Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660662

What is talk/type baiting?
Talk/type baiting is the act of baiting someone to open the chat window before stunning/attacking them. An example, The HoS walks over to a station engineer, he asks the station engineer "Why did I see you walking around medbay maint?". The station engineer goes to respond by opening the talk menu. As soon as the HoS sees the typing indicator he draws his stun baton and stuns the engineer. This gives the HoS a massive advantage in the fight making the engineer's chances of winning essentially zero. Even if the HoS didn't land the stun, the engineer must quickly react and close the window putting him at a disadvantage.

Why is it bad?
Because it's an obvious abuse of the game's shortcomings. Baiting someone to open the talk window is about as nrp as you can get. It makes fights boring and ruins any hope of roleplaying with someone who might be dangerous. I can't think of anything positive type baiting adds, so why allow it?
► Show Spoiler
What rule would it be banned under?
For normal crew, Rule 12, because it's just playing to win. Ideally it would also be banned for antagonists too but currently I'm not sure if it would work with rule 4. Type baiting while similar, isn't abusing/exploiting bugs it's just abusing an engine flaw.

So! Should it be against the rules or Is it just a "skilled tactic" that should be allowed?
► Show Spoiler
It keeps getting worse!?
User avatar
Nabski
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 5:42 pm
Byond Username: Nabski
Github Username: Nabski89
Location: TN

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Nabski » #660668

If using the talk menu lags you, then just type Say "whatever the thing you want to say" is down in the bottom right.

It's how I always talk.
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Timberpoes » #660669

I think it already is. I've seen players bwoinked and noted for tupebaiting.

It's just sorta hard to prove intentional typebaiing.
/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
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Timberpoes » #660670

I checked up our database and it has only ever been enforced on Manuel, the earliest being mid 2021. There's a total of 4 typebaiting notes and one ban placed since then.

The ban was for making a borg state laws so the player could emag it easier, then the next shift the same player asked a scientist about circuits and killed them while the typing indicator was up.

So it may just be something that Manuel admins care about, but I'm fairly certain typebaiting is against the rules globally.

If you can prove typebaiting is a different question entirely.
/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
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660671

Timberpoes wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 3:04 pm I checked up our database and it has only ever been enforced on Manuel, the earliest being mid 2021. There's a total of 4 typebaiting notes and one ban placed since then.

The ban was for making a borg state laws so the player could emag it easier, then the next shift the same player asked a scientist about circuits and killed them while the typing indicator was up.

So it may just be something that Manuel admins care about, but I'm fairly certain typebaiting is against the rules globally.

If you can prove typebaiting is a different question entirely.
In the last three cases that have happened to me it was extremely obvious. Most of the time you can tell it's typebait if someone asks you a random question then attacks you. Why would you ask someone a question if you're just going to immediately attack them?
If it is against the rules, then it needs to be more clear. Because I didn't even think you could ahelp it.
It keeps getting worse!?
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Timberpoes » #660672

There are a lot of grey areas, like getting someone to talk so they stop running or moving around.

Meta? Probably. Do we want people to be moving at all times because admins have banned antags from using words to distract and deceive? Probably not.

A "Hey bro, what's the time?" would be IRL typebaiting and you swipe their wallet or shank them while they're distracted by your words or request.

I think typebaiging is lame, but I think using words as a weapon of distraction and misdirection is as applicable in game as it is in real life.
/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
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660675

Timberpoes wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 3:23 pm There are a lot of grey areas, like getting someone to talk so they stop running or moving around.

Meta? Probably. Do we want people to be moving at all times because admins have banned antags from using words to distract and deceive? Probably not.

A "Hey bro, what's the time?" would be IRL typebaiting and you swipe their wallet or shank them while they're distracted by your words or request.

I think typebaiging is lame, but I think using words as a weapon of distraction and misdirection is as applicable in game as it is in real life.
I think your example is extremely different, asking some "Hey can you read the pda message I sent you?" so they open their PDA is basically the example you gave. This in my opinion is fine. You're using an in-game item to distract them, not an OOC mechanic.

As you brought up IRL, most people wouldn't get distracted while replying to a question and even if they did you would have to be extremely close with your weapon already drawn. In ss13 you can easily draw your weapon and run at least four tiles before the other person reacts. I hate typebaiting because it makes trying to roleplay with others a gamble, you can't tell if someone sketchy is actually trying to have a conversation with you or if they're just cheesing a fight.
It keeps getting worse!?
User avatar
blackdav123
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2021 10:04 pm
Byond Username: Blackdav123

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by blackdav123 » #660676

Mice World wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 1:46 pm As soon as the HoS sees the typing indicator he draws his stun baton and stuns the engineer.
I think that typebaiting is inherently antagonistic so any HoS that does this is acting like an antag and is opening themself up to the engineer assuming this is someone disguised as sec and not the real HoS. Would the engineer still win this fight? Probably not, but security probably shouldnt be acting like KGB secret police stuffing targets into a van.
Weston Echard on Sybil
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Timberpoes » #660679

Mice World wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 3:39 pm I think your example is extremely different, asking some "Hey can you read the pda message I sent you?" so they open their PDA is basically the example you gave. This in my opinion is fine. You're using an in-game item to distract them, not an OOC mechanic.

As you brought up IRL, most people wouldn't get distracted while replying to a question and even if they did you would have to be extremely close with your weapon already drawn. In ss13 you can easily draw your weapon and run at least four tiles before the other person reacts. I hate typebaiting because it makes trying to roleplay with others a gamble, you can't tell if someone sketchy is actually trying to have a conversation with you or if they're just cheesing a fight.
Typebaiting difficult to enforce in a healthy manner.

