/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... ead#unread

Good luck.

damn kendrick had a meltdown lol

This appeal discussion has probably run its course, I’m just left with two lasting questions (about policy applied from this case, not about this case in particular at all):

1) How is possession of the spare not a security risk that should be investigated seriously by sec? AA in the past was always treated as a security risk, and the spare allows a player with easy access to whatever gear they could possibly want, as well as the ability to give out Head of Staff IDs and undermine all of command. If that gets into the wrong hands it’s too late to repair the damage since anyone could have a HoS ID in their bag hidden away.

2) How is a security officer supposed to validly confirm the validity of the spare’s owner if the captain doesn’t respond due to being, say, killed from the very guy you are temporarily detaining?

This is supposing there has been no gimmick of giving out the spare stated by the captain. Does sec really have to let the guy with AA go because the cap is not responding? They can’t hold the AA temporarily until he replies (or is found dead)? And if it turns out the cap was just not replying, they can be blown up to death for theft?

As a sec officer if I saw someone non-command with the spare I would cuff him, remove the ID, and wait for a cap response for a bit in brig with the fella while trying to contact cap. If I still got no reply, I would tell the guy I’m sorry but I need confirmation this is his ID from whoever gave it to him, and ask him if he could get the cap to verify it on comms or something, and that once he did so I would hand him the ID back. Is that a wrong way to handle it? The alternative is just letting whoever has AA keep AA, despite it being only obtainable from the cap himself who refuses to verify the story. If it was a clown in particular with the spare, I might forgo the whole “cuff and confiscate” part and ask on comms before detaining, since clowns being given AA is a time honored tradition for captains.

I mean if the ONLY valid way the item could be theirs is with the explicit consent of the captain, and all other ways would fall under theft or worse, then only the captain can confirm that for you. If a guy has a sec ID because he claims the cap “promoted them,” am I expected to just assume they are telling the truth rather than cuff and confiscate until I can verify their story?

Bro he investigated the spare which was fine. Even keeping it for a bit was fine.

The part that turned him into valid salad was when he went out of his way to keep it hidden from the captain when specifically asked - even going so far as to literally say "oh I guess the clown lost it what a shame "

All he had to do to not be banned was ANY of the following

• Leave it in the evidence room
  Give it to the captain
  Not directly lie to the captain about not having it
  Not ahelp his death claiming "oh I have no idea why the clown would want me dead I guess he's just a shitter? Please ban him"

XivilaiAnaxes wrote:Bro he investigated the spare which was fine. Even keeping it for a bit was fine.

The part that turned him into valid salad was when he went out of his way to keep it hidden from the captain when specifically asked - even going so far as to literally say "oh I guess the clown lost it what a shame "

All he had to do to not be banned was ANY of the following

• Leave it in the evidence room
  Give it to the captain
  Not directly lie to the captain about not having it
  Not ahelp his death claiming "oh I have no idea why the clown would want me dead I guess he's just a shitter? Please ban him"

sinfulbliss wrote:I’m just left with two lasting questions (about policy applied from this case, not about this case in particular at all)

Again, I’m not interested in this case in particular as it has run its course 5x over, I’m asking these questions to clarify SoP for the future.

sinfulbliss wrote:

XivilaiAnaxes wrote:Bro he investigated the spare which was fine. Even keeping it for a bit was fine.

The part that turned him into valid salad was when he went out of his way to keep it hidden from the captain when specifically asked - even going so far as to literally say "oh I guess the clown lost it what a shame "

All he had to do to not be banned was ANY of the following

• Leave it in the evidence room
  Give it to the captain
  Not directly lie to the captain about not having it
  Not ahelp his death claiming "oh I have no idea why the clown would want me dead I guess he's just a shitter? Please ban him"

sinfulbliss wrote:I’m just left with two lasting questions (about policy applied from this case, not about this case in particular at all)

Again, I’m not interested in this case in particular as it has run its course 5x over, I’m asking these questions to clarify SoP for the future.

ask a head who's second-in-command or the cap
if the cap's dead, toss the spare in storage or whatever until they're revived
if they can't be revived give it to the HoS and he'll give you a promotion

1) How is possession of the spare not a security risk that should be investigated seriously by sec?

well sure, it is.

