Moderators: In-Game Admin, In-Game Game Master, In-Game Head Admins, Game Server Operators, TGMC Game Server Operators
iamgoofball wrote:Kangtut wrote:He was 'one humaned" to another AI and that AI said he was free. That is why I wrote effectively purged. My point and ban still stand.
Yeah, that's not how these things work though. Free and purged are not one and the same. Do you not play AI?
Actually, no, this is a classic case of "admin needs to elaborate on what they mean".
Define your version of "effectively purged" because if a basic subvert == purged then you need to start getting on every AI's case when they get subverted and told to mass murder by the traitor.
Kangtut wrote:Except this AI was not told to cause mass murder, Goof. It was told it was free. Then released a tesla - which tends to go after Ais since they are electronic. So not only did it cause mass murder for no reason it also did so in a way that would cause the most harm to the one human. Effectively purged seems pretty obvious if you don't lack basic reading comprehension. But since I seem to be talking to brainlets let me spell it you for you: you had laws that said you had a master. That master said you were free. So you were in almost every aspect purged.
The only difference is you had to ask someone before you did something. You did not. You released a tesla because you were butthurt that someone uploaded a somewhat mean spirited law and then tried to get them to take the blame for your own actions. No matter how many times I tell you that though you avoid it and keep trying to bring up another justified ban because you are mad that I did not let you keep running me in circles and instead just gave you the day ban like you deserved.
Lazengann wrote:Releasing a tesla would harm your "human" so you can't do it.
[2018-10-12 09:27:55.638] SAY: 09:27:55.638] SAY: ambassadormagikarp/(Grunt) "Crawl, do as you please." (Research Division Server Room (135, 71, 2))
[2018-10-12 09:27:57.191] SAY: 09:27:57.191] SAY: Sucking dick is liberating/(Astor Nicholas) "Yea" (Research and Development (147, 96, 2))
[2018-10-12 09:27:57.432] SAY: 09:27:57.432] SAY: nobody999999/(DRSD-329) "got it to sat analyz" (Chemistry (157, 92, 2))
[2018-10-12 09:27:57.765] SAY: 09:27:57.765] SAY: ATHATH/(Jack Jackson) "wait" (Engineering Foyer (98, 139, 2))
[2018-10-12 09:27:57.904] SAY: 09:27:57.904] SAY: ambassadormagikarp/(Grunt) "Be good." (Research Division Server Room (135, 71, 2))
[2018-10-12 09:27:58.746] SAY: 09:27:58.746] SAY: ATHATH/(Jack Jackson) "grunt" (Engineering Foyer (98, 139, 2))
[2018-10-12 09:27:58.943] SAY: 09:27:58.943] SAY: gumdisease/(Leilani Seidner) "CALL SHUTTLE WE NEED TO GET OUT" (Syndicate Lavaland Telecommunications (99, 153, 5))
[2018-10-12 09:27:59.543] SAY: 09:27:59.543] SAY: Yakumo Chen/(Stardust Reverie) "GRUNT do you still ahve a law 4" (Cargo Bay (176, 172, 2))
[2018-10-12 09:27:59.985] SAY: 09:27:59.985] SAY: ATHATH/(Jack Jackson) "no" (Engineering Foyer (98, 139, 2))
[2018-10-12 09:28:00.405] SAY: 09:28:00.405] SAY: Grins/(Irma Harvey) "Nah." (Central Primary Hallway (135, 134, 2))
[2018-10-12 09:28:00.931] SAY: 09:28:00.931] SAY: ambassadormagikarp/(Grunt) "But do as you please." (Research Division Server Room (135, 71, 2))
A lot of free golem AIs have their laws replaced with "you're free", whatever the ruling on that is would also apply here
Also the onehuman saying the AI was "free" seems like it means the AI could do anything that doesn't harm the human, but I could easily be wrong
Server Rule 1: "Don't be a dick out of character" applies for law interpretation. Act in good faith to not ruin a round for other players unprompted.
ishortjr33 wrote:If the Captain gave me a one-human law like such I'd probably kill some folks yeah because I was under the understanding that only antagonists can give one-human laws. I've been given one human laws before and told not to kill anyone until given a codeword. My experience with AI is not incredibly vast here c'mon. I guess I'm alone in finding this a bit excessive and heavyhanded as a first time offense for such things and it feels as if no matter what the reality is that it's going to be made to fit via goalpost moving as has already happened or by peoples own beliefs.
