Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permissio
Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permissio
I think we all agreed this is a silly rule forced in by SoS that no one liked and admins rarely enforced anyway.
So can we make it again that if the HoS, or even the warden/sec-officer, legitimately* executes someone without higher up permission its nothing beyond an IC issue?
That is the execution needs to be legitimate under space law, executing for minor crimes should obviously still be an OOC issue, though allowable if the person is repeatedly being a turd.
So can we make it again that if the HoS, or even the warden/sec-officer, legitimately* executes someone without higher up permission its nothing beyond an IC issue?
That is the execution needs to be legitimate under space law, executing for minor crimes should obviously still be an OOC issue, though allowable if the person is repeatedly being a turd.
-
- Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 10:28 pm
- Byond Username: ShadowYui
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Minor bureaucratic rule cost me 60 seconds in between my Sec valids, must get redtext at all costs, beep boop execute people for emags beep boop
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Take your shit posts back to singulo, thanks
- Steelpoint
- Github User
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:37 pm
- Byond Username: Steelpoint
- Github Username: Steelpoint
- Location: The Armoury
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Please don't act like a child aly.
I think at minimum the Head of Security should have the right to freely execute anyone at their own discretion, akin to the Captain, and answering only to *Central Command or maybe the Captain as well (though it could be argued that Central Command has given express executive permission to give the HoS the power to freely preform executions that exceeds (or at the same level) even the Captain's authority for times of great duress). The Warden and Sec Officers already have some leeyway in executions under certain circumstances or can just be given carte blanche by the Captain or HoS to do what's necessary.
*Admins
I think at minimum the Head of Security should have the right to freely execute anyone at their own discretion, akin to the Captain, and answering only to *Central Command or maybe the Captain as well (though it could be argued that Central Command has given express executive permission to give the HoS the power to freely preform executions that exceeds (or at the same level) even the Captain's authority for times of great duress). The Warden and Sec Officers already have some leeyway in executions under certain circumstances or can just be given carte blanche by the Captain or HoS to do what's necessary.
*Admins
- imblyings
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:42 pm
- Byond Username: Ausops
- Location: >using suit sensors
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
>Where possible, executions are to be authorized by, in order of availability; Captain/acting Captain → Head of Security → Warden.
>Where possible
If the captain isn't responding, being a comdom and jerking off being useless, or if he's just plain dead, then go for it. It's not a hard and fast rule and if you have a good case for it, then it shouldn't even matter anyway. The strange thing is though, I don't Malkevin was referring to this specific bit of policy but the rules page otherwise doesn't really mention something like this.
>Where possible
If the captain isn't responding, being a comdom and jerking off being useless, or if he's just plain dead, then go for it. It's not a hard and fast rule and if you have a good case for it, then it shouldn't even matter anyway. The strange thing is though, I don't Malkevin was referring to this specific bit of policy but the rules page otherwise doesn't really mention something like this.
The patched, dusty, trimmed, feathered mantle of evil +13.
- Steelpoint
- Github User
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:37 pm
- Byond Username: Steelpoint
- Github Username: Steelpoint
- Location: The Armoury
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
To be frankly honest though I've personally never had any trouble, as the HoS, in executing people without seeking the Captain's approval. However I tend to only execute when I know I can legally do so.
But its still a grey area that I know other people have had run in's with admins in the past, and it would be a good move to try and get a consensus/ruling/whatever on this. As people have wildly varying opinions on the subject.
But its still a grey area that I know other people have had run in's with admins in the past, and it would be a good move to try and get a consensus/ruling/whatever on this. As people have wildly varying opinions on the subject.
- Saegrimr
- Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:39 pm
- Byond Username: Saegrimr
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
I only really have to bwoink people when I get ahelps from a sec officer doing it himself out of nowhere. I just ask who he got permission from, then ask warden/hos/captain if he authorized any executions lately.
Generally people that really earned an execution don't even bother ahelping. Its just the greytiding shitters, and those tend to get a reply of "shouldn't have been acting like a twat all round"
Generally people that really earned an execution don't even bother ahelping. Its just the greytiding shitters, and those tend to get a reply of "shouldn't have been acting like a twat all round"
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
- Stickymayhem
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
- Byond Username: Stickymayhem
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
If the Captain is alive and available, he should be asked. If you literally can't get a response from him after asking in command/security/pda then ask the HoS. If that fails for the above reasons or because he's dead, ask the warden.
