/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

What is the appropriate response when security attacks you/abuses you/arrests you FNR for 20 minutes?

Adminhelping about cell times or false arrests is generally "IC issue," but retaliating violently will get you banned. If you retaliate non violently they'll "escalate" to murdering you or permabrigging you. They're allowed to break into anywhere they want, take what they want, etc. Nobody IC will care because everyone knows they can't be antagonists.

Is there an appropriate response other than rolling over and dying/letting the guy mess with your round?

And no this isn't just about that recent ban appeal, this has been something that's been bothering me for a while. We have a class of player who is more or less rules free yet it's bannable to retaliate or protect yourself.

kevinz000 wrote:

Arianya wrote:

kevinz000 wrote:just got off a round with someone who played security. they walked into science and shot a golem in one of the labs FNR and shot me when I tried to free the golem as a security officer. said that if you aren't killing anyone you're allowed to kill you're playing security wrong. literally said i should validhunt anyone who can be valided.
next round rushed promotion to HOS, asked captain to let him perma a clown for /walking into/ (not breaking in!) the brig, criticized me over helping the golem the PREVIOUS ROUND, captain thought he was a good choice somehow and i was just completely done with security at that moment and fucked off because I can't deal with shitters who get put into a HoS role and captains who side with said shitters. Traitors hijacked the shuttle and I barely gave a fuck.

also pillz this is exactly the type of player that made me assume you were just bucklecuffing him FNR because so many people do random bullshit as security.

Did you ahelp it

My mistake for not doing so but no as golems ARE ruled valid so I'm assuming it'll be brushed off.

Was it a lab golem or a lavaland golem

I don't think lab golems are valid unless they are seen helping an antag

Screemonster wrote:

kevinz000 wrote:

Arianya wrote:

kevinz000 wrote:just got off a round with someone who played security. they walked into science and shot a golem in one of the labs FNR and shot me when I tried to free the golem as a security officer. said that if you aren't killing anyone you're allowed to kill you're playing security wrong. literally said i should validhunt anyone who can be valided.
next round rushed promotion to HOS, asked captain to let him perma a clown for /walking into/ (not breaking in!) the brig, criticized me over helping the golem the PREVIOUS ROUND, captain thought he was a good choice somehow and i was just completely done with security at that moment and fucked off because I can't deal with shitters who get put into a HoS role and captains who side with said shitters. Traitors hijacked the shuttle and I barely gave a fuck.

also pillz this is exactly the type of player that made me assume you were just bucklecuffing him FNR because so many people do random bullshit as security.

Did you ahelp it

My mistake for not doing so but no as golems ARE ruled valid so I'm assuming it'll be brushed off.

metagrudging someone for taking a side other than them on a previous round isn't fuckin' valid though

plus cancerous attitude to security IN LOGGED DIALOGUE

Plus probably metagaming depending on what terms he used

Plus permabrigging FNR

Lab golem who far as I can recall was in science in one of the labs when he shot it. Captain didn't let him perma the clown

Oh yeah
Here we go!~
[10:32:05]SAY: Hawk Blackman/Dart Cartier : When the law gives you grounds to kill, only a traitor would not kill.
so yeah calls me a traitor because I didn't kill golems standing around in science FNR. 10/10.

kevinz000 wrote:Lab golem who far as I can recall was in science in one of the labs when he shot it. Captain didn't let him perma the clown

Oh yeah
Here we go!~
[10:32:05]SAY: Hawk Blackman/Dart Cartier : When the law gives you grounds to kill, only a traitor would not kill.
so yeah calls me a traitor because I didn't kill golems standing around in science FNR. 10/10.

Only lavaland golems are valid. Lab golems are under other players and killing them fnr is a dick move

Why bother admin helping when 90% of the time it'll be ruled as an IC issue? Hell the only negative note I have is when I got into an argument with an admin about being abused by horrible sec. And I wouldn't concede that their actions were an IC issue but rather a violation of rule one, so I got labeled as a complainer. Was also told I couldn't escalate the situation or I'd be banned : P

Jembo wrote:Why bother admin helping when 90% of the time it'll be ruled as an IC issue? Hell the only negative note I have is when I got into an argument with an admin about being abused by horrible sec. And I wouldn't concede that their actions were an IC issue but rather a violation of rule one, so I got labeled as a complainer. Was also told I couldn't escalate the situation or I'd be banned : P

That's sort of the point of policy discussion. I think people are aware that the current state of the game is how you described. Everyone's trying to decide what if anything should change.

