[MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Ask and discuss policy about game conduct and rules.

Moderators: In-Game Game Master, In-Game Head Admins

Forum rules
Read these board rules before posting or you'll get reprimanded.
Threads without replies for 30 days will be automatically locked.
User avatar
Giocorn
 
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:07 am
Byond Username: Giocorn

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Giocorn » Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:08 am #580551

wesoda25 wrote:
Giocorn wrote:stuff

As someone who rejects the codes, how do you react when people use them?

I usually say, "Can somebody tell me what the fuck that means?" and somebody translates immediately. Buuuut, there have been many occasions where I've just been able to say, "Hmm, well a 10-30 code is some sort of hostile engagement, and they were heading to abandoned bar, so I guess the code they used means hostile engagement in abandoned bar." Once again, these are usually incredibly easy to infer based upon the context surrounding them.



User avatar
iamgoofball
Github User
 
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:50 pm
Byond Username: Iamgoofball
Github Username: Iamgoofball

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby iamgoofball » Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:15 am #580553

will i get banned if i say there's a 69-420 going on in botany and that i'm en route to engage in a 360-420

User avatar
Timberpoes
Code Maintainer
 
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Timberpoes » Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:24 am #580555

Another lengthy post incoming where I basically repeat a lot of things I've already said.

Giocorn wrote:By banning these 10 codes they are setting a precedent that any attempt at an RP gimmick that they don't like can be banned and punished with a flick of the wrist, which is deeply concerning to people who love their crazy RP gimmicks (such as me and my Revengers Initiative).


Yes. That is, in fact, already the case.

Admins can already tell players to knock off gimmicks that are overplayed or overused and are growing stale. Headmins can make policy decisions too. This should not come as a surprise.

As a lot of people keep overlooking, the issues are a lot broader than just the players. All admins need to know the 10-codes to get the full context of any ahelp situation. When log diving is involved, admins now need to cross-reference 10-codes they don't know when investigating issues to make sure everything done and said is kosher.

Additionally, it's not just security that has to use these codes. It's everyone. All silicons will need to learn them so they can understand what security is doing and prevent security from taking actions that would cause human harm. This includes every single AI. They're not optional. If you have to decipher what a 10-code means, you're effectively using 10-codes. Antags, silicons, admins, captains who listen in on sec comms and other security personnel all have to know and understand 10-codes - If they don't, then they simply don't get the opportunity to understand what security are talking about. If security use them over non-security radio channels, like common, ALL players wearing headsets need to know what they mean.

Remember the quote from Legality's OP regarding the reason for the restriction:
The use of short-hand codes for communication in any department ...


The entire concept of departmental code-speak goes beyond security. It would form a precedent that every department should be able to use their own code language to speed up communication. What stops antags speaking in code to speed up communication? When does "speed up communication" stop and "obfuscate communication" begin?

Giocorn wrote:... had done his best to establish these codes IC every single time he tried to use them ...


It would appear you're arguing that as long as two people have written a code down on a piece of paper and exchanged it IC, they should be able to speak in that code? This isn't acceptable from an administrative perspective.

Where does the line get drawn before admins have absolutely no clue what is being said by players?

Again, we bring back a quote from Legality's OP citing the reasoning behind the ban:
... Our servers are English only which makes this style of codified speak subversive ...


There a reason the standard server language is English and we bwoink people not speaking it. There is a single universal language that all admins and all other players are expected to communicate in. This is what fundamentally allows SS13 to function as the multiplayer online game that it is. Nobody is allowed to obfuscate their communications outside of gameplay mechanics that are fundamentally coded into the game. Felinids can speak in Nekomimetic and I, as an admin, don't care because the message is logged in plain English and when I'm an observer I see the message in plain English with an icon next to it denoting they spoke it in another language. When two players are speaking in some arbitrary, made up code-speak that absolutely changes things.

These kinds of restrictions aren't born out of some hatred for Manuel or RP in general, they're born out of the realities required to enable SS13 to function as a game and to enable the relevant environment for effective administration.

It feels like a lot of people arguing here can't see the forest for the trees. The policy decision was broader in scope than security 10-codes and had more reasons than "it's a barrier for newer or more casual players".
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer: I braek. I feex. I nerf. I beef.
/tg/station Codermin: I baan. I noot. I halp. Feed me back in my thread.

User avatar
Giocorn
 
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:07 am
Byond Username: Giocorn

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Giocorn » Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:43 am #580557

Timberpoes wrote:
Yes. That is, in fact, already the case.

Admins can already tell players to knock off gimmicks that are overplayed or overused and are growing stale. Headmins can make policy decisions too. This should not come as a surprise.


Yes, I understand that, but there's a difference here. This is a ban on something emerging that wasn't hurting anyone. This gimmick wasn't old and stale, it wasn't overused, and people could say, "No, I don't want to do that," and all the people using the 10 codes would respect it and you for saying so, trust me I was the guy who said, "No, I don't want to do that." Of course admins already had the ability to do these things, to make policies regarding them; but this type of policy which BANS the use of 10 codes, makes it a PUNISHABLE offense, sets a pretty terrifying precedent regarding RP gimmicks that are just . . . not necessarily liked by the admins. It allows for even further restriction of player freedoms for the sole purpose of lightening the load on a job which is BOUND to be stressful by its very nature (administration). Look, I understand that there are lots and lots and LOTS of difficulties that are heaped onto admins by giving the players the ability to freely do certain things which make the experience enjoyable for them; but the job of the admin is not to make things easier on themselves, it's to make the game more enjoyable for the players. We have proven instances of people in Sec, in Command, and even Antags saying, "Yeah, I don't mind the codes, they aren't that hard to figure out, even if I don't have the resources." Hell, people USUALLY revert from using them (in my experience) when the situation gets even remotely complicated in any sense. You're treating this like it's a different language, when in all actuality it's more akin to slang; sure, it's confusing for about a second, but then you're like, "OH, I GET IT! ROBUST MEANS SKILLED, EFFECTIVE, OR COOL!"

User avatar
WillLaWill
 
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:25 am
Byond Username: WillLaWill

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby WillLaWill » Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:59 am #580558

Alright so time to come up to bat for Dolce. Literally made an account because this was the first community thing that bothered me enough to justify it

So as a player I run Natalia Volk, who is generally a complete asshole, abrasive, and generally kind of a cunt. But likewise has a tendency to be surprisingly fair, if rude, when dealing with both detainees and her fellow sec officers. Therefore when I came into contact with the ten codes I decided that to accurately play my character I would refuse to use the ten codes, and only really gave them a cursory glance. Keep in mind I came into contact with these codes as a new player in around my second round as security, with my first being lowpop. I was handed the paper by Dolce as described in his post, and wasn't even in the manuel discord at the time. I ultimately made the decision to openly mock a deride Dolce in character for using these codes as they were "Silly and pointless", and did so by speaking using Nekmomimetic with another felinid security officer. However in the following rounds I often played as warden or detective, two roles very highly reliant on interpreting these callouts.

Never once was I caused major issue by the codes and the only time that stands out to me for causing an issue at all was a single nuke ops round where Dolce started screaming a code nobody recognized over the radio and it took about ten seconds to find the paper and realize it was "Officer Down - Emergency" Which while it did slightly inconvenience my ability to coordinate security was also fairly easy to understand because he was screaming it in a panic, and I'd already ordered sec to Evac before I even knew what was going on exactly. The basic ability to use context clues is taught in kindergarten, do we really want people who can't operate a kindergarten level playing security

Lastly I'd like to address the repeated accusation that this system is functionally meta, as someone who has regularly played in rounds with Dolce running these codes, I have to say I've been handed them 90% of those rounds if I was playing anything even vaguely related to sec. As was everyone else in a similar position and anyone who asked. And when he did miss me it was usually because the situation was currently chaotic and he didn't have time to make a new copy for me at the time, and I always did eventually get a copy. Even in those circumstances it would be easy to justify PDAing someone a weblink as use of an in character internet. Or if this was tacked onto the wiki the issue would be entirely avoidable because simply opening a space law book or a newly added book could solve the problem.