It makes sense, makes removing people from the round permanently more difficult and encourages better handling of antags better than KILL EM ALL AND LET CENTCOM SORT EM OUT.
It makes sense, makes removing people from the round permanently more difficult and encourages better handling of antags better than KILL EM ALL AND LET CENTCOM SORT EM OUT.
Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be
- Scones
- Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:46 am
- Byond Username: Scones
- Location: cooler than thou
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
I've never even seen this be an issue. Admins don't go after people and say "WHOA BUDDY LOOKS LIKE YOU DIDN'T GET THE CAPTAINS STAMP SIGNATURE AND DICK PICS ATTACHED TO THAT EXECUTION WARRANT"
Like everyone else here said, if the Captain isn't responding, he isn't available. Kill 'em all.
Like everyone else here said, if the Captain isn't responding, he isn't available. Kill 'em all.
plplplplp WOOOOooo hahahhaha
- Stickymayhem
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 6:13 pm
- Byond Username: Stickymayhem
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
If you're playing the game to kill all the antags you're doing it wrong anyway.
No one on the station, not even security, should want all the antags dead in a round where the shuttle can be called. The goal should be keeping control, not deny all the greentext.
No one wants a round to end because "Well we killed them all and now nothing is happening" you should be escaping from a catastrophe.
No one on the station, not even security, should want all the antags dead in a round where the shuttle can be called. The goal should be keeping control, not deny all the greentext.
No one wants a round to end because "Well we killed them all and now nothing is happening" you should be escaping from a catastrophe.
Boris wrote:Sticky is a jackass who has worms where his brain should be, but he also gets exactly what SS13 should be
- Steelpoint
- Github User
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:37 pm
- Byond Username: Steelpoint
- Github Username: Steelpoint
- Location: The Armoury
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
What happens to antagonists after they've been captured by Security (effectively the antagonist version of being killed and spaced) should not be a massive concern to admins outside of unlawful executions (unlawful being just killing people for no reason or without any premeditation).
If the round has gotten stagnate because the antagonists have been captued/executed then the fault lies on the antagonists for not being good enough and the admins for not fixing the issue. You don't get to blame security for the round being boring because in a perfect world that's their job, but its the job of the admins to act as gamemaster's and move the round forward even if Security is doing its job well, not complain that sec should not be killing antags because that's just a lazy cop out.
If the round has gotten stagnate because the antagonists have been captued/executed then the fault lies on the antagonists for not being good enough and the admins for not fixing the issue. You don't get to blame security for the round being boring because in a perfect world that's their job, but its the job of the admins to act as gamemaster's and move the round forward even if Security is doing its job well, not complain that sec should not be killing antags because that's just a lazy cop out.
- ThatSlyFox
- Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 7:00 am
- Byond Username: ThatSlyFox
- Location: USA!
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
We have also adopted this weird "dying isn't fun" motto. Which is weakening antags from a code point of view. A admin can only do so much before people complain and bitch about us doing something that is going against their meta.
On topic of executions, is it really that hard to ask your superior if you can kill someone? It isn't.
On topic of executions, is it really that hard to ask your superior if you can kill someone? It isn't.
- Falamazeer
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 12:05 am
- Byond Username: Wootanon
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Not hard to ask, sometimes pretty hard to get an answer.
Ham Sammich, beating a dead horse since 2010.
NikNakFlak wrote:....It's true...that is why I removed my forum avatar
lumipharon wrote:ass parasite was pretty meh when I tried it.
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
^This^Falamazeer wrote:Not hard to ask, sometimes pretty hard to get an answer.
I've always gotten the impression that some admins interpret a lack of an answer to be a lack of permission
Also it is hard to ask, because the AI has constant access to all the comms channels. As soon as it gets a word about an execution it'll do whatever it can to prevent it, I've even seen AIs get bent out of shape when security plays it smart and says "Can we transfer x to CentCom" - guaranteed the AI will send a borg to snoop at the transfer room and then act with mock surprise that it's actually a death chamber.
And then you have to deal with an uppity AI and borgs doing everything they can to prevent people going to the brig, a situation that you have to fight with one hand tied behind your back because its become defacto policy that you can't blow away the borgs for following their laws too strictly.
By the way, unlike how alyssayui was implying with their fallacious statement I'm not arguing for the laxing of the rules for my benefit because I've long since realised that executions are a giant pain in the arse and functionally offer zero benefit over permaing - which has the additional benefit that I can walk up to their cells and gloat at them if I fell like.
