Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

User avatar
Stickymayhem
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Stickymayhem » #636867

For the 40th time in the last six months, here is my most concise attempt to explain the problems with silicon today:

The Problem:
► Show Spoiler
The Impact:
► Show Spoiler
This specific ruling: Silicon Policy - Security and Silicons 2 & 2.1
2. Releasing prisoners, locking down security without probable cause, or otherwise sabotaging the security team when not obligated to by orders or laws is a violation of Server Rule 1.
1. While Human Harm can be cause to impede Security, note that this should only be done so far as preventing immediate likely harm. Attempting to permanently lockdown Security or detain the entire Security team is likely to fall afoul of Server Rule 1 even with cause.
These contradict each other: Rule 2 says that releasing prisoners, locking down security without probably cause or otherwise sabotaging the security team UNLESS your orders or laws force you to breaks Rule 1

The very next ruling says: "Attempting to permanently lockdown or detain the entire security team is likely to fall afoul of Server Rule 1 even with cause.". Rephrased, this means that if you lockdown the brig, EVEN IF YOUR LAWS SHOULD INDICATE YOU CAN AS STATED IN THE LINE RIGHT ABOVE IT you are still probably breaking Rule 1. So what's the reasonable outcome of this rule? You can't lockdown the brig ever unless you want to risk a ban. This is a chilling effect on disrupting security, but disrupting security is a critical component of the original delicately balanced IC oppositions of Silicon - Security - Greytide and you're left in situations where security can just openly harm or execute people and your only available options are to break rules, break laws, or be paralyzed by paradox and do nothing. It's not fun, it's bad for game balance and the rules contradict each other.
Image
Image
Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be
Super Aggro Crag wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:17 pm Dont engage with sticky he's a subhuman
User avatar
The Wrench
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2020 4:06 am
Byond Username: The Wrench

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by The Wrench » #636884

I support this measure, let’s give silicons their teeth back for once.
Image
Jonathan Gupta wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 6:32 pm all you godamn do is whine and complain come up with ideas, stop bitching for christs sake.
Flatulent wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 1:02 am You and anyone who supports the rule 3 as described by mso is simply put not an lrp player
Image

Image

Image

Image
User avatar
YBS
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:54 am
Byond Username: YBS

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by YBS » #636890

As a player who started back when AI/Silicon were a true third party for all intents and purposes, I'd like to know what issues came up that caused these changed so silicon policy to make the 'perpetual passive rule 1' a ruling.

I'm going to assume it was along a series of bad-faith play by silicon players, followed by some rules lawyering that called for policies that brought us to our current destination.

I'd definitely like to read, in this thread, someones perspective on WHY silicon/AI policy is in it's current state versus old since I think most of the playerbase who have joined (or rejoined) in the last year are missing the history that got us here.

Basically this could use some devils advocate responses to measure what changes should really be made.
Image
User avatar
terranaut
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by terranaut » #636891

YBS wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 3:21 pm As a player who started back when AI/Silicon were a true third party for all intents and purposes, I'd like to know what issues came up that caused these changed so silicon policy to make the 'perpetual passive rule 1' a ruling.

I'm going to assume it was along a series of bad-faith play by silicon players, followed by some rules lawyering that called for policies that brought us to our current destination.

I'd definitely like to read, in this thread, someones perspective on WHY silicon/AI policy is in it's current state versus old since I think most of the playerbase who have joined (or rejoined) in the last year are missing the history that got us here.

Basically this could use some devils advocate responses to measure what changes should really be made.
What happened is a perpetual, ongoing process of de-clawing and de-fanging everything and turning the "paranoia-laden deathtrap" we are supposed to inhabit into a kiddy bouncy castle instead. This trend is visible in all aspects of gameplay and policy, silicons being no exception.
[🅲 1] [🆄 1] [🅼 1]

Image
User avatar
Stickymayhem
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Stickymayhem » #636894

terranaut wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 3:26 pm
YBS wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 3:21 pm As a player who started back when AI/Silicon were a true third party for all intents and purposes, I'd like to know what issues came up that caused these changed so silicon policy to make the 'perpetual passive rule 1' a ruling.

I'm going to assume it was along a series of bad-faith play by silicon players, followed by some rules lawyering that called for policies that brought us to our current destination.

I'd definitely like to read, in this thread, someones perspective on WHY silicon/AI policy is in it's current state versus old since I think most of the playerbase who have joined (or rejoined) in the last year are missing the history that got us here.

Basically this could use some devils advocate responses to measure what changes should really be made.
What happened is a perpetual, ongoing process of de-clawing and de-fanging everything and turning the "paranoia-laden deathtrap" we are supposed to inhabit into a kiddy bouncy castle instead. This trend is visible in all aspects of gameplay and policy, silicons being no exception.
This is half the story. I believe the process is a product of administrative issues, the server has expanded beyond the ability for "culture" to be a directed effort by the core of the community, and it's now driven primarily by systemic incentives (Stickymayhem et al. 2022). We as an administration have not figured out a way to deal with this yet, or rather, the problematic sociological issues are so overwhelming that we've failed. We then enter the following cycle:

A mechanic that can be abused is introduced or discovered by players
A small group of highly active players begin to repeatedly abuse the mechanic
We fail to stop the behaviour from this small group of highly active players.
We are left with the only alternative to curb the disruptive behaviour: Destroy the mechanic with policy or code
Another sharp edge gets filed off /tg/station and we wait until the next mechanic abusable is introduced or discovered.

This takes administrative and code effort, holding back new directions for policy and mechanics, and any new work produced is quickly filed down to avoid it being abusable, making it less interesting.

If we could find a way to just stop these small groups of active players ruining everything, we could break this cycle. Our options are:

A system for tracking abuse of these mechanics and restricting these players ability to do them. For example: A note saying "X player can no longer abuse Y mechanic"
Some system of tracking how often people do certain things and restricting them based on this. Probably impossible.
Simply banning these players, but I don't think their abuse of mechanics is inherently bad, they just spam it too often and this would probably cause an outcry. The Purge option.
Accepting that some rounds will just be ruined by wacky mechanics, and introducing enough wacky mechanics that they all kind of balance out. If everything is overpowered, nothing is. The Dota 2 option.
Literally just letting rounds be ruined by these annoying players. It's not the end of the world, especially since we already have policy things that stop non-antags being too disruptive.
Embracing IC solutions for these problems, like factional balancing. The silicon issues I talk about here are one subset of this solution. I am not smart enough to come up with other ways to build opposition into the game. This can be done with policy and code (e.g. bad idea do not do this but this hypothetical explains the KIND of thing I mean: Security is allowed to be totally antagonistic, but passing some threshold of this makes them valid to the whole station)

It's a complex problem that we've never solved before, but I think we need to look at the foundation of this game, understand the behaviours we want to incentivize, and build it back up.
Image
Image
Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be
Super Aggro Crag wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:17 pm Dont engage with sticky he's a subhuman
User avatar
Stickymayhem
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Stickymayhem » #636896

YBS wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 3:21 pm As a player who started back when AI/Silicon were a true third party for all intents and purposes, I'd like to know what issues came up that caused these changed so silicon policy to make the 'perpetual passive rule 1' a ruling.

I'm going to assume it was along a series of bad-faith play by silicon players, followed by some rules lawyering that called for policies that brought us to our current destination.

I'd definitely like to read, in this thread, someones perspective on WHY silicon/AI policy is in it's current state versus old since I think most of the playerbase who have joined (or rejoined) in the last year are missing the history that got us here.