Screemonster wrote:metagrudging someone for taking a side other than them on a previous round isn't fuckin' valid though

^
I'd have told him off in typical fashion.

I do agree that security to the most extent of all jobs, and heads of staff coming in second, REQUIRES more adminning and policy. Few bad apples are ruining it for everyone and the rule on "minimal effort" which currently only mandates not roundstart suiciding all the time without notice should be expanded to actually doing their jobs and not being a dick. There's few things that I would hate more when playing security then greytiding heads of staff/security, security who thinks being a dick is how it's meant to be played, and anyone in both heads or security that immediately fuck off and do nothing for the whole round just wasting a slot, or spacing themselves. Even worse, some fucks suicide in public with all their weapons on them. :/

i told everyone

>without secborgs there's no one to check shitsec
>without secborgs there isn't enough security to check greytide and/or murderbone

>remove secborg

>get murderbone, shitsec, greytide

it helps relieve the pain

Cik wrote:i told everyone

>without secborgs there's no one to check shitsec
>without secborgs there isn't enough security to check greytide and/or murderbone

>remove secborg

>get murderbone, shitsec, greytide

it helps relieve the pain

It really does. And it ties right back into my point about needing more admin intervention when shit people are shit. Getting security cyborgs back would make me immensely happy, and it could help rectify some of those problems, but it would absolutely require more strict enforcement of ai-laws and generally being a not-shit player, otherwise we'll end up right back here.

Sweaterkittens wrote:

Cik wrote:i told everyone

>without secborgs there's no one to check shitsec
>without secborgs there isn't enough security to check greytide and/or murderbone

>remove secborg

>get murderbone, shitsec, greytide

it helps relieve the pain

It really does. And it ties right back into my point about needing more admin intervention when shit people are shit. Getting security cyborgs back would make me immensely happy, and it could help rectify some of those problems, but it would absolutely require more strict enforcement of ai-laws and generally being a not-shit player, otherwise we'll end up right back here.

I told you in IRC I was gonna write up a big angry rant about my idea of why this became a problem, so I did. Don't want to see this thread 180 into secborg discussion again so try out here
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=8904

Saegrimr wrote:

Lumbermancer wrote:HoS and Captain have to be held to the higher standards.

It's a pretty sad day when I feel safer with a randomname sec i've never seen than the HoS.

This. There's been an upsurge of randomname sec players recently, but the static name sec players are usually the worst (attitude terms) from my experience.

J_Madison wrote:This. There's been an upsurge of randomname sec players recently, but the static name sec players are usually the worst (attitude terms) from my experience.

Talking to some of them through ahelps, seems like most come from higher RP servers and tend to be more friendly/lenient but also a little retarded when it comes to enforcing the law.
I've had to tell a couple of them that assistants being in maint isn't "trespassing" or "loitering" and not worth brig time, or even worth acknowledging they exist.

Gonna have to side with Mehki on this one. It was a bit metagrudge-y, but it was to deprive that guy from doing it again.

Also I hardly have issues with sec at all, even when I'm breaking into their shit. Luckiest assistant right here.

Wow, it was like several months ago that people were calling for blood when I shotgunned them for running into the armory.

I've also had stunned sec officers for being shitcurity to prisoners.

And I ALWAYS challenge a HoS's order.

Warden is the best sec roll hands down.

Isn't yackemflam banned? He made some neat drawings

i didn't even know he had ever touched another role besides toxins scientist

he's one of those guys where it goes to his head

Please provide a 100 word minimum essay due before Christmas formatted in APA style arguing for or against the "brig sentences below ten minutes rule are IC" precedent.

Maybe lawyers should be given a real role. They can act as watchdogs, and file complaints to the captain and if necessary, admins Centcom, who will send the appropriate authorities to deal with the department. An IC solution would be much more preferable to going back to gimped sec.

Too many times I've had my hands tied when people with a history of excessive behaviour as security toe the line using the tiniest infraction as reason for a ten minute brig sentence. Any other job would be bwoinked for depriving the freedom of another player for ten minutes for actions that don't affect anyone except for breaking """space law""". But it's hard to quantify a threshold at which brig sentences become an OOC issue- and harder still to convert an action into a fair amount of time behind bars. A ten minute window of IC issue allows admins to skip over what would be a very subjective area.

That being said, it's the players who suffer, since ten minutes can be a sixth of the round for them. I've seen some wardens put someone in for ten minutes only to raise the timer back to ten minutes when it's nearly ended for the most minor of infractions. They're clearly using their position of power over other players in a way they shouldn't but admins aren't there sometimes or when they are, can't do anything about it.