But still, its nice to have the option there.
- Falamazeer
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 12:05 am
- Byond Username: Wootanon
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Like I said in the other thread pretty much about this, There are far to many rounds where the brig is GONE, be it bombs, riots, or singuloth. For there not to be an answer for security.
And it changes from admin to admin, day to day, One day, I'm told it's valid that an officer beat me to death for feuding with the mime because he had no way to arrest me, No extra cuffs, despite him WATCHING said mime baton me randomly in a hallway, and he never even took the baton.
Then I read about the headmin banning an officer for spacing a nutjob asshat geneticist who tried to monkey him after the brig was destroyed.
Some people need to be removed from the round, Or they just keep coming back, When the brig is gone, the captains dead, and the head of security won't answer, sometimes you just gotta space a motherfucker, preferably welded in a locker with an air tank and radio so you can hear him SCREAM!!!
That being said, If you don't want to let security handle it IC, then you guys need to start handling it OOC by giving out bans to people who harass and antagonize officers with the threat of lethal force repeatedly.
And it changes from admin to admin, day to day, One day, I'm told it's valid that an officer beat me to death for feuding with the mime because he had no way to arrest me, No extra cuffs, despite him WATCHING said mime baton me randomly in a hallway, and he never even took the baton.
Then I read about the headmin banning an officer for spacing a nutjob asshat geneticist who tried to monkey him after the brig was destroyed.
Some people need to be removed from the round, Or they just keep coming back, When the brig is gone, the captains dead, and the head of security won't answer, sometimes you just gotta space a motherfucker, preferably welded in a locker with an air tank and radio so you can hear him SCREAM!!!
That being said, If you don't want to let security handle it IC, then you guys need to start handling it OOC by giving out bans to people who harass and antagonize officers with the threat of lethal force repeatedly.
Ham Sammich, beating a dead horse since 2010.
NikNakFlak wrote:....It's true...that is why I removed my forum avatar
lumipharon wrote:ass parasite was pretty meh when I tried it.
- Not-Dorsidarf
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:14 pm
- Byond Username: Dorsidwarf
- Location: We're all going on an, admin holiday
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
I'm fairly sure that with executions it's pretty safe to play it like:
-> Ask the captain. If he says no, tough monkies. If he says yes, unzip harmbaton. If he doesn't answer, see below
-> If you are the HOS, unzip harmbaton
-> If you are not the HOS, ask the HOS. If he says no, tough monkies. If he says yes, unzip baton blah blah you get where I'm going.
-> Ask the captain. If he says no, tough monkies. If he says yes, unzip harmbaton. If he doesn't answer, see below
-> If you are the HOS, unzip harmbaton
-> If you are not the HOS, ask the HOS. If he says no, tough monkies. If he says yes, unzip baton blah blah you get where I'm going.
kieth4 wrote: infrequently shitting yourself is fine imo
There is a lot of very bizarre nonsense being talked on this forum. I shall now remain silent and logoff until my points are vindicated.
Player who complainted over being killed for looting cap office wrote: ↑Sun Jul 30, 2023 1:33 am Hey there, I'm Virescent, the super evil person who made the stupid appeal and didn't think it through enough. Just came here to say: screech, retards. Screech and writhe like the worms you are. Your pathetic little cries will keep echoing around for a while before quietting down. There is one great outcome from this: I rised up the blood pressure of some of you shitheads and lowered your lifespan. I'm honestly tempted to do this more often just to see you screech and writhe more, but that wouldn't be cool of me. So come on haters, show me some more of your high blood pressure please.
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Yes, I agree that is how it should happen.
The question is whether not following that SoP is grounds for OOC admin involvement.
After all if the Cap/HoS are that bothered they can demote the officer or give some other IC form of punishment.
The question is whether not following that SoP is grounds for OOC admin involvement.
After all if the Cap/HoS are that bothered they can demote the officer or give some other IC form of punishment.
-
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 1:55 am
- Byond Username: Tsaricide
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Asking for permission to execute should be an IC issue, if the HoS chooses not to ask and the captain finds out then he has the option to discipline the HoS. Just my opinion.
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
So after the mess last week, I assume we're now all in agreement that execution requests should be back to being a fully an IC issue - up/down & sideways along the chain of command?
- ThatSlyFox
- Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 7:00 am
- Byond Username: ThatSlyFox
- Location: USA!
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Last thing we need is secuirty officers and the HoS executing someone without asking and praying the captain does something IC. FYI he isn't and most likely wouldn't know.
