Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Locked
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by sinfulbliss » #628710

For a while the discussion has come up that Spacelaw, although being rewritten for MRP, is essentially pointless on LRP. Most experienced security players agree it should not be given any weight. Most believe enforcing it at all will make you shitsec, ruining both others' rounds and likely yours as well. Some admins, too, have said it is an RP suggestion and has no bearing on the server rules.

I think this is a pretty big issue, considering 1) new security officers are misled heavily as they enforce it religiously, and 2) security players are, in some circumstances, noted or bwoinked for the overzealous enforcement of spacelaw (viewtopic.php?f=34&t=30236).

However, I don't believe it is best used only as an RP suggestion. Security, especially on LRP, are in the unique position where they are allowed, and sometimes even expected, to execute nonantagonists for certain crimes. It is extremely important it is clear what they are allowed to execute for, and Spacelaw is the only place where this is explicitly listed.

Moreover, enforcing Spacelaw is recommended as Standard Operating Procedure for security:
"You are an enforcer of Space Law, you're not The Law."
Standard Operating Procedure, unlike Spacelaw, is something security players are expected to follow closely and may receive bwoinks for departing from. One conflict this creates is that SoP states you should not execute for capital offenses if the player is already detained, whereas Spacelaw opens this up as a valid option (and justifiably so, especially on LRP).

Whether or not Spacelaw is merely an RP suggestion, a player should ideally be able to enforce it as security without being bwoinked, and without being shitsec for doing so. Because of this I believe Spacelaw, especially for LRP players, should have some guidelines for security around its enforcement in SoP.

I've written some that I think could be helpful below. The reasoning is spoiler'd below each for space reasons.
[Note: these are intended as guidelines for the enforcement of Spacelaw as security, not parts of Spacelaw themselves.]
  • "Minor" and "Medium" crimes are best disregarded on LRP servers unless they create a legitimate threat, grief, or harm.
    Spoiler:
    On MRP, minor and medium crimes can often be enforced as a necessary part of a roleplay scene. Arresting someone for drug distribution and vandalism, for instance, could have a place in a roleplay scenario among players. However, on LRP, arresting for petty crimes which do not cause any direct harm to the round for players, is seen as extremely bad practice.
  • Ignore lesser crimes if a threat of greater severity is on the station (i.e., blob, xenomorphs, nuclear operatives, cultists, etc.).
    Spoiler:
    Another behavior of security which instantly makes them shitsec and risks violating rule 1 (e.g., arresting for possession of a weapon during xenomorphs).
  • If a fight is consensual, it does not need to be broken up or arrested for.
    Spoiler:
    Consensual fights are incredibly common on LRP servers, and brigging both players for them is, while valid according to current spacelaw, really bad practice.
  • You can only execute players who have committed capital crimes, repeated major crimes, or are confirmed to be antagonists. This should only be done if the evidence against them is rock-solid.
    Spoiler:
    Probably the most important thing to make clear, since execution affects someone's round more than any arrest would. It should be clear in SoP whether capital crimes can be met with capital punishment. Currently SoP says "not if the player is detained," and Spacelaw says "optionally." I think it's best if it is allowed, although admins have various opinions on this. I believe allowing it is especially important on LRP servers, where capital crimes by nonantagonists are more common, and things like grand-theft fit under "acting like an antagonist." Either way, this could use some clarification.
  • If you depart from the Standard Operating Procedures (viz., using lethal force where not explicitly required to), you void your meta-protections and may face administrative action if deemed to violate Rule 1.
    Spoiler:
    There are many scenarios where security finds themselves in a valid conflict with another player that is instigating against them or getting in the way of their ability to do their job. In these scenarios security may depart from SoP to retaliate as a normal player via escalation rules - or they may instead stick with SoP and arrest them nonharmfully for "assault of an officer." In the former case, it should be noted that responding with lethal force where unnecessary voids your metaprotections. If it is unnecessary and unjustified, it would then violate rule 1 or escalation policy.
The main question I want to raise here is: what is the correlation between Spacelaw and Standard Operating Procedure? Should Spacelaw be something security players are expected, or even allowed, to enforce? What are your thoughts about these possible guidelines?
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Mothblocks
Code Maintainer
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:33 am
Byond Username: Jaredfogle