*officer sees clown with the spare*
pda -> hey capt, is the clown suppose to have your spare?
pda <- "no."
".s clown stole spare, last seen going in to medbay"
".s ai track the clown for me please"

-or-

*crickets.*
".s AI wellness check on the captain please."

I just don't see why the sop has to be to arrest first. This sounds powergamey to do without justification for the individualized case.

Taking them to brig and giving them a chance to explain things is definitely much better compared to seths response of stun take and run away. not ideal, and the kind of thing thats situational. Having blood on them would be cause to err on the side of arrest first and ask questions later in brig/interview (as long as you don't skip that step), coming in midround would be cause to err on the side of asking first and setting to arrest later.

2) How is a security officer supposed to validly confirm the validity of the spare’s owner if the captain doesn’t respond due to being, say, killed from the very guy you are temporarily detaining?

Finding out the captain could be MiA sounds like something to investigate. Could ask the cmo to check suit sensors and the ai to track the captain while sec radioing for the hos to try and raise them on command which would also alert the other heads to the growing situation.

And at that point, it might be best to search the suspect for clues.

(you see how having active ic justification for things (compared to passive assumptions) changes how things look to an admin doing a fact specific inquiry into the case)

https://tgstation13.org/msoshit/Daisy%2 ... 20Law.html

anywho, this thread is running its course, have some goodshitsec.

Botany changes really took their toll on her huh

MrStonedOne wrote:https://tgstation13.org/msoshit/Daisy%2 ... 20Law.html

anywho, this thread is running its course, have some goodshitsec.

Please send more this is gold.

lmao now the volunteer lawyers are showing up

An issue at stake in this appeal is the rule of “act like an antag, get treated like an antag”, and the idea that illegitimate arrests can be escalated as any conflict, even to a surprise instant death attack.

how the fuck is this a problem
if you're worried that illegitimate arrests will get escalated into you getting killed then I guess you'd better put in some fucking effort to ensure your arrests are legit

I was unable to find any evidence that Laughing was aware that the Clown had been given the spare before the Cap asked if he was carrying it, but there was evidence that he did not believe the Clown’s claims beforehand.

oh no so someone made an assumption based on limited information and an IC conflict arose
however will we cope this isn't what space station 13 or any hidden traitor game is about at all

All this considered, what logs/policy/rules/etc I have looked into seem to show that Laughing’s largest offense would be keeping the spare for himself and lying to the Cap that he’d had it. If, though, security is allowed to be escalated against for not legitimate arrests, and it has already been asserted that this is powergaming, I’m not sure what about this isn’t IC. Powergaming is allowed in LRP and is banned on Manuel.

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST YOU FUCKING ILLITERATE DIPSHITS THE BAN IS NOT ABOUT POWERGAMING AND TAKING THE ID, IT NEVER WAS, IT WAS FOR AHELPING THE CLOWN AND TELLING THE ADMIN THAT IT WAS UNPROVOKED

Imagine if he'd just used the say verb to communicate with the clown instead

Pandarsenic wrote:Imagine if he'd just used the say verb to communicate with the clown instead

the thing is, that "almost like it was wrong to give it to the clown in the first place!" thing is like... that comes across to me as the guy basically acting like he's untouchable because of his red shirt

and now seccies are mad at finding out that they're not

Screemonster wrote:lmao now the volunteer lawyers are showing up

An issue at stake in this appeal is the rule of “act like an antag, get treated like an antag”, and the idea that illegitimate arrests can be escalated as any conflict, even to a surprise instant death attack.

how the fuck is this a problem
if you're worried that illegitimate arrests will get escalated into you getting killed then I guess you'd better put in some fucking effort to ensure your arrests are legit

Security has to operate on incomplete information. Going from 90% sure someone did something to 100% sure is nearly impossible and would require a degree of research and investigation that is essential impossible or, at the very least, completely impractical given the environment of a typical LRP round.