- Loonikus
- Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:20 am
- Byond Username: Loonicus
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Just ask the captain, its his station and your executing one of his crewmen. Outside of exceptional circumstances, the captain should have a say in it.
If the captain isn't available or is off ignoring his duties and dicking around, than it should fall to the HoS to decide. Also, Code Red is obviously free reign for Security to do practically anything they want so that's something else to consider.
As for admin enforcement, I don't think its always necessary. Its a case by case issue, if the station is going to hell, perma is destroyed, and the captain is MIA, I completely understand clubbing a prisoners skull in. If you ask the captain and he says no, and you decide to do it anyway because I AM THE LAW than you are being a shit who deserves a demotion, but it should really only be an admin issue if it becomes chronic.
If the captain isn't available or is off ignoring his duties and dicking around, than it should fall to the HoS to decide. Also, Code Red is obviously free reign for Security to do practically anything they want so that's something else to consider.
As for admin enforcement, I don't think its always necessary. Its a case by case issue, if the station is going to hell, perma is destroyed, and the captain is MIA, I completely understand clubbing a prisoners skull in. If you ask the captain and he says no, and you decide to do it anyway because I AM THE LAW than you are being a shit who deserves a demotion, but it should really only be an admin issue if it becomes chronic.
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
You guys aren't seeing the tree for the forest.
Yes, you should be asking the captain/acting-captain/hos/warden in that order for permission to execute, and failure to do is definitely grounds for an IC demotion, probably a perma brig yourself for a murder charge.
But thats not the question at hand
The question is whether admins should be involved in IC disputes over legitimate executions.
As demonstrated by rdght91's ban, he was only banned, and the ban upheld, because he followed the SOP but got the wrong answer from a distracted HoS who also had OOC reasons to not want to get involved.
MSO even went as far as saying that if rdght91 hadn't had even bothered contacting the HoS nothing would've come of it because rdght91 had enough IC reason to execute that geneticist.
STP only upheld the ban and moved the thread to the resolved section because of the existence of this silly rule that no one but SoS wanted.
And remember, perma is functionally equivalent executions.
IC-wise sec officers shouldn't be permaing people, but theres no OOC rule against this unless they're permaing people for illegitimate reasons.
Yes, you should be asking the captain/acting-captain/hos/warden in that order for permission to execute, and failure to do is definitely grounds for an IC demotion, probably a perma brig yourself for a murder charge.
But thats not the question at hand
The question is whether admins should be involved in IC disputes over legitimate executions.
As demonstrated by rdght91's ban, he was only banned, and the ban upheld, because he followed the SOP but got the wrong answer from a distracted HoS who also had OOC reasons to not want to get involved.
MSO even went as far as saying that if rdght91 hadn't had even bothered contacting the HoS nothing would've come of it because rdght91 had enough IC reason to execute that geneticist.
STP only upheld the ban and moved the thread to the resolved section because of the existence of this silly rule that no one but SoS wanted.
And remember, perma is functionally equivalent executions.
IC-wise sec officers shouldn't be permaing people, but theres no OOC rule against this unless they're permaing people for illegitimate reasons.
- Sometinyprick
- In-Game Game Master
- Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:24 pm
- Byond Username: STP
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
I don't rightly know who made the rule, but Stickymayhem is dead set in keeping the rule in place and I don't want it at all.
Unless any of you can convince him it's up to hg what happens.
Unless any of you can convince him it's up to hg what happens.
i play leo bonhart, feel free to grief me
- Falamazeer
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 12:05 am
- Byond Username: Wootanon
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Well that's unlikely, he's proven in four threads about this exact issue (The original two with the geticist asshole, this one, and the how to not get banned with the brig gone thread)Sometinyprick wrote: Unless any of you can convince him
That sticky gives absolutely no fucks that his community thinks he is wrong and doesn't appreciate security micromanaging.
That being said, Moving forward, I won't let a retarded rule stop me from doing literately the only thing that makes sense when push comes to shove, I don't execute unless it's absolutely beyond reproach in my mind, And I refuse to let fear of a bwoink scare me out of the job entirely, Continuous streams of different people in positions of power with a branch of the same stick up half the communities ass over security is what made it the unplayable mess it is today.
If you want a better security, there is only one path that's grounded in sense, loosen the admincuffs, and make the role appeal to the veterans of the server, rather than the shitty new guys exclusively.
Because right now, the only regulars of merit are the masochists such as myself.