>luke

You know well as I, either lawyers play along or become adversarial to security. They have no real power other than how well they can talk security players into doing things. The moment they use force to correct something they get kicked out of the brig and their ID stripped. Lawyers who exist to monitor the brig for ahelpable situations isn't an IC solution.

That's my point, imblyings. Lawyers in their current state are more or less a meme role. Ever role aside from clown and mime should have some kind of real purpose. What I'm proposing is a means to give them something to do other than being annoying shits or shitcurity cheerleaders. They system itself could be automated, where the captain can call for a centcom team if enough complaints are logged against sec by lawyers.

I finally understand what antisec people feel. When you get wordlessly arrested for something you did not do, and wordlessly stripped while you are trying to talk to them, while not resisting, and then they leave you in a room that is being filled with plasma. Holy fucking shit

Yes but giving lawyers something else to do doesn't add something to stop security from being bad, unless you had something that sidestepped how they currently are.

I will repeat that the problem is not that that there isn't enough admin intervention against shitty sec players the problem is that there is too much admin intervention against people who deal with shitty sec in game.

Security can take care off itself vs shitters. Don't go crying when you loose vs one once in a while after escalation happened.

TheColdTurtle wrote:Isn't yackemflam banned? He made some neat drawings

I was banned for welderbombing HoPline.

I haven't touched toxins since the science ban.

Shaps didn't care.

>CPTANT

shitty sec don't get enough admin attention

this thread isn't about shitters or security's victim complex/victimization depending on time of day, this is solely about players who get victimized by security and have no IC method of recourse

We told you not to put your servers on the hub and you didnt listen.....

Yeah because having no players is totally preferable to having growing pains.

imblyings wrote:>CPTANT

shitty sec don't get enough admin attention

this thread isn't about shitters or security's victim complex/victimization depending on time of day, this is solely about players who get victimized by security and have no IC method of recourse

I literally said that that is not the problem.

I said the problem is that admins punish people who deal with sec IC get treated to harshly

Dropping this here. I know i can be a shitty sec officer sometimes but i take the dedication to my role very seriously.

Sometimes OOC (judgemental admins that shouldn't be infringing only moderating on IC and up to date with policy) affects the 'impossible' IC. I refer of course to 1 and only public admin note in which i was mis-labelled (i strongly deny the claim, since no investigation other than my own personal took place with evidence into account, admins very much "shielding their own") and then more or less publically berated and branded for 'bad conduct' personally for being unorthodox then obliged by superiority roles IC to 'destroy' the corpse with the evidence persevered against myself by anti sec sentiment.

Now i have the IC mandatory requirement to break immersion and policy to carry cuffs at all times as detective because admins can't keep their anti-sec policy in their pants, and will chase down every opportunity with a no tolerance rule as a blunt and crude way based off personal admin tactility because it doesn't fit in with their own personal narrative & the system is ultimately rigged in favour of the victim rather than impartial blame and contextual understanding of IC policy scenarios and obligations to be a good RP'er as well as a good player. Its in no way a balanced system and it degrades my confidence for both IC and OOC security.

> A small while later the victim becomes a trialmin; just WHAT are the kiddies meant to learn about impartiality about this? You can discredit IC behaviour all you like but flawed OOC judgement to leap before you look just creates institutionalized problems. Icing on the cake.

- Vent over

You need to read a book on communicating with simple english because you write like an overeager english major.

Ran into shitcurity earlier. I punched a clown and got rightfully brigged. I got 5 minutes so I was just standing around in the cell. An officer holding his baton starts opening and closing the sliding door. After a minute he comes in and beats me to orange, saying "he tried to escape", then just stands in my cell with his baton out for two minutes. No other sec would do anything so I just stood there.

I ahelped it but nothing happened as far as I know. Wasn't contacted.

So it seems admins won't do anything about shitsec unless they're executing or tossing you into perma.

give me a name, server, and time and date

No secborgs is a good point. The addition of door remotes also basically means heads get to sanction as much harm as they want the the AI can't do shit against them without depowering entire departments*, hos is the most likely head to be sanctioning violence put it together. Sec can basically go to antirev levels of abuse every round with no hindrance. Not to mention stupid rulings like CAN'T BOLT ALL SEC IN ASSUMED THEY'RE PREVENTING HARM, even when break room is splattered with blood, haven't been countermanded since AI emasculation as if the AI can still do that effectively.