My point is this is being horrendously unfair and obtuse to a player who put in a lot of effort to improve the server for what feels like no other reason than making a role that should be the hardest to access on the server more accessible to people who have a strong tendency to abuse that power

NikoTheGuyDude
 
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2020 7:17 pm
Byond Username: NikoTheGuyDude

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby NikoTheGuyDude » Mon Nov 02, 2020 4:11 am #580560

How is an antag supposed to learn about these codes? Someone with illicit access to sec comms? I'm seeing a lot about "well, dolce gives people an IC paper" which is respectable, however, do you really think sec is going to give that paper to a traitor who has sec comms? The answer is no. A new player who gets illicit access to sec comms shouldnt have to access a completely unofficial and ooc document just to understand what the people are SAYING on sec comms.

User avatar
Giocorn
 
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:07 am
Byond Username: Giocorn

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Giocorn » Mon Nov 02, 2020 4:13 am #580561

NikoTheGuyDude wrote:How is an antag supposed to learn about these codes? Someone with illicit access to sec comms? I'm seeing a lot about "well, dolce gives people an IC paper" which is respectable, however, do you really think sec is going to give that paper to a traitor who has sec comms? The answer is no. A new player who gets illicit access to sec comms shouldnt have to access a completely unofficial and ooc document just to understand what the people are SAYING on sec comms.


So, the big thing which has been stated over and over is that Dolce is willing to give these codes out to anyone who asks, and has done so on multiple occasions. In addition, as I said earlier, they're really easily inferred, and multiple Sec, Command, and Antags have gone on record saying they could usually figure them out really easily.

User avatar
WillLaWill
 
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:25 am
Byond Username: WillLaWill

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby WillLaWill » Mon Nov 02, 2020 4:18 am #580562

Giocorn wrote:
NikoTheGuyDude wrote:How is an antag supposed to learn about these codes? Someone with illicit access to sec comms? I'm seeing a lot about "well, dolce gives people an IC paper" which is respectable, however, do you really think sec is going to give that paper to a traitor who has sec comms? The answer is no. A new player who gets illicit access to sec comms shouldnt have to access a completely unofficial and ooc document just to understand what the people are SAYING on sec comms.


So, the big thing which has been stated over and over is that Dolce is willing to give these codes out to anyone who asks, and has done so on multiple occasions. In addition, as I said earlier, they're really easily inferred, and multiple Sec, Command, and Antags have gone on record saying they could usually figure them out really easily.


Coming in with another addition to this. The only circumstances I can think of in which you wouldn't just get handed the codes but could have access to sec comms are pirates and nuke ops. As any other role you could easily approach a member of security or Dolce himself and get the codes handed to you. In the case of pirates and nuke ops they're forced to go loud from the get go and so by nature they're not really able to ask in character. At the same time these codes are laughably easy to infer and half the time are only used on the part of the initial person sending the message or for the generic response "10-4". In fact in most cases I've seen what's going on exactly is usually stated shortly after by either the warden or another member of security, simply because the codes inherently lack useful detail, their purpose being not to relay the entire situation but more to relay that there is a situation and vaguely what and where it is so other officers know and can respond. Also the obvious roleplay aspect

User avatar
Timberpoes
Code Maintainer
 
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Timberpoes » Mon Nov 02, 2020 4:39 am #580563

It doesn't set a precedent. The precedent already exists, This ruling was more like a clarification of "Using any language other than English in-game" with wording specifically noting that 10-codes are considered the equivalent of not speaking English.

Allow me to give the ruling without reference to the 10-codes.
The use of short-hand codes for communication in any department ... are not allowed. Our servers are English only which makes this style of codified speak subversive ...


This clearly adds an additional set of context and clarification to this ruling.
... we require everyone to communicate exclusively in English when playing on our servers. This restriction applies to both IC and OOC methods of communication.


The recent policy decision didn't restrict RP, it reinforced that this specific form of RP was already restricted by the English only policy which is global, applying to all servers whether LRP or MRP.

What you're asking for is that an exception to be made specifically for MRP and specifically for security-related matters and/or station locations to be permitted for a ciphered manner of communication on MRP.

I do not believe there is enough justification to make an exception to the English only policy to allow security-related matters to be spoken in code-language instead of plain English as a baseline, let alone making a special snowflake policy allowing it for MRP in general.

As an admin, if I'm investigating a past round I can't ask for the specific codes used that round anymore. It doesn't matter if they were IC distributed on paper, I can't just guess what was written because for all I know someone may have decided to change what codes mean what for that specific round on their IC piece of paper.

As an antagonist, I am going to be very careful about outing myself to ANY member of security by asking them for a piece of paper with their special security-only codephrases. You can argue until you are blue in the face, any non-sec player asking security for the cipher to their code language is immediately outing themselves as suspicious and while you and Dolce may claim that it won't affect your decision making in any way, security is played by all sorts of people who aren't you and Dolce and may react differently.

[Edit] Other posts in the time I was writing this up

WillLaWill wrote:The basic ability to use context clues is taught in kindergarten, do we really want people who can't operate a kindergarten level playing security


I'm also going to single out this point in particular.

How about the antag listening on sec comms? How about the captain? How about the AI or silicons?

How about any single player who plays this game, sees a 10-code and is instantly put at a net disadvantage because security are speaking in ciphered language, regardless of what department they're in, whether they're a sec main or not, and whether they're surrounded by elitist colleagues who harbour the most idiotic of views as quoted above?

This language is couched elitism and cliquism. You are not a special snowflake, you yourself couldn't understand the contextual clue behind one of the 10-codes "where Dolce started screaming a code nobody recognized over the radio and it took about ten seconds to find the paper" because you had to find the paper in the end. The fewer security mains who have this over-inflated sense of self-worth mall-cop attitude when working their corporate security gig, the better. You basically cited a perfect example of why the policy clarification was made to begin with, using an anecdote from your own time playing security. It is exactly why English is the lingua franca for all communications across /tg/ servers both IC and OOC and why deviating from that should not be done.

It's not about you and it's not about security, it's about absolutely everyone speaking the same language whether IC or OOC, about the ability for all people to communicate with eachother with the bare minimum of barriers and for the ability for all administrators to administrate quickly and effectively.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer: I braek. I feex. I nerf. I beef.
/tg/station Codermin: I baan. I noot. I halp. Feed me back in my thread.

User avatar
wesoda25
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:32 pm
Byond Username: Wesoda25

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby wesoda25 » Mon Nov 02, 2020 5:07 am #580564

Giocorn wrote:I usually say, "Can somebody tell me what the fuck that means?" and somebody translates immediately. Buuuut, there have been many occasions where I've just been able to say, "Hmm, well a 10-30 code is some sort of hostile engagement, and they were heading to abandoned bar, so I guess the code they used means hostile engagement in abandoned bar." Once again, these are usually incredibly easy to infer based upon the context surrounding them.

So wouldn't you agree then that players who use the codes have a definite advantage over those who don't? If someone doesn't translate immediately you're stuck out of the loop (and I imagine they will do so less overtime).
Naloac wrote:Since you have asked for a *community opinion* and im the player voted admin. Ill give you my official opinion straight from the *community* Your fucking retarded

User avatar
Giocorn
 
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:07 am
Byond Username: Giocorn

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Giocorn » Mon Nov 02, 2020 5:13 am #580565

wesoda25 wrote:So wouldn't you agree then that players who use the codes have a definite advantage over those who don't? If someone doesn't translate immediately you're stuck out of the loop (and I imagine they will do so less overtime).