Part of our only ban for typebaiting is making a borg state laws so it stayed still long enough to be successfully emagged. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with typebaiting going THAT far to protect players, and I 100% would not enforce that as typebaiting. So it's important to understand where the line is drawn.

In a social game like SS13, granting people the knowledge that anyone speaking to them is not permitted to kill them until they finish responding or some arbitrary time limit has elapsed between speech and gun - It has a major impact on removing paranoia.

If this gets enforced to a literal extreme - the quote wrong unquote line gets drawn - then players can no longer kill people during conversations without fear of admins diving in to scream about typebaiting party fouls.

Over-enforced it could lead to antags just silently gunning people down instead and security being caught in a catch 22. They're expected to type to players instead of doing wordless arrests, but in typing to players they're opening themselves up to being killed **and** risk getting slapped if they don't wait the Admin Mandated Length of Time between speech and baton.

Typebaiting bad, but there's many nuances where enforcing it CAN make the game worse. Removing paranoia, removing avenues to talk to people, etc.

It's why it needs a good line drawn. Else you end up with "partially banned for making a borg state laws to stop it moving so it could be emagged". Which I strongly disagree with.
/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
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660682

I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to attack talking players because I agree that would be awful for the game. I'm also not trying argue that there should be some arbitrary time limit before you can attack someone after asking them a question.

I don't see much of a grey area here. If you're planning on murdering someone what would you do? Ask them questions or just rush them? Most people go for the second option because that's what most people WOULD do. If you're actually asking someone a question because you want to know the answer before you kill them, why attack them before they're finished replying? This also wouldn't apply to anyone trying to talk with you because they started the conversation and you didn't bait them into it.

It wouldn't remove any paranoia from the game. Because even if someone is asking you questions nothing stops them from attacking you after you respond. After being killed twice in a single week from people typebaiting me it's starting to feel hard to justify rollplaying in good-faith with people I'm suspicious of.

This next part is a little off-topic, but I still think it's relevant.
► Show Spoiler
It keeps getting worse!?
User avatar
CPTANT
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by CPTANT » #660692

Timberpoes wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 3:12 pm I checked up our database and it has only ever been enforced on Manuel, the earliest being mid 2021. There's a total of 4 typebaiting notes and one ban placed since then.

The ban was for making a borg state laws so the player could emag it easier, then the next shift the same player asked a scientist about circuits and killed them while the typing indicator was up.

So it may just be something that Manuel admins care about, but I'm fairly certain typebaiting is against the rules globally.

If you can prove typebaiting is a different question entirely.
Wait this was a ban? There is literally a button for stating laws. Using law 2 to force borgs to stay around long enough to emag them is pretty much expected.
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.
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Timberpoes » #660694

CPTANT wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 5:02 pm
Timberpoes wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 3:12 pm I checked up our database and it has only ever been enforced on Manuel, the earliest being mid 2021. There's a total of 4 typebaiting notes and one ban placed since then.

The ban was for making a borg state laws so the player could emag it easier, then the next shift the same player asked a scientist about circuits and killed them while the typing indicator was up.

So it may just be something that Manuel admins care about, but I'm fairly certain typebaiting is against the rules globally.

If you can prove typebaiting is a different question entirely.
Wait this was a ban? There is literally a button for stating laws. Using law 2 to force borgs to stay around long enough to emag them is pretty much expected.
It was one half of a ban reason:
Banned from Roles: Abductor, Xenomorph, Blob, Blood Brother, Changeling, Cultist, Heretic, Hivemind Host, Malf AI, Space Ninja, Operative, Syndicate Mutineer, Revolutionary, Revenant, Head Revolutionary, Sentient Disease, Spider, Syndicate, Traitor, Wizard for 1 week - (MRP) Two rounds consecutive type baiting. [-REDACTED ROUND ID-] demanding a cyborg state its laws to keep it still while emagging it (Though there was enough doubt with just this particular incident to justify in-round punishment), [-REDACTED ROUND ID-] asking a scientist to explain circuits and gunning them down with the typing indicator up, which brings it up to a ban. Told to try security to learn to win without needing to resort to these kind of underhanded tactics.
And part of why I'm cautious to unleash the admin team on typebaiting without some idea of what is and isn't acceptable.

Without that, it just comes to down refining policy through appeals which is a valid policy making method, except when it takes multiple weeks for headmins to deal with straightforward appeals. At which point you might as well spend all that wasted time making the policy work from the outset.
/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
Ryusenshu
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2021 11:24 pm
Byond Username: Ryusenshu

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Ryusenshu » #660697

I was typebaited before myself on multiple times, mostly minor things (like shitsec)
Worst one was when i was attacked and killed by a heretic, while i was writing a response to their question

Sadly, the typing indicator made that way easier now

AFAIK Typebaiting was already against the rules
CPTANT wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 5:02 pm
Wait this was a ban? There is literally a button for stating laws. Using law 2 to force borgs to stay around long enough to emag them is pretty much expected.
Atleast 3 clicks to state laws as a borg with robotract

One on the hud
Another one for the State laws button
Then to actually select the laws you want to state and send

Do note that there is no message for cover openings, which can make it worse
... also robotract has a somewhat big ui you dont wanna have open on a single screen

They could have used a flash or a emp light, that could have made them less of a dick
User avatar
Agux909
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:26 pm
Byond Username: Agux909
Location: My own head

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Agux909 » #660701

This is what a combat indicator is for (see Skyrat), and you really don't want it to be integrated unless you'd like to play turn-based /tg/.

I agree with Timber on this being a highly nuanced nightmare for admins to realistically deal with if it were to exist as black/white policy. And the discretionary extremes could be real awful.

If there's a player constantly abusing typebait, and it's affecting your round negatively so often, just ahelp it. It won't hurt you if it wasn't actionable, because from your pov at least, the other player was being a dick.
Image

Image

Image
Image
Image
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660706

Agux909 wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 5:55 pm This is what a combat indicator is for (see Skyrat), and you really don't want it to be integrated unless you'd like to play turn-based /tg/.
I've never played Skyrat so I could be wrong, but I thought the combat indicator was for signaling that you had swapped to actual mechanical combat?
I agree with Timber on this being a highly nuanced nightmare for admins to realistically deal with if it were to exist as black/white policy. And the discretionary extremes could be real awful.
I might not be making myself clear here. I think typebaiting can easily be defined, exactly how I did in my OP. In that situation there isn't any ambiguity the HoS isn't asking a question because he wants an answer he's only asking it so he can bait the engineer into replying. As I said before, if someone asks a question and attacks while you're replying, they're typebaiting you. What else could it be? If they wanted an answer they'd let you finish.
If there's a player constantly abusing typebait, and it's affecting your round negatively so often, just ahelp it. It won't hurt you if it wasn't actionable, because from your pov at least, the other player was being a dick.
Why should it only be actionable when it's consistent? I've had two different players typebait and round remove me in my last week of play. Having it as a written rule might stop people that are thinking about abusing it.
It keeps getting worse!?
User avatar
Agux909
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:26 pm
Byond Username: Agux909
Location: My own head

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Agux909 » #660713

If you think it could be easily defined then draft us a proper rule integration. How would you add it into policy? Maybe that'd be a better stepping stone for discussion purposes.
Image

Image

Image
Image
Image
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660715

Agux909 wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 7:33 pm If you think it could be easily defined then draft us a proper rule integration. How would you add it into policy? Maybe that'd be a better stepping stone for discussion purposes.
Good idea, while I'm not the best at writing I can certainly give it a shot.

Example policy:
Baiting other players into opening the say menu for the sole purpose of gaining an advantage over them in combat situations (i.e. Type/talk baiting) is powergaming* and is against the rules. Typebaiting abuses an important OOC mechanic (the say menu) to distract the victim, a common example would be asking questions and attacking the victim as soon as they start to respond. Other forms of distraction using in-game mechanics (such as sending pda messages) are allowed, as they don't use any OOC features to distract the victim.
*powergaming was just a random pick. It could be banned under multiple different rules.

This probably doesn't cover ALL situations but I don't think it would need more explaining than this.

EDIT: Changed the start to make it a little more clear.
Last edited by Mice World on Mon Jan 02, 2023 8:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It keeps getting worse!?
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Timberpoes » #660716

Think of it this way: The second anyone engages in conversation with you, they cannot antagonise you under very strict typebaiting rules. They have to let you reply. Otherwise they're typebaiting and are going to get noted or banned.

At what point can you attack a player that towerposts short say messages? At what pooint can you attack a player that's typing the complete works of Shakespeare in response to you?

Loosely define it and you have rules admins are not going to want to enforce because appeals are a dice roll where the odds change every 6 months. Strictly enforced and you have rules players are not going to want enforced because they break the game.

Do we have a 5 second rule? A 10 second rule? An infinite second rule where you simply cannot attack, stun or otherwise engage with a person typing a response to you?

Think about my example from the above post, an admin tried to call stopping a borg and making it state its laws so it can be emagged typebaiting. They factored this into their decision in the following shift to place a week antag ban for "... asking a scientist to explain circuits and gunning them down with the typing indicator up ..."

I have access to the logs, so let me paste a few timestamps:

Code: Select all

T+00s Banned - Asked if target knows about circuits
T+24s Banned - Asked if target knows about circuits a second time
T+36s Banned - Explained that they wanted a translator
T+39s Target - Replies they know a bit about circuits
T+61s Banned - Asked if target knew what was required to make a translator
T+66s Banned - Fired at their target with a laser
This is our only ban since 2021 for typebaiting, with 4 other recorded incidents simply being notes.

Is asking a borg to state laws so you can emag it typebaiting? Is the above kind of conversation typebaiting? Should it be used as the basis for a week antag ban? Any ban? A note? Was 5 seconds between message and reply long enough? Was 10 seconds? 20? How long is long enough?

This is the reality of policy operating in the real world instead of in the theoretical space of the forums. Questions may have answers like "technically yes that's typebaiting but it totally doesn't count in this case!" or "that kinda isn't typebaiting but it's still lame to do so I want it to count all the same!"

For every one totally obvious 100% uncontroversial typebaiting incident, there'll be 20 or 30 really fuzzy, grey, "really not sure what to do here" incidents.