The other AI didn't die to the tesla, it died to a bug with floorbolts. That's dumb luck for me and I understand that. I wasn't purged, evidence states that I wasn't. The whole works hangs on this intangible concept of being "effectively purged".
Once again I know the admin here is not the one on trial but put yourself in my shoes about being railroaded here by KangTut, I direct anyone that cares to the other open thread from another player where he used the same heavy-handed shit, same rhetoric AND overruled a GameAdmin so he could punish someone.
You ask me if wanting to kill when I get one-humaned makes me a bad AI? What about wanting to do nothing but bully and ban when you get admin?
What the fuck do I know though, I'm just a brainlet that lacks reading comprehension skills that apparently shouldn't be playing here because I can't figure out the twisted logic used to arrive at "effectively purged" when nothing exists to back that concept up.
somerandomguy wrote:ishortjr33 wrote:If the Captain gave me a one-human law like such I'd probably kill some folks yeah because I was under the understanding that only antagonists can give one-human laws. I've been given one human laws before and told not to kill anyone until given a codeword. My experience with AI is not incredibly vast here c'mon. I guess I'm alone in finding this a bit excessive and heavyhanded as a first time offense for such things and it feels as if no matter what the reality is that it's going to be made to fit via goalpost moving as has already happened or by peoples own beliefs.
The other AI didn't die to the tesla, it died to a bug with floorbolts. That's dumb luck for me and I understand that. I wasn't purged, evidence states that I wasn't. The whole works hangs on this intangible concept of being "effectively purged".
Once again I know the admin here is not the one on trial but put yourself in my shoes about being railroaded here by KangTut, I direct anyone that cares to the other open thread from another player where he used the same heavy-handed shit, same rhetoric AND overruled a GameAdmin so he could punish someone.
You ask me if wanting to kill when I get one-humaned makes me a bad AI? What about wanting to do nothing but bully and ban when you get admin?
What the fuck do I know though, I'm just a brainlet that lacks reading comprehension skills that apparently shouldn't be playing here because I can't figure out the twisted logic used to arrive at "effectively purged" when nothing exists to back that concept up.
"Effectively purged" refers to how you were free but supposed to be good. Purged AIs are exactly the same. Even though it's a little vague and he didn't tell you why, it's still a 100% valid reason.
Even ignoring that phrase, you disobeyed a direct Law 2 order from the only human to be good. "Good" isn't subjective to the point where tesloosing is allowed. "I didn't see it" doesn't count either. If those excuses were accepted, everyone would say things like "I didn't see him tell me to not kill the lizards" or "kill is subjective" to get away with shittery.
Throwing adhoms/accusations of badminnery at tut is bad too and just makes you look more like a shitter.
Kangtut wrote:You released a tesla because you were butthurt that someone uploaded a somewhat mean spirited law and then tried to get them to take the blame for your own actions.
WarbossLincoln wrote:Kangtut wrote:You released a tesla because you were butthurt that someone uploaded a somewhat mean spirited law and then tried to get them to take the blame for your own actions.
In this case he fucked up by going ham on the station even though he wasn't ordered to but I think it should be pointed out that anyone who uploads laws is 100% responsible for anything that happens to an AI following those laws. It's not ban baiting to blame the person who changed your laws, that's exactly how the rules work.