If we fuck up, you can actually ahelp for the wrongful arrest. The admin will bwoink us and we will explain our reasoning. The admin then, if we acted in good faith, will tell us we got it wrong and to release you. Bam, problem solved. Not all admins will do this I suppose, but it has happened in my experience enough that I am sure it is a legitimate avenue for a player wrongfully arrested.

If you want to take it into your own hands and get revenge over it, don’t expect to have success like the clown did. The most likely scenario, even if you do kill the officer that arrested you illegitimately (in good faith), is getting swarmed by the rest of sec and round ended, or spending the rest of your round hiding in maint. It’s not your best bet, to be completely honest. If you get wrongfully arrested your best bet is to respond calmly to the officer or ask for the HoS/warden/cap if your words are falling on deaf ears and explain why it’s a mistake. Yelling and screaming “shitsec” and being an ass just makes lots of seccies tune out any legitimate defense you might have.

Even if your defense is legit, if you’re being a cunt about it, you are way more likely to just piss the person who’s trying to do their job off. I have a feeling that’s why people never have success with it. If you can keep your cool you have a way better chance of sorting it out (although I agree that’d hard since it’s very annoying to be wrongfully arrested).

Disclaimer: I actually prefer taking it into my own hands for revenge or IC resolution as well, but that’s knowing I’ll be sacrificing the entire round essentially as a result since I like the whole fight and chase. It’s not a good plan if you had other ideas for the round.

Wordswordswordswordswords

Have u tried not being a shitter

sinfulbliss wrote:If you can keep your cool you have a way better chance of sorting it out (although I agree that’d hard since it’s very annoying to be wrongfully arrested).

Wrong.

sinfulbliss wrote: Security has to operate on incomplete information. Going from 90% sure someone did something to 100% sure is nearly impossible and would require a degree of research and investigation that is essential impossible or, at the very least, completely impractical given the environment of a typical LRP round.

So you might have to take a gamble and risk suffering the consequences if you gamble and lose. So what?

sinfulbliss wrote: If we fuck up, you can actually ahelp for the wrongful arrest. The admin will bwoink us and we will explain our reasoning. The admin then, if we acted in good faith, will tell us we got it wrong and to release you. Bam, problem solved. Not all admins will do this I suppose, but it has happened in my experience enough that I am sure it is a legitimate avenue for a player wrongfully arrested.

1. muh immersions at using OOC channels to resolve an IC problem
2. this is no fucking use if there isn't an admin about
3. So if an officer just straight-up unambigiously wrongs you but not in a way that's bannable (such as, oh I don't know, STEALING YOUR STUFF?) you're supposed to just "oh well he's not an antag and he didn't get banned so I guess my hands are tied"

anyone who advocates "you should ahelp them instead of taking matters into your own hands" for something that, while opening them to IC retaliation, isn't against the rules for them to do is missing some fucking neurons.

Screemonster wrote: So you might have to take a gamble and risk suffering the consequences if you gamble and lose. So what?

A gamble where you're outgunned, outnumbered, and you're probably going to just die and piss yourself off further. That's "so what."

Screemonster wrote: 1. muh immersions at using OOC channels to resolve an IC problem

I'm the last person to go OOC to resolve IC, but if sec wrongs you, you have very few options if you want to have a normal round afterwards aside from an ahelp.

Screemonster wrote: 2. this is no fucking use if there isn't an admin about

@supportmin

Screemonster wrote:3. So if an officer just straight-up unambigiously wrongs you but not in a way that's bannable (such as, oh I don't know, STEALING YOUR STUFF?) you're supposed to just "oh well he's not an antag and he didn't get banned so I guess my hands are tied"

Nah, you can do what you want. Just saying you'll end up perma-brigged or roundended, almost certainly, if you go the retaliation route.

Screemonster wrote:anyone who advocates "you should ahelp them instead of taking matters into your own hands" for something that, while opening them to IC retaliation, isn't against the rules for them to do is missing some fucking neurons.