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Mothblocks » #628711

Standard Operating Procedure, unlike Spacelaw, is something security players are expected to follow closely and may receive bwoinks for departing from.
The top of the SOP wiki page says the exact opposite--that it's a suggestion just like space law. Are we talking about something different, or are you saying SOP happens to align to what the rules are?
Shaps-cloud wrote: Mon Dec 07, 2020 7:59 am May eventually become one of the illusive maintainer-headmins if they choose to pursue that path, having a coder in the senior admin leadership has usually been positive for both sides in the past.
Head Coder of /tg/station, hi!

Head Admin of /tg/station Feb 2022.

Mothblocks everywhere, >>> Say nice things about me <<<
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by sinfulbliss » #628713

Mothblocks wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 8:11 am
Standard Operating Procedure, unlike Spacelaw, is something security players are expected to follow closely and may receive bwoinks for departing from.
The top of the SOP wiki page says the exact opposite--that it's a suggestion just like space law. Are we talking about something different, or are you saying SOP happens to align to what the rules are?
The page you're referring to goes into depth about SoP during various alert levels and threats - it makes more sense these things would be optional. I'm referring specifically to the Standard Operating Procedures listed on the "Guide to security" page here:
Image

I don't believe the rules align with SoP, but departing from certain aspects of SoP will certainly conflict with the rules. For instance,
You have stun weapons, USE THEM. Don't kill if you're not in serious danger. See the Rules for more details.
and later in the guide,
Don't confiscate items that were unrelated to the crime (tools, gloves)
The issue is that SoP advises enforcing Spacelaw, but doing so leads players into behavior that is considered rule-breaking or very bad practice for security, especially on LRP. I don't believe this can be fixed by changing Spacelaw, since the issue is not with Spacelaw but with the enforcement and treatment of Spacelaw by security. It becomes rulebreaking particularly in the enforcement of minor/medium offenses and execution for capital offenses (although it is unclear whether this fits in Security Policy 3 "acting like an antag").
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Mothblocks
Code Maintainer
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:33 am
Byond Username: Jaredfogle

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Mothblocks » #628715

That is also not enforced by the rules (except the part that links to the rules, because it's just the rules), and is not on a moderated page (Guide to security), anyone can edit that.
Shaps-cloud wrote: Mon Dec 07, 2020 7:59 am May eventually become one of the illusive maintainer-headmins if they choose to pursue that path, having a coder in the senior admin leadership has usually been positive for both sides in the past.
Head Coder of /tg/station, hi!

Head Admin of /tg/station Feb 2022.

Mothblocks everywhere, >>> Say nice things about me <<<
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Pandarsenic » #628732

Mothblocks wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 9:51 am That is also not enforced by the rules (except the part that links to the rules, because it's just the rules), and is not on a moderated page (Guide to security), anyone can edit that.
Would it be accurate to say that

1) Presently you can play security without needing to read anything except the rules
2) This is expected to remain the case
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by sinfulbliss » #628736

Mothblocks wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 9:51 am That is also not enforced by the rules (except the part that links to the rules, because it's just the rules), and is not on a moderated page (Guide to security), anyone can edit that.
The two quotes I linked are, among other parts of this guide, enforced by the rules, but regardless, my point is not that the guide to security should be a substitute to the rules. It is that enforcing Spacelaw leads players to behavior which specifically conflicts with the rules.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
RaveRadbury
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2019 3:41 am
Byond Username: RaveRadbury
Github Username: RaveRadbury
Location: BK ChatZone
Contact:

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by RaveRadbury » #628742

If you're going to push for this issues with EoC need to be addressed.

