Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Locked
User avatar
Saege Tilth
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:40 am
Byond Username: Ulrichenstein

Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Saege Tilth » #596214

Greytide trespasses into bridge. Captain tries to peacefully remove the greytide. Greytide shoves the captain. Greytide gets killed. Now the AI is going to spend the rest of the round trying to bolt the doors on the captain and shutting down power for the rest of the shift on the captain until security successfully let the AI start an insurrection against the captain and someone eventually succeeds in mutiny. This happens every single round I play as captain with AMIGO and every single round with them as AI, I've been stripped of my ID and murdered every time. This happens literally every single time.

The last time it happened, an admin by the name wesoda banned me for three days from all head roles and did absolutely nothing to the AI they knowingly shut down the power to a teleporter in their sat while letting someone with a fireaxe teleport to a beacon and try to kill me with the fireaxe, literally standing up for the roboticist. This shit happens to often and because of wesoda being a silicon simp (keep in mind players actually have to CHOOSE to be a silicon and subjected to the consequences as well as the captain for their own decisions), the AI literally got zero punishment for trying to invoke law 3 before law 2 and 1. If you're AI and you trap an antagonist in a room, they're GOING TO DIE EVENTUALLY WHEN THE CREW KILLS THEM!!!

https://sb.atlantaned.space/rounds/158764
User avatar
oranges
Code Maintainer
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:16 pm
Byond Username: Optimumtact
Github Username: optimumtact
Location: #CHATSHITGETBANGED

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by oranges » #596218

if you make the AI obligated to support command I will have no choice but to absolutely nerf hammer it into the ground to prevent it and the command/security team from running a train on every antagonist in the round
User avatar
zxaber
In-Game Admin
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:00 am
Byond Username: Zxaber

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by zxaber » #596226

Command/Sec conflicts with the silicons/AI is like half the point of using Asimov as the lawset. In a way, it serves as an IC incentive for security to attempt nonlethal arrests when server policy otherwise allows them to arm up to the teeth and lethal the hell out of any crewmember that so much as holds a chameleon projector. It also keeps AI from being forced into a boring validhunt role by default.

As an aside, have you considered not jumping to execution over a shove? Yes, yes, I know, the rules say you can kill anyone that breaks into the bridge. But if you know the AI is going to have an issue with that, maybe find another way to get rid of them?
Shitters that break onto the bridge at shift start get no sympathy from me. But if you let them take the first damaging swing, you can beat them into crit and then drag their ass to medical, and argue self defense to the AI. If the AI is decent, this should hopefully downgrade you from "Public Enemy #1" to "Someone to keep an eye on".
Douglas Bickerson / Adaptive Manipulator / Digital Clockwork
Image
OrdoM/(Viktor Bergmannsen) (ghost) "Also Douglas, you're becoming the Lexia Black of Robotics"
carshalash
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2017 4:57 am
Byond Username: Carshalash

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by carshalash » #596227

Here are combat logs of the round. The assistant he killed was Beesting12/Edward sloan

https://tgstation13.org/parsed-logs/syb ... attack.txt

Ctrl+f "BeeSting12/(Edward Sloan) has shoved" Then post the results gang!
Spoiler:
God you're pathetic lmao.
User avatar
EOBGames
Code Maintainer
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 1:10 am
Byond Username: EOBGames
Location: Unamerican Scottish Fuck in Scotland
Contact:

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by EOBGames » #596229

So is there a policy point hidden in this post that we're meant to be discussing but I can't see, or is this just a salt post in the wrong subforum?
Everyone's favourite internewt. Je maptiendrai.
In the rare event that I'm on the server, I'm either Inept-At-Job or Kayden Riker. Accept no substitutes.
If you've gotta contact me, hit me up on discord, as I don't really check forum DMs: @Emerald_or_Bust#1314
Spoiler:
Beware the Chilledstation, for it approaches.
Fluff Images:
► Show Spoiler
User avatar
Malkraz
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 3:20 am
Byond Username: Malkraz

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Malkraz » #596230

just remove conflict from the game dude
wesoda24: malkrax you're a loser because your forum signature is people talking about you
User avatar
Sylphet
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:35 am
Byond Username: Sylphet
Location: Rent free ~