Ham Sammich, beating a dead horse since 2010.
NikNakFlak wrote:....It's true...that is why I removed my forum avatar
lumipharon wrote:ass parasite was pretty meh when I tried it.
- Scones
- Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:46 am
- Byond Username: Scones
- Location: cooler than thou
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
HG has been in bus, and tgsleads, I don't know what's stopping him from reaching a simple Y/N on this. I don't think he's going through some careful process of deliberation or anything.
plplplplp WOOOOooo hahahhaha
- Steelpoint
- Github User
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:37 pm
- Byond Username: Steelpoint
- Github Username: Steelpoint
- Location: The Armoury
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
If HG won't do his job than either flip a coin or hold some player vote on the issue as a stand in for his vote.
-
- Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 5:07 pm
- Byond Username: TheNightingale
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
It's better to ask forgiveness than permission. The answer? Execute first, tell the HoS later.
- Hibbles
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:33 pm
- Byond Username: HotelBravoLima
- Location: United States
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
My own opinion is that it should be more about 'does this person deserve death?' than 'does this execution have authorization?' because with the latter, we might end up protecting people who deserve to get fucked, and punishing people just doing that to them.
And yet at the same time, how can we encourage Security officers to kill less if we change this? You really should be bringing in people alive unless they're too great a threat or causing too much trouble. Or they're giant never-going-to-change shitlers. Like, that was the point of the policy in the first place, to try and discourage Random Officer 3 from just walking into a compliant prisoner's cell and killing them.
And yet at the same time, how can we encourage Security officers to kill less if we change this? You really should be bringing in people alive unless they're too great a threat or causing too much trouble. Or they're giant never-going-to-change shitlers. Like, that was the point of the policy in the first place, to try and discourage Random Officer 3 from just walking into a compliant prisoner's cell and killing them.
RIP
-
- TGMC Administrator
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 4:40 am
- Byond Username: Lumipharon
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Yeah it doesn't really make sense.
If you're killing someone who doesn't deserve to be killed, then you should be in OOC shit whether you got permission or not.
Conversely, if the execution is justified, what relevence is some other players opinion, from an OOC perspective?
I mean really, 80% of the time traitors and shit get killed on the spot, either by sec or random crew. At some point between 'murderboning' and 'dead', they have to be very much incapacitated, and no longer a threat. (usually crit and getting beaten to death death with a toolbox or their own weapons)
Yet people never get in trouble for this.
IF however, a sec officer drags the murderboner away from the lynch mob, heals him, takes him to the brig, then decided to execute him for his murderous rampage without approval, he'll get banned.
This is not consistant and doesn't make sense from an OOC perspective, so why do we still have the rule?
If you're killing someone who doesn't deserve to be killed, then you should be in OOC shit whether you got permission or not.
Conversely, if the execution is justified, what relevence is some other players opinion, from an OOC perspective?
I mean really, 80% of the time traitors and shit get killed on the spot, either by sec or random crew. At some point between 'murderboning' and 'dead', they have to be very much incapacitated, and no longer a threat. (usually crit and getting beaten to death death with a toolbox or their own weapons)
Yet people never get in trouble for this.
IF however, a sec officer drags the murderboner away from the lynch mob, heals him, takes him to the brig, then decided to execute him for his murderous rampage without approval, he'll get banned.
This is not consistant and doesn't make sense from an OOC perspective, so why do we still have the rule?
- Sometinyprick
- In-Game Game Master
- Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:24 pm
- Byond Username: STP
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
As I've said before it's being discussed and I'm waiting for hg to say his bitlumipharon wrote:Yeah it doesn't really make sense.
If you're killing someone who doesn't deserve to be killed, then you should be in OOC shit whether you got permission or not.
Conversely, if the execution is justified, what relevence is some other players opinion, from an OOC perspective?
I mean really, 80% of the time traitors and shit get killed on the spot, either by sec or random crew. At some point between 'murderboning' and 'dead', they have to be very much incapacitated, and no longer a threat. (usually crit and getting beaten to death death with a toolbox or their own weapons)
Yet people never get in trouble for this.
IF however, a sec officer drags the murderboner away from the lynch mob, heals him, takes him to the brig, then decided to execute him for his murderous rampage without approval, he'll get banned.
This is not consistant and doesn't make sense from an OOC perspective, so why do we still have the rule?