I myself don't even ahelp sec for minor abuses, I resolve it IC, personally. My point is if you want to have a normal round after being wronged, you shouldn't resolve it IC. Can you read something with nuance for 20 seconds or does everything have to be "HURR SEC GOOD DON'T HURT SEC EVER" when you disagree with it? If you want to retaliate yourself and turn your round into a plot for revenge, go ahead! It's exactly what I do too! It's just a terrible idea if you wanted to, I don't know, do a job or chill.

thankfully I dont have to read any of this.

sinfulbliss wrote: I myself don't even ahelp sec for minor abuses, I resolve it IC, personally. My point is if you want to have a normal round after being wronged, you shouldn't resolve it IC. Can you read something with nuance for 20 seconds or does everything have to be "HURR SEC GOOD DON'T HURT SEC EVER" when you disagree with it? If you want to retaliate yourself and turn your round into a plot for revenge, go ahead! It's exactly what I do too! It's just a terrible idea if you wanted to, I don't know, do a job or chill.

then what the fuck are you even arguing about

"players should be allowed to resolve conflicts IC without being forced to involve the admins or getting banned when security is the instigator"

"NO, I PERSONALLY RESOLVE CONFLICTS IC WHEN I CAN I'M JUST AWARE THERE WILL BE CONSEQUENCES"

what the actual fuck are you arguing for

yes if you escalate against sec and other sec see you doing a murder then you're valid salad and you can't round remove them as they're legitimately responding to a crime

nobody's saying it's a good idea to fight sec that fuck with you, just that the sec shouldn't have admin protection from such

once i was wizard and didn't epic win (because i'm not very good at fighting) and laughingxd said in dchat when i died "why didn't you get us ghosts anything if you're so fucking bad"
:{

Naloac wrote:thankfully I mostlikely dont have to read any of this.

it's pretty much resolved and the remnants of the thread are arguing over dumb shit that no longer matters. I only follow the thread at this point to see how retarded sec bootlicking can get.

Screemonster wrote:

sinfulbliss wrote: I myself don't even ahelp sec for minor abuses, I resolve it IC, personally. My point is if you want to have a normal round after being wronged, you shouldn't resolve it IC. Can you read something with nuance for 20 seconds or does everything have to be "HURR SEC GOOD DON'T HURT SEC EVER" when you disagree with it? If you want to retaliate yourself and turn your round into a plot for revenge, go ahead! It's exactly what I do too! It's just a terrible idea if you wanted to, I don't know, do a job or chill.

then what the fuck are you even arguing about

"players should be allowed to resolve conflicts IC without being forced to involve the admins or getting banned when security is the instigator"

"NO, I PERSONALLY RESOLVE CONFLICTS IC WHEN I CAN I'M JUST AWARE THERE WILL BE CONSEQUENCES"

what the actual fuck are you arguing for

yes if you escalate against sec and other sec see you doing a murder then you're valid salad and you can't round remove them as they're legitimately responding to a crime

nobody's saying it's a good idea to fight sec that fuck with you, just that the sec shouldn't have admin protection from such

He is literally just arguing for the sake of arguing

Screemonster wrote: then what the fuck are you even arguing about
nobody's saying it's a good idea to fight sec that fuck with you, just that the sec shouldn't have admin protection from such

Literally you are.

Screemonster wrote: anyone who advocates "you should ahelp them instead of taking matters into your own hands" for something that, while opening them to IC retaliation, isn't against the rules for them to do is missing some fucking neurons.

You realize you can ahelp things that aren't explicitly "against the rules," right? "Wrongful confiscation" isn't a rule but in this very thread it got someone secbanned for 30 days. Bad faith sec abuse falls under rule 1 and can be ahelped, and that's literally a better avenue than "taking matters into your own hands," if you had ideas for the round that involved something other than fighting with sec.

Sec is held to a higher standard because of the power differential, that standard isn't enforced via IC means it's enforced via admins.

sinfulbliss wrote:Sec is held to a higher standard because of the power differential, that standard isn't enforced via IC means it's enforced via admins.