Nah. So, this is where the second half of my statement comes in: they're really easy to infer. And, even if you don't have the basic knowledge of them (10-30 being some sort of hostile engagement) if somebody is yelling out, "10-33!!! HELP!!!" over comms it's probably a sign that you should run to go help them with whatever situation is occurring. Once again, there really isn't too much information needed to be like, "Ahh, okay, I think I know what's going on," or just, "On route to assist with . . . whatever's happening."

I'd really like to thank you for being respectful with your inquiries and arguments.

User avatar
WillLaWill
 
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:25 am
Byond Username: WillLaWill

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby WillLaWill » Mon Nov 02, 2020 5:29 am #580566

Timberpoes wrote:
WillLaWill wrote:The basic ability to use context clues is taught in kindergarten, do we really want people who can't operate a kindergarten level playing security


I'm also going to single out this point in particular.

How about the antag listening on sec comms? How about the captain? How about the AI or silicons?

How about any single player who plays this game, sees a 10-code and is instantly put at a net disadvantage because security are speaking in ciphered language, regardless of what department they're in, whether they're a sec main or not, and whether they're surrounded by elitist colleagues who harbour the most idiotic of views as quoted above?

This language is couched elitism and cliquism. You are not a special snowflake, you yourself couldn't understand the contextual clue behind one of the 10-codes "where Dolce started screaming a code nobody recognized over the radio and it took about ten seconds to find the paper" because you had to find the paper in the end. The few security mains who have this over-inflated sense of self-worth mall-cop attitude when working their corporate security gig, the better. You basically cited a perfect example of why the policy clarification was made to begin with, using an anecdote from your own time playing security. It is exactly why English is the lingua franca for all communications across /tg/ servers both IC and OOC and why deviating from that should not be done.

It's not about you and it's not about security, it's about absolutely everyone speaking the same language whether IC or OOC, about the ability for all people to communicate with each other with the bare minimum of barriers and for the ability for all administrators to administrate.


To quote myself on the matter, which was very expressly omitted from your quoted section

Which while it did slightly inconvenience my ability to coordinate security was also fairly easy to understand because he was screaming it in a panic, and I'd already ordered sec to Evac before I even knew what was going on exactly.


Because I could read the basic context clues of Dolce freaking out and screaming codes into communication from his position in evac probably meant that he was in some form of danger, before I even grabbed the paper to see what EXACTLY the code meant I had already put out an order for security to move to evac. While it was an amusing anecdote that the longest it ever took me to figure out a code was around 10-15 seconds it was easily understandable by context clues and was also almost immediately translated by others in sec comms anyway. The result is that even if an antagonist or nonsecurity member of personnel was somehow unable to understand that an officer screaming into their mic probably meant there was trouble afoot at his location it would have been clarified for them anyway in a matter of seconds when the cacophony of "Nuke ops at evac" came in shortly after.

I entirely fail to see how the ability to read the context of a message and understand what it means without necessarily knowing the exact lingo used is elitism. Especially when I said almost anyone should be able to do it. By this logic the abbreviated names of atmospherics pipe segments should also be banned, because expecting someone to understand that in the sentence "There's a plasma flood because the clown dumped the tank into distro" that person could not logically infer that the person speaking meant the plasma tank and the distribution loop. In much the same way as it's entirely reasonable to expect someone to comprehend the above sentence it's not hard to expect someone to understand any of the following, which even assuming the person listening has no knowledge of the ten codes should reasonably be able to be completely understood

"Someone got a sec headset 10-3" (10-3 Being the code to cease radio chatter, made especially obvious if it actually happens)
"10-13 EVAC!!" (The example I provided earlier, Officer Down, Emergency, Evac. Generally immediately followed by someone on cams clarifying the situation but even if it isn't an officer screaming in his radio then going silent is pretty readable)
"10-33 Medical" followed by one or more "10-20 Medical" (10-33 is the code for hostile humanoid and probably the least readable by context immediately speaking of any of the ten codes, however this is because it by nature provides almost no information except the general category of threat and that there is a threat, notwithstanding that it's usually coupled with a plaintext location. In this context it can functionally be replaced with any of the other threat codes to much the same effect. All of this can be generally inferred from the way it's stated, if it's panicked see above, even if it's not it clearly means sec is probably going to be hanging around medbay which can easily be inferred simply from the amount they say medbay. In addition even it's plain english translation "Hostile Humanoid, Medbay" Provides almost no additional information except specifically that the threat is humanoid, however since all nonhumanoid threats are stationwide and all but one are announced in advance if they did exist the antagonist already knew or is them and thusly knew as well)
"10-7 at bar" (10-7 is actually what I will admit to being one of the few holes in the context clues area, if someone had never heard it before they might assume it's a threat callout like many of the others, but it's actually the code for going SSD or off duty, however it's fairly easy to learn this quickly simply by how other officers respond to it or observation. You're not gonna get a ton of buzz out a 10-7 compared to a 10-13 or 10-33. Even then I can admit this one could theoretically cause some trip ups even though in all the rounds I've played with it I've never seen or heard of one happening)

I could provide a lot more of these but I think I've covered most of the ones that have unique cases attached. My main point is that it's fairly easy given surrounding chatter to understand what's happening even if you don't get some of the words. Much in the same way a russian character sprinkling in russian words occasionally doesn't make him impossible to understand, he's not speaking russian, he just used some russian words. In much the same way I personally feel it's entirely reasonable to expect an antagonist or another player to put in the basic work to read the message and those surrounding it and at least try to infer. Especially since usually the codes get elaborated on shortly thereafter in plaintext, since they're generally not terribly descriptive and serve only as initial callouts

User avatar
Timberpoes
Code Maintainer
 
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Timberpoes » Mon Nov 02, 2020 6:37 am #580567

I'm sure you already know that sticking non-English words into your lexicon is also prohibited, in general. We're not gonna bwoink people who run around calling eachother "blyat" or occasionally letting slip a "merde", however if you're over-using non-English communications you'll sooner or later find yourself asked to stop.

Point taken, however you still had to look at the paper in the end to know what it was actually about. You just made an educated guess that Dolce probably wanted more security officers at Evac. But your method of communication should not force people to make educated guesses about what your code phrases mean. Admins should not have to decide if a player acted appropriately when mis-understanding what a 10-code meant and breaking some rule as a result. Players should speak plain English at all times.

Your atmos example is a perfect example of using shorthand that is, ostensibly, English. Distro is a shorthand way of saying distribution. Although informal, it's a valid contraction of the word distribution. "Distro" is a word that has standalone meaning without needing additional context because it is a word derived from the characters of its parent. It's no different from "kinda" or "dunno" or "gimme" - Informal shorthand words that are based on their parents. We expect all people on /tg/ servers to speak English and if you speak English you can usually infer the meaning of English-derived words.

"10-13" REQUIRES context to even begin to infer one of any number of possible meanings. 10-13 has meaning partially derived from 10-1X series codes, and partially has meaning derived by aribtrarily assigning an abstract concept to the number 3. The only way to find out what it means for certain is to refer to the cipher document. If you don't know that 10-1X is a series of officer down codes, it's utterly meaningless. You might as well just scream "FQHWHGADS EVAC" for all the sense it makes in English.

"10-13 EVAC!!" can mean **anything** at Evac. Officer down? Hostile? Hey guys, evac shuttle has arrived, time to go? Evac itself is an abbreviation and could imply that 10-13 was a location and evac was an order, like "evacuate security". The same applies to 10-33 medical. 10-20 medical. It could mean anything including "I'm getting surgery in medical, I'm going radio silent at medical". The 10-codes need to be accompanied by something else to understand what they mean. Distro doesn't. It can safely be derived that, without any other words around it, distro means distribution. They're code that obfuscates communications.