It doesn't make sense for this rule to be in place, but yet we have it.
i play leo bonhart, feel free to grief me
-
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 1:47 pm
- Byond Username: Callanrockslol
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Good luck, the wild HG is know for its elusivenessSometinyprick wrote:As I've said before it's being discussed and I'm waiting for hg to say his bitlumipharon wrote:Yeah it doesn't really make sense.
If you're killing someone who doesn't deserve to be killed, then you should be in OOC shit whether you got permission or not.
Conversely, if the execution is justified, what relevence is some other players opinion, from an OOC perspective?
I mean really, 80% of the time traitors and shit get killed on the spot, either by sec or random crew. At some point between 'murderboning' and 'dead', they have to be very much incapacitated, and no longer a threat. (usually crit and getting beaten to death death with a toolbox or their own weapons)
Yet people never get in trouble for this.
IF however, a sec officer drags the murderboner away from the lynch mob, heals him, takes him to the brig, then decided to execute him for his murderous rampage without approval, he'll get banned.
This is not consistant and doesn't make sense from an OOC perspective, so why do we still have the rule?
It doesn't make sense for this rule to be in place, but yet we have it.
The most excessive signature on /tg/station13.
Still not even at the limit after 8 fucking years.
The evil holoparasite user I can't believe its not DIO and his holoparasite I can't believe its not Skub have been defeated by the Spacedust Crusaders, but what has been taken from the station can never be returned.
OOC: TheGel: Literally a guy in a suit with a shuttle full of xenos. That's a doozy
Still not even at the limit after 8 fucking years.
Spoiler:
OOC: TheGel: Literally a guy in a suit with a shuttle full of xenos. That's a doozy
- Sometinyprick
- In-Game Game Master
- Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:24 pm
- Byond Username: STP
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
It's more a problem of time-zones to be very honest.callanrockslol wrote: Good luck, the wild HG is know for its elusiveness
i play leo bonhart, feel free to grief me
- Wyzack
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:32 pm
- Byond Username: Wyzack
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
I have no issues with HG but isnt being super hard to get ahold of pretty damn counter productive to his role as one of our three headmins?
Arthur Thomson says, "Since there are no admins I would loging with another account and kill you"
Caleb Robinson laughs.
Arthur Thomson catches fire!
certified good poster
Caleb Robinson laughs.
Arthur Thomson catches fire!
tusterman11 wrote:Can you stop lying? I just asked you and you are was a piece of shiit on me!!!
EngamerAzari's real number one fangirl <3Kor wrote:I wish Wyzack was still an admin.
certified good poster
-
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 2:24 pm
- Byond Username: Jacough
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
If you're really having that much trouble reaching him then well, fuck him. I know this isn't a paid position, he's doing this in his free time, he does this because he loves the server, blah blah blah, etc etc. but if he can't weigh in on headmin decisions then fuck it, go with majority vote. For me personally this hasn't been too big of an issue. I've performed several executions of grey tiders and confirmed syndicates as a warden and only been bwoinked for one which was ruled valid on my part (The dude was metagrudging over me demoting him the previous round for beating prisoners by space lubing the brig, grey tiding all round, and continuing to harass security after being dunked three times and demoted by the CMO). As long as I'm not expected to bend over and take it in the ass each time some dick sniffing inbred cunt decides to stir shit up for sec because "HURRR FUCK DA POLICE" simply because SoS was butthurt over people ruining his epic greytiding faggotry I'm good.Sometinyprick wrote: As I've said before it's being discussed and I'm waiting for hg to say his bit
It doesn't make sense for this rule to be in place, but yet we have it.
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Bumping this seeing as Kor is a headmin now and we might actually get a proper sensible decision on this.
- oranges
- Code Maintainer
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:16 pm
- Byond Username: Optimumtact
- Github Username: optimumtact
- Location: #CHATSHITGETBANGED
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
I see you guys still really want your valids
-
- TGMC Administrator
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 4:40 am
- Byond Username: Lumipharon
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
I do think that getting permission for a VALID execution should be an IC issue.
That said, people kill antags because 'gottavalid' way too often, but that's not an admin issue - the rogue officer or the captain himself deciding to execute the traitor for non harmfully stealing magboots is equally as shitty. But should be equally allowable by policy.
That said, people kill antags because 'gottavalid' way too often, but that's not an admin issue - the rogue officer or the captain himself deciding to execute the traitor for non harmfully stealing magboots is equally as shitty. But should be equally allowable by policy.