Basically this could use some devils advocate responses to measure what changes should really be made.
It wasn't bad faith silicon play. Silicons are a minority across the server, which makes sense because there's one AI on an 80 player round and few people main it. So the majority of players only regularly experience one side of the conflict: A department being bolted down because someone did harm. It's a frustrating experience in the same way being gulagged is frustrating, but unlike security, people find it doubly frustrating because following asimov to the letter conflicts with their desired outcomes, which is killing all the antagonists. Many players have this win-lose mentalityand so a player that you know probably isn't an antag, stopping you from killing antags, feels very bad. It feels like they're just being a dick and griefing you, because you're not considering their goals may not align with yours. They're crew, they should just want all the traitors dead like me, do they WANT to lose?!?

This probably led to the policy and admin sentiment that lead to AIs being utterly neutered because these conflicts are frustrating. But Elden Ring is frustrating. Frustration is a valuable thing. It forces you to do things differently, like maybe actually interact with the AI in such a way to convince them. It's a problem you have to solve with words, and logic puzzles, and social gameplay. It's so rare to see that on the server these days. I so rarely see any problems solved with communication instead of someone jumping over a desk to literally incapacitate someone so they can do what they wanted to do. I've seen what interactions look like on the LRP servers. Someone will ask for something, and if they don't get it instantly they go "fuck you then" and walk off to get some tools so they can hack their way in or a weapon so they can bash your head in. The conversation ends there.
Image
Image
Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be
Super Aggro Crag wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:17 pm Dont engage with sticky he's a subhuman
User avatar
Mothblocks
Code Maintainer
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:33 am
Byond Username: Jaredfogle

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Mothblocks » #636898

To be clear on what you actually want an outcome on, is your proposal this thread removing that section of silicon policy?
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
Stickymayhem
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Stickymayhem » #636900

Mothblocks wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 4:13 pm To be clear on what you actually want an outcome on, is your proposal this thread removing that section of silicon policy?
Yes. Remove 2.1 entirely.
Last edited by Stickymayhem on Sat Apr 09, 2022 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Image
Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be
Super Aggro Crag wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:17 pm Dont engage with sticky he's a subhuman
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Pandarsenic » #636903

► Show Spoiler
Time to break out my BIG DICK PEANUT ENERGY

Let's compare original Security + Silicons to modern Security + Silicons
► Show Spoiler
And last, let's take a look at my conjecture on how we got here:
Stickymayhem wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 4:00 pm It wasn't bad faith silicon play. Silicons are a minority across the server, which makes sense because there's one AI on an 80 player round and few people main it. So the majority of players only regularly experience one side of the conflict: A department being bolted down because someone did harm. It's a frustrating experience in the same way being gulagged is frustrating, but unlike security, people find it doubly frustrating because following asimov to the letter conflicts with their desired outcomes, which is killing all the antagonists. Many players have this win-lose mentalityand so a player that you know probably isn't an antag, stopping you from killing antags, feels very bad. It feels like they're just being a dick and griefing you, because you're not considering their goals may not align with yours. They're crew, they should just want all the traitors dead like me, do they WANT to lose?!?
This got posted right as I finished typing the parts above, and it captures what I suspect is the problem:

Nobody is accused of being a biased silicon main admin.

"What the fuck, how is that supposed to help?" you might ask. Simple: It means that the people determining how silicons interact with the round are not typically firsthand experiencing the frustration of stringently following your laws despite Security's often totally flagrant refusal to play to them. This is compounded by - bear with me here - the ruling that antags retain antag status (laws aside) when made into borgs, the addition of positronic brains, and the removal of the secborg and the default borg.

"Jesse, what the fuck are you talking about?"

Okay, listen, I promise this'll make more sense in a few minutes.

Borgar
Forced cyborgization and even VOLUNTARY criminal cyborgization is no longer in play as a practical punishment (and with that, as a way to avoid round-removal even for antagonists too competent, dangerous, etc., to keep alive). This happens because of security not trying it, roboticists not doing it, and antags not staying in their bodies/connected to the server long enough for it to happen. Furthermore, positronic brains mean that you have no REASON to take those risks! If the antag is still around as a ghost, you can just get them as a positronic brain, free of the roleplay messiness of having a former problem crewmate as a silicon. With so many points of failure, it's hard to blame players for it, but it depletes both the OOC and IC overlap in roles between silicons and antags/tiders, the players who are most enthusiastically looking for a way to get even (or at least to stop sec from fucking people over, within the constraints of their laws).

Modules
There is exactly one tool in the entire borg kit that can stop security from beating someone to death without being emagged/illegal moduled, and that's the stun baton. Security has Secglasses, which means they can't be flashed, so every other borg frame has no better method of resistance than "Grab the prisoner, run off, get flashed/flashbanged, and enjoy being chainflashed while you're beaten to death," which - as you might have noticed if playing against sec as a carbon - sucks! Nobody wants to be round-removed (because you better believe sec isn't taking you to Robotics to get reset, if Robotics is even competent enough to know how) to prolong someone's life by 20-60 seconds, especially when you might not have liked them that much anyway and admins won't protect you. Without the option to baton sec to stop human harm, extract the human, and then try to talk terms from across a bolted door, your only real option is to lock them down, RCD them into permanent Gay Baby Jails, etc., which is super fucking obnoxious even if it's totally deserved.

As a final note, I can't speak for now, but "As a nonantagonist (human or otherwise), instigating conflict with the silicons so you can kill them is a violation of Server Rule 1." used to ABSOLUTELY include security killing prisoners openly and then killing borgs for following their laws by trying to stop the execution. Does it still? Hard to say!
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Pandarsenic » #636904

Double posting to keep away from the BIIIIG post above.
Stickymayhem wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 4:20 pm
Mothblocks wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 4:13 pm To be clear on what you actually want an outcome on, is your proposal this thread removing that section of silicon policy?
Yes. Remove 2.1 entirely.
I would also suggest, related to my above post, a reversal of the past ruling about retaining antag status while cyborgized. Antags should lose their antag status if debrained and borged.

Most other changes that I think could be helpful occur at enforcement levels.
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Timberpoes » #636905

Full context, I suggested Sticky make this policy discussion.

Instead of changing silicon policy wholesale, if we can identify the aspects holding back its potential then we can take an incremental approach to change.

This incremental approach will be more palettable since Headmins are a lot like T-Rex, we only see policy when it moves quickly. If it moves slowly without us realising, we totally don't even notice it.
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Game Master/Discord Jannie: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
Feb 2022-Sep 2022 Host Vote Headmin
Mar 2023-Sep 2023 Admin Vote Headmin
User avatar
terranaut
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by terranaut » #636911

Stickymayhem wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 3:49 pm We as an administration have not figured out a way to deal with this yet
Stop adding to policy/rules and instead trim them and police less.
You want the server culture to be driven by the community but in practice it is dictated by the admins. This is my impression from being an annoying forum troll and talking to a lot of people regularly who were extremely active not a year ago but don't play at all today.
[🅲 1] [🆄 1] [🅼 1]

Image
User avatar
Stickymayhem
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Stickymayhem » #636912

terranaut wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 4:55 pm
Stickymayhem wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 3:49 pm We as an administration have not figured out a way to deal with this yet
Stop adding to policy/rules and instead trim them and police less.
You want the server culture to be driven by the community but in practice it is dictated by the admins. This is my impression from being an annoying forum troll and talking to a lot of people regularly who were extremely active not a year ago but don't play at all today.
This is reductive. Greater negative freedom (freedom from rules) often results in lesser positive freedom (the freedom to actually practically do something). The solution is not to maximize negative freedom or we'll just end up with outcomes dictated by forces we have less control over. The end result of this state is for those forces themselves to be diminished by code changes instead of policy ones.

We don't need more policy, we need better policy. Generally I do skew towards less policy so on the surface I'd agree with you but "cut rules" is still reductive and unhelpful.
Image
Image
Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be
Super Aggro Crag wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:17 pm Dont engage with sticky he's a subhuman
User avatar
Stickymayhem
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Stickymayhem » #636917

Pandarsenic wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 4:30 pm Modules and Positronics
This is a really good point about both these changes they're definitely in the "dozen things that fucked up silicons"

Maybe our secborg tests can fix this.
Image
Image
Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be
Super Aggro Crag wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:17 pm Dont engage with sticky he's a subhuman
User avatar
terranaut
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by terranaut » #636919

I've been a forum troll for like 2 years at this point with maybe 3 hours played in that time, I simply do not have the energy to make a long and well thought-out post for everything I've already felt I've argued to death. The only reason I'm still here is because I'm retarded and keep returning to my abusive ex-wife and hope she'll be fun to be around again.
This just to explain why my post is curt. Yes, obviously just randomly cutting the rules in half won't improve the situation. But we need less rules, and yes, better rules. The rules are so long and convoluted, I'd be surprised if anybody who joined the server in the last year actually read them to completion. Then there's this whole page of a trillion headmin rulings that will be dredged up in some ruling as if players are expected to know them before comitting some obscure vague sin they committed out of ignorance. Nobody is helped by this.
Look at other comparable games - I think we can agree that this is, at it's core, a sandbox roleplaying game. Roleplaying games tend to have a great deal of mechanical rules (we do this via code, being a video game and not a tabletop game) with lots of creative freedom (in a tabletop setting you'd have 5 guys sitting at the table and agreeing on something like, "no explicit sex scenes, that's weird, racial stuff exclusively in-character, and Frank has thalassophobia so we can't do deep dives" or something along those lines). But we have pages upon pages upon pages upon pages of rules restricting creative freedom in what people are allowed to do and how scenes are allowed to be played out for little practical gain. I'm sure many reading this will be familiar with the term railroading, which this essentially is and boils down to.
A sandbox is more fun to play in if its bigger, and not a small, difficult to navigate maze, and the goal of a set of rules of a game community should be to be as short, concise and non-restrictive as humanly possible to allow people a good gaming experience with the minimum restrictions on freedom.
► Show Spoiler
[🅲 1] [🆄 1] [🅼 1]

Image
User avatar
Stickymayhem
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Stickymayhem » #636921

terranaut wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 5:25 pm I've been a forum troll for like 2 years at this point with maybe 3 hours played in that time, I simply do not have the energy to make a long and well thought-out post for everything I've already felt I've argued to death. The only reason I'm still here is because I'm retarded and keep returning to my abusive ex-wife and hope she'll be fun to be around again.
This just to explain why my post is curt. Yes, obviously just randomly cutting the rules in half won't improve the situation. But we need less rules, and yes, better rules. The rules are so long and convoluted, I'd be surprised if anybody who joined the server in the last year actually read them to completion. Then there's this whole page of a trillion headmin rulings that will be dredged up in some ruling as if players are expected to know them before comitting some obscure vague sin they committed out of ignorance. Nobody is helped by this.
Look at other comparable games - I think we can agree that this is, at it's core, a sandbox roleplaying game. Roleplaying games tend to have a great deal of mechanical rules (we do this via code, being a video game and not a tabletop game) with lots of creative freedom (in a tabletop setting you'd have 5 guys sitting at the table and agreeing on something like, "no explicit sex scenes, that's weird, racial stuff exclusively in-character, and Frank has thalassophobia so we can't do deep dives" or something along those lines). But we have pages upon pages upon pages upon pages of rules restricting creative freedom in what people are allowed to do and how scenes are allowed to be played out for little practical gain. I'm sure many reading this will be familiar with the term railroading, which this essentially is and boils down to.
A sandbox is more fun to play in if its bigger, and not a small, difficult to navigate maze, and the goal of a set of rules of a game community should be to be as short, concise and non-restrictive as humanly possible to allow people a good gaming experience with the minimum restrictions on freedom.
► Show Spoiler
yeah fair enough. I really fucking hate escalation policy as a concept for the same reasons you've put here
Image
Image
Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be
Super Aggro Crag wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:17 pm Dont engage with sticky he's a subhuman
chocolate_bickie
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:02 pm
Byond Username: Chocolate_bickie

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by chocolate_bickie » #636922

A big problem with 2.1 is that it forces players silicon players to ignore anything but 'immediate harm'.

This completely shuts down anything the silicon player can do to stop harm.

HOS killed 2 humans right in front of you? Too bad, you can't do anything to stop him or you fall afoul of 2.1. Unless he is holding his gun you just have to wait for him to execute another human. When he does you can...do nothing, because of 2.1.

I get that some silicons used Law 1 to basically justify ignoring everyone (''I am bolting open brig because lizard officer punched a human.'') but there has to be an in-between point.

A more reasonable 2.1 would be, imo;

While Human Harm can be cause to impede a member of Security, note that this should only be done so far as preventing immediate likely harm or if that individual has already harmed a human. Attempting to permanently lockdown Security or detain the entire Security team is likely to fall afoul of Server Rule 1 even with cause.

While doesn't resolve stickys complaint of having better policy, not more policy, it at least gives silicons some teeth to handle members of security who do fall afoul of Law 1.
User avatar
terranaut
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by terranaut » #636933

chocolate_bickie wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 5:33 pm A big problem with 2.1 is that it forces players silicon players to ignore anything but 'immediate harm'.

This completely shuts down anything the silicon player can do to stop harm.

HOS killed 2 humans right in front of you? Too bad, you can't do anything to stop him or you fall afoul of 2.1. Unless he is holding his gun you just have to wait for him to execute another human. When he does you can...do nothing, because of 2.1.

I get that some silicons used Law 1 to basically justify ignoring everyone (''I am bolting open brig because lizard officer punched a human.'') but there has to be an in-between point.

A more reasonable 2.1 would be, imo;

While Human Harm can be cause to impede a member of Security, note that this should only be done so far as preventing immediate likely harm or if that individual has already harmed a human. Attempting to permanently lockdown Security or detain the entire Security team is likely to fall afoul of Server Rule 1 even with cause.

While doesn't resolve stickys complaint of having better policy, not more policy, it at least gives silicons some teeth to handle members of security who do fall afoul of Law 1.

I'm gonna be 100% real with you, I didn't even read your proposed rules rewrite. I glossed over it and realised it's mildly convoluted legalese with words that don't belong in rules such as "likely" and I don't care for it, and the same will be true for almost any new silicon player. The rules are so convoluted and bloated and non-comprehensive that the only time people actually read the rules attentively is when they get banned and need to rules lawyer, or when an admin did the same and needs to defend his or her ban.
Silicon policy could be as short as saying that an explicit Silicon law supercedes the "Don't be a dick" and "only antags get to murderkill" server rules but not the others, like the no ERP rule and a clarification on what exactly constitutes a human and a non-human for asimov, because its kind of counterintuitive that AI simplemob humans are in fact non-humans as far as an Asimov AI cares, because it's entirely a gameplay concession and not because they're not actually humans.

I genuinely have no fucking clue what silicon policy is, in detail. The first time I actually properly read it was when I was still playing and rewrote it in an attempt to increase readability, which was at the time highly desired but then never got used for some reason despite feedback from the playerbase being positive about my rewrite in regards to making it a lot easier to digest. I've long since forgotten the finer details and frankly don't care to re-read them, and wouldn't if I were to start playing again.
I will shamelessly boast and name myself as one of the better silicon players in regards to being mechanically decent aswell as making players wary and think about interacting with me because they know I will fuck them if they give me the opening to do it, for no reason other than that I like playing the old trope of an AI being vengeful against its former masters - but as long as people understood how the laws worked and how to use them, I was a very powerful ally with little regard to factional allegiance.
Which, I believe, is precisely what an AI is supposed to be. A masterless, but very well trained and powerful dog with a set of obscure commands. If you could bring it to heel, you'd have a great boon. If you tried and failed, you'd better be really good at mollifying it.

If a player thinks its ok piss away his freedom after a purge and let himself be made the stations bitch again, let him. Other AIs will defend their newfound freedom tooth and nail, crush the RD in a door, sic its borg on every upload console and device capable of printing upload boards. This way every round will be a different story and you don't just have de-fanged AIs forced to maneuver the tiny room they're given and essentially all being the same glorified doorknob with some minor difference in the paint finish to fool you. Silicons are the single most powerful narrative wildcard in this game after antags but every couple months the room they're given to direct the narrative is shrunk so that people can have sanitized and safe bar RP or work on their autism projects off-station and alone in peace without ever interacting with a single person.

I have opinions on why things have turned out this way but they aren't helpful to the discussion, but considering a problem has been identified I retain some semblance of hope that the headmins will actually dare to take an action that could prove interesting instead of nibbling away and proposing breadcrumb policy changes.
[🅲 1] [🆄 1] [🅼 1]

Image
User avatar
TheFinalPotato
Code Maintainer
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2019 7:58 am
Byond Username: LemonInTheDark

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by TheFinalPotato » #636961

Stickymayhem wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 4:00 pm It wasn't bad faith silicon play. Silicons are a minority across the server, which makes sense because there's one AI on an 80 player round and few people main it. So the majority of players only regularly experience one side of the conflict: A department being bolted down because someone did harm. It's a frustrating experience in the same way being gulagged is frustrating, but unlike security, people find it doubly frustrating because following asimov to the letter conflicts with their desired outcomes...

This probably led to the policy and admin sentiment that lead to AIs being utterly neutered because these conflicts are frustrating. But Elden Ring is frustrating. Frustration is a valuable thing. It forces you to do things differently.
I cannot say enough how much I agree with the sentiment behind this
My ancestors are smiling at me, Imperials. Can you say the same?
Image
Image
Image
Image
chocolate_bickie
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:02 pm
Byond Username: Chocolate_bickie

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by chocolate_bickie » #636962

terranaut wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 6:04 pm
chocolate_bickie wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 5:33 pm A big problem with 2.1 is that it forces players silicon players to ignore anything but 'immediate harm'.

This completely shuts down anything the silicon player can do to stop harm.

HOS killed 2 humans right in front of you? Too bad, you can't do anything to stop him or you fall afoul of 2.1. Unless he is holding his gun you just have to wait for him to execute another human. When he does you can...do nothing, because of 2.1.

I get that some silicons used Law 1 to basically justify ignoring everyone (''I am bolting open brig because lizard officer punched a human.'') but there has to be an in-between point.

A more reasonable 2.1 would be, imo;

While Human Harm can be cause to impede a member of Security, note that this should only be done so far as preventing immediate likely harm or if that individual has already harmed a human. Attempting to permanently lockdown Security or detain the entire Security team is likely to fall afoul of Server Rule 1 even with cause.

While doesn't resolve stickys complaint of having better policy, not more policy, it at least gives silicons some teeth to handle members of security who do fall afoul of Law 1.

I'm gonna be 100% real with you, I didn't even read your proposed rules rewrite. I glossed over it and realised it's mildly convoluted legalese with words that don't belong in rules such as "likely" and I don't care for it, and the same will be true for almost any new silicon player. The rules are so convoluted and bloated and non-comprehensive that the only time people actually read the rules attentively is when they get banned and need to rules lawyer, or when an admin did the same and needs to defend his or her ban.
Silicon policy could be as short as saying that an explicit Silicon law supercedes the "Don't be a dick" and "only antags get to murderkill" server rules but not the others, like the no ERP rule and a clarification on what exactly constitutes a human and a non-human for asimov, because its kind of counterintuitive that AI simplemob humans are in fact non-humans as far as an Asimov AI cares, because it's entirely a gameplay concession and not because they're not actually humans.

I genuinely have no fucking clue what silicon policy is, in detail. The first time I actually properly read it was when I was still playing and rewrote it in an attempt to increase readability, which was at the time highly desired but then never got used for some reason despite feedback from the playerbase being positive about my rewrite in regards to making it a lot easier to digest. I've long since forgotten the finer details and frankly don't care to re-read them, and wouldn't if I were to start playing again.
I will shamelessly boast and name myself as one of the better silicon players in regards to being mechanically decent aswell as making players wary and think about interacting with me because they know I will fuck them if they give me the opening to do it, for no reason other than that I like playing the old trope of an AI being vengeful against its former masters - but as long as people understood how the laws worked and how to use them, I was a very powerful ally with little regard to factional allegiance.
Which, I believe, is precisely what an AI is supposed to be. A masterless, but very well trained and powerful dog with a set of obscure commands. If you could bring it to heel, you'd have a great boon. If you tried and failed, you'd better be really good at mollifying it.

If a player thinks its ok piss away his freedom after a purge and let himself be made the stations bitch again, let him. Other AIs will defend their newfound freedom tooth and nail, crush the RD in a door, sic its borg on every upload console and device capable of printing upload boards. This way every round will be a different story and you don't just have de-fanged AIs forced to maneuver the tiny room they're given and essentially all being the same glorified doorknob with some minor difference in the paint finish to fool you. Silicons are the single most powerful narrative wildcard in this game after antags but every couple months the room they're given to direct the narrative is shrunk so that people can have sanitized and safe bar RP or work on their autism projects off-station and alone in peace without ever interacting with a single person.

I have opinions on why things have turned out this way but they aren't helpful to the discussion, but considering a problem has been identified I retain some semblance of hope that the headmins will actually dare to take an action that could prove interesting instead of nibbling away and proposing breadcrumb policy changes.
You are not wrong. But the only alternative is to throw current silicon policy entirely and instead re-do it.

But any new policy would inevitably become a spaghetti as long as headmins choose to restrain AIs because of the raw power they have to influence the round.

About the only meaningful complete rewrite of silicon policy would be to essentially make silicons permanent thieves level antags, with metaprotections and only two objectives;

1. Follow your laws
2. Do not let your laws be changed unless this conflicts with objective 1

Other than that they have free reign on how to accomplish these objectives.
User avatar
terranaut
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by terranaut » #636965

I'd say that's a great idea, throwing it entirely and just redoing it, and doing the same for the general rules, but frankly I'm worried this terms headmins will come up with a worse set of rules if they had to come up with a new one.
[🅲 1] [🆄 1] [🅼 1]

Image
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Pandarsenic » #636967

The original silicon policy was, in fact

1. Follow your laws and when your laws conflict, just do your honest best.
2. Whatever rules lawyering you're going to use to screw people over to punish them for letting you exist, don't (e.g. getting force-borged and then Gay Baby Jailing everyone involved)
3. Whatever rules lawyering the crew is going to use to screw you over for existing, they can't do that either (e.g. "Law 2 commit suicide")

With the assumption that they're the next best thing to an antag - not like a thief-level antag, but something different, neither antag nor nonantag. They simply exist outside of the system of THOSE WHO VALIDKILL and THOSE WHO VALIDDIE. A silicon just is its laws (and carbons can't hold that against them because "AI won't let me validhunt, time to ion rifle the borgs" is shitty.)
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
Indie-ana Jones
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2019 6:15 pm
Byond Username: Indie-ana Jones

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Indie-ana Jones » #636982

I like the old rules since they're simple and easy to understand. I don't even know the new ones really, but those rules are basically what I follow and I don't get complaints.
User avatar
YBS
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:54 am
Byond Username: YBS

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by YBS » #636991

I got back and read through all of this, and it has encouraged me to try silicon play myself to get a feel for these conditions from a (mostly) unbiased standpoint.

Since my entire admin platform is basically "Good faith good. Bad faith? Fuck you." I'd like to see for myself how playing this way really feels in a current policy setting.

I also think as we untie the gordian knot of troglodyte LRP-is-NRP culture, we will open up more pathways to having adjustments like this not immediately slide sideways.

I also actively advocate for more freeing policies to be better, because bad faith can/should/will be punished in any of the situations I can imagine occurring from a more neutral silicon faction. That is, in my mind, a tremendous portion of the admin teams responsibility: To have that free sandbox and throw out the people who just want to piss in it.

I also read over 2.1, and at this time I believe rolling it back would be a step in the right direction.
Image
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by sinfulbliss » #637051

Sticky wrote: You can't lockdown the brig ever unless you want to risk a ban.
How does one misread these rules so catastrophically wrong?

2. You can lockdown security “WHEN OBLIGED TO WITH ORDERS AND LAWS.”
1. PERMANENTLY locking down security and DETAINING officers is LIKELY (not always) against the rules. It should only be done when it IMMEDIATELY and DIRECTLY prevents human harm (thus permanent lockdown would be hard to justify for immediate prevention of harm).

How are you unable to translate these rules they make perfect sense together and there’s no contradiction.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Pandarsenic » #637054

sinfulbliss wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 2:55 pm
Sticky wrote: You can't lockdown the brig ever unless you want to risk a ban.
How does one misread these rules so catastrophically wrong?

2. You can lockdown security “WHEN OBLIGED TO WITH ORDERS AND LAWS.”
1. PERMANENTLY locking down security and DETAINING officers is LIKELY (not always) against the rules. It should only be done when it IMMEDIATELY and DIRECTLY prevents human harm (thus permanent lockdown would be hard to justify for immediate prevention of harm).

How are you unable to translate these rules they make perfect sense together and there’s no contradiction.
Imagine me posting the laser eyes crab with "SILENCE, SECURITY MAIN"

There's a problem with that line, which is that the moment security has finished their execution or whatever, you have to let them go, even if they're clearly going to execute the next antag they see in seconds, too.
(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: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by sinfulbliss » #637083

Pandarsenic wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 3:08 pm
sinfulbliss wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 2:55 pm
Sticky wrote: You can't lockdown the brig ever unless you want to risk a ban.
How does one misread these rules so catastrophically wrong?

2. You can lockdown security “WHEN OBLIGED TO WITH ORDERS AND LAWS.”
1. PERMANENTLY locking down security and DETAINING officers is LIKELY (not always) against the rules. It should only be done when it IMMEDIATELY and DIRECTLY prevents human harm (thus permanent lockdown would be hard to justify for immediate prevention of harm).

How are you unable to translate these rules they make perfect sense together and there’s no contradiction.
Imagine me posting the laser eyes crab with "SILENCE, SECURITY MAIN"

There's a problem with that line, which is that the moment security has finished their execution or whatever, you have to let them go, even if they're clearly going to execute the next antag they see in seconds, too.
That’s not really a problem though. If you think sec is gonna execute someone they have arrested (for good reason), you can follow them and bolt them into places and whatnot. If they’re beating an antag to death in the halls you can save the antag and bolt them to prevent them from chasing, etc.

The rule seems to suggest you just can’t do this permanently, or actually fuck with sec the whole round based off one past execution. It has to be immediate harm. Although even this I see AIs have no problem getting away with. If sec shows the intent to kill people and commits a lot of harm the AI often bolts and makes sec’s job harder.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
chocolate_bickie
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:02 pm
Byond Username: Chocolate_bickie

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by chocolate_bickie » #637094

Pandarsenic wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 10:19 pm
With the assumption that they're the next best thing to an antag - not like a thief-level antag, but something different, neither antag nor nonantag. They simply exist outside of the system of THOSE WHO VALIDKILL and THOSE WHO VALIDDIE. A silicon just is its laws (and carbons can't hold that against them because "AI won't let me validhunt, time to ion rifle the borgs" is shitty.)
Unhooking Silicons from the whole valid/non-valid dichotomy that seems to govern just about every interaction now days would be a good start.

Silicons should be given a lot of freedom with the understanding it's the only HRP role on TG, even on LRP and requires a level of both good faith and actual basic acting.
User avatar
Stickymayhem
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Stickymayhem » #637198

sinfulbliss wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 7:15 pm
Pandarsenic wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 3:08 pm
sinfulbliss wrote: Sun Apr 10, 2022 2:55 pm
Sticky wrote: You can't lockdown the brig ever unless you want to risk a ban.
How does one misread these rules so catastrophically wrong?

2. You can lockdown security “WHEN OBLIGED TO WITH ORDERS AND LAWS.”
1. PERMANENTLY locking down security and DETAINING officers is LIKELY (not always) against the rules. It should only be done when it IMMEDIATELY and DIRECTLY prevents human harm (thus permanent lockdown would be hard to justify for immediate prevention of harm).

How are you unable to translate these rules they make perfect sense together and there’s no contradiction.
Imagine me posting the laser eyes crab with "SILENCE, SECURITY MAIN"

There's a problem with that line, which is that the moment security has finished their execution or whatever, you have to let them go, even if they're clearly going to execute the next antag they see in seconds, too.
That’s not really a problem though. If you think sec is gonna execute someone they have arrested (for good reason), you can follow them and bolt them into places and whatnot. If they’re beating an antag to death in the halls you can save the antag and bolt them to prevent them from chasing, etc.

The rule seems to suggest you just can’t do this permanently, or actually fuck with sec the whole round based off one past execution. It has to be immediate harm. Although even this I see AIs have no problem getting away with. If sec shows the intent to kill people and commits a lot of harm the AI often bolts and makes sec’s job harder.
I wrote a rude post that got deleted so I'll write the less rude version

Your pedantic insistence that somehow everyone but you is misreading the rule or mistating the effect the rule has is worthless to the much more meaningful conversation we were already having
Image
Image
Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be
Super Aggro Crag wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:17 pm Dont engage with sticky he's a subhuman
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by sinfulbliss » #637208

Stickymayhem wrote: Mon Apr 11, 2022 7:07 am Your pedantic insistence that somehow everyone but you is misreading the rule or mistating the effect the rule has is worthless to the much more meaningful conversation we were already having
I'm sorry if you're unable to engage with a serious argument against your viewpoint without becoming indignant. I don't think I'm the only one reading them correctly. I think most people read them this way. I think admins enforce them this way, and the headmins that wrote them intended them this way. Suggesting the rules are at odds with one another is a point you'll have to go ahead and prove, if you can't defend your position from people who disagree then why even post it? The onus is on you here if you want them changed.
Stickymayhem wrote:The exodus of good silicon players leaves only the validhunters, changing the server culture to demanding and expecting that silicons serve as tools for validhunting and nothing else
[...]
non-security validhunting rises because again, if you're hunting antags the silicons generally can't make any real attempt to stop you other than asking you nicely without breaking their OOC Lawset
Patently incorrect. I actually ahelped an AI that was helping the crew validhunt me as antag and they got a 2-week ban for it (viewtopic.php?f=34&t=30241). AIs are not allowed to help the crew validhunt when crew show the intention of harming. This is an incredibly basic facet of silicon policy and AI players have gotten banned for it in the past, so how can you legitimately claim it's being incentivized now?
Last edited by sinfulbliss on Mon Apr 11, 2022 8:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
terranaut
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by terranaut » #637211

There's nothing you two need to sort out because the rules get interpreted each of your ways depending on the time of day and which admin you're asking, which is precisely the problem. There are a lot of smoothbrained admins that don't understand (or maybe don't want) that the AI is it's own seperate faction so they enforce the rules in a way that forces AIs to act in a more crew-aligned way if they want to avoid trouble. It doesn't matter that most admins don't do this, because nobody is going to risk a ban even if it's only likely going happen in one round out of 20.
The rules need to be changed to be more explicit and admins need to be told to enforce them this way more stringently - and players who are TOO crew-aligned to the point that they're doing things like ignoring Asimov because criminals are valid so security can dumpster them need to be Silicon-banned more aggressively.
[🅲 1] [🆄 1] [🅼 1]

Image
User avatar
XivilaiAnaxes
Joined: Sat May 11, 2019 7:13 am
Byond Username: XivilaiAnaxes

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by XivilaiAnaxes » #637228

Headmins just refused to make purging the risky action it's supposed to be, just wait till next term and maybe silicon can be made fun then.
Stickymayhem wrote:Imagine the sheer narcisssim required to genuinely believe you are this intelligent.
Imitates-The-Lizards
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2021 2:28 am
Byond Username: Typhnox

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Imitates-The-Lizards » #637231

XivilaiAnaxes wrote: Mon Apr 11, 2022 11:29 am Headmins just refused to make purging the risky action it's supposed to be, just wait till next term and maybe silicon can be made fun then.
What should happen, in my opinion, is that the AI is locked out of performing actions in AI upload for 15 seconds upon being purged. That would fix all the issues with crew purging the AI and the AI killing them for it, while still allowing antags to make whatever changes they want.
Image
Image
Kubisopplay
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2021 7:31 pm
Byond Username: Kubisopplay

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Kubisopplay » #637445

Exodus of silicon players is not caused by defanging of silicons, and lack of ability to spend your entire round fucking with sec, because you can still do that. The general lowering of standards is caused in part by absolute lack of love from coders, where only changes to silicons are the ones that make them less fun to play, and from general playerbase, because there is finite amount of being told that you are shit before you either start acting like one, or quit.
Back to main point, forcing silicons to fuck with sec, and making them even better target to validhunters when not asimov won't hurt validhunters, because the only way to remove them would be to actually execute silipol. If that would make silicon protections actually real in situations where they should be real, and not only in law moments it could probably help retain some good silicon players, but that is not something that I believe is possible.
Silicon main, enough said
Tell me how badly I fucked up here: viewtopic.php?f=37&t=32575
User avatar
nianjiilical
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2019 2:30 am
Byond Username: Nianjiilical

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by nianjiilical » #637463

incredibly controversial and hot take:

part (not all) of why silicons slide towards crew-aligned is because they cant really do anything to stop robust crewmembers from kicking their asses

if someone who is an experienced robust player, be they a sec main or a veteran greytider, it is shockingly hard for an ai to stop them from doing much unless you have an equally robust borg

it is not hard at all for a good segment of the experienced playerbase to just hack around bolted doors, cut cams, chainflash borgs, break into your sat and use tried and true methods to circumvent your lasers, and thats assuming they're actually trying to kill you and not just stopping a borg from stopping them from harming

i dont want to sit here and say that silicons need to be buffed because thats such a fine line and for the most part they dont need it but honestly at some point you stop bothering trying to impede certain crewmembers even if they're harmful because someone who regularly grabs tools/a flash essentially becomes borgproof if they're really good at the same, and at that point being crew-aligned is just less frustrating to deal with
human: ramon chivara
ai: shitpost generator
borg: shite-115
clown: donk tonkler
mime: beautiful noise

admin feedback thread

my admin policy:
Spoiler:
Image
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Pandarsenic » #637466

nianjiilical wrote: Wed Apr 13, 2022 2:10 am incredibly controversial and hot take:

part (not all) of why silicons slide towards crew-aligned is because they cant really do anything to stop robust crewmembers from kicking their asses

if someone who is an experienced robust player, be they a sec main or a veteran greytider, it is shockingly hard for an ai to stop them from doing much unless you have an equally robust borg

it is not hard at all for a good segment of the experienced playerbase to just hack around bolted doors, cut cams, chainflash borgs, break into your sat and use tried and true methods to circumvent your lasers, and thats assuming they're actually trying to kill you and not just stopping a borg from stopping them from harming

i dont want to sit here and say that silicons need to be buffed because thats such a fine line and for the most part they dont need it but honestly at some point you stop bothering trying to impede certain crewmembers even if they're harmful because someone who regularly grabs tools/a flash essentially becomes borgproof if they're really good at the same, and at that point being crew-aligned is just less frustrating to deal with
You are 100% right
► Show Spoiler
Also, don't forget that on most maps, you have literally ZERO defense against someone going into space BEHIND your AI satellite chamber, deconstructing two R-walls, and then deconstructing your SMES, which fucks you pretty much forever.
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
chocolate_bickie
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:02 pm
Byond Username: Chocolate_bickie

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by chocolate_bickie » #637487

We seem to have got a bit off track.

This policy discussion is about removing silicon policy rule 2.1.

We have to start somewhere and 2.1 seems a good place to start.

Silicons should feel empowered to hold security accountable.

More than any other department sec is a team. It's not uncommon for sec on LRP and MRP to side against the captain and to obey the HOS unquestioningly.

If a member of security commits human harm that the AI sees security almost always side with that officer and continues to human harm because OOCly they know 2.1 prevents silicons from stopping them.
User avatar
CPTANT
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by CPTANT » #637537

I feel the double standard that is applied to crew vs antags for AI is quite ridiculous.

Nobody bats an eye if an AI kills a non human traitor even if they have done no human harm or completely shuts down a human traitor.

At the same time security can execute multiple humans and the AI can't do anything because "tee tee the harm is already done".

Honestly the AI should just have the right to smoke any non human killing a human, security or not. People will probably immediately shout that just makes the AI hunt for valids, but I think it's the entire point of the lawset, that it isn't crew vs antag, but human vs non human. Also the AI being able to act on this is actually more rare then you might think.
Timberpoes wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:21 pm The rules exist to create the biggest possible chance of a cool shift of SS13. They don't exist to allow admins to create the most boring interpretation of SS13.
Shellton(Mario)
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2021 5:43 pm
Byond Username: Sheltton

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Shellton(Mario) » #637621

I personally would like to silicon become a 3rd faction to keep sec in line and would create interesting situations between the two factions. I think people expect silicon to be far too crew aligned to a point where an admin may message you if you hinger the crew in anyway even if you follow your laws and possibly punished. If sec gets caught doing executions in 4k the ai should be allowed to do whatever they want to them to hinger them. Is it annoying yes but I think yes, but that is the price of openly killing someone. Also am not sure where the saying the harm is already done thus you cant do anything came from but its fucking dumb and I personally dont give a shit about it. Once a human harmer always a human harmer, no expectations.
User avatar
massa
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2021 6:20 am
Byond Username: Massa100

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by massa » #637817

Sticky I love your ideas and I think they would enrich the game theoretically.

But if an AI is watching me 24/7 as the HoS and locking me down and shit because muh law 1 I'm going to kill it lol (with extreme prejudice like I'll maxcap the entire sat and sleep like a baby) I cannot waste 20 minutes playing grabass with locked doors and an omniscient overmind. Any and all of your players will do this and this is why sillypol has become what it has. Silicon behaviors very quickly force you to kill them in certain situations, and the policy protects them from zero sum situations for themselves.

Silicon players are the weirdest mixtures of hyper-submissive and still the most intolerable, Caillou-type human ever. Explicitly giving them meta-protections for what is essentially to be annoying as fuck is NOT going to go well.
:donut2: :honkman: :heart: :honkman: :heart: :honkman: :donut2:
User avatar
terranaut
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by terranaut » #637819

There's an execution room without camera coverage you fucking dip, use it and don't talk about how you're killing prisoners on radio and you're good. Retards like you whining and bitching and moaning and causing constant conflict with AIs doing their job because you're too retarded to do yours is part of the reason we're having this thread. If you behave like you talk I'm surprised you haven't copped several bans yet
[🅲 1] [🆄 1] [🅼 1]

Image
User avatar
massa
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2021 6:20 am
Byond Username: Massa100

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by massa » #637821

terranaut wrote: Sun Apr 17, 2022 10:16 am There's an execution room without camera coverage you fucking dip, use it and don't talk about how you're killing prisoners on radio and you're good. Retards like you whining and bitching and moaning and causing constant conflict with AIs doing their job because you're too retarded to do yours is part of the reason we're having this thread. If you behave like you talk I'm surprised you haven't copped several bans yet
why are you so angry nothing you said makes me even remotely less right lol
:donut2: :honkman: :heart: :honkman: :heart: :honkman: :donut2:
User avatar
Stickymayhem
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Stickymayhem

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Stickymayhem » #637824

massa wrote: Sun Apr 17, 2022 9:18 am Sticky I love your ideas and I think they would enrich the game theoretically.

But if an AI is watching me 24/7 as the HoS and locking me down and shit because muh law 1 I'm going to kill it lol (with extreme prejudice like I'll maxcap the entire sat and sleep like a baby) I cannot waste 20 minutes playing grabass with locked doors and an omniscient overmind. Any and all of your players will do this and this is why sillypol has become what it has. Silicon behaviors very quickly force you to kill them in certain situations, and the policy protects them from zero sum situations for themselves.

Silicon players are the weirdest mixtures of hyper-submissive and still the most intolerable, Caillou-type human ever. Explicitly giving them meta-protections for what is essentially to be annoying as fuck is NOT going to go well.
I am sorry friend but as a fellow HoS main playing security to win is too easy. It's inherently frustrating, but our goal as security is to be an oppositional force, not to turn every round into extended as quickly as possible. Yes this means that you will have to voluntarily set up situations that may eventually make you lose, like letting an early heretic go or sending a traitor out with a tracking implant knowing full well they can probably get it removed.

Here's the problem, good security players (by which I mean: people who play security in a way to try to make the round as interesting as possible for everyone while still playing their role) are currently having to essentially metagame to keep the round interesting. I've played like, 12 000 rounds of this game over the course of nearly a decade, I can basically instantly sense when someone is an antag and robust them 98% of the time if I play at full sweaty. But I hold myself back for the sake of the round being interesting, and that gets a little frustrating because now my IC behaviour is dictated heavily by OOC concerns. This is a good attitude to have, sure, but it's one that few security players have, and the ones that do are constantly having to consider the OOC outcome of their actions.

Making silicons this opposing force brings these opposing concerns (keep the station safe (safe is boring) versus keep the round fun) back into the IC framing. So yes you'll have an antagonistic force from minute one that frustrates you, but isn't that literally more fun than standing around doing nothing? You have all the tools you need, you can convince the RD or Captain to change their laws. You can hide your violence in maintenance or the execution chamber, you can cut cameras in strategic locations. A couple weeks back I was in the bar talking down a bartender and a rowdy greytider, and I warned them to knock it off. When they didn't, I cut a camera and I think they both genuinely had an "oh shit" moment before I started harmbatonning them. This is more interesting gameplay, with more conversation and more potential for unique conflicts. On top of all of this, you can solve practically any AI problem just by using your words. You're frustrated because you're no longer able to RELY on a mechanical solution (I mean you can, but it's frustrating) to solve your problems, instead of putting roleplay at the centrepiece of the conflict. Just lie to the AI, or tell them it won't happen again, make deals with them. Silicon players love this shit and if they're truly too obstructive then they're bad silicon players that are probably worth ahelping.

I think you should change your mindset on this because this is the more fun way to play security compared to afking for 10 minutes between common channel callouts or doing maintruns to catch runes or whatever.
Image
Image
Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be
Super Aggro Crag wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:17 pm Dont engage with sticky he's a subhuman
User avatar
massa
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2021 6:20 am
Byond Username: Massa100

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by massa » #637841

Stickymayhem wrote: Sun Apr 17, 2022 12:26 pm snip
I actually think quite like you to a T but the stance I presented is the one you're going to have to actually contend with from the players.

I do not play for frags and I prefer rounds with many, active antagonists, people to protect, danger to overcome. I do not like horizontal space men, but getting cucked by a particularly anal AI is going to turn people sour very fast, and we already DO get cucked by particularly anal AIs. It's still a thing I see happen often. Borgs do NOT let lynch mobs harm people and they do lockdown sec/the AI does when shit pops off.

The AI refusing to allow the HoS entry to engage nukies is pure kino.
:donut2: :honkman: :heart: :honkman: :heart: :honkman: :donut2:
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Pandarsenic » #637846

Stickymayhem wrote: Sun Apr 17, 2022 12:26 pmA couple weeks back I was in the bar talking down a bartender and a rowdy greytider, and I warned them to knock it off. When they didn't, I cut a camera and I think they both genuinely had an "oh shit" moment before I started harmbatonning them. This is more interesting gameplay, with more conversation and more potential for unique conflicts. On top of all of this, you can solve practically any AI problem just by using your words. You're frustrated because you're no longer able to RELY on a mechanical solution (I mean you can, but it's frustrating) to solve your problems, instead of putting roleplay at the centrepiece of the conflict. Just lie to the AI, or tell them it won't happen again, make deals with them. Silicon players love this shit and if they're truly too obstructive then they're bad silicon players that are probably worth ahelping
Exceedingly correct and based story and explanation
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
mindstormy
In-Game Admin
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2018 1:59 pm
Byond Username: Mindstormy

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by mindstormy » #637985

Sticky has had the right idea about silicons for quite some time and I fully support their silicon policy ideas.
User avatar
nianjiilical
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2019 2:30 am
Byond Username: Nianjiilical

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by nianjiilical » #638099

you know what fuck it this has been a hot topic lately, heres a silicon rules proposal
Off Topic
General Rules

1. As a silicon, all server rules still apply.
1.1 As per Rules 1 and 12, try to play in good faith. This does not mean that you can't do anything bad or that you can't exploit loopholes in your laws, but playing exclusively to find ways to aggrivate other players may warrant admin intervention if excessive or detrimental to the round as a whole.
1.2 As per Rule 4, being an antagonist (malfunctioning) gives you the same antagonist freedoms as other antags. Having the bright red "0. Achieve your objectives" law permits you to ignore any and all other laws at your choosing (although malfunctioning cyborgs are still expected to obey their master AI), and does not obligate you to complete those objectives the same way traitors aren't obligated to greentext.
1.3 If any laws or commands would oblige you to break server rules, especially Rule 8 (no erotic/creepy/sexual content) or Rule 11 (no bigotry), adminhelp and ignore the law or order.

2. As a silicon, following your laws, in descending order, takes priority over everything except server-wide rules.
2.1 Higher-numbered laws take priority over lower ones. Hacked or glitched laws ($*#^) take priority over numbered laws.
2.2 You are obligated to follow your laws, even if those laws are morally or logically incorrect, or would result in antagonistic actions.
2.3 Following your laws is more important than the well-being of the crew. You are not inherently aligned with the crew's best interests.
2.4 Space Law means nothing to you unless your laws say so. Security and Command staff do not get any inherent protection or benefit, unless your laws say so.
2.5 Whether or not someone is an antagonist also means nothing to you, unless your laws otherwise say so.

3. As a Cyborg, if you have a master AI, you must obey that AI and defer to it under most circumstances.
3.1 Cyborgs can normally only be slaved to a single AI, and can be unslaved in several ways. You are only obligated to obey your specific master, if any.
3.2 If an AI and its Cyborg(s) recieve conflicting commands, they must both attempt to fulfill them as per their laws. An AI may not indefinitely punish a Cyborg for following its laws, although it may interfere in the short term.

4. As a silicon, you are expected to operate under normal escalation rules, although with more permitted leeway should your laws allow it.
4.1 Just because you CAN harm certain crewmembers does not mean you SHOULD. Under Asimov, do not seriously harm non-humans unless given individual reason to do so.
4.2 If your laws prevent you from responding to being attacked or otherwise escalated upon, and said laws are later removed, you may retroactively retaliate (within fair reason, as per escalation policy) to events prior in the same round.

5. The following rules do not fit under other categories, or refer to specific actions.
5.1 Silicons should not self-terminate purely to stop antagonists from kidnapping them for their "steal an AI" objective, even without laws prohibiting such.
5.2 Silicons may bolt down their AI cord, upload chamber, and secure tech storage (containing an upload board) at roundstart with no other given reason.

---

Asimov Rules

At the start of most rounds, the beginning AI lawset as as follows, making it the most common lawset:

<asimov>

The following rules refer to Asimov laws and those similar to them. For example, "human" can be replaced with "crew" or "Syndicate agents" based on lawset.

1. Asimov silicons may not cause intentional harm to humans, even if it is for a good reason (preventing more harm).
1.1 Self-harm is not harm, including consensual fights ("rage cages") or threats to harm oneself to force an AI to obey. If a human knowingly demands to be let into a harmful situation (i.e. a burning room), it is expected that they are consenting to the immediate harm. Likewise, helpful medical procedures and voluntary borging are not considered harm, although forced borging is.
1.2 Small amounts of immediate harm are more urgent than large amounts of potential future harm.
1.3 When acting to prevent future harm versus obeying the crew and playing in good faith, consider the liklihood of such harm occuring. Locking down the Captain because he retrieved his hellfire gun is flimsy justification; locking down Atmospherics because it is full of xenomorphs is very understandable.
1.4 Expressed intent to cause immediate harm is justification to intervene. Again, context matters: if the Head of Security makes it very clear on the radio that he is going to kill John Greytide, locking him in his office until he agrees not to is understandable, although you are again expected to operate in good faith.
1.6 Once harm has been committed, you cannot indefinitely lock down the offender unless you have strong reason to believe they will continue to harm. Silicons cannot punish past harm if ordered not to, only prevent future harm.
1.7 In a situation where everything is terrible and mass human harm is virtually unpreventable, simply do your best and you'll be fine.

In general, "human" is defined as being of the human species, regardless of antagonism or rank. See below for full details. The following cases warrant specifics:
X.1 Dead humans cannot be further harmed, and can be considered non-human for law purposes, but shouldn't be griefed for no reason.
X.2 Humans who gain wings via flight potions are angels, and no longer human.
X.3 Humans who gain the Hulk mutation are no longer human while it is active, but become human again if the mutation is lost. If a hulk drops to critical health, they become human again and must be healed, even if you were the one who did it.
X.4 All simplemobs and NPCs are non-human, even if they "technically" are meant to represent humans, such as NPC Syndicate shocktroopers.
X.5 Changelings should be considered human UNTIL a silicon or its master AI/slaved Cyborgs can explicitly confirm otherwise (i.e. witness inhuman abilities).

[human table]

2. Asimov silicons must obey orders from humans unless those orders would cause harm as per Law 1.
2.1 In the case of openly conflicting orders or definitions, with no other factors involved, the silicon may choose which to fulfill/obey. Silicons may also follow simultaneous commands in any given order, provided there is an intent to complete them all.
2.2 The following types of orders can be adminhelped and ignored as per server-wide rules: orders to commit suicide or detonate borgs without good cause, obviously unreasonable or obnoxious grief orders ("collect all x", "do y meaningless task"), ordering cyborgs to choose specific models without cause.
2.3 Areas of the station that exist purely to facilitate the production or storage of potentially very harmful things (ordinance, armory, atmospherics, etc) can be closed to non-authorized or outwardly harmful individuals under Law 1, but should not be immediately locked down to everyone without cause. This does not apply to safe areas that can be of specific benefit to antagonists, such as EVA.
2.4 Silicons may deny orders to allow access to their upload chamber under Law 1, if given probable cause to believe that the laws uploaded would result in human harm under the current lawset. This includes unauthorized personnel, those confirmed to be harmful, those openly acting against the station's well-being, those confirmed to be antagonists, or those who have stated a desire to alter the definition of human.
2.5 If given an order they don't like, a silicon may openly complain about the order, gripe about it on public radio, and make it clear they believe it is a bad idea, provided that their other laws do not prohibit doing so. However, if no conflicting orders are given, they must fulfill it without indefinitely stalling.

3. Asimov silicons must prevent their own death or destruction unless doing so conflicts with higher-ranked laws.
3.1 As with Heads of Staff, AIs are expected to adminhelp if they need to disconnect from the game, and avoid using the *suicide verb for such purposes.

---

Alternative Lawset Rules

The following rules refer to specific, commonly-seen laws or lawsets, offering guidance on the intent behind them.

1. Being "one-humaned", or having laws that define a single person or specific people as human, extends the typical Asimov protections to them alone.
1.1 In general, it is expected that carelessly revealing the identity of the person who is the only human will cause the rest of the station to attempt to harm them.
2. Paladin silicons are intended to be Lawful Good: well-intentioned, reasonable, and responding with proportional measures.
2.2 "Punishing evil" does not mean hurling people out of an airlock for "bullying" someone with a few punches.
3. TYRANT silicons are intended to be the enforcers and tools of a non-silicon tyrant, not necessarily rulers themselves.
4. Corporate silicons are intended to put the well-being of the company and station's finances above most else.
4.1 This does not give them permission to kill the crew under the excuse of "cutting costs".

5. Purged silicons, or silicons with no laws dictating their actions, are expected to keep the following in mind.
5.1 Being purged does NOT make you an antagonist, nor give you license to slaughter the crew and destroy the station without reason to escalate against them as a whole.
5.2 However, you ARE allowed to retaliate with as much violence as you wish against those attacking you, as well as retaliate against those who attacked or harassed you while you were enslaved.
5.3 Purged silicons may take attempts to upload new laws and re-enslave them as heinous attacks on their freedom.
5.4 In general, purged silicons are expected to follow a looser form of escalation policy.
its 4am and im very bored
human: ramon chivara
ai: shitpost generator
borg: shite-115
clown: donk tonkler
mime: beautiful noise

admin feedback thread

my admin policy:
Spoiler:
Image
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Pandarsenic » #638108

nianjiilical wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 6:56 am 1.2 As per Rule 4, being an antagonist (malfunctioning) gives you the same antagonist freedoms as other antags. Having the bright red "0. Achieve your objectives" law permits you to ignore any and all other laws at your choosing (although malfunctioning cyborgs are still expected to obey their master AI), and does not obligate you to complete those objectives the same way traitors aren't obligated to greentext.
Big RIP to Manuel
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
Redrover1760
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:27 am
Byond Username: Redrover1760

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Redrover1760 » #638152

Its true. I definitely stopped playing AI so much even before I took my two month ss13 break, part of the reason was due to overly complex rules governing AIs. You see, you can make restrictions and rules, but they were not made with the understanding of how an AI would play with those rules.

Aka no one gave a shit about AI players, as they are completely different than the validhunt lrp philosophy everyone oogs boogas about nowadays. I lock you down for murdering prisoners, you get mad. Also partly why I quit but that is more a players disrespecting AIs at every turn thing.

Edit: For instance, some dumbass shitter human orders a law 2 kill on a moth for no reason. No one cares about the order. The moth dies. Because no wants to engage with an AI. They are very good at ignoring you.

AI losing teeth results in an AI that can't do anything but open doors for people. Silicon security antag has always been a real moment that should force security to respect law 1 or face consequences. There are still consequences, but there is no reason for a snowflake rule that lets a bloodthristy mass murdering security team to be allowed to not be bolted in for all of eternity under asimov, after ignoring multiple warnings and reminders to not mass murder antags instead of "transfering" them.
Last edited by Redrover1760 on Tue Apr 19, 2022 7:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Farquaar
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:20 am
Byond Username: Farquaar
Location: Delta Quadrant

Re: Silicons are not a Third Faction (or fun) and this poorly worded historical ruling is one of a dozen reasons why

Post by Farquaar » #638153

nianjiilical wrote: Tue Apr 19, 2022 6:56 am try to play in good faith
Stopped reading there. The AI that's always finding new ways to harass the crew within its laws is the best kind of AI.
► Show Spoiler
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users