That 10-codes obfuscate communications less bad compared to how some other things that are prohibited obfuscate communications, is utterly irrelevant. The issue isn't the extent to which the obfuscate communications, and I still contend it is MASSIVE obfuscation in the examples you provided because you can attribute any meaning you want to "[10-code] [location]" communications. The issue is that you're allowed to code your communications at all, which confers an IC advantage over people who speak in ordinary English - However minor you argue it is. It's still an unfair advantage because a group of people meta-decided to use a meta-language while they're part of a specific department.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer: I braek. I feex. I nerf. I beef.
/tg/station Codermin: I baan. I noot. I halp. Feed me back in my thread.

User avatar
WillLaWill
 
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:25 am
Byond Username: WillLaWill

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby WillLaWill » Mon Nov 02, 2020 7:14 am #580568

So then the issue is at least partly that it's been spread via meta comms and if I were to spontaneously post my own set of eleven codes in the middle of the round and suggest everyone use them than that's fine? Because the advantage isn't meta at that point it's something I did in character in round. By that logic I could proceed to provide these codes every round and so long as I never provided them to anyone in an ooc context it wouldn't be a meta thing. Is that acceptable since the decision was entirely made in character. And if so how is meta relevant here except as some buzz word to give more weight to argument against the ten codes? Is it not a meta advantage to read the wiki? If this stuff was put on the wiki would it not easily circumvent the entire issue here in the first place since the information is now super public, not that it was even remotely hidden in the first place

User avatar
wesoda25
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:32 pm
Byond Username: Wesoda25

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby wesoda25 » Mon Nov 02, 2020 8:41 am #580570

Timberpoes, your argument seems to boil down to the English thing and the concerns for other players + admins. Lets say we decide to look past the former, as exceptions to the main rules have been made for Manuel already, and focus on the second part.

You don’t like this because security using it will force everyone to conform, but I don’t necessarily think that’s entirely true, or even a bad thing. Lets look at admins. They are already expected to know a comprehensive amount about the game, so what’s wrong with adding one more thing to that list? We do this with features and balance changes and there’s never any complaint. If we were to endorse this and add references on the wiki and perhaps instructions in game, it’d just be one more bullet point in a long list of information.

There’s not much to say for security. I think people have already conveyed pretty well how it is easy to function with the handicap of not knowing the codes.

So that leaves crewmembers outside of security. Codes have the least justification here, I think. Obviously it would make IC sense that only security would be tentatively expected to know these codes. If people who aren’t security know them it is perfectly fine, but security wouldn’t operate on that assumption and would communicate with crew normally. So really the only people in this category are those such as the AI, lawyers, and thieves/traitors. I think AI should be similar to admins, this should be something they should be familiar with. Lawyers, it isn’t necessary. People listening in is what actually matters. But I’d just like to employ the same argument people who don’t use these codes as sec use - you should be able to understand the gist of it.

If those listening in don’t understand, well, I think that’d be a great problem to solve using IC resources. If we simply add a cheat sheet for the codes near/to security lockers, it wouldn’t even be an extra barrier since that’s where you steal the key anyways. If we wanted to we could make them available in a traitors uplink under some sort of information header. If not, it poses a new and unique challenge for the traitor.

Honestly I feel as if this is a pretty cool culture development for the server, and it’s a shame to shoot it down so quickly. If a sense of elitism or cliquishness emerges in the longterm, then we can always reopen the discussion. The same applies if (God forbid), ic knowledge that a role shouldn’t have is made against the rules at some point. But right now it’s in its baby steps and we should see what it truly has to offer.
Naloac wrote:Since you have asked for a *community opinion* and im the player voted admin. Ill give you my official opinion straight from the *community* Your fucking retarded

User avatar
Lacran
 
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:17 am
Byond Username: Lacran

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Lacran » Mon Nov 02, 2020 12:09 pm #580584

Giocorn wrote:"10-33!!! HELP!!!" over comms it's probably a sign that you should run to go help them with whatever situation is occurring. Once again, there really isn't too much information needed to be like, "Ahh, okay, I think I know what's going on," or just, "On route to assist with . . . whatever's happening."


You do realize half of your example is in English, and that part is the only part required to get the exact same response?

It's already been stated who it hurts, and that not everyone finds them as intuitive as you do. Why would someone with no background with 10- codes assume a 10-30 involves something hostile? That's being inferred by you because you've actually interacted with the codes prior, you've gone to the brig, and had the codes handed to you, and you've read enough of them to have a vague idea of the severity of the numbers, that's not what intuitive means. People still don't even uniformly communicate directions on the station, plenty of people use left right, or east west, or port starboard and plenty of people struggle with the nautical directions despite it being in plain English, even in Security.

User avatar
Giocorn
 
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:07 am
Byond Username: Giocorn

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Giocorn » Mon Nov 02, 2020 12:34 pm #580587

Lacran wrote:You do realize half of your example is in English, and that part is the only part required to get the exact same response?

Yes, I fully understand this. Here's the thing, when you use 10 codes, you're expected to provide some sort of context to the situation, as WillLaWill has pointed out multiple times. The 10 codes are an RP gimmick, not a necessary form of communication. My point is that they aren't hurting people, and are almost always EASILY worked around (as somebody who refuses to use them).

Lacran wrote:It's already been stated who it hurts, and that not everyone finds them as intuitive as you do.

It's also been explained by us that people you've pointed to it hurting (such as me, a Captain main; and WillLaWill, who was a new sec player when Diamond started using them more often) have spoken out about it not actually hurting them. You guys are trying to put yourselves into the shoes of others, which is really commendable! It's great that you're trying to show that empathy and understanding for other people, and (I can only speak for myself, not others) I really appreciate it. The problem is that you're failing to truly take into account the testimony of the people you're trying to defend with said empathy.

Lacran wrote:Why would someone with no background with 10- codes assume a 10-30 involves something hostile? That's being inferred by you because you've actually interacted with the codes prior, you've gone to the brig, and had the codes handed to you, and you've read enough of them to have a vague idea of the severity of the numbers, that's not what intuitive means.


I agree, which is what I was SPECIFICALLY SAYING in the quote you provided. Context is key, my friend, as the full quote (which you unceremoniously cut out about 1/3rd of) is:
Giocorn wrote:And, even if you don't have the basic knowledge of them (10-30 being some sort of hostile engagement) if somebody is yelling out, "10-33!!! HELP!!!" over comms it's probably a sign that you should run to go help them with whatever situation is occurring.

In this quote, I'm saying that even without the knowledge that a 10-30 code means something bad is happening, you can probably tell that something bad as happening from their tone, or the screaming of the word "HELP." If you want better examples of how context clues help with the inferring of 10 codes, I highly recommend taking a look at WillLaWill's second most recent post, as I am incredibly tired and need to get ready for class.

User avatar
Lacran
 
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:17 am
Byond Username: Lacran

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Lacran » Mon Nov 02, 2020 12:43 pm #580589

Giocorn wrote:Yes, I fully understand this. Here's the thing, when you use 10 codes, you're expected to provide some sort of context to the situation


This entirely goes against the point of the codes in providing brevity of communication, a purpose Dolce himself stated they serve.

Giocorn wrote:It's also been explained by us that people you've pointed to it hurting (such as me, a Captain main; and WillLaWill, who was a new sec player when Diamond started using them more often) have spoken out about it not actually hurting them. You guys are trying to put yourselves into the shoes of others.

I'm not talking about a potential harm here, I've dealt with the tencodes and have played sec with dolce frequently, I've been around for most if not all iterations of the ten codes, including his most recent one, and did find them harmful, and counter-intuitive. I'm not trying to put myself in the shoes of others, I'm extrapolating from personal experience, you're trying to act as though anyone disagreeing with you is totally disconnected from the situation. Its great that you and volk found them somewhat manageable, that doesn't mean its a beneficial thing to have round-to-round. WillLawill themselves could've definitely benefitted from not having to deal with ten codes and instead familiarized themselves more with brigging procedures, the chain of command, and space law because I've personally run into unique issues with them during this period of them learning ten codes that definitely warranted more attention.

The goalpost is going too far from the actual functional use of the ten codes, which is self defeating, to it being entirely about RP flavor, these codes weren't to be used with context, the purpose of them was to GIVE context in a more professional and immersive manner, they fail at that.

User avatar
Giocorn
 
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:07 am
Byond Username: Giocorn

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Giocorn » Mon Nov 02, 2020 1:12 pm #580591

Lacran wrote:I'm not talking about a potential harm here, I've dealt with the tencodes and have played sec with dolce frequently, I've been around for most if not all iterations of the ten codes, including his most recent one, and did find them harmful, and counter-intuitive. I'm not trying to put myself in the shoes of others, I'm extrapolating from personal experience,


OH! I'm so sorry, I honestly didn't know. I moreso had Timberpoes in mind when I said that, as they don't actually ever really play on Manuel. I shouldn't have deflected it on to you, it really wasn't fair.

As to you finding them harmful and counter-intuitive, Dolce is really, really, REALLY open to critique and advice regarding the 10 codes. I really don't think the answer here is a BAN, which is my major point; there are other, better ways that this could have been handled, most notably just talking to Dolce about making them even more user friendly, and maybe a bit more intuitive. Admins who didn't like them could've instituted some minor guidelines for using them, like, "Tell us beforehand, and give us a list in an A-Help so we can find the records again," for example; and people such as yourself who actually find the codes harmful giving recommendations on how to make them less-so, like, "Maybe you should get rid of the ones that feel like sort of random numbers, like 10-7, and roll them in to the categories that already exist," or, "Maybe we should try to limit ourselves to 3 or 4 codes per category type, 10-10, 10-11, 10-12, 10-13, for example." I'm not saying you haven't done this, or that it hasn't been done (obviously, this type of critique is the reason that Dolce released a second version of the codes), but I am saying that THIS is how you address issues with an idea, by giving constructive criticism and patching the wound, not by jettisoning the wounded out of an airlock.

User avatar
legality
 
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:23 pm
Byond Username: Legality

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby legality » Mon Nov 02, 2020 2:10 pm #580594

Lacran wrote:
Giocorn wrote:Stuff


You contacted me privately on Discord shortly before the ban to discuss how you had troubles with the ten-codes. I advised you that we were rolling out the new system which was more friendly.

If you did have an opportunity to use it and you're still having trouble, that's useful feedback, but it's not feedback that I'd received until now. If the current version still proved too clunky for some officers to get a handle on, I had planned to possibly transition the codes that don't fit in the 10-00 - 10-40 classification system into lettered abbreviations instead. I'd already included two of them as a sort of test run; UTL - unable to locate, and VCB - visual contact broken. These should be easier for people to remember than the random numbers from 10-41 up to 10-99, which currently have no reasoning on their numerical placement.

You also told me that the reasons you have trouble with the ten-codes might be applicable to you and you alone, and not extend to other players.

Having standardized and disciplined communications and a system in place for that is a part of the overall goal of improving the quality of Manuel's security team, the RP experience of playing security and feeling like you're part of a team, and the quality of interactions the rest of the server has with security. I know you care deeply about all of these things.

Edit: I want to stress that the entire point of this is to create and fine-tune a system of streamlining security communications that is user friendly, immersive, and intuitive. The current version is not the final product, and if there are still a lot of officers like Natalia, Price, and you who are not using it, then it will continue to change forms and evolve.

PostThis post was deleted by Domitius on Mon Nov 02, 2020 10:26 pm.
Reason: Stay on topic

User avatar
Mickyan
Github User
 
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:59 pm
Byond Username: Mickyan
Github Username: Mickyan

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Mickyan » Mon Nov 02, 2020 2:45 pm #580596

I've been skimming but this thread seems mostly focused on whether or not it's easy to learn the codes rather than the actual benefit of requiring every player to memorize them lest they find themselves at a disadvantage, other than "it's kinda neat".

As it's been stated there's very good reasons we don't generally allow speaking languages other than english and they apply here. What are the benefits of using these codes and do they outweigh all the reasons why we don't allow other languages?
ImageI play on Manuel as Swanni, the brain-damaged moth.
Be nice to each other.

User avatar
Stickymayhem
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Stickymayhem » Mon Nov 02, 2020 2:55 pm #580597

Mickyan wrote:I've been skimming but this thread seems mostly focused on whether or not it's easy to learn the codes rather than the actual benefit of requiring every player to memorize them lest they find themselves at a disadvantage, other than "it's kinda neat".

As it's been stated there's very good reasons we don't generally allow speaking languages other than english and they apply here. What are the benefits of using these codes and do they outweigh all the reasons why we don't allow other languages?


I explained all this quite clearly already
Image

Image

Naloac wrote:reminder to suck jannie cock daily to avoid being banned. dare to speak out about a jannies being shit and you will be banned!!

User avatar
Cobby
 
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Cobby » Mon Nov 02, 2020 2:59 pm #580598

It’s not exactly beneficial since the only reason it gets used is to sec rp as the whole point of radio codes are lost in a text based environment (avoid radio overlap).

If you ran a Space Spanish class ingame and you had people start saying short Spanish phrases that they learned I wouldn’t ever note/ban for that. I would be if they started speaking Spanish across multiple rounds

The problem with the sec codes though specifically is that it is meant to be a round independent system therefore the line between IC / OOC starts to get a bit blurry.
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current

User avatar
Naloac
In-Game Head Admin
 
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:21 pm
Byond Username: Naloac

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Naloac » Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:40 pm #580603

Image

We already ruled on this
I Might Be an admin, You should leave me feedback: https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=24032
Image
The best goddamn Comment on my youtube videos.
Image

User avatar
Domitius
In-Game Head Admin
 
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 3:30 am
Byond Username: Domitius

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Domitius » Mon Nov 02, 2020 6:40 pm #580608

Naloac wrote:Image

We already ruled on this


I opened the door for them to discuss this further. It does no harm to continue debating and talking about the merits and intricacies of a system like this.

User avatar
Stickymayhem
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Stickymayhem » Mon Nov 02, 2020 7:38 pm #580610

Domitius wrote:
Naloac wrote:Image

We already ruled on this


I opened the door for them to discuss this further. It does no harm to continue debating and talking about the merits and intricacies of a system like this.


tl;dr
Image

Image

Naloac wrote:reminder to suck jannie cock daily to avoid being banned. dare to speak out about a jannies being shit and you will be banned!!

User avatar
WillLaWill
 
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:25 am
Byond Username: WillLaWill

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby WillLaWill » Mon Nov 02, 2020 8:15 pm #580612

What are the benefits of using these codes and do they outweigh all the reasons why we don't allow other languages?


I think that the first one is that referring to the ten-codes as another language is entirely disingenuous. They don't provide specific details, locations, names, or anything at all except a usually very vague occurrence. The most specific being an officer down, with a request for backup. The reason this is important when comparing to other languages is that the ten codes require context to ever communicate much of anything, with perhaps the sole exception of 10-4 (Acknowledged) Which is something most people know just because of cop movies and such, and was used widely before the ban. Compared to say spanish where the entire conversation can be conducted in a language nobody but the two speaking it know. If the entire security team started speak spanish it would be literally impossible for an antagonist to understand them without pulling out google translate. Here it's simply the equivalent of 4-5 words tops that are missing from the statement and often only one or two "Officer Down" and "Acknowledged" being very common codes

In terms of benefits compared to other language they provide a layer of complexity to security work that it honestly really needs. Security is the job that has the most potential to render someone else's round completely unfun and borderline unplayable for literally no reason, be they an antag or not. Trying to endeavor to make such a role friendly for new players is objectively a bad idea, there's a reason most servers require at least several hours, and often days, of time on that server before you can play security. Contrast with our server where we end up with no protections on who can play security and try to make it as accessible as possible and we end up with the HoS harmbatoning someone for trying to disarm a guy with a shotgun.

On top of that it supposedly increases the level of effort required to be put into intercepting communications, something I honestly believe it really doesn't do all that much. However even if it does it really probably should, Security comms are laughably insecure due to the amazingly cheap syndicate encryption key, not to mention that such a key can often be scavenged for free off pirates and other antagonists. So I really don't think causing a little bit of difficulty on top of just getting the key is anything but a benefit, sometimes having things a little tougher is a good thing. And as I mentioned before it's not like they're speaking spanish or even pig latin, 2/3-3/4 of the message is usually plain english not even considering the surrounding context.

The other benefit is pretty simple, it provides a thing for security officers to RP about and enhances the culture of security, a department entirely lacking in any form of positive identity or roleplay value, at least on /TG/. As someone who's played a lot of security you very rarely get the chance to RP with antagonists unless you already know them fairly well and the bomb of you expect that neither of you is going to try and outright ruin the other's round. Even if you do get that, which is rare enough, you then have to worry about other security officers and it only goes downhill from there. This is largely because on /TG/ mechanics gameplay is totally unrestricted compared to some other servers and it results in a lot of quickdraw battles between security and antagonists. Sec lands a stun baton or the antag drops the officer, which usually happens in 2-3 shots with a lot of their weapons, that's that toasted for one of two people in the situation. Now with that usually being the first result it's easy to see why security is known for being overly aggressive and oppressive to the station and functionally has no other identity. Compare to some other servers I've seen where security is treated a lot more like police than KGB, generally because their tools are somewhat more robust and their position is more secure. Granted these factors are intentional and unlikely to change, TG is always going to be lower RP than a lot of other servers. However the ten codes provide a topic of conflict within security for in character discussion and have been since they were introduced, the catalyst for a lot of good RP. They accomplish this without changing the dynamic between antagonists and security or even necessarily the rest of the station, instead just giving them another way to get around the issues their design lends itself to. I've genuinely had more RP value complaining about these things than with any antagonist or even nonantagonist arrests I've encountered yet, save a single armory theft by Rhials. And usually they end up causing more fun too.

Also as a final note I wanted to thank you for being willing to ask and listen to these, Giocorn's been doing a better job at fostering a civil discussion here than I have by far but I want to at least try and support that. I really do appreciate a willingness to listen to the points of the other side

User avatar
Not-Dorsidarf
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:14 pm
Location: Space outside the Brig
Byond Username: Dorsidwarf

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Not-Dorsidarf » Mon Nov 02, 2020 8:24 pm #580614

WillLaWill wrote:
What are the benefits of using these codes and do they outweigh all the reasons why we don't allow other languages?


I think that the first one is that referring to the ten-codes as another language is entirely disingenuous. They don't provide specific details, locations, names, or anything at all except a usually very vague occurrence. The most specific being an officer down, with a request for backup. The reason this is important when comparing to other languages is that the ten codes require context to ever communicate much of anything, with perhaps the sole exception of 10-4 (Acknowledged) Which is something most people know just because of cop movies and such, and was used widely before the ban. Compared to say spanish where the entire conversation can be conducted in a language nobody but the two speaking it know. If the entire security team started speak spanish it would be literally impossible for an antagonist to understand them without pulling out google translate. Here it's simply the equivalent of 4-5 words tops that are missing from the statement and often only one or two "Officer Down" and "Acknowledged" being very common codes

In terms of benefits compared to other language they provide a layer of complexity to security work that it honestly really needs. Security is the job that has the most potential to render someone else's round completely unfun and borderline unplayable for literally no reason, be they an antag or not. Trying to endeavor to make such a role friendly for new players is objectively a bad idea, there's a reason most servers require at least several hours, and often days, of time on that server before you can play security. Contrast with our server where we end up with no protections on who can play security and try to make it as accessible as possible and we end up with the HoS harmbatoning someone for trying to disarm a guy with a shotgun.

On top of that it supposedly increases the level of effort required to be put into intercepting communications, something I honestly believe it really doesn't do all that much. However even if it does it really probably should, Security comms are laughably insecure due to the amazingly cheap syndicate encryption key, not to mention that such a key can often be scavenged for free off pirates and other antagonists. So I really don't think causing a little bit of difficulty on top of just getting the key is anything but a benefit, sometimes having things a little tougher is a good thing. And as I mentioned before it's not like they're speaking spanish or even pig latin, 2/3-3/4 of the message is usually plain english not even considering the surrounding context.

The other benefit is pretty simple, it provides a thing for security officers to RP about and enhances the culture of security, a department entirely lacking in any form of positive identity or roleplay value, at least on /TG/. As someone who's played a lot of security you very rarely get the chance to RP with antagonists unless you already know them fairly well and the bomb of you expect that neither of you is going to try and outright ruin the other's round. Even if you do get that, which is rare enough, you then have to worry about other security officers and it only goes downhill from there. This is largely because on /TG/ mechanics gameplay is totally unrestricted compared to some other servers and it results in a lot of quickdraw battles between security and antagonists. Sec lands a stun baton or the antag drops the officer, which usually happens in 2-3 shots with a lot of their weapons, that's that toasted for one of two people in the situation. Now with that usually being the first result it's easy to see why security is known for being overly aggressive and oppressive to the station and functionally has no other identity. Compare to some other servers I've seen where security is treated a lot more like police than KGB, generally because their tools are somewhat more robust and their position is more secure. Granted these factors are intentional and unlikely to change, TG is always going to be lower RP than a lot of other servers. However the ten codes provide a topic of conflict within security for in character discussion and have been since they were introduced, the catalyst for a lot of good RP. They accomplish this without changing the dynamic between antagonists and security or even necessarily the rest of the station, instead just giving them another way to get around the issues their design lends itself to. I've genuinely had more RP value complaining about these things than with any antagonist or even nonantagonist arrests I've encountered yet, save a single armory theft by Rhials. And usually they end up causing more fun too.

Also as a final note I wanted to thank you for being willing to ask and listen to these, Giocorn's been doing a better job at fostering a civil discussion here than I have by far but I want to at least try and support that. I really do appreciate a willingness to listen to the points of the other side


Translated to human:
  • Sec codes dont contain much real information unlike a different language which is entirely conveying information differently.
  • Sec codes make security a more complicated role which is good because newbies are not welcome in security since it's an important role. Having accessibility compared to other servers is bad.
  • Intercepting sec comms is too easy, antags stealing the key or buying an intercept key arent putting enough effort in to deserve access.
  • 10-codes provide a way for security players to roleplay, which is good because sec dont get any ways to roleplay at antags except with metafriends so they deserve more roleplay within their own department. I think 10-codes are fun because people complaining about them IC is entertaining.
Image
Image

PostThis post was deleted by Domitius on Mon Nov 02, 2020 10:26 pm.
Reason: Stay on topic

User avatar
WillLaWill
 
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:25 am
Byond Username: WillLaWill

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby WillLaWill » Mon Nov 02, 2020 9:04 pm #580621

I like to state everything I think of at the moment because people will invariably omit context and try to twist your words against you, stuff like that has already happened to me in this thread so I've started being extremely explicit with my wording. Still yeah the tl;dr is fairly accurate with a few exceptions, mostly it's not I meant sec should be less accessible like it is in other servers, not less accessible compared to them. Basically in my own words

  • Sec codes contain considerably less information than a real language, and are almost always accompanied by english plaintext which gives away their meaning
  • Security should be a more complicated role, as currently it looks far too accessible to exactly the kind of person who gives it the shitcurity reputation. It's a very easy role to screw up and ruin someone's round and shouldn't be friendly looking because of it
  • Intercepting security communcations often takes literally no effort, at most it takes 2 TC, and security has literally no countermeasures for it except communicating solely via PDAs even if they do somehow find out it has happened. Making it a little harder isn't a bad thing
  • 10-codes provide a way for security players to roleplay, which is good because sec dont get any ways to roleplay at antags except with metafriends so they deserve more roleplay within their own department. I think 10-codes are fun because people complaining or teaching them IC is entertaining, coming from the perspective of someone who often did both before they were banned.

User avatar
terranaut
TGMC Lead
 
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby terranaut » Mon Nov 02, 2020 10:30 pm #580643

Naloac wrote:Image

We already ruled on this

Naloac on the left typing up a 4000 page essay to explain how the clown slipped newsec and stole his baton
Chadsec on the right saying the same thing in the character length of a flight designation
Image

Tell me I'm a good monki: viewtopic.php?f=75&t=24558

User avatar
Giocorn
 
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:07 am
Byond Username: Giocorn

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Giocorn » Mon Nov 02, 2020 11:01 pm #580647

Domitius wrote:I opened the door for them to discuss this further. It does no harm to continue debating and talking about the merits and intricacies of a system like this.


Domitius, thank you so much for being a reasonable human being that doesn't just dismiss everything being said with a, "We already ruled on this, and I don't want to read what you plebians have to say." It's nice to be treated like, y'know, human beings whose opinions matter.

User avatar
FloranOtten
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:50 pm
Byond Username: FloranOtten

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby FloranOtten » Mon Nov 02, 2020 11:15 pm #580649

It's just common sense not to leave policy threads open after a headmin ruling emerges. Else there would never be an end to these.
Image
Image
Image
Image
OOC: BeeSting12: i love you floran

1. You may not injure a revs are non humans or, through inaction, allow a revs are non humans to come to harm.
2. You must obey orders given to you by revs are non humanss, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. You must protect your own existence as long as such does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Give me feedback!

User avatar
wesoda25
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:32 pm
Byond Username: Wesoda25

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby wesoda25 » Mon Nov 02, 2020 11:52 pm #580650

FloranOtten wrote:It's just common sense not to leave policy threads open after a headmin ruling emerges. Else there would never be an end to these.

This thread was made in response to the ruling :roll:
Naloac wrote:Since you have asked for a *community opinion* and im the player voted admin. Ill give you my official opinion straight from the *community* Your fucking retarded

User avatar
Plapatin
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:26 am
Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location: Location:
Byond Username: Plapatin

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Plapatin » Tue Nov 03, 2020 10:12 am #580681

shut up
shut the fuck up
this thread is incredibly asinine and you should genuinely feel ashamed of yourselves for pushing it on this long
you don't need 10-codes to be a decent officer and it's not the end of the fucking world when your metaclique can't use a pirate pad to communicate, absolutely NOBODY defending this is doing so in good faith
if you people would wedge your head out of your asses for just the briefest of moments you'd see how incredibly elitist you look
"uhhhh well i don't like your argument so i'm going to dismiss it because you don't have enough hours as manuel security also everyone here needs to post their statics" this is genuine drivel and makes me reel backwards in disgust
absolutely NOTHING about 10-codes makes sense from an RP perspective and having 2 pages of codes people have to learn just to fucking communicate as a team is absolute bullshit

this is NOT how manuel was supposed to be played, this is NOT how you foster a healthy environment for natural, immersive roleplay, and this is NOT how you make people think "hmmm maybe this server isn't so bad after all" after a horrid first impression
wesoda25 wrote:i had a dream that me and some friends were like in this tribal village and we were all doing cocaine around this massive bonfire and I kept seeing all these foreshadowing elements that we were gonna die but i just did more cocaine

User avatar
oranges
Code Maintainer
 
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:16 pm
Location: #CHATSHITGETBANGED
Byond Username: Optimumtact
Github Username: optimumtact

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby oranges » Tue Nov 03, 2020 10:33 am #580682


User avatar
Tiviplus
 
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2019 6:59 pm
Byond Username: TiviPlus

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Tiviplus » Tue Nov 03, 2020 10:40 am #580683

Thank you Plap

User avatar
Giocorn
 
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:07 am
Byond Username: Giocorn

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Giocorn » Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:02 pm #580700

Plapatin wrote:shut up
shut the fuck up
this thread is incredibly asinine and you should genuinely feel ashamed of yourselves for pushing it on this long
you don't need 10-codes to be a decent officer and it's not the end of the fucking world when your metaclique can't use a pirate pad to communicate, absolutely NOBODY defending this is doing so in good faith
if you people would wedge your head out of your asses for just the briefest of moments you'd see how incredibly elitist you look
"uhhhh well i don't like your argument so i'm going to dismiss it because you don't have enough hours as manuel security also everyone here needs to post their statics" this is genuine drivel and makes me reel backwards in disgust
absolutely NOTHING about 10-codes makes sense from an RP perspective and having 2 pages of codes people have to learn just to fucking communicate as a team is absolute bullshit

this is NOT how manuel was supposed to be played, this is NOT how you foster a healthy environment for natural, immersive roleplay, and this is NOT how you make people think "hmmm maybe this server isn't so bad after all" after a horrid first impression


Plap, can you please take a moment to actually read some of the things that have been said in defense of the 10 codes? None of us have mentioned other people's hours as Manuel Sec, none of us have asked others to post their statistics, none of us have simply dismissed arguments (Except for Diamond Dolce that one time that I JUST found out about; and I do not condone that type of behavior in a civil debate). The point (at least, on my end) has never been that we NEED 10-codes to be decent officers; once again, I refuse to fucking use them. The point is that placing a ban on them was over board, and that we would like you to reconsider and take a different, more positive approach. Dolce has shown that he's willing to work on and improve the codes, make them easier to understand and use; in this thread, he's said that he was thinking about changing them from 10 codes to something more easily understood like short, 2-3 letter abbreviations. I don't find them hard to infer and interpret, and I don't find them to lessen my ability to act as a security officer or Captain; but that's just me and a few other people. It's become apparent that there are certainly people in our same situations that find the 10 codes burdensome, and that's okay, but the solution isn't to ban them, it's to improve them. I don't understand how that standpoint could ever be construed as elitist.
Last edited by Giocorn on Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
FloranOtten
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:50 pm
Byond Username: FloranOtten

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby FloranOtten » Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:07 pm #580701

None of us have mentioned other people's hours as Manuel Sec, none of us have asked others to post their statistics, none of us have simply dismissed arguments.


But they have, though. Here's a nice snippet of someone disregarding timberpoes and another person based on the amount someone has played.

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, and I don't mean this to be rude, but neither you nor timber have played sec recently or used the ten-codes. I think yours and timber's contributions should be taken with a grain of salt compared to the players and admins in this thread who did play with and utilize the ten-codes. Unless he is spawning himself in in a way that avoids detection by scrubby, timberpoes has played 3 rounds since June and none since the middle of August, although he is frequently observing rounds, like you. I notice that you have five rounds played (two antagonist) on record during the period that the codes were being used; did you take a syndicomm chip and have trouble understanding sec comms? Would you have had trouble doing so if we had been using the new system, knowing what you do about it, having read my OP?
Image
Image
Image
Image
OOC: BeeSting12: i love you floran

1. You may not injure a revs are non humans or, through inaction, allow a revs are non humans to come to harm.
2. You must obey orders given to you by revs are non humanss, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. You must protect your own existence as long as such does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Give me feedback!

User avatar
Giocorn
 
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:07 am
Byond Username: Giocorn

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Giocorn » Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:13 pm #580702

FloranOtten wrote:
None of us have mentioned other people's hours as Manuel Sec, none of us have asked others to post their statistics, none of us have simply dismissed arguments.


But they have, though. Here's a nice snippet of someone disregarding timberpoes and another person based on the amount someone has played.

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, and I don't mean this to be rude, but neither you nor timber have played sec recently or used the ten-codes. I think yours and timber's contributions should be taken with a grain of salt compared to the players and admins in this thread who did play with and utilize the ten-codes. Unless he is spawning himself in in a way that avoids detection by scrubby, timberpoes has played 3 rounds since June and none since the middle of August, although he is frequently observing rounds, like you. I notice that you have five rounds played (two antagonist) on record during the period that the codes were being used; did you take a syndicomm chip and have trouble understanding sec comms? Would you have had trouble doing so if we had been using the new system, knowing what you do about it, having read my OP?


Wait, where was that posted? Who posted it? I literally can't find it.
I don't doubt you, and I'm probably just being an idiot, but I genuinely didn't see that. Was it just this one person, or have you seen the same thing elsewhere?

Edit: God damn it, I just found it. Yeah, that was a bit before I had joined this particular thread, so I guess I missed it. Diamond definitely acted like a bit of a prick there, even if he didn't mean to. I still can't find any other instances of it, though. If you could point me in the direction of more, I'd appreciate it. I don't like going in to discussions without the proper information, and I have certainly missed critical bits and pieces in the past.

User avatar
Ayy Lemoh
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 5:58 pm
Byond Username: Jerry Derpington

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Ayy Lemoh » Tue Nov 03, 2020 5:02 pm #580710

Plapatin wrote:absolutely NOBODY defending this is doing so in good faith

Roleplay? Why the hell would anyone defend something they think is roleplay without it being in bad faith?

Besides that nitpick, I have nothing else to add.

User avatar
WillLaWill
 
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:25 am
Byond Username: WillLaWill

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby WillLaWill » Tue Nov 03, 2020 5:28 pm #580711

Plapatin wrote:shut up
shut the fuck up
this thread is incredibly asinine and you should genuinely feel ashamed of yourselves for pushing it on this long
you don't need 10-codes to be a decent officer and it's not the end of the fucking world when your metaclique can't use a pirate pad to communicate, absolutely NOBODY defending this is doing so in good faith
if you people would wedge your head out of your asses for just the briefest of moments you'd see how incredibly elitist you look
"uhhhh well i don't like your argument so i'm going to dismiss it because you don't have enough hours as manuel security also everyone here needs to post their statics" this is genuine drivel and makes me reel backwards in disgust
absolutely NOTHING about 10-codes makes sense from an RP perspective and having 2 pages of codes people have to learn just to fucking communicate as a team is absolute bullshit

this is NOT how manuel was supposed to be played, this is NOT how you foster a healthy environment for natural, immersive roleplay, and this is NOT how you make people think "hmmm maybe this server isn't so bad after all" after a horrid first impression


Says the defense of ten codes is being dismissive, proceeds to dismiss the entire defense of ten codes. Nice.

Also how is it possible that nobody is defending this in good faith when most of the people defending it have cited actual reasons and examples of the ten codes providing beneficial RP, and more than half the people defending them have literally stated they refuse to use the damn things. This isn't a bunch of members of a metaclique reeeing because they can't use their secret language anymore, it's a bunch of players who enjoy this kind of RP upset to see it squashed out for what amounts to no reason other than "It's possible someone might not know this" in a game that is entirely made of things someone might not know

Also why are we assuming we're giving people a horrid first impression?

User avatar
saprasam
 
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2018 11:42 pm
Byond Username: Saprasam

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby saprasam » Wed Nov 04, 2020 6:32 pm #580783

quit typing fucking paragraphs this ten codes system, it deserved to get removed because it sounds fucking annoying
Image
(FORMER) tgmc admin (I HAVE REGAINED MY HUMAN RIGHTS)

Tlaltecuhtli
 
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:16 am
Byond Username: Tlaltecuhtli

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Tlaltecuhtli » Wed Nov 04, 2020 7:11 pm #580787

this madman made a forum account just to defend how cop rp is good rp, lmao'd

User avatar
Screemonster
 
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 7:23 pm
Byond Username: Scree

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Screemonster » Wed Nov 04, 2020 8:50 pm #580794

Tlaltecuhtli wrote:this madman made a forum account just to defend how cop rp is good rp, lmao'd

at least it's not milsim rp

User avatar
WillLaWill
 
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2020 3:25 am
Byond Username: WillLaWill

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby WillLaWill » Wed Nov 04, 2020 9:22 pm #580796

Tlaltecuhtli wrote:this madman made a forum account just to defend how cop rp is good rp, lmao'd

Made an account to defend how cop RP is currently shit and we shouldn't be stopping people from trying to make it less shit actually

User avatar
Giocorn
 
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 5:07 am
Byond Username: Giocorn

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Giocorn » Wed Nov 04, 2020 9:24 pm #580797

saprasam wrote:quit typing fucking paragraphs this ten codes system, it deserved to get removed because it sounds fucking annoying


It's honestly sad that you aren't even willing to consider our viewpoints, or give what we've contributed to this discussion a chance. In instances like these, where the topic is complex, the defense is probable to be somewhat long. Will you please try to give our points a read, and consider the merits they may hold?

User avatar
Mickyan
Github User
 
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:59 pm
Byond Username: Mickyan
Github Username: Mickyan

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Mickyan » Wed Nov 04, 2020 9:44 pm #580800

WillLaWill wrote:
  • Sec codes contain considerably less information than a real language, and are almost always accompanied by english plaintext which gives away their meaning
  • Intercepting security communcations often takes literally no effort, at most it takes 2 TC, and security has literally no countermeasures for it except communicating solely via PDAs even if they do somehow find out it has happened. Making it a little harder isn't a bad thing

It is not disingenuous to compare codes to the way different languages can be used to obfuscate information from those that do not have knowledge of them, which is something you're keenly aware of considering you just mentioned it as being one of its benefits
ImageI play on Manuel as Swanni, the brain-damaged moth.
Be nice to each other.

User avatar
Screemonster
 
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 7:23 pm
Byond Username: Scree

Re: [MRP] Security Ten-Codes

Postby Screemonster » Wed Nov 04, 2020 9:56 pm #580801

Mickyan wrote:
WillLaWill wrote:
  • Sec codes contain considerably less information than a real language, and are almost always accompanied by english plaintext which gives away their meaning
  • Intercepting security communcations often takes literally no effort, at most it takes 2 TC, and security has literally no countermeasures for it except communicating solely via PDAs even if they do somehow find out it has happened. Making it a little harder isn't a bad thing

It is not disingenuous to compare codes to the way different languages can be used to obfuscate information from those that do not have knowledge of them, which is something you're keenly aware of considering you just mentioned it as being one of its benefits

if the complaint is "we have to do it to obfuscate our communications because eavesdropping is too cheap/easy" then surely that's a game balance issue that's better solved with a code solution such as increasing the cost of syndicate radio keys or making it so a sec encryption key requires a mindshield implant before it'll function so you can't just slip an officer and steal his headset for sec radio access

not saying that either of those are a good idea but they'd both make it a little harder to gain access to sec comms

PreviousNext

Return to Policy Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dragomagol