-
- Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:26 pm
- Byond Username: KorPhaeron
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
That's the problem in making a single hard line. Silently tasing, cuffing, and spacing a guy because you saw him emag a door is shitty, but on the flipside it's stupid to ban a security officer if he just caught a traitor who spaced 8 people and beats him to death.lumipharon wrote:I do think that getting permission for a VALID execution should be an IC issue.
That said, people kill antags because 'gottavalid' way too often, but that's not an admin issue - the rogue officer or the captain himself deciding to execute the traitor for non harmfully stealing magboots is equally as shitty. But should be equally allowable by policy.
If you make it an OOC issue traitors salty they lost will abuse the rule to try and get revenge on people who stopped their killing spree, and if you make it an IC issue people will shit all over any attempt at roleplay to straight up murder everyone they can (like that recent RP ops round where they bought only space cash and tried to buy the station, and the captain screamed NUKE OPS when he saw they shared a name and started executing all of them)
- Arete
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:55 am
- Byond Username: Arete
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
To be fair, if you're talking about the same round I saw the other day, the ops did win that one after the crew mutinied. They sure as hell knew that murdering the ops would be valid, but by and large they found it too amusing to spoil. At some point you've got to trust the playerbase to not choose the shittiest of all possible worlds.Kor wrote:If you make it an OOC issue traitors salty they lost will abuse the rule to try and get revenge on people who stopped their killing spree, and if you make it an IC issue people will shit all over any attempt at roleplay to straight up murder everyone they can (like that recent RP ops round where they bought only space cash and tried to buy the station, and the captain screamed NUKE OPS when he saw they shared a name and started executing all of them)
- Saegrimr
- Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:39 pm
- Byond Username: Saegrimr
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
:^)Arete wrote:At some point you've got to trust the playerbase to not choose the shittiest of all possible worlds.
tedward1337 wrote:Sae is like the racist grandad who everyone laughs at for being racist, but deep down we all know he's right.
-
- TGMC Administrator
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 4:40 am
- Byond Username: Lumipharon
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Yeah but what I mean specifically, is that currently, OOC wise you need cap permission (down the chain of command yadda yadda) to execute someone, else you'll get banned.Kor wrote:That's the problem in making a single hard line. Silently tasing, cuffing, and spacing a guy because you saw him emag a door is shitty, but on the flipside it's stupid to ban a security officer if he just caught a traitor who spaced 8 people and beats him to death.lumipharon wrote:I do think that getting permission for a VALID execution should be an IC issue.
That said, people kill antags because 'gottavalid' way too often, but that's not an admin issue - the rogue officer or the captain himself deciding to execute the traitor for non harmfully stealing magboots is equally as shitty. But should be equally allowable by policy.
If you make it an OOC issue traitors salty they lost will abuse the rule to try and get revenge on people who stopped their killing spree, and if you make it an IC issue people will shit all over any attempt at roleplay to straight up murder everyone they can (like that recent RP ops round where they bought only space cash and tried to buy the station, and the captain screamed NUKE OPS when he saw they shared a name and started executing all of them)
This strikes me as extremely retarded - either the guy is valid to kill or not, getting IC permission from an IC person should be an IC issue.
The thing about people executing valids when it's shitty to do so is completely seperate.
-
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2015 3:36 am
- Byond Username: Roadhog1
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Shit, I thought we had scrapped this rule already. It's dumb, someone is deserves to die because antag status/IC criminal acts or they don't.
I also want to apologize to some admin I don't remember when I got into an argument after I gassed a greytider, you were right- I thought we had tossed it. Can we, please?
Shitty behavior toward gimmick antags or execessive dickisness to caught antags can be handled by the crew IC or by admin fuckery, not bans.
I also want to apologize to some admin I don't remember when I got into an argument after I gassed a greytider, you were right- I thought we had tossed it. Can we, please?
Shitty behavior toward gimmick antags or execessive dickisness to caught antags can be handled by the crew IC or by admin fuckery, not bans.
- Oldman Robustin
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 2:18 pm
- Byond Username: ForcefulCJS
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
This shouldn't be a rule plain and simple. This isn't about MUH VALIDS, I don't distinguish between perma and murder at all (unless I perma someone in a case where I'm awaiting evidence to confirm/deny that they committed a high crime). I don't get some special satisfaction from lasering someone to death compared to dragging them into their perma cell. If you're that kind of sadistic officer then surely their crying and begging as you seal them into their cell is more satisfying.