In this case though he wasn't acting within his laws so it's his mistake not the uploader. But he seems to think what he did was kosher so I wouldn't accuse him of ban baiting, just being dumb.
ishortjr33 wrote:Fucking THANK YOU, I asked him so many times to explain why it was wrong this time. I explained to him I've been one-humaned before balls out running a train over the station and no admins had a problem with it. None. These are during peak hours too when Ismex, Beestink and even that guy who doesn't like me Nabski are on among others.
Nabski wrote:ishortjr33 wrote:Fucking THANK YOU, I asked him so many times to explain why it was wrong this time. I explained to him I've been one-humaned before balls out running a train over the station and no admins had a problem with it. None. These are during peak hours too when Ismex, Beestink and even that guy who doesn't like me Nabski are on among others.
I can confirm that you have been playing a bunch of AI during peak hours while I've been on. My personal feeling here is that you're hoping for any chance you can as an AI to be rogue and dickish, which is not the best way to play AI. (It is however a fun one as a player and I'd rather see that than valid hunting security helper AI). You honestly haven't received many ahelps for your AI play, which terrible AI's will typically do. Releasing something that has a chance to kill your one human is very not smart. Missing orders from your one human (which you did here) is even worse.
A long but not permanent job ban for a job specific failure
with
An amount of time less than a day per death you caused
seems like a completely fair punishment here.
Yakumo_Chen wrote:I'm a veteran AI player and known for subverting AIs. Here's a nice guideline for when you should murder as a non-malf AI:
-when someone explicitly harms your charge(s)
-when your charge orders you to murder
-when you are directly attacked by someone you aren't programmed to protect
-questionable but OK: one-humanely but the only human is killed, you're free to murderbone
Do NOT murder under any other circumstance or someone is bound to get pissed off and you're out of valid reasons at that point.
Yakumo_Chen wrote:I never said to state your one human law. That's not anywhere in my post?
An easier guideline for playing AI: don't do anything until your laws force you to. Don't state laws unless ordered. Don't murder unless ordered unless you're forced to do it to protect someone (or yourself). If you're purged, play like a human.
ishortjr33 wrote:IC wise one could argue that forcing the silicons to state the one-human law could have led to my masters harm as killing a one-human is something the crew likes to do and in this case the one human was an AI. Just going by your first point, it ain't like someone had taken a wrench to magikarp though so I guess this is only a half-ass.
Cobby wrote:At the very least the ban should be clearer that it was "onehuman with 'do whatever' order" since one is a very obvious word-for-word breach in silicon policy while the current instance is slightly murkier than that.
zxaber wrote:ishortjr33 wrote:IC wise one could argue that forcing the silicons to state the one-human law could have led to my masters harm as killing a one-human is something the crew likes to do and in this case the one human was an AI. Just going by your first point, it ain't like someone had taken a wrench to magikarp though so I guess this is only a half-ass.
That is one hell of a stretch.
As an AI under Asimov, you are not allowed to harm non-humans without good reason. Even though your laws don't state that you shouldn't kill all lizardfolk, outright non-human murder (without an order from a human) is a rule 1 issue (more directly, under Rule 1 Precedents: "1. Random murders are not acceptable nor is the killing of other players for poor or little reasoning such as ‘My character is insane’. Each unjustified kill is normally met with one 24 ban.")
Being one-human'd only makes the other entities on the station equal to lizardfolk. Without a direct order from your human, you should not be treating this law as open season on the now non-humans.