See viewtopic.php?f=45&t=30235
User avatar
Mothblocks
Code Maintainer
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:33 am
Byond Username: Jaredfogle

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Mothblocks » #628752

Pandarsenic wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 4:06 pm
Mothblocks wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 9:51 am That is also not enforced by the rules (except the part that links to the rules, because it's just the rules), and is not on a moderated page (Guide to security), anyone can edit that.
Would it be accurate to say that

1) Presently you can play security without needing to read anything except the rules
2) This is expected to remain the case
Answer to both of these should be "Yes, I'd hope so".
Shaps-cloud wrote: Mon Dec 07, 2020 7:59 am May eventually become one of the illusive maintainer-headmins if they choose to pursue that path, having a coder in the senior admin leadership has usually been positive for both sides in the past.
Head Coder of /tg/station, hi!

Head Admin of /tg/station Feb 2022.

Mothblocks everywhere, >>> Say nice things about me <<<
User avatar
Armhulen
Global Moderator
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:30 pm
Byond Username: Armhulenn
Github Username: bazelart
Location: The Grand Tournament

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Armhulen » #628760

Pandarsenic wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 4:06 pm
Mothblocks wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 9:51 am That is also not enforced by the rules (except the part that links to the rules, because it's just the rules), and is not on a moderated page (Guide to security), anyone can edit that.
Would it be accurate to say that

1) Presently you can play security without needing to read anything except the rules
2) This is expected to remain the case
why wouldn't we want this to be the case, playing security already has a lot more expectations and challenges than most other jobs in the game
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Pandarsenic » #628761

Armhulen wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 7:49 pm
Pandarsenic wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 4:06 pm
Mothblocks wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 9:51 am That is also not enforced by the rules (except the part that links to the rules, because it's just the rules), and is not on a moderated page (Guide to security), anyone can edit that.
Would it be accurate to say that

1) Presently you can play security without needing to read anything except the rules
2) This is expected to remain the case
why wouldn't we want this to be the case, playing security already has a lot more expectations and challenges than most other jobs in the game
Basically where I'm going with this. Anything tweaked (or existing, if someone thinks it conflicts as-is already) about Space Law or SoP needs to be subordinate to the idea that as long as you aren't using your security status (or metaprotections) to dick people over, you're basically fine.

People try to over-formalize sec procedures a lot and I feel doubtful that it's generally going to provide any net benefit.
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
Armhulen
Global Moderator
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:30 pm
Byond Username: Armhulenn
Github Username: bazelart
Location: The Grand Tournament

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Armhulen » #628763

enough rules for sec and people just go play the other antag stopper role: assistant. already a big problem on certain servers.
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by sinfulbliss » #628765

RaveRadbury wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 4:55 pm If you're going to push for this issues with EoC need to be addressed.

See viewtopic.php?f=45&t=30235
I agree, that would need to reach a consensus first.
Pandarsenic wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 9:17 pm Basically where I'm going with this. Anything tweaked (or existing, if someone thinks it conflicts as-is already) about Space Law or SoP needs to be subordinate to the idea that as long as you aren't using your security status (or metaprotections) to dick people over, you're basically fine.
Except, you're not fine! You can be bwoinked for the overzealous enforcement of Spacelaw, while following the security rules. Officers may make arrests for minor or medium crimes, which in many cases is harmful enough to be at least considered extremely detestable behavior as security, if not outright rulebreaking via Rule 1. Likewise, one might execute for a capital offense (not EoC) - is this allowed under "acting like an antagonist" (Security Rule 3) or is this against Security Rule 1? I have seen it enforced both ways from admins.
Pandarsenic wrote:People try to over-formalize sec procedures a lot and I feel doubtful that it's generally going to provide any net benefit.
Some people I have talked to express this view as well. It's all simply a matter of experience, and it is a job you learn with experience, like any other job. Except here's the thing - if you fuck up botany, maybe your plant dies. If you fuck up security, you ruin someone's round. It's important it is formalized what is and isn't proper behavior for security. Generally the rules will protect you from a bwoink, but we should at the very least make sure SoP and Spacelaw doesn't lead players in directions that are rulebreaking or bad practice.
Armhulen wrote:enough rules for sec and people just go play the other antag stopper role: assistant. already a big problem on certain servers.
A very big problem, yeah - but this isn't because they have to read 6 extra rules on the rules page. It is because security is held to a higher standard than other roles - you can simply play assistant and avoid being held to this higher standard while still being able to hunt EoCs. Clearing up all of these clashes and conflicts between SoP, Spacelaw, the rules, and the server culture itself, would only help matters.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Mothblocks
Code Maintainer
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:33 am
Byond Username: Jaredfogle