WRONG!! It's enforced by an explosive lance. If I greytide into any area on the station, and you don't spend at least 30 minutes collecting fingerprints, video and photo evidence, eye witness reports as well as verifying all of these in a publicly held court AND adjust the time according to all the factors listed in space law BEFORE you put me in a cell for two minutes, you are valid to escalation and I WILL teleport an high explosive near the vicinity of your chest area that will detonate and eviscerate all of your limbs and vital organs AND you will be banned for an entire month if you dare to ahelp it!

BONERMASTER wrote:

sinfulbliss wrote:Sec is held to a higher standard because of the power differential, that standard isn't enforced via IC means it's enforced via admins.

WRONG!! It's enforced by an explosive lance. If I greytide into any area on the station, and you don't spend at least 30 minutes collecting fingerprints, video and photo evidence, eye witness reports as well as verifying all of these in a publicly held court AND adjust the time according to all the factors listed in space law BEFORE you put me in a cell for two minutes, you are valid to escalation and I WILL teleport an high explosive near the vicinity of your chest area that will detonate and eviscerate all of your limbs and vital organs AND you will be banned for an entire month if you dare to ahelp it!

You know BONERMASTER has lost his chill when he doesn't sign up his post. I hope you're proud of what your actions achieved here Sinful.

BONERMASTER wrote:

sinfulbliss wrote:Sec is held to a higher standard because of the power differential, that standard isn't enforced via IC means it's enforced via admins.

WRONG!! It's enforced by an explosive lance. If I greytide into any area on the station, and you don't spend at least 30 minutes collecting fingerprints, video and photo evidence, eye witness reports as well as verifying all of these in a publicly held court AND adjust the time according to all the factors listed in space law BEFORE you put me in a cell for two minutes, you are valid to escalation and I WILL teleport an high explosive near the vicinity of your chest area that will detonate and eviscerate all of your limbs and vital organs AND you will be banned for an entire month if you dare to ahelp it!

Lmao okay that's fucking funny . I have nothing more to argue.

technokek wrote:Why is Laughingx still replying to the thread? He said he wouldn't any more...

Desperately flailing trying to turn the court of public opinion to his side not realizing no one is going to try and overthrow MSO like they did scaredy, erro, and an0n3 because he's been keeping the lights on for years and gets involved with administrative shit like once every 27 months

god that's an awful lot of words for "I took something that belonged to someone, refused to give it back when asked by the fucking captain, then ahelped when someone later attacked me for it"

you can't lawyer your way out of being a cunt

Super Aggro Crag wrote:

technokek wrote:Why is Laughingx still replying to the thread? He said he wouldn't any more...

Desperately flailing trying to turn the court of public opinion to his side not realizing no one is going to try and overthrow MSO like they did scaredy, erro, and an0n3 because he's been keeping the lights on for years and gets involved with administrative shit like once every 27 months

I heard about a headmin that overruled MSO once. I forgot their name. We all forgot their name actually. Technically I think they don't have a name anymore. I always wondered why they quit SS13 right after... I heard they died a few days later too. It was from natural causes, if memory serves... Like I said I don't remember their name though.

Laughingx wrote:That last post

lmao at bothering to read that.

for all these words he has nothing on Oldman Robustin appeals. Ya boi is literally a lawyer.

More words does not a better argument make.

Farquaar wrote:More words does not a better argument make.

Defendant's last reply was a bit sloppy, some of his sentences were kind of incoherent from the fatigue but still a solid 8/10.
I think this appeal is a battle of endurance and Laughingx was losing but then MSO broke out the capslock so it could be anyone's game at this point.
As an oracle I predict there will soon be a one or two sentence reply followed by "appealed denied" and topic closed but who knows, it's been completely unpredictable so far.

Super Aggro Crag wrote:

technokek wrote:Why is Laughingx still replying to the thread? He said he wouldn't any more...

Desperately flailing trying to turn the court of public opinion to his side not realizing no one is going to try and overthrow MSO like they did scaredy, erro, and an0n3 because he's been keeping the lights on for years and gets involved with administrative shit like once every 27 months

Just like Elizabeth II of Britain... ?