*needing to do it faster than they can one click unbolt doors.

the sillicon nerfs were fine until secborg removal

at that point it became ridiculous; 6 months of constant human buffs and then the removal of essentially the only real combat capability from sillicons.

at a point there was a trifecta of balance. violent traitors attack sec, borgs help sec; sec attacks nonviolent traitors, sillicons attack sec;

remove one leg from the table and no wonder the whole thing teeters dangerously.

further, the removal of a "neutral" party capable of effectively opposing both sides directly increases hitlersec, as there is no downside to just executing/harmbatoning people, the AI can't do shit and everyone knows it. and murderboning: because getting caught is a death sentence (because of above and no reliable sillicons to rescue you if you are nonviolent) therefore it's better to break out the big guns and kill as many sec as possible to remove the risk of getting your fun turbohitler'd

the complaints about murderboning and hitlersec stem directly from the lack of effective, well-played sillicone capable of inconveniencing those who violate the law(s)

imblyings wrote:give me a name, server, and time and date

[23:21:47]SAY: Noah Garratt/Aeroscythe : This clown was attempting escape
Bagil
On the logs for the 19th.

oranges wrote:You need to read a book on communicating with simple english because you write like an overeager english major.

Literally incapable. May i recommend for ages 1-3 "Everybody is different" for your own qualified reading quota, i mean literally incapable as physically & mentally impossible

DrPillzRedux wrote:Ran into shitcurity earlier. I punched a clown and got rightfully brigged. I got 5 minutes so I was just standing around in the cell. An officer holding his baton starts opening and closing the sliding door. After a minute he comes in and beats me to orange, saying "he tried to escape", then just stands in my cell with his baton out for two minutes. No other sec would do anything so I just stood there.

I ahelped it but nothing happened as far as I know. Wasn't contacted.

So it seems admins won't do anything about shitsec unless they're executing or tossing you into perma.

Honk honk, that's a shitty situation but some people do it. Sec brutality very well is a thing but the lawyers have no actionable IC power without really pushing the meaningless boundary internal affairs meme given that they can't even set up a cohesive court case if detectives ever pull through with comprehensive evidence. (clowns are also practically protected persons in the space legal system anyway, bit of a grim comparison to sex offenders but if a riot broke out of their cells, they would probably go beat up the clown first)

> Sec is much worse and self righteous with no admins on, and there's a golden few rounds to flaunt this on sybil with the poor coverage.

> If lawyers/IA's had more actionable and respectable power to handle ahelps IC with a bit of prodding, admins wouldn't even need to regulate the lowest forms of sec abuse and even ahelps. The lawyer working as their agent gets a fax/message from nanotren and sets up a trial, if nobody turns up on good reasoning grounds then escalate it OOC, but otherwise handling it IC would be fine.

>pillz

The only admin that seemed active was in the middle of dealing with something else and a few more ahelps came in after the admin was finishing up. It's possible they forgot to answer you. What happened was shit even if it was two harmbatons but logs aren't enough and a proper ban or even note request like this usually requires witnesses and dragging in the officer to hear his side of the story. If it happens again, mention the ckey and this thread, and if it's the same guy maybe admins can put two and two together and treat the situation accordingly.

please stop turning policy threads into ban requests

FantasticFwoosh wrote:

oranges wrote:You need to read a book on communicating with simple english because you write like an overeager english major.

Literally incapable. May i recommend for ages 1-3 "Everybody is different" for your own qualified reading quota, i mean literally incapable as physically & mentally impossible

Do you ever wonder why you end up miscommunicating with everyone?

oranges wrote:

FantasticFwoosh wrote:

oranges wrote:You need to read a book on communicating with simple english because you write like an overeager english major.

Literally incapable. May i recommend for ages 1-3 "Everybody is different" for your own qualified reading quota, i mean literally incapable as physically & mentally impossible

Do you ever wonder why you end up miscommunicating with everyone?

I talk clearly to those 'tuned in' who mostly know me personally. Some people even think im smart for talking like this. The expectations placed upon myself to be a certain way is often further than the truth. Why are you pressing this off topic subject.

oranges wrote:please stop turning policy threads into ban requests

Physically and mentally impossible. This is ultimately what the thread topic leads to, unable to enact IC justice in a moderate manner and the OOC powers that be have to slog it out through enquiries on a daily basis on account of a system that is flawed. The fact that a ban request is being called out in the middle of the discussion is like the waiter cooking your eggs on a teppanyaki grille fuelled by hate & sodium chloride infront of you while taking your order.