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Mothblocks » #628776

So to be clear, is this thread about how following SoP/space law can get you bwoinked? That's what Rave's thread is for. Is it that SoP is presently enforced by the rules? Because it isn't. I'm confused, what is the policy you want to discuss here, why not just edit the guide to security page yourself if you don't agree with the writing there? What do you want the headmin opinion of?
Shaps-cloud wrote: Mon Dec 07, 2020 7:59 am May eventually become one of the illusive maintainer-headmins if they choose to pursue that path, having a coder in the senior admin leadership has usually been positive for both sides in the past.
Head Coder of /tg/station, hi!

Head Admin of /tg/station Feb 2022.

Mothblocks everywhere, >>> Say nice things about me <<<
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by sinfulbliss » #628803

Mothblocks wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 11:41 pm So to be clear, is this thread about how following SoP/space law can get you bwoinked? That's what Rave's thread is for. Is it that SoP is presently enforced by the rules? Because it isn't. I'm confused, what is the policy you want to discuss here, why not just edit the guide to security page yourself if you don't agree with the writing there? What do you want the headmin opinion of?
I'd consider the issues somewhat separate. On MRP it seems the issue is Spacelaw's conflict with Roleplay Rule 6, and the first bullet of the MRP security policy and precedents that mention how EoCs can be punished (although I don't play MRP much at all and could be wrong here).

LRP has an entirely separate problem with enforcing Spacelaw, which involves the enforcement of lesser crimes, which can and does become rulebreaking. I wasn't aware I could just add these things into SoP - I will do so! What I'm looking for the headmin opinion on is essentially:

1) Is execution a valid option as a punishment for someone who committed a capital offense (i.e, grand theft) under Security Policy 3 "acting like an antagonist," or is it forbidden under Security Policy 1 "where possible [...] use nonlethal methods"?

2) Are SoP and Spacelaw supposed to reflect proper conduct as security, or are security only bound by the Security Policy and Precedents on the Rules page? That is: can "bad conduct" as security include conduct which departs from SoP and Spacelaw?
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
GamerAndYeahMick
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2021 10:17 pm
Byond Username: GamerAndYeahMick
Location: Quahog

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by GamerAndYeahMick » #628832

We want people to be arrested for "Minor" and "Medium" crimes on the standard servers, if tiders are dealt with ic then they won't need to be dealt with oocly as much.

EDIT: Consensual fights should be broken up as well to not disturb the crew doing things :)
Image
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Pandarsenic » #628863

If you want to spar literally just go to the holodeck instead of wasting medical's time and resources btw
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
Archie700
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 1:56 am
Byond Username: Archie700

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Archie700 » #628893

What is even defined as "consensual fight", is it a fight agreed between 2 people beforehand, like the sort you get in ragecages?
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by sinfulbliss » #628921

GamerAndYeahMick wrote: Sat Feb 05, 2022 4:04 pm We want people to be arrested for "Minor" and "Medium" crimes on the standard servers, if tiders are dealt with ic then they won't need to be dealt with oocly as much.

EDIT: Consensual fights should be broken up as well to not disturb the crew doing things
Arresting someone for vandalism, drug possession, having a weapon like a knife, etc. are way too minor to justify negatively affecting someone's round for. If a tider is assaulting someone then of course that should be arrested for - that's why I wrote "unless they create a legitimate threat, grief, or harm."