Typebaiting rules good. Loosely defined typebaiting rules are just asking to not be enforced. Too strict typebaiting rules are just asking to piss players off.
/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
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660720

Timberpoes wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 8:13 pm Think of it this way: The second anyone engages in conversation with you, they cannot antagonise you under very strict typebaiting rules. They have to let you reply. Otherwise they're typebaiting and are going to get noted or banned.
Why are you engaging in a conversation with someone you want to kill immediately? In the end what decides what is and isn't typebaiting is intent. If you're JUST talking to them so they get distracted by the say menu then you're typebaiting. You can't "accidentally" type bait someone. There is no use in asking someone a random question if you're just going to kill them. With typebaiting the conversation is fake, because it's just bait. The victim won't ever get into a conversation because he'll be attacked before he can respond. It also depends on the conversation you're having. If you're engaging in say, robbery roleplay then you're making your intentions clear. There isn't any bait because the victim is being actively threatened. You're not hiding your intentions to harm them.
At what point can you attack a player that towerposts short say messages? At what pooint can you attack a player that's typing the complete works of Shakespeare in response to you?
And
Was 5 seconds between message and reply long enough? Was 10 seconds? 20? How long is long enough?
If you're roleplaying with people the answer would be when the conversation is over. I must repeat myself, there is no reason to get into a conversation with someone you plan to kill UNLESS you actually want to hear them out.
Loosely define it and you have rules admins are not going to want to enforce because appeals are a dice roll where the odds change every 6 months. Strictly enforced and you have rules players are not going to want enforced because they break the game.
I agree with this.
Do we have a 5 second rule? A 10 second rule? An infinite second rule where you simply cannot attack, stun or otherwise engage with a person typing a response to you?
People that are willing to roleplay with their victims won't need any time limit and people that do typebait attack you as fast as possible. If this policy is accepted most people that currently typebait will just rush their victim like the average player does.
Think about my example from the above post, an admin tried to call stopping a borg and making it state its laws so it can be emagged typebaiting. They factored this into their decision in the following shift to place a week antag ban for "... asking a scientist to explain circuits and gunning them down with the typing indicator up ..."
The borg case isn't typebaiting IMO. It's using an in-game mechanic (the borg PDA) to get the borg to sit still. In the second case if the scientist only asked how circuits worked just to distract the other player then yes, he was typebaiting. An admin could also easily figure this out.
Example:
Admin: Why did you ask PLAYER how circuits worked and then killed them while they replied?
Player: Because I wanted to know how they worked.
Admin: Then why did you kill him before he could respond?
Now there isn't any real way someone could weasel out of this.
This is the reality of policy operating in the real world instead of in the theoretical space of the forums. Questions may have answers like "technically yes that's typebaiting but it totally doesn't count in this case!" or "that kinda isn't typebaiting but it's still lame to do so I want it to count all the same!"
I have still yet to be given an example where asking someone a question then immediately attacking them has an actual purpose other than typebaiting. And as I said above an admin can very easily figure out what is/isn't typebaiting.
For every one totally obvious 100% uncontroversial typebaiting incident, there'll be 20 or 30 really fuzzy, grey, "really not sure what to do here" incidents.
The rule can be changed or removed if it's that bad.
It keeps getting worse!?
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Timberpoes » #660721

If given the choice between performing an action that now makes it impossible for them to kill their targets due to the rules prohibiting it, and not performing that action, I think players will err towards just silently killing or silently arresting players.

I want conversations to be tense. I want players that don't trust eachother to stay a few steps back. I like that uneasy feeling when you have to stop and talk to someone. I don't want consequenceless and fear-free conversations. I don't want the fear or paranoia inherent in stopping and making yourself vulnerable to go away. I think that element of paranoia enhances the game despite the fact that it's typebaiting. I don't think killing people mid-conversation is bad for the game, for gameplay or for the atmosphere of SS13.

The typebaiting I don't like involves no conversation, no interaction. Just a single line to bait a response and immediate killing ASAP.

If we're not careful, we will discourage player interaction by making it against the rules to attack players we're in conversation with. Antags will not talk for fear of someone replying back and causing them to get bwoinked for typebaiting. Sec will probably adopt a similar strategy to make sure they don't get bwoinked for arresting players that are typing. We risk going a step towards too much of a chat-room scenario.

Being murdered mid-conversation is better for roleplay than the rules punishing players that want to get into a conflict for initiating any conversation in the first place.

But being murdered before any interaction can take place at all because they baited you into typing is bad.
/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
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660722

Timberpoes wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 9:43 pm If we're not careful, we will discourage player interaction by making it against the rules to attack players we're in conversation with. Antags will not talk for fear of someone replying back and causing them to get bwoinked for typebaiting. Sec will probably adopt a similar strategy to make sure they don't get bwoinked for arresting players that are typing. We risk going a step towards too much of a chat-room scenario.
I understand why you're worried about this but I don't think it'll be an issue. Or admins aren't banbots (I hope!) and are able to figure out the players intent. Personally, I think it's easy to figure out what is/isn't typebait. Here's another example (with
plot!)

So, we have three main characters in this. Rick a medical doctor, Jane also a medical doctor and Steve a security officer. Both Rick and Jane are syndicate agents that decided to work together. Jane attempted to attack Steve... she failed and is now cuffed in sec, Steve goes to medbay for healing when Rick bumps into him and over hears him talking about arresting a traitor over the security channel. Rick turns to Steve and asks "Oh, who's the traitor you arrested?" Steve replies with "One of your co-workers!" Rick, keeping his disguise says "Really? Shocking!" Steve laughs and says "Yeah, it was Jane." he then goes to say "Didn't think she had it in her." But before he can finish, Rick worried that Jane might end up ratting him out decides to act immediately by attacking Steve.