Executions generally happen because perma is too slow or too risky because of an emergency, and that's when you're least wanting to sit around waiting for some Memester Captain to finish honking people in the bar to actually listen to his radio and respond.
If you're worried about people executing traitors for balloons and emags and playing cards then that's pretty simple rule 1 stuff. Security can't give a 20 minute sentence for a janitor not using signs to mop at roundstart, in the same vein they can't execute people for emagging a door to get tools or something.
Even that last statement is kind of iffy. It's hilarious how many times people get executed and the admins will chant "act like an antag get dunked like an antag" if you get caught breaking into the captain's office, but using well known and dangerous syndicate hacking tools to bust in somewhere slightly less controversial is somehow better protected by our policy?
Executions generally happen because perma is too slow or too risky because of an emergency, and that's when you're least wanting to sit around waiting for some Memester Captain to finish honking people in the bar to actually listen to his radio and respond.
If you're worried about people executing traitors for balloons and emags and playing cards then that's pretty simple rule 1 stuff. Security can't give a 20 minute sentence for a janitor not using signs to mop at roundstart, in the same vein they can't execute people for emagging a door to get tools or something.
Even that last statement is kind of iffy. It's hilarious how many times people get executed and the admins will chant "act like an antag get dunked like an antag" if you get caught breaking into the captain's office, but using well known and dangerous syndicate hacking tools to bust in somewhere slightly less controversial is somehow better protected by our policy?
- imblyings
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:42 pm
- Byond Username: Ausops
- Location: >using suit sensors
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
I don't remember the last time I enforced this rule, actually I don't think it's really come up at all in game.
I've been thinking about this and the intent with sec rules really should just be to limit any actual abuse eg. theft of belongings for no reason or constantly using harsh sentences for trivial shit.
I've been thinking about this and the intent with sec rules really should just be to limit any actual abuse eg. theft of belongings for no reason or constantly using harsh sentences for trivial shit.
The patched, dusty, trimmed, feathered mantle of evil +13.
-
- TGMC Administrator
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 4:40 am
- Byond Username: Lumipharon
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
I almost got secbanned for killing oldman once because the HoS was screaming for help and there was no way to secure him (we were in space).
so yeah.
so yeah.
- Scones
- Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:46 am
- Byond Username: Scones
- Location: cooler than thou
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Way too situational to try and quantify and enforce with hard policy
plplplplp WOOOOooo hahahhaha
- Luke Cox
- Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:52 am
- Byond Username: NocturnalQuill
- Location: Prisoner Transfer Room
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
HoS should be in charge of executions where confirmed traitors are concerned in my opinion. If it's a grey area (guy is just being a shit and killing people), defer to the captain.
-
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 3:01 am
- Byond Username: Incomptinence
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
Let hos decide but captain can overrule him. Simple there the hos is more than the biggest loot pinata again.
-
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2015 3:36 am
- Byond Username: Roadhog1
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
^We're getting off the point. Yeah, IC you SHOULD have the captain/HOS permission for execution, and you risk being fired/jailed/executed yourself for failing to do so IC, but the whole thing should remain IC unless the person simply did not deserve to die for OOC reasons.
Some admins operate on the strict no permission=ban and some are more flexible, but this just creates a shitty situation for security in the current rules.
Some admins operate on the strict no permission=ban and some are more flexible, but this just creates a shitty situation for security in the current rules.
- Falamazeer
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 12:05 am
- Byond Username: Wootanon
Re: Admin enforced requirement for Captain's Execution permi
As it's being enforced isn't working, RDGHT91 nearly got another note and ban for delivering righteous justice to a motherfucker of a janitor who randomly walked up and shot em with a tranq dart, Justice was found in the end but without the HoS permission a vicious baiter would have happily got his way, and THE VICTIM OF A RANDOM DART would have been banned for retaliating appropriately.
Keep it a rule, but make it context specific, Outright exposed antags, massive repeat shitlers, random griefers, and the normal expempt people (Ops wiz, ling, shadowling, evil hulk, anyone you cannot safely disable for arrest) should not require captain/HoS permissions.
Keep it a rule, but make it context specific, Outright exposed antags, massive repeat shitlers, random griefers, and the normal expempt people (Ops wiz, ling, shadowling, evil hulk, anyone you cannot safely disable for arrest) should not require captain/HoS permissions.
Ham Sammich, beating a dead horse since 2010.
NikNakFlak wrote:....It's true...that is why I removed my forum avatar
lumipharon wrote:ass parasite was pretty meh when I tried it.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot]