:
If someone is delivering a fiery hatespeech about lizards, and some player gets riled up and goes off and torches a lizard, it shouldn't be the person giving the speech's fault.

[/quote]

Or you can hold those who actually went out and did it accountable instead of making up a new rule. If people know they will get banned for getting fired up and greytiding over someone's words they are less likely to use it as an excuse. Then people can spew all the "shitty unfun" hatespeech they want about lizards or the captain, and it can be handled IC rather than an admin getting upset over it because the librarian is filling the newscaster with hate. Maybe add a law to the spacelaw book that mentions "rabblerousing or hatespeech is punishable by x"

If I want to read "Why humans are better than lizards Volume 2" over radio, I should be allowed to. If I want to say "LIZARDS SHOULDN'T BE ON THIS STATION" or "EVERY LIZARD SHOULD BE SHOVED IN AN OVEN" I should be able to so long as I am not doing any of these things. I am glad to see that Anon generally agrees that this form of RP is okay as long as it isn't turned into something violent or an excuse to greytide. But if someone (or 4 people) decide(s) to make it violent, and that was not the CLEAR intention of the "orginal screamer" then why the fuck should the "screamer" be punished for it?

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 9:29 am #57478

chesquatt wrote:"LIZARDS SHOULDN'T BE ON THIS STATION" or "EVERY LIZARD SHOULD BE SHOVED IN AN OVEN" I should be able to so long as I am not doing any of these things.

Someone then agrees with you.
Two more speak up and also yell "YEAH FUCK LIZARDS"
Soon you have about 12 or so all riled up ready to form a lynch mob.

I've seen it happen enough times. Just stop.

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:26 am #57491

chesquatt wrote:
Saegrimr wrote:I think you're assuming I wouldn't ban everybody involved instead of just the initial screamer.

chesquatt wrote:
If someone is delivering a fiery hatespeech about lizards, and some player gets riled up and goes off and torches a lizard, it shouldn't be the person giving the speech's fault.
Or you can hold those who actually went out and did it accountable instead of making up a new rule. If people know they will get banned for getting fired up and greytiding over someone's words they are less likely to use it as an excuse. Then people can spew all the "shitty unfun" hatespeech they want about lizards or the captain, and it can be handled IC rather than an admin getting upset over it because the librarian is filling the newscaster with hate. Maybe add a law to the spacelaw book that mentions "rabblerousing or hatespeech is punishable by x"

If I want to read "Why humans are better than lizards Volume 2" over radio, I should be allowed to. If I want to say "LIZARDS SHOULDN'T BE ON THIS STATION" or "EVERY LIZARD SHOULD BE SHOVED IN AN OVEN" I should be able to so long as I am not doing any of these things. I am glad to see that Anon generally agrees that this form of RP is okay as long as it isn't turned into something violent or an excuse to greytide. But if someone (or 4 people) decide(s) to make it violent, and that was not the CLEAR intention of the "orginal screamer" then why the fuck should the "screamer" be punished for it?

The act of speaking isn't the issue. The reason you're doing and saying what you're doing and saying is what is important here. If your intention is to form a mob of "angry lizard haters" to stir shit etc, that's pointlessly asking for trouble. There's no "good RP" to be had there because that train only goes one place and it gets there fast.

chesquatt · Post by **chesquatt** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:21 pm #57550

Saegrimr wrote:
chesquatt wrote:"LIZARDS SHOULDN'T BE ON THIS STATION" or "EVERY LIZARD SHOULD BE SHOVED IN AN OVEN" I should be able to so long as I am not doing any of these things.
Someone then agrees with you.
Two more speak up and also yell "YEAH FUCK LIZARDS"
Soon you have about 12 or so all riled up ready to form a lynch mob.

I've seen it happen enough times. Just stop.

Right, so why are you going to ban the guy who "Riled people up" rather than the people who got riled up? Your acting like there is some kind of inevitability involved when people yell "GAS THE LIZARDS" that people get riled up and do that shit. People have free will and reason, and they use those words as an excuse to do bullshit, if the captain says "Clowns don't belong on this station" and someone goes off and kills the clown it wouldn't make much sense to ban the captain and the guy who killed the clown.
Individual accountability should take precedent over some "group responsibility," are you gonna ban someone for running alongside a lynchmob but not actually doing anything, or for saying "I support the greytide freedomfighters" even though they themselves are just sitting at their post?