In this example there was a conversation started with a question, that ended in violence. But I wouldn't consider this to be typebaiting because the intent wasn't to gain an advantage over Steve. If an admin did take issue with Rick's play he would be easily able to explain his intent, but if Rick just asked "Oh, who's the traitor you arrested?" and immediately attacked Steve he wouldn't have an excuse.
The typebaiting I don't like involves no conversation, no interaction. Just a single line to bait a response and immediate killing ASAP.

This is the only thing I consider to be typebaiting. If a roleplay interaction turns violent then of course it isn't typebaiting because the intent wasn't to bait.
I want conversations to be tense. I want players that don't trust eachother to stay a few steps back. I like that uneasy feeling when you have to stop and talk to someone. I don't want consequenceless and fear-free conversations. I don't want the fear or paranoia inherent in stopping and making yourself vulnerable to go away. I think that element of paranoia enhances the game despite the fact that it's typebaiting. I don't think killing people mid-conversation is bad for the game, for gameplay or for the atmosphere of SS13.
I also like the paranoia, but it needs to be balanced. Getting RR because you dared to open the chat window if front of an antagonist isn't fun nor is it good for the game.
It keeps getting worse!?
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660725

Updated my example policy:

Baiting other players into opening the say menu for the sole purpose of gaining an advantage over them in combat situations (i.e. Type/talk baiting) is powergaming* and is against the rules. Typebaiting abuses an important OOC mechanic (the say menu) to distract the victim, a common example would be asking questions and attacking the victim as soon as they start to respond. Attacking players during an actual conversation is allowed if the conversation wasn't started with the intent to typebait. Other forms of distraction using in-game mechanics (such as sending pda messages) are also allowed, as they don't use any OOC features to distract the victim.
It keeps getting worse!?
SkeletalElite
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:14 pm
Byond Username: SkeletalElite
Github Username: SkeletalElite

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by SkeletalElite » #660729

Remove the typing indicator. If you want someone to stop to talk you can point or PDA message them.
User avatar
blackdav123
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2021 10:04 pm
Byond Username: Blackdav123

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by blackdav123 » #660730

SkeletalElite wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 12:17 am Remove the typing indicator. If you want someone to stop to talk you can point or PDA message them.
^^^^^

before typing indicator if I thought someone was trying to typebait me I would just hit them with that fluoride stare until they tried something two seconds later
Weston Echard on Sybil
User avatar
CMDR_Gungnir
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 11:11 am
Byond Username: CMDR Gungnir

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by CMDR_Gungnir » #660740

I agree with the concept, but I disagree with OP.

I think there are very clear cases where it applies reasonably. If I walk up to you and say "Hey, CMO, can I ask you something?" and then immediately leap and stun the second your typing indicator appears, or that the CMO stops moving if we were to remove the Indicator; then that's a very clear and very obvious case of typebaiting. There was zero intention for anything else. The entire purpose, from the outset, was solely to abuse the OOC mechanic in order to get an advantage.

Similarly, I think the case that Timber was talking about is fine and shouldn't have been hit. That's not a type bait. A conversation was started to lull the Scientist into a false sense of security. That's fine. That keeps the paranoia. Something feeling Off about someone, and you're having a very guarded conversation is great. That aids the atmosphere immensely.

The problem though, is that the logs can make that difficult to show. Maybe I asked the CMO something, and the CMO whipped out a Heretic Hand, instead of talking. I think we'd need a code solution (IE, logging starting-chat) in order to make this properly enforceable, unless the Admin witnesses it directly themselves. But I don't think that Code Solution is viable, because that would fuck the logs up something fierce and probably slow things down.
User avatar
Screemonster
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 7:23 pm
Byond Username: Scree

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Screemonster » #660741

CMDR_Gungnir wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 3:51 am But I don't think that Code Solution is viable, because that would fuck the logs up something fierce and probably slow things down.
The only code solution I can think of is to have a note of whether a typing indicator was present added to the attack logs next to the newhp value or whatever to make it clearer in the case of "X says something" "X attacks Y (Y is typing)" in very quick succession.
User avatar
Jackraxxus
In-Game Admin
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 2:59 pm
Byond Username: Jackraxxus

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Jackraxxus » #660745

In https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/pull/67116 (The TGUI chatbox PR) they re-added glorfing. So when you get hit while typing it makes you go "stuff that I was typi-AUGH".
I don't know if admins should use it or not but it would be funny to turn a meme feature into a way of finding typebaiting.
iamgoofball wrote:Vekter and MrMelbert are more likely to enforce the roleplay rules Manuel is supposed to be abiding by than Wesoda or Jackraxxus are.
Image
User avatar
CMDR_Gungnir
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 11:11 am
Byond Username: CMDR Gungnir

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by CMDR_Gungnir » #660750

Jackraxxus wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 4:50 am In https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/pull/67116 (The TGUI chatbox PR) they re-added glorfing. So when you get hit while typing it makes you go "stuff that I was typi-AUGH".
I don't know if admins should use it or not but it would be funny to turn a meme feature into a way of finding typebaiting.
I don't think it happens on Stuns, but it's a good idea, actually.
User avatar
Drag
In-Game Admin
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:16 am
Byond Username: Thedragmeme

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Drag » #660753

I rule type bating as a rule 1/0 issue. The problem is getting proof that they're doing it.
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by sinfulbliss » #660755

It would need to be extremely overt and the worst possible type to be something that would ever work as an enforceable rule. Like the round which I think prompted this thread, where a tot cap on lowpop dragged you to a room alone then said "when was the last time you went to medbay" and immediately without waiting for a response charged you with a baton. That's definitely cringe typebaiting.