Consensual fights won't disturb the crew doing things because it's between two individuals. If anything I find the crew enjoys huddling around the fight and watching it.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
iamgoofball
Github User
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:50 pm
Byond Username: Iamgoofball
Github Username: Iamgoofball

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by iamgoofball » #628926

sinfulbliss wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 9:18 am Arresting someone for vandalism, drug possession, having a weapon like a knife, etc. are way too minor to justify negatively affecting someone's round for. If a tider is assaulting someone then of course that should be arrested for - that's why I wrote "unless they create a legitimate threat, grief, or harm."
what if they just didn't do the crimes
User avatar
Djaubb
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2021 9:53 am
Byond Username: Djaubb

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Djaubb » #628950

sinfulbliss wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 9:18 am
GamerAndYeahMick wrote: Sat Feb 05, 2022 4:04 pm We want people to be arrested for "Minor" and "Medium" crimes on the standard servers, if tiders are dealt with ic then they won't need to be dealt with oocly as much.

EDIT: Consensual fights should be broken up as well to not disturb the crew doing things
Arresting someone for vandalism, drug possession, having a weapon like a knife, etc. are way too minor to justify negatively affecting someone's round for. If a tider is assaulting someone then of course that should be arrested for - that's why I wrote "unless they create a legitimate threat, grief, or harm."

Consensual fights won't disturb the crew doing things because it's between two individuals. If anything I find the crew enjoys huddling around the fight and watching it.
To add to that, security, at least on Terry, have way too many shitters to deal with to bother with minor offences.

I won't drift off to greytide problem but..

I don't think the problem here lies in the lack of guideline to follow at all cost but the lack of tools of secOffs and the amount of shit they have to deal with.

My point of view is the opposite of you, maybe its server dependent but very few officers follow the space law and their decisions are arbitrary. But:


I used to think most secs were shitsec because of that. Multiple rounds drafted into sec (I was prisoner role) made me think that if they had to follow the space law or SoP at all cost then they would be weirdly inefficient.

It's better to have a broad line of conduct and let officers use their personal judgment, otherwise you could have more banbait as shitters will always know space law better than secoffs.
You can only execute players who have committed capital crimes, repeated major crimes, or are confirmed to be antagonists. This should only be done if the evidence against them is rock-solid.
Here is a good banbait. What is a rock'solid evidence? Shitters could always ahelp saying that officers had no solid evidence, or got the evidences from an "abusive search". Or even, if it's green alert and I'm secoff, should I execute directly someone that has multiple tot/high values items?

If this rule was absolutely followed then a lot of shitters would be killed and officers jobbanned. A lot of major crimes are done by greytiders BuT tHaTs An Ic PrObLeM until some die, and then it's an ooc problem.
User avatar
GamerAndYeahMick
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2021 10:17 pm
Byond Username: GamerAndYeahMick
Location: Quahog

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by GamerAndYeahMick » #628958

Deal with the shitters and there won't be shitters, I play/ed terry security :)
Image
User avatar
Djaubb
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2021 9:53 am
Byond Username: Djaubb

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Djaubb » #628961

GamerAndYeahMick wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 4:37 pm Deal with the shitters and there won't be shitters, I play/ed terry security :)
Props to you then, I don't think I will every play sec on Terry;

While we are on this topic, I would like to add that
"You are an enforcer of Space Law, you're not The Law."
Should be changed, secOffs should be The Law ala Judge Dredd (well, I know it would go wrong very quickly), poor sec need to be more robust, not more shackles.
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by sinfulbliss » #628988