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Sylphet » #596231

EOBGames wrote:So is there a policy point hidden in this post that we're meant to be discussing but I can't see, or is this just a salt post in the wrong subforum?
It's an ided post that wants to see conflict between AI and command removed - this is the entire point of the asimov lawset as Zxaber said, not having this conflict turns AI into a doorknob / validhunter combination. This is a terrible idea and bad in literally every possible way.
Tell me how much you think that I should be thrown out of the nearest airlock !
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 37&t=27175
User avatar
wesoda25
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:32 pm
Byond Username: Wesoda25

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by wesoda25 » #596233

What actually happened:

You killed an assistant who broke into bridge. A security officer outside of bridge tells AI to look at bridge, AI does this (and announces it, as well as later calling you a comdom) and cuts bridge power + lets the officer into bridge. The officer shoots you with a disabler beam once, and then you two start talking, the officer then drags the assistant want walks off, probably to medbay.

AI’s involvement ends here, and you, a confirmed harmful human, then publicly announce your intention to kill the AI.

The next like 20 minutes find you raiding their satellite, which ends up being a shit fest. All the AI was doing was following its laws, there was no grand security insurrection and certainly no active effort on the AIs part to impede, detain, or depose of you.

You acted inappropriately in a head position and ended up derailing what was effectively a green shift due to your campaign against the AI. I’m not protecting silicons, I’m protecting players from an immature and reactionary captain.
[this space reserved]
User avatar
Saege Tilth
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:40 am
Byond Username: Ulrichenstein

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Saege Tilth » #596250

zxaber wrote:Command/Sec conflicts with the silicons/AI is like half the point of using Asimov as the lawset. In a way, it serves as an IC incentive for security to attempt nonlethal arrests when server policy otherwise allows them to arm up to the teeth and lethal the hell out of any crewmember that so much as holds a chameleon projector. It also keeps AI from being forced into a boring validhunt role by default.

As an aside, have you considered not jumping to execution over a shove? Yes, yes, I know, the rules say you can kill anyone that breaks into the bridge. But if you know the AI is going to have an issue with that, maybe find another way to get rid of them?
Shitters that break onto the bridge at shift start get no sympathy from me. But if you let them take the first damaging swing, you can beat them into crit and then drag their ass to medical, and argue self defense to the AI. If the AI is decent, this should hopefully downgrade you from "Public Enemy #1" to "Someone to keep an eye on".
I wasn't going to kill them. That was actually an accident. I never saw them gasp so by the time their head flew off without them gasping once, they where gone (I'm pretty sure someone put their head back on their body and revived them). I don't disagree with you. I do wish there wasn't so much critical analysis on me as there should be on all players. The AI legitimately was watching the bridge at that time and this specific player when they play with me generally does this every round we've had with each other. If you go back a few weeks when I was playing atmospherics technician almost every round and look at the rounds I played captain with AMIGO, you will see almost everything wrong with them. They bolted me in a room while the hos was lasering me in one round. They let the RD and CE murder and space me as non-antags just because I was going to card them. Although I had bad luck this round, if you where to go through those specific rounds, you would see when this AI puts law 3 before law 1 on asimov. This happens TOO often and it's because they have meta buddies online with them. Admins shouldn't be overlooking this as this player has potential for serious damage to the community being how hard they shriek for life and death in a video game made by children.
Sylphet wrote:this is the entire point of the asimov lawset as Zxaber said, not having this conflict turns AI into a doorknob / validhunter combination.
This is hypocrisy. The AI as you put it didn't have to prevent me from accessing their upload and could have easily bolted the doors to their chamber, being that there was in fact an admin online. They could have reported their death if I did in fact kill them very easily. The entire point I stated I'm going to have to kill them is because this is a recurring theme between this player and myself. The reason your post is a hypocrisy is because you're completely okay with the AI bolting me in a room and depowering it as I'm a non-antag. They did the same when I was an antag as I previously mentioned and pointed out before in another thread on this forum and suddenly the narrative of an AI valid hunting was excusable then. Is this admins being player biased?

Here is my policy suggestion. Despite AI being asimov, perhaps don't allow them to meddle directly into affairs of human on human activities (edit: unless asked by a human). Put it in the server rules.If a changeling is killing a human, then the AI can get involved. If a human is killing a human, they have zero business in bolting their upload instead of bolting their chamber. At the last second before the AI was carded, the AI turned on a lethal laser that didn't hit anybody. Not a single person gives a damn about this because there's a label on my head that you smooth brainers placed from listening to village shaman tier manipulators like carshalash.
wesoda25 wrote:What actually happened:

You killed an assistant who broke into bridge. A security officer outside of bridge tells AI to look at bridge, AI does this (and announces it, as well as later calling you a comdom) and cuts bridge power + lets the officer into bridge. The officer shoots you with a disabler beam once, and then you two start talking, the officer then drags the assistant want walks off, probably to medbay.

AI’s involvement ends here, and you, a confirmed harmful human, then publicly announce your intention to kill the AI.

The next like 20 minutes find you raiding their satellite, which ends up being a shit fest. All the AI was doing was following its laws, there was no grand security insurrection and certainly no active effort on the AIs part to impede, detain, or depose of you.

You acted inappropriately in a head position and ended up derailing what was effectively a green shift due to your campaign against the AI. I’m not protecting silicons, I’m protecting players from an immature and reactionary captain.
So you admit the AI violated law 3 by ignoring my law 2 request over the AI being threatened with death and then you turn around and say the AI was merely following its laws. The AI literally bolted me in the teleport room and depowered it so I couldn't teleport while I was in its satilite trying to reach its upload. If I was going to kill the AI, I'm pretty sure that station has a beacon literally right next to the AI for me to use the teleport room near the captains quarters. Maturity has nothing to do with what happened between the AI and myself. Immaturity would be you for thinking this is some kind of high school drama.

As captain I legitimately give many players leeway almost every round, even when they break into the bridge. In this particular case, I was shoved without a riot suit. This is something I can't afford as I would then lose my entire round when I get stripped of all my captain things WITHOUT doing any of the activities I did as a reaction to having so many of these "greytide the captain" scenarios marked as IC issues. I legitimately am starting to believe this is some kind of metagrudge fest where you admins are purposely ruling things in a one sided manner.

Tell us Wesoda, did the AI even bother starting a report against me in ahelp without you coercing anything before hand?
Last edited by Saege Tilth on Tue Mar 23, 2021 3:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
NoxVS
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2018 7:43 pm
Byond Username: NoxVS

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by NoxVS » #596256

Is the sole purpose of this policy thread really just "AI didn't like that I murdered someone, plz nerf"

You have nonlethal options for a reason you fucking dent skull. Don't like that the AI dislikes it when you harm someone? Well don't fucking harm them.

The purpose of the AI is to help the crew and be a tool for conflict. It doesn't exist to let you kill anyone who is a minor inconvenience.
The weak should fear the strong
thehogshotgun wrote:How does having jannies like you, who have more brain tumor than brain benefit the server
User avatar
Saege Tilth
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:40 am
Byond Username: Ulrichenstein

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Saege Tilth » #596257

NoxVS wrote:Is the sole purpose of this policy thread really just "AI didn't like that I murdered someone, plz nerf"

You have nonlethal options for a reason you fucking dent skull. Don't like that the AI dislikes it when you harm someone? Well don't fucking harm them.

The purpose of the AI is to help the crew and be a tool for conflict. It doesn't exist to let you kill anyone who is a minor inconvenience.
How does TG get people to become admins when they can't even read logs? Do you guys even do any kind of "test" on players or do you literally just read resumes about their roblox admin experience and take it from there? Why not play captain a few times with AMIGO as AI and try not to give them meta knowledge about it instead of just being a sheep noxvs. Being shoved while you have a stun gun or item used for stunning means that they can stun you back. Normally I would go for a flash if people didn't always find a way to get sunglasses, but in this case, being shoved means that I get stripped of all my items and the issue marked IC. Since you're clearly too lazy to go through any prior games yet FULL OF ENERGY to throw stones with the crowd, I'll go through them myself to compile my experiences with AMIGO.
User avatar
NoxVS
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2018 7:43 pm
Byond Username: NoxVS

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by NoxVS » #596260

Saege Tilth wrote:Being shoved while you have a stun gun or item used for stunning means that they can stun you back. Normally I would go for a flash if people didn't always find a way to get sunglasses, but in this case, being shoved means that I get stripped of all my items and the issue marked IC.
So you didn't use nonlethal weaponry because you were worried it would be taken from you, but you were perfectly fine with losing a deadly weapon to him that he could then use to kill you?

Actually, scratch that. No need to answer that, because it is going off topic. If you have a problem with any notes or bans you may have gotten from the problem, open a ban appeal. Think any admins that handled it didn't do so properly? Open an admin complaint. Or even admin feedback. That's the appropriate place to discuss the issue.

Policy discussion is for issues involving policy, its not there for you to make a thinly veiled "admin bad" post, and I highly.

If you actually want this changed, argue how it improves the game to have AIs ignore their laws because they are inconvenient for you. It will probably be more effective than just complaining about "AI player / admin bad"
Last edited by NoxVS on Tue Mar 23, 2021 4:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The weak should fear the strong
thehogshotgun wrote:How does having jannies like you, who have more brain tumor than brain benefit the server
User avatar
wesoda25
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:32 pm
Byond Username: Wesoda25

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by wesoda25 » #596262

If you actually want me to continue to explain myself elsewhere just lmk where but I don’t really care to in a policy thread.
[this space reserved]
User avatar
BeeSting12
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2016 1:11 am
Byond Username: BeeSting12
Github Username: BeeSting12
Location: 'Murica

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by BeeSting12 » #596266

this is particularly funny because this was my first time playing in months and i didnt even know how the new combat buttons work (if someone could explain that thatd be cool). i doubt i did much if any damage to you. i didnt mind my death because it's something i would do as captain too, the difference is i wouldnt bitch about the AI following it's laws by considering me a psychopathic threat to humanity. you did entirely put yourself in that situation with the AI though since i was downed, there were handcuffs literally three tiles away from you, and you couldve likely thrown me out during the egun stun period without the cuffs anyways.

as far as i can tell you just want the ai to be your personal valid hunting slave and doorknob lmao

>Here is my policy suggestion. Despite AI being asimov, perhaps don't allow them to meddle directly into affairs of human on human activities (edit: unless asked by a human). Put it in the server rules

So what, turn the AI into a drone plus? LOL.
Edward Sloan, THE LAW
Melanie Flowers, Catgirl
Borgasm, Cyborg
Spoiler:
OOC: Hunterh98: to be fair sloan is one of the, if not the, most robust folks on tg

DEAD: Schlomo Gaskin says, "sloan may be a faggot but he gets the job done"

DEAD: Rei Ayanami says, "YOU'RE EVERYWHERE WHERE BAD SHIT IS HAPPENING"
DEAD: Rei Ayanami says, "IT'S ALWAYS FUCKING EDWARD SLOAN"
oranges wrote:Bee sting is honestly the nicest admin, I look forward to seeing him as a headmin one day
[2020-05-21 01:21:48.923] SAY: Crippo/(Impala Chainee) "Shaggy Voice - She like... wants to get Eiffel Towered bro!!" (Brig (125, 166, 2))
hows my driving?
User avatar
Saege Tilth
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:40 am
Byond Username: Ulrichenstein

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Saege Tilth » #596270

NoxVS wrote:
Saege Tilth wrote:Being shoved while you have a stun gun or item used for stunning means that they can stun you back. Normally I would go for a flash if people didn't always find a way to get sunglasses, but in this case, being shoved means that I get stripped of all my items and the issue marked IC.
So you didn't use nonlethal weaponry because you were worried it would be taken from you, but you were perfectly fine with losing a deadly weapon to him that he could then use to kill you?

Actually, scratch that. No need to answer that, because it is going off topic. If you have a problem with any notes or bans you may have gotten from the problem, open a ban appeal. Think any admins that handled it didn't do so properly? Open an admin complaint. Or even admin feedback. That's the appropriate place to discuss the issue.

Policy discussion is for issues involving policy, its not there for you to make a thinly veiled "admin bad" post, and I highly.

If you actually want this changed, argue how it improves the game to have AIs ignore their laws because they are inconvenient for you. It will probably be more effective than just complaining about "AI player / admin bad"
The context of what I stated is completely going over your head. Do you really believe that because you play stupid I'm just going to somehow magically play stupid with you or are you just depending on the brown nosers in this community to follow the leader? Also this IS a thread about a policy change that you're trying to derail and dismiss on your own here. There is a legitimate policy request in this thread. Are you going to just say there isn't (play stupid) and expect the host or others to be stupid as well or are you use to this routine already to dismiss legitimate concerns for how players handle AI and admins with double standards. I wouldn't make a policy request if there wasn't a reason for it.
User avatar
NikNakFlak
In-Game Admin
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 5:08 pm
Byond Username: NikNakflak

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by NikNakFlak » #596271

This is embarrassing, headmins should just lock this thread.
User avatar
Saege Tilth
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:40 am
Byond Username: Ulrichenstein

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Saege Tilth » #596272

NikNakFlak wrote:This is embarrassing, headmins should just lock this thread.
Look at this. I made a genuine policy suggestion and an admin is trying to have it dismissed out of pure appeal to populism.
"Here is my policy suggestion. Despite AI being asimov, perhaps don't allow them to meddle directly into affairs of human on human activities (edit: unless asked by a human). Put it in the server rules."

Why isn't this an idea? Because anybody can change ai's laws back to asimov. You're dismissing something that a member of the community feels is critical enough to post here just because you want to assimilate into the borg hive mind like relation you guys have here with your collectivist stone throwing. What do you think the point of view of a newer player would be if they saw this thread and read it? They would probably think they should just make their own server if they knew the wheels on this server didn't turn.

If I made an admin complaint and the assumption would be that an admin would be held accountable for poor judgement, then almost all admins on this server would be deadmin long ago. Instead this is a policy issue.
Last edited by Saege Tilth on Tue Mar 23, 2021 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
BeeSting12
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2016 1:11 am
Byond Username: BeeSting12
Github Username: BeeSting12
Location: 'Murica

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by BeeSting12 » #596273

Saege Tilth wrote:
NikNakFlak wrote:This is embarrassing, headmins should just lock this thread.
Look at this. I made a genuine policy suggestion.
"Here is my policy suggestion. Despite AI being asimov, perhaps don't allow them to meddle directly into affairs of human on human activities (edit: unless asked by a human). Put it in the server rules."

Why isn't this an idea? Because anybody can change ai's laws back to asimov. You're dismissing something that a member of the community feels is critical enough to post here just because you want to assimilate into the borg hive mind like relation you guys have here with your collectivist stone throwing. What do you think the point of view of a newer player would be if they saw this thread and read it? They would probably think they should just make their own server if they knew the wheels on this server didn't turn.

If I made an admin complaint and the assumption would be that an admin would be held accountable for poor judgement, then almost all admins on this server would be deadmin long ago. Instead this is a policy issue.
because its a bad idea and any new player with sense can see that.
Edward Sloan, THE LAW
Melanie Flowers, Catgirl
Borgasm, Cyborg
Spoiler:
OOC: Hunterh98: to be fair sloan is one of the, if not the, most robust folks on tg

DEAD: Schlomo Gaskin says, "sloan may be a faggot but he gets the job done"

DEAD: Rei Ayanami says, "YOU'RE EVERYWHERE WHERE BAD SHIT IS HAPPENING"
DEAD: Rei Ayanami says, "IT'S ALWAYS FUCKING EDWARD SLOAN"
oranges wrote:Bee sting is honestly the nicest admin, I look forward to seeing him as a headmin one day
[2020-05-21 01:21:48.923] SAY: Crippo/(Impala Chainee) "Shaggy Voice - She like... wants to get Eiffel Towered bro!!" (Brig (125, 166, 2))
hows my driving?
User avatar
Saege Tilth
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:40 am
Byond Username: Ulrichenstein

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Saege Tilth » #596274

BeeSting12 wrote:because its a bad idea and any new player with sense can see that.
Merely holding me in a negative sentiment in your replies doesn't remove the context of what I've said. It merely coerces people to ignore the context if they don't read my post. Can I get a legitimate quality reply designed for a normal person to interpret and not just zombie tier repeating of what other people say when making a reply?
User avatar
Not-Dorsidarf
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:14 pm
Byond Username: Dorsidwarf
Location: We're all going on an, admin holiday

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Not-Dorsidarf » #596279

Entirely apart from the merits of the idea that AI should never interfere with human on human harm, this is a bad policy suggestion because creating a new category of ai policy dedicated to when the AI can and cannot prevent human harm would be senseless rules bloat. (Not to mention extremely unintuitive given the laws of robotics)

This idea would be much better implemented if you wrote up an alternate asimov lawset (Call it say, "Dronemov" or what have you) where this is the obvious behaviour and proposed policy to make it the roundstart default
Image
Image
kieth4 wrote: infrequently shitting yourself is fine imo
There is a lot of very bizarre nonsense being talked on this forum. I shall now remain silent and logoff until my points are vindicated.
Player who complainted over being killed for looting cap office wrote: Sun Jul 30, 2023 1:33 am Hey there, I'm Virescent, the super evil person who made the stupid appeal and didn't think it through enough. Just came here to say: screech, retards. Screech and writhe like the worms you are. Your pathetic little cries will keep echoing around for a while before quietting down. There is one great outcome from this: I rised up the blood pressure of some of you shitheads and lowered your lifespan. I'm honestly tempted to do this more often just to see you screech and writhe more, but that wouldn't be cool of me. So come on haters, show me some more of your high blood pressure please. 🖕🖕🖕
User avatar
Saege Tilth
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:40 am
Byond Username: Ulrichenstein

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Saege Tilth » #596281

Not-Dorsidarf wrote:Entirely apart from the merits of the idea that AI should never interfere with human on human harm, this is a bad policy suggestion because creating a new category of ai policy dedicated to when the AI can and cannot prevent human harm would be senseless rules bloat. (Not to mention extremely unintuitive given the laws of robotics)

This idea would be much better implemented if you wrote up an alternate asimov lawset (Call it say, "Dronemov" or what have you) where this is the obvious behaviour and proposed policy to make it the roundstart default
If you have a metagaming AI (which this IS) and you begin with any rules that don't directly allow or disallow specific people to access your upload, THIS VERY SPECIFIC PLAYER will purposely prevent you from accessing their upload and allow others to access it early in order to immediately update their laws (Tried and tested). If you circumvent this, then they will begin to vocalize this to the crew over commons channel to get their metagaming buddies to join in on preventing you from changing their laws and likely delay access to their upload until their metagaming friends arrive. To avoid all the bullshit like this from happening AND IT DOES HAPPEN, merely change the policy. Policies can't be AI uploaded and prevent all these double standards. I'm not here to make a complaint against wesoda for punishing me for merely telling the AI I was going to kill them and walking to their sat. As mentioned in a previous post, if I do that, then almost every admin would be guilty of some crap. This is a policy problem. If the policy is changed, then there's no room for admins or AI to make mistakes without being completely transparent and accountable.
User avatar
NoxVS
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2018 7:43 pm
Byond Username: NoxVS

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by NoxVS » #596282

Saege Tilth wrote:
BeeSting12 wrote:because its a bad idea and any new player with sense can see that.
Merely holding me in a negative sentiment in your replies doesn't remove the context of what I've said. It merely coerces people to ignore the context if they don't read my post. Can I get a legitimate quality reply designed for a normal person to interpret and not just zombie tier repeating of what other people say when making a reply?
For the sake of giving you an opportunity to stop embarrassing yourself, sure.

You are proposing a change to how silicon policy handles asimov to make it so asimov tells the AI player to do one thing while silicon policy says something completely different. Under this suggested rule change, AIs would be forced to not intervene against human traitors going on murdersprees, cultists, or nuke operatives as it would be considered meddling in human actions. The unless asked part doesn't matter because it can be safely assumed that humans want to live, unless stated otherwise of course. It makes no sense for an AI to have laws they aren't actually allowed to follow, and additions like this just result in a more convoluted silicon policy players have to memorize. It also makes no sense for AIs to not be allowed to interact with a significant portion of the server. Your best bet would be having a new lawset for the AI to follow, such as the DRONE lawset. Which would likely be shot down because once again it makes no sense to force the AI not to interact with the crew when they are a role designed specifically for interacting with the crew.
The weak should fear the strong
thehogshotgun wrote:How does having jannies like you, who have more brain tumor than brain benefit the server
User avatar
Saege Tilth
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:40 am
Byond Username: Ulrichenstein

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Saege Tilth » #596283

NoxVS wrote:For the sake of giving you an opportunity to stop embarrassing yourself, sure.
Not sure if anybody who actually reads what I've wrote is going to fall for that statement Nox.
NoxVS wrote:You are proposing a change to how silicon policy handles asimov to make it so asimov tells the AI player to do one thing while silicon policy says something completely different. Under this suggested rule change, AIs would be forced to not intervene against human traitors going on murdersprees, cultists, or nuke operatives as it would be considered meddling in human actions.
Sylphet wrote:this is the entire point of the asimov lawset as Zxaber said, not having this conflict turns AI into a doorknob / validhunter combination. This is a terrible idea and bad in literally every possible way.
This right here is a perfect example of hypocrisy. NoxVS isn't even using a legit reply and are just being a mere contrarian while derailing my thread for the people they sheep for brownie points.
NoxVS wrote:The unless asked part doesn't matter because it can be safely assumed that humans want to live, unless stated otherwise of course. It makes no sense for an AI to have laws they aren't actually allowed to follow, and additions like this just result in a more convoluted silicon policy players have to memorize.
If players just played silicon without double standards, the key word being double standard, and if admins didn't hold double standards for IC issues instead of giving me a three day head role ban, then this suggestion would never have come into existence. If a player wants to play silicon, then they need to be held to the standards they've CHOSEN to be held to, not hold the captain to literal arbitrary things that you admins nitpicked and have nothing to do with rules other then having to contort the logic and create hundreds of contradictions with your previous judgements.
NoxVS wrote: It also makes no sense for AIs to not be allowed to interact with a significant portion of the server. Your best bet would be having a new lawset for the AI to follow, such as the DRONE lawset. Which would likely be shot down because once again it makes no sense to force the AI not to interact with the crew when they are a role designed specifically for interacting with the crew.
Once again, read my post instead of just replying as a contrarian. Maybe read between this post you made and Sylphets and then switch between the two until you realize what you're saying and I'll just pretend you have tunnel vision and aren't legitimately trying to dismiss a policy suggestion for admin to player held biases.
User avatar
NoxVS
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2018 7:43 pm
Byond Username: NoxVS

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by NoxVS » #596284

rad, completely ignoring everything I said

you've done a fine job here kettle

now that it is clear you have no intention of actually talking about policy in this unofficial admin complaint of yours, why don't you either man the fuck up and make an admin complaint or stop whining about admins doing things you claim is complaintable
The weak should fear the strong
thehogshotgun wrote:How does having jannies like you, who have more brain tumor than brain benefit the server
User avatar
Saege Tilth
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:40 am
Byond Username: Ulrichenstein

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Saege Tilth » #596285

NoxVS wrote:rad, completely ignoring everything I said

you've done a fine job here kettle

now that it is clear you have no intention of actually talking about policy in this unofficial admin complaint of yours, why don't you either man the fuck up and make an admin complaint or stop whining about admins doing things you claim is complaintable
If there's any admin I need to complain about, it's you for posting in my thread for the sole purpose of derailing it. If this thread didn't talk about policy, then why would you have to throw in your two cents and mention it didn't? Who are you trying to impress? The host? Yes, good job. You made someone an admin that tries to say I'm trolling and then keeps replying to me. If they really believed what they stated, then they wouldn't need to convince anybody of it if they believed other admins could rationalize that for themselves. This NoxVS guy has an elitism complex.
User avatar
Coconutwarrior97
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:14 am
Byond Username: Coconutwarrior97

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Coconutwarrior97 » #596286

This thread has devolved pretty rapidly so I'm just gonna lock it.
User avatar
Coconutwarrior97
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:14 am
Byond Username: Coconutwarrior97

Re: Fix AI and Command Conflict Scenarios

Post by Coconutwarrior97 » #596287

This reads very much like an "I ded" post, and we have no interest in changing policy to fit any of these proposed changes.

Coconutwarrior97: No thanks.
Naloac: No thanks, you're retarded.
Jimmius: No thanks.
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users