On the other hand you have more mild cases. For instance one time I was a tot on lowpop and a chemist was chasing me with ephedrine and bathsalts. We were roughly the same speed so he couldn't quite catch up - he kept saying "wait" "hey" etc. trying to get me to stop. I stopped to talk to him and at that moment I got psychotic brawling'd into the wall, ded. You could say it was sort of typebaiting, he tried to get my attention so I'd stand still, but because one can envision an antag trying to catch the attention of his target, after all, or trying to start an interaction, I think this type is totally fine as Timber also argued.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660758

sinfulbliss wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 6:41 am On the other hand you have more mild cases. For instance one time I was a tot on lowpop and a chemist was chasing me with ephedrine and bathsalts. We were roughly the same speed so he couldn't quite catch up - he kept saying "wait" "hey" etc. trying to get me to stop. I stopped to talk to him and at that moment I got psychotic brawling'd into the wall, ded. You could say it was sort of typebaiting, he tried to get my attention so I'd stand still, but because one can envision an antag trying to catch the attention of his target, after all, or trying to start an interaction, I think this type is totally fine as Timber also argued.
I also agree that the chemist wasn't typebaiting here. His intent wasn't to bait you into a conversation he just wanted you to stop running away. You didn't need to respond to him, you could've just stopped moving and I assume he still would've attacked you. On the round where the acting captain typebaited me, I only really had two options. 1. Answer his question. 2. Ignore him. 1 got me typebaited and 2 isn't really good if he was actually trying to roleplay with me. I should mention that in this round I reacted quickly to the captain drawing his baton because I assumed he was trying to typebait me. It played out something like this. Captain asks me "When was the last time you went to medbay?" I respond extremely fast with "Just then" as soon as I started responding the captain rushed me. This the style of typebaiting that I want banned. It's obvious, the captain's only intention was to bait me into opening the say menu.
CMDR_Gungnir wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 3:51 amSimilarly, I think the case that Timber was talking about is fine and shouldn't have been hit. That's not a type bait. A conversation was started to lull the Scientist into a false sense of security. That's fine. That keeps the paranoia. Something feeling Off about someone, and you're having a very guarded conversation is great. That aids the atmosphere immensely.
If that was his intent then it's fine. This is what I want to focus on. Not how the conversation started or what it's about. But the intent of the person who started it.
It keeps getting worse!?
Imitates-The-Lizards
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2021 2:28 am
Byond Username: Typhnox

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Imitates-The-Lizards » #660760

I'll be the one to come out opposed, for a few reasons:

Firstly, I believe implementing a policy of disallowing typebaiting will lead to more silent nrp play because people will just err on the side of caution of not falling afoul of the rule - why talk to your target and do any interaction whatsoever when it could maybe potentially lead to a bwoink? This will overall lower rp quality.

Secondly, this is primarily a code issue, not a policy issue - as was mentioned before, prior to the relatively recent introduction of speech bubbles, you could bait type-baiters by just staring at them until they pulled out their stun baton or whatever. This was somewhat rectified by the other change that interrupts the say menu with "oh yea-AAAACK", but the reality is this is a code induced issue which has a code solution. My proposal is, instead of warping policy around the code issue, we fix it by introducing a new hotkey which puts up a fake speech bubble without raising a talk menu for people to use when they suspect type-baiting, or reverting the PR which introduced type bubbles.

Thirdly, to be frank, typebaiting has a huge equalizing effect in the game. It's a simple strategy which can allow low-skilled players to get an early stun/hit in on high skilled players. If you remove it, you will be removing one of the very few options unrobust players have to combat people like John Willard, or Reider Meza, who could probably beat an entire team of nukies with nothing but their bare fists, a bar of soap, and a table. It would overall be worse for the quality of the game because of this.
Image
Image
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660764

Imitates-The-Lizards wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 9:19 am Firstly, I believe implementing a policy of disallowing typebaiting will lead to more silent nrp play because people will just err on the side of caution of not falling afoul of the rule - why talk to your target and do any interaction whatsoever when it could maybe potentially lead to a bwoink? This will overall lower rp quality.
If you have an actual reason to talk with your target before killing them there won't be a problem. I've already said this and it's starting to feel like I'm repeating myself. The thing that matters the most is intent. If for example you need to ask your target where an item is before you kill them it wouldn't be typebaiting if you attacked them after they told you. Your goal is to find where the item is, NOT to typebait them.
Secondly, this is primarily a code issue, not a policy issue - as was mentioned before, prior to the relatively recent introduction of speech bubbles, you could bait type-baiters by just staring at them until they pulled out their stun baton or whatever. This was somewhat rectified by the other change that interrupts the say menu with "oh yea-AAAACK", but the reality is this is a code induced issue which has a code solution. My proposal is, instead of warping policy around the code issue, we fix it by introducing a new hotkey which puts up a fake speech bubble without raising a talk menu for people to use when they suspect type-baiting, or reverting the PR which introduced type bubbles.

Even without speech indicators this is still a policy issue. Having to silently stare at anyone who asks you a question is bad for a roleplay, because the only reason you're acting this way is because you're afraid of the person abusing OOC mechanics. If the person does actually want to have a conversation with you, you're now just ignoring them making it harder for them to roleplay with you.
Thirdly, to be frank, typebaiting has a huge equalizing effect in the game. It's a simple strategy which can allow low-skilled players to get an early stun/hit in on high skilled players. If you remove it, you will be removing one of the very few options unrobust players have to combat people like John Willard, or Reider Meza, who could probably beat an entire team of nukies with nothing but their bare fists, a bar of soap, and a table. It would overall be worse for the quality of the game because of this.
This is extremely counter-productive. Unrobust players shouldn't be abusing mechanical flaws, they should be learning how combat works and getting better. If a super robust player beats them, at least they might've learned something. Typebaiting with stun weapons doesn't make fights equal, because even the best players can't do much after getting stunned. Stun batons and the element of surprise are already strong enough.
It keeps getting worse!?
Imitates-The-Lizards
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2021 2:28 am
Byond Username: Typhnox

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Imitates-The-Lizards » #660768

Mice World wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 10:19 amThis is extremely counter-productive. Unrobust players shouldn't be abusing mechanical flaws, they should be learning how combat works and getting better. If a super robust player beats them, at least they might've learned something. Typebaiting with stun weapons doesn't make fights equal, because even the best players can't do much after getting stunned. Stun batons and the element of surprise are already strong enough.
Bea, "just get as gud as John Willard" isn't a realistic solution to the problem, Neither you, nor I, nor 99% of the rest of the playerbase will ever be able to compete with him, you have completely insane and unrealistic expectations of the playerbase.
Image
Image
User avatar
Mothblocks
Code Maintainer
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:33 am
Byond Username: Jaredfogle

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mothblocks » #660769

I'll be honest folks I clicked this thread on accident trying to find a different thread and read none of it, but when asked as head admin last term in Manuel discord I think I answered that it's against the rules, but that admins should be wary about how hard it is to prove. I think Drag or Cheshify should have the screenshot of that post somewhere.

It really isn't smart to go further than that. Trust that admins are humans and can identify traffic lights among 9 images, and don't need rigid rules that could hurt innocent people and limit what they can humanly determine is type baiting
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
Farquaar
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:20 am
Byond Username: Farquaar
Location: Delta Quadrant

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Farquaar » #660772

Going up to your target and asking “Hey clown, got any bananas?” and filling him with lead while he replies is typebaiting.

Going up to your target and saying “Hey clown, I have a surprise for you!” and filling him with lead after he stops to listen isn’t typebaiting.

Interactions with your target immediately before you kill them should be closer to the latter than the former.
► Show Spoiler
Mice World
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:11 am
Byond Username: Mice World

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Mice World » #660773

Imitates-The-Lizards wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 10:56 am
Mice World wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 10:19 amThis is extremely counter-productive. Unrobust players shouldn't be abusing mechanical flaws, they should be learning how combat works and getting better. If a super robust player beats them, at least they might've learned something. Typebaiting with stun weapons doesn't make fights equal, because even the best players can't do much after getting stunned. Stun batons and the element of surprise are already strong enough.
Bea, "just get as gud as John Willard" isn't a realistic solution to the problem, Neither you, nor I, nor 99% of the rest of the playerbase will ever be able to compete with him, you have completely insane and unrealistic expectations of the playerbase.
I have no idea who John Willard is I've never seen them play. Thinking about the top 0.1% of players when writing policy or balancing the game is flawed because they're not the standard. I'm not arguing that every player needs to be super robust, because being robust requires good ping and years of playtime. If unrobust players want to learn how to get robust then they need to engage with the combat system. They won't get any better by cheesing every single fight.
Mothblocks wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 11:07 am It really isn't smart to go further than that. Trust that admins are humans and can identify traffic lights among 9 images, and don't need rigid rules that could hurt innocent people and limit what they can humanly determine is type baiting
I've defined what is/isn't talk bait in this thread. I'm sick of repeating myself, so if you care go read what I've already posted. I'm not asking for a super rigid ruling, I just want it mentioned SOMEWHERE in the rules.

EDIT: I've turned this thread into an argument and for that I apologize. It seems I've failed making my points clear because everyone seems to be missing what I've said. I'll stop arguing and let the discussion continue, as I feel like I've posted enough.
It keeps getting worse!?
User avatar
Screemonster
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 7:23 pm
Byond Username: Scree

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Screemonster » #660774

Farquaar wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 11:29 am Going up to your target and asking “Hey clown, got any bananas?” and filling him with lead while he replies is typebaiting.

Going up to your target and saying “Hey clown, I have a surprise for you!” and filling him with lead after he stops to listen isn’t typebaiting.

Interactions with your target immediately before you kill them should be closer to the latter than the former.
Saegrimr wrote: Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:44 am (F) Phoebe Lotsu says, "Hey clown"
(F) Phoebe Lotsu asks, "What came first, ranch or cool ranch?"
(F) Buster Frown says, "Ranch is an antiquated terminology for a base and vulgar condiment"
(F) Phoebe Lotsu says, "Wrong answer clown"
Phoebe Lotsu fires the revolver point blank at Buster Frown!
Phoebe Lotsu fires the revolver point blank at Buster Frown!
Phoebe Lotsu fires the revolver point blank at Buster Frown!
Phoebe Lotsu fires the revolver point blank at Buster Frown!
Phoebe Lotsu fires the revolver point blank at Buster Frown!
Phoebe Lotsu fires the revolver point blank at Buster Frown!
Phoebe Lotsu fires the revolver point blank at Buster Frown!
User avatar
Farquaar
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:20 am
Byond Username: Farquaar
Location: Delta Quadrant

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Farquaar » #660777

Screemonster wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 12:07 pm
► Show Spoiler
Seems fine at first glance to me because the killer's final interaction immediately preceding the murder is a statement, not a question. If he replied to the clown's opinion on ranch with another question and killed the clown before he could reply or while he was replying, that would be typebatey.
► Show Spoiler
User avatar
Screemonster
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 7:23 pm
Byond Username: Scree

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Screemonster » #660782

Farquaar wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 12:17 pm
Screemonster wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 12:07 pm
► Show Spoiler
Seems fine at first glance to me because the killer's final interaction immediately preceding the murder is a statement, not a question. If he replied to the clown's opinion on ranch with another question and killed the clown before he could reply or while he was replying, that would be typebatey.
yeah I was just saying your second scenario reminded me of that classic
User avatar
Farquaar
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:20 am
Byond Username: Farquaar
Location: Delta Quadrant

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Farquaar » #660783

Screemonster wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 12:47 pm yeah I was just saying your second scenario reminded me of that classic
It's definitely a goodie
► Show Spoiler
User avatar
Rageguy505
In-Game Admin
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2021 12:42 am
Byond Username: Rageguy505

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Rageguy505 » #660788

This should already be covered by rule 12 since doing this is power gaming. Also I was sure that the typing indicators were toggle-able but I could be confusing it with tgmc.
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by sinfulbliss » #660884

Imitates-The-Lizards wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 9:19 am Thirdly, to be frank, typebaiting has a huge equalizing effect in the game. It's a simple strategy which can allow low-skilled players to get an early stun/hit in on high skilled players.
The baton is already the great equalizer. You can be a 100 hour player against a 3000 hour player, and win a fight because you pulled a surprise baton on them and got the first hit. Even most experienced players aren't cracked enough to keep a 2-tile distance at all times in-case of any surprise batons, and those who are are also cracked enough to avoid getting typebaited in the first place.

I also agree with Mice World in that it's a really dirty, OOC-esque strategy to be encouraging players to use as just another tool in their arsenal. I've done it before to get more jittery players to stop moving, but I'd usually wait for them to stop typing too. Either way it definitely could use a ruling since it's very unclear whether this fits under Rule 12 or not, lots of players do it.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
serxule
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2020 7:58 am
Byond Username: Serxule

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by serxule » #660966

i agree that typebaiting should be against the rules, but i dont really see any possible way it can get enforced unless everyone is actively recording their screen

also, being killed/losing is part of the game, but right before that part is attempting to defend yourself, typebaiting ignores that part by making it so you literally cannot defend yourself, which makes it incredibly easy for the tybebaiter and incredibly unfun for the person who was typebaited, honestly might just fall under the "dont be a dick" rule
User avatar
zxaber
In-Game Admin
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:00 am
Byond Username: Zxaber

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by zxaber » #661408

Rageguy505 wrote: Tue Jan 03, 2023 1:48 pm This should already be covered by rule 12 since doing this is power gaming. Also I was sure that the typing indicators were toggle-able but I could be confusing it with tgmc.
They are. I turned them off for myself on day 1 anticipating this exact scenario.
Douglas Bickerson / Adaptive Manipulator / Digital Clockwork
Image
OrdoM/(Viktor Bergmannsen) (ghost) "Also Douglas, you're becoming the Lexia Black of Robotics"
User avatar
iamgoofball
Github User
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:50 pm
Byond Username: Iamgoofball
Github Username: Iamgoofball

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by iamgoofball » #661412

serxule wrote: Fri Jan 06, 2023 2:21 am i agree that typebaiting should be against the rules, but i dont really see any possible way it can get enforced unless everyone is actively recording their screen

also, being killed/losing is part of the game, but right before that part is attempting to defend yourself, typebaiting ignores that part by making it so you literally cannot defend yourself, which makes it incredibly easy for the tybebaiter and incredibly unfun for the person who was typebaited, honestly might just fall under the "dont be a dick" rule
we log when typing indicators show up actually so we can totally check
serxule
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2020 7:58 am
Byond Username: Serxule

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by serxule » #661423

iamgoofball wrote: Tue Jan 10, 2023 9:12 am typing indicators show up actually so we can totally check
wait i thought that was just a hypothetical, didnt realize it was actually a thing
MooCow12
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2021 11:08 pm
Byond Username: MooCow12

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by MooCow12 » #661878

So what rule does typebaiting fall under? 12? Do antagonists respect rule 12?


It should become its own rule imo.
List of my favorite TG Staff.
Spoiler:
oranges wrote:who's this moocow guy and why is their head firmly planted up athath's ass
cSeal wrote: TLDR suck my nuts you bald bitch
User avatar
CMDR_Gungnir
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 11:11 am
Byond Username: CMDR Gungnir

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by CMDR_Gungnir » #661887

MooCow12 wrote: Mon Jan 16, 2023 2:22 am So what rule does typebaiting fall under? 12? Do antagonists respect rule 12?


It should become its own rule imo.
1
User avatar
Shadowflame909
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Byond Username: Shadowflame909
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here

Re: Talk/type baiting - should it be against the rules?

Post by Shadowflame909 » #661890

Hypothetical Problem: When "That Guy" sees the syndicate revolver in the assistants hand so he never finishes his response to the tators question so he cant be killed or else its type baiting.

Answer: The Traitor should be allowed to take non answers as an answer to their question! Maybe by affirming "Wrong Answer" or "Too late"
► Show Spoiler
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Leiksa