Saying "gas the lizards" does not initiate a mind control sequence that forces people to go batshit. Sentient people make the decision to use it as an excuse, and should be punished, even if some assistant is saying "I think someone should torch science" and someone does, that does not make it the assistant's fault, it is the fualt of the sentient and independent person who made the choice to go and ACTUALLY torch science. The guy who said "Someone should torch science" or "Fucking kill the clown, shithead stole X" should be punished IC for "conspiring to X," but only banned if they themselves took the action.

danno · Post by **danno** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:23 pm #57551

the bottom line here is that I can yell "GREYTIDE WORLDWIDE" and go start a riot
or just yell "I SCREAM FOR ICE CREAM" and go start one to the same effect

it's not the initial nonsense you scream, it's what you do afterwards and what other people do

chesquatt · Post by **chesquatt** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:28 pm #57552

danno wrote:
it's not the initial nonsense you scream, it's what you do afterwards and what other people do

Right, that is what I am saying. If the initial nonsense indirectly gets the singulo release, or someone lynched (whatever happens) then the person to blame is the person who picked up that nonsense and turned it into a reason to fuck up the station.
But "I SCREAM FOR ICE CREAM" can be loosely considered "entertaining the idea of a lynchmob" if after the fact someone hops the counter and beats the chef to death for the icecream cart. You can then be punished for saying "I SCREAM FOR ICE CREAM."

There is clearly a gap in fault, intention and action between someone saying "Shove a lamp up his ass" and someone tieing down the clown and ACTUALLY shoving a lamp up his ass.

Unless we are going to make a new rule that somehow makes your character subordinate to some greyshit yelling "SLIT EVERY MIME'S THROAT" that takes away one's freewill not to, there is not reason to ban the greyshit who is yelling. You ban the guy whos actually killed the mime.

dezzmont · Post by **dezzmont** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:41 pm #57554

danno wrote:the bottom line here is that I can yell "GREYTIDE WORLDWIDE" and go start a riot
or just yell "I SCREAM FOR ICE CREAM" and go start one to the same effect

it's not the initial nonsense you scream, it's what you do afterwards and what other people do

The problem is when you scream something intentionally inflamatory.

While in both situations it is clear the mob was looking for an excuse to behave poorly, and no one should pretend you mind controlled people, there is a point where you end up actively trying to instigate bad behavior and should be held accountable too.

This isn't just because deliberately trying to start shit, even if other people need to actually take the plunge with you, is clearly a jerk move. It is because those shouts can get people on the edge, or even people who are relatively ok, to get swept up into a mob mentality, and because it can cause shitty activity to become larger and more organized. People looking to start shit usually just steal shoes or something and try to instigate valid fights, but when it looks like a mob may start they may push for a mob and get what they want on a much more distruptive scale.

As a side note, the reason for our broad overarching rules of behavior are not so admins don't have to give examples you can toe the line around. When pressed an admin should be able to give an example of behavior falling into that category and behavior that doesn't, or judge example situations with that dreaded "but situation" disclaimer. That used to literally be a method to test how good an admin you would be. However examples aren't there to be the beginning or ends of rules. The rules are never going to be a set "You can or can't do this specific thing" except in highly controversial areas, like silicon rules, and usually that is a stopgap while something better is developed.

Aurx · Post by **Aurx** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 8:59 pm #57587

But people react to certain nonsense and not others. And they don't react if not given something to react to.

This is similar to giving a random assistant a laser gun during a rev round. Sure, you don't force them to use it. But they can only use it because you provided them the opportunity to use it. If they use it, it's only because you initiated the series of events. Therefore, you are directly responsible for the shots fired.
Except with "GAS THE LIZARDS", you're handing intent out to everybody. Odds are very good that at least one jackass is going to take you up on that proposition.

This is something so likely to cause grief to occur that we're simply banning it outright.

Post by **Vekter** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 10:41 pm #57613

This is why we can't have nice things.

Jaimon · Post by **Jaimon** » Sat Jan 10, 2015 11:16 pm #57625

Aurx wrote:But people react to certain nonsense and not others. And they don't react if not given something to react to.

This is similar to giving a random assistant a laser gun during a rev round. Sure, you don't force them to use it. But they can only use it because you provided them the opportunity to use it. If they use it, it's only because you initiated the series of events. Therefore, you are directly responsible for the shots fired.
Except with "GAS THE LIZARDS", you're handing intent out to everybody. Odds are very good that at least one jackass is going to take you up on that proposition.

This is something so likely to cause grief to occur that we're simply banning it outright.

I spawn in with an O2 bottle every round. I can use that O2 bottle for violence. ban now pls