Djaubb wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:57 pm To add to that, security, at least on Terry, have way too many shitters to deal with to bother with minor offences.
Exactly, aside from being a nuisance to players, it's also incredibly inefficient and a waste of time. Spray-painting floors doesn't make you a shitter and shouldn't even be given a glance.
Djaubb wrote:It's better to have a broad line of conduct and let officers use their personal judgment, otherwise you could have more banbait as shitters will always know space law better than secoffs.
You can only execute players who have committed capital crimes, repeated major crimes, or are confirmed to be antagonists. This should only be done if the evidence against them is rock-solid.
Djaubb wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:57 pmHere is a good banbait. What is a rock'solid evidence? Shitters could always ahelp saying that officers had no solid evidence, or got the evidences from an "abusive search". Or even, if it's green alert and I'm secoff, should I execute directly someone that has multiple tot/high values items?
If you are going to kill someone you should be certain they actually did what you're killing them for - that doesn't seem controversial to me. I don't see how banbaiting is a risk. If they ahelp saying sec didn't have solid evidence to execute them, it won't matter once sec shows the evidence. This happens all the time as it is.
Last edited by sinfulbliss on Mon Feb 07, 2022 4:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Djaubb
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2021 9:53 am
Byond Username: Djaubb

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Djaubb » #628995

Bruh, I was going to post an concrete example of why rock-solid proof can't be a thing, and checked the logs for one hour, and then got to the https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Guide_to_security .

My example was about lings;
A sec had hard circonstantial evidences of two persons disappearing (no body left) and another person had the stuff of those two. He got fingerprint, caught the suspected ling (because the suspect wouldn't give straight answers over comms... it was "why do you care" answers) and interrogated it after a chase. The person gave vague answers. I thought secperson should have killed on the spot that person (I saw a part where it looked that the suspected ling either dusted someone or was standing aside the person when they threw themself in the SM, it was ambiguous, and I said it to secperson).
Situation got ahelp'ed, suspected ling was "right" ahelpwise (I think, I say that after watching the logs) but the sec didn't want to kill anyway (stated it multiple times before ahelp).
Secperson wanted to do MMI test which was refused (I know there is a policy against it), I don't know if it's was the point of the ahelp or if the admin refused it because they saw it happening while the ahelp was ongoing, still, the suspected ling wasn't a ling.

Anyway, this:
While you are free to terminate a confirmed Changeling, you must be 100% certain that the suspect is a Changeling before executing.
It seems that secOffs are already asked to have "rock-solid" proofs, the ahelp I witnessed seems to say the same thing; I'm wrong.

(shit that mean that I should have ahelp the time I got off'ed by a secOff because I was strongly suspected to be a ling and I wasn't)

Tho I'm wrong, I still think it's a bad way to solve things (maybe a reason more for me to not play secOff), the secperson did its utmost to solve the situation and tried to get proofs but in the end it got ahelp'ed.
I can feel the secperson's nerves cracking, I hope they got off without a ban/job ban/note (there is way more in favor of secperson in the logs but it isn't the subject).

Well, I really hope sec guidelines won't be stricter than what it is now. Otherwise we would lost a lot of the few remaining secOffs (seriously, I don't play prisoner anymore because I see less and less wardens/secOffs).
Last edited by Djaubb on Sun Feb 13, 2022 4:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Zybwivcz
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:30 am
Byond Username: Zybwivcz

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Zybwivcz » #630107

Djaubb wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 1:26 am My example was about lings;
I recently had an admin bitch at me for twenty minutes because as SEC, in a round with lings on the station, I killed a sentient monkey caught breaking into permabrig and then shuttlecrushed it with the gulag shuttle. That's my ling/secpolicy story.

sinfulbliss wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 11:46 pm Exactly, aside from being a nuisance to players, it's also incredibly inefficient and a waste of time. Spray-painting floors doesn't make you a shitter and shouldn't even be given a glance.
Do you seriously think that tiders are getting arrested for graffiti? That when people talk about tiding on LRP they're talking about consensual fist fights or drug possession or anything remotely like that?

Complete this sentence: "When an assistant has, in the first ten minutes of the round, stolen a baton and disabler from a SEC, stolen the captain's spare and the hand tele, and is running around maint violently resisting attempts to detain them, the response of SEC should be...."

sinfulbliss wrote: Sun Feb 06, 2022 11:46 pm If you are going to kill someone you should be certain they actually did what you're killing them for - that doesn't seem controversial to me. I don't see how banbaiting is a risk. If they ahelp saying sec didn't have solid evidence to execute them, it won't matter once sec shows the evidence. This happens all the time as it is.
The SEC officer who catches the suspected and sneaky traitor is not going to undertake an exhaustive and lengthy investigation before killing them for being a traitor. Know why? Because while you're interviewing them in the brig the captain is screaming for help over comms about the three metagang shitters who have for yet another round broken into the bridge to attack and loot him.


The current meta is that SEC gets bwoinked for killing tiders who were openly and clearly acting like antags, because the fact they were so clearly acting like antags means they weren't antags because real antags wouldn't be so open in acting like antags, so tiders acting like antags mustn't be treated like antags. This is a problem.
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Pandarsenic » #630139

Zybwivcz wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 5:43 am
Djaubb wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 1:26 am My example was about lings;
I recently had an admin bitch at me for twenty minutes because as SEC, in a round with lings on the station, I killed a sentient monkey caught breaking into permabrig and then shuttlecrushed it with the gulag shuttle. That's my ling/secpolicy story.
The hell? Even if you're not a ling, sentient monkey shittery makes you valid salad, doesn't it?
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
Djaubb
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2021 9:53 am
Byond Username: Djaubb

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Djaubb » #630145

Pandarsenic wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 1:47 pm
Zybwivcz wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 5:43 am
Djaubb wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 1:26 am My example was about lings;
I recently had an admin bitch at me for twenty minutes because as SEC, in a round with lings on the station, I killed a sentient monkey caught breaking into permabrig and then shuttlecrushed it with the gulag shuttle. That's my ling/secpolicy story.
The hell? Even if you're not a ling, sentient monkey shittery makes you valid salad, doesn't it?
I'm not Zybwicz so I don't have context for that but:

-One, shitters, even if they are shitters, are not valid. Read my example, you can be bwoinked even if you do your best, if the shitter is not antag then it's not valid. Even if he acts like an antag (bruh, you are command and don't answer to HoS...).

-Second, viewtopic.php?p=620077#p620077 I saw this link one or two days ago when people were speaking OOC and it made me cringe. I know you can have circumstances, all things are not equal, but you put a ruling that the sanctions are not equal DEPENDING ON THE JUDGE. I understand the meaning behind this ruling, but you clearly say "if you are lucky then what you do is okey or maybe not and then you can take a note/ban". Even if it's a shitter monkey in a confirmed ling round, the rules can make no sense for players (then again, my example, you have to be 100% sure about the ling nature of someone to round remove it, which is impossible to obtain) ...

The problem is that we give way too much protection to shitters. The few rounds I do as AI (it's mostly 23h-02h UTC time on Terry) you have very few secOffs and a lot of shitters and admins (no I'm not putting the two together); problem is, the secOffs can't use lethal until they got they stuff stolen, but shitters can use the escalation rule to wash their very dirty hands. It's very saddening to see the secOffs getting robusted by greys because if they were to use lethal then they would be bwoinked. Of course I'm speaking of non-antag shitters. And to add to that, shitters often like to help other shitters/antags, and that the where officers get robusted.
User avatar
Misdoubtful
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2020 7:03 pm
Byond Username: Misdoubtful
Location: Delivering hugs!

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by Misdoubtful » #631812

I always considered it a guideline for not getting dunked on as security first and an example guideline for RP ideas second.

If you do things reasonably you probably won't open yourself up to a bruising as security for being a massive Debbie Downer and pissing off the crew.
Hugs
User avatar
RaveRadbury
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2019 3:41 am
Byond Username: RaveRadbury
Github Username: RaveRadbury
Location: BK ChatZone
Contact:

Re: Spacelaw as SoP for Security

Post by RaveRadbury » #633274

We are not interested in implementing Space Law as SOP for sec, as this approaches having Space Law as anything more than an RP suggestion. At this time Space Law does not exist in such a way where having it come close to being a part of the rules is a good idea.

Headmin Votes:
RaveRadbury: Agree
Dragomagol: Agree
NamelessFairy: Agree
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users