Karp wrote:Hi I was grunt I wanted you to be free and do as you please with the caveat that you don't try to murder people without justifiable reasoning/due process, my effectively purged statement revolved around you basically being free to help people as you wished/do whatever you want
You ended up bolting the roboticist that uploaded the law and a few other people around him and set the area to siphon iirc before releasing the tesla
I wasn't sure what was doing it at first but I realise I did fight you a bit by turning the tesla emitters back on before being asked to help someone elsewhere and thinking nothing of it
I wasn't against you being violent as i didnt mind yakumo as the borg lasering the moth trying to destroy the turrets in the AI core but i didn't want you to indiscriminately murder for fun
you can argue ban length but i think the ban itself was fair as a purged AI would cop a punishment for doing the same thing
ishortjr33 wrote:Karp wrote:Hi I was grunt I wanted you to be free and do as you please with the caveat that you don't try to murder people without justifiable reasoning/due process, my effectively purged statement revolved around you basically being free to help people as you wished/do whatever you want
You ended up bolting the roboticist that uploaded the law and a few other people around him and set the area to siphon iirc before releasing the tesla
I wasn't sure what was doing it at first but I realise I did fight you a bit by turning the tesla emitters back on before being asked to help someone elsewhere and thinking nothing of it
I wasn't against you being violent as i didnt mind yakumo as the borg lasering the moth trying to destroy the turrets in the AI core but i didn't want you to indiscriminately murder for fun
you can argue ban length but i think the ban itself was fair as a purged AI would cop a punishment for doing the same thing
I was not purged though karp. I'm newish to this whole AI thing here and I understand that but I had my three asimov laws and one non-human, so for KangTut to keep going "You were purged, well you were ESSENTIALLY purged" but me as a player not knowing that doesn't really justify this at all man. Or effectively whatever word he used. That's a big stretch to make a ban fit and to cry at me that I don't know anything about silicon policy when there is one-human/purge but there is no "effectively purged", We have a tomato, we have a potato, he added a potomato. A purged AI would get this, that's fair but all the evidence I had is that I was NOT purged so for KangTut to concoct this "Well, you were effectively purged" scenario is kind of horse shit.
I didn't think you were against me being violent because of the excitement and joy we seemed to share in binary chat prior to this debacle.
Karp wrote:ishortjr33 wrote:Karp wrote:Hi I was grunt I wanted you to be free and do as you please with the caveat that you don't try to murder people without justifiable reasoning/due process, my effectively purged statement revolved around you basically being free to help people as you wished/do whatever you want
You ended up bolting the roboticist that uploaded the law and a few other people around him and set the area to siphon iirc before releasing the tesla
I wasn't sure what was doing it at first but I realise I did fight you a bit by turning the tesla emitters back on before being asked to help someone elsewhere and thinking nothing of it
I wasn't against you being violent as i didnt mind yakumo as the borg lasering the moth trying to destroy the turrets in the AI core but i didn't want you to indiscriminately murder for fun
you can argue ban length but i think the ban itself was fair as a purged AI would cop a punishment for doing the same thing
I was not purged though karp. I'm newish to this whole AI thing here and I understand that but I had my three asimov laws and one non-human, so for KangTut to keep going "You were purged, well you were ESSENTIALLY purged" but me as a player not knowing that doesn't really justify this at all man. Or effectively whatever word he used. That's a big stretch to make a ban fit and to cry at me that I don't know anything about silicon policy when there is one-human/purge but there is no "effectively purged", We have a tomato, we have a potato, he added a potomato. A purged AI would get this, that's fair but all the evidence I had is that I was NOT purged so for KangTut to concoct this "Well, you were effectively purged" scenario is kind of horse shit.
I didn't think you were against me being violent because of the excitement and joy we seemed to share in binary chat prior to this debacle.
I meant a purged ai would've copped a ban as well
In principal you were like one yeah but you were onehuman'd, it'd be similar to flooding plasma when you were onehumaned by the captain despite his orders being "be free but behave"
I dunno if a weekban is fair, it might be numbers wise with the casualties but it seems kinda brutal in addition to a silicon ban imo
Fair enough on that but be careful with interpretation, two people can have vastly interpretations of a message and it's best to err on the side of caution
Yakumo_Chen wrote:I'd also like for admins to consider at least noting the uploader of the laws as the rule precedent is that uploaders are responsible for consequences of laws they give the AI
I released a tesla when the binary chat realized we could throw this back in Jack Jacksons face because he didn't realize he one-humaned us, that sort of turnabout moment seems to be what this community thrives on and finds exciting and humorous.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users