Welp, that's another policy thread thoroughly derailed. Good job, everyone.

Y-you too

Atlanta-Ned wrote:Welp, that's another policy thread thoroughly derailed. Good job, everyone.

Let's go back to talking about how a theoretical IAA can attempt to deal with security ICly

I feel if a real guideline for security was made, then real sec brutality could be lessened.

Having it all be vague and up to players to define only serves for it to swerve back and forth on "regular/oldfags that are lax" and "pubbies and new players that are harsh."

And having players follow space law as a guideline is shit because then in dubious cases their efforts or understanding is just thrown out the window because, again, just a guideline.

D&B wrote:I feel if a real guideline for security was made, then real sec brutality could be lessened.

Having it all be vague and up to players to define only serves for it to swerve back and forth on "regular/oldfags that are lax" and "pubbies and new players that are harsh."

And having players follow space law as a guideline is shit because then in dubious cases their efforts or understanding is just thrown out the window because, again, just a guideline.

Saw a lizard cite the awful space law article last night for a 5 minute sentence for a greyshirt just for carrying insuls, going so far as to throw the space law book down and point to it, even though that specific pair of insuls were the pair from the youtool and nobody ever reported a theft. Yes there's the old joke about there only being one pair in the machine, but that pair was his. The fact that the Space Law article even mentions Insulated Gloves specifically when there's a coin operated purchasable pair and a huge stock always in cargo when cargo isnt jacking off into pizza feels like it's just there to encourage shitters to punish assistants with 5 min sentences for having gloves.

Not to say that assistants wearing gloves don't deserve it, that is.

But therein lies only part of my issue with Space Law. The article is draconic in terms of the game's age mostly because this game gets updated so quickly that the wiki lags a million years behind. There are some articles that reference things we haven't seen in a year. Updating space law also doesn't mean that everyone's going to see the update to space law and they might just go with an idea they have from weeks or months past where they were told that arresting someone for X means a Y sentence, when now it "should" be two minutes less, etc. Not everyone's going to read a changelog entry that says "we changed the space law book to slightly modify times on things so sure hope that shitcurity reads it" or "we split up sabotage laws to better state that accidentally electrifying a door isnt the same as bombing the station because we've seen people have their head beaten in just for trying their hand at hacking and fucking up sure hope you guys don't continue to execute them for this". Hell, the most in depth edits we've had in years were style changes, format changes, and the edit war between HG and Kosmos

D&B wrote:I feel if a real guideline for security was made, then real sec brutality could be lessened.

Having it all be vague and up to players to define only serves for it to swerve back and forth on "regular/oldfags that are lax" and "pubbies and new players that are harsh."

And having players follow space law as a guideline is shit because then in dubious cases their efforts or understanding is just thrown out the window because, again, just a guideline.

As a detainee:
You are entitled to a search when you are arrested and brought to the brig.
You are entitled to stay silent or cooperate for a reduced sentance.
You are entitled to a lawyer to hear your case and find weakness in the arresting reason. If a lawyer is not present, you may ask the HOP or represent yourself.
You are entitled to medical care.

As an officer:
You are entitled to search them when you see fit, and remove discrepant possessions.
You are entitled to increase their timer or punishment if they're uncooperative, rude, and/or delay the process.
You are entitled to ask for other officers for help handling the case.
You are entitled to ask for another officer to take over and handle the prisoner.
You are entitled to refuse requests from the prisoner.

And as always:
If a player is actively attempting to remove you from the round, you have rights to do the same to them. It's your job to prevent to you what you'd like to do to others.

The real question that needs to be answered from this thread is: When are ban requests being re-opened?

D&B wrote:I feel if a real guideline for security was made, then real sec brutality could be lessened.

Having it all be vague and up to players to define only serves for it to swerve back and forth on "regular/oldfags that are lax" and "pubbies and new players that are harsh."

And having players follow space law as a guideline is shit because then in dubious cases their efforts or understanding is just thrown out the window because, again, just a guideline.

The problem with this is that it defines lines that players are going to be CONSTANTLY toeing. Having an inconsistently enforced, poorly defined policy is the only real solution.
It's not a good one by any stretch of the imagination, but the playerbase has consistently proven that it can't have nice things.

Bolien wrote:The real question that needs to be answered from this thread is: When are ban requests being re-opened?

When I get elected headmin

With the change of repurposing it to only be used for ahelps that were never replied to/properly investigated instead of just asking to ban people you don't like

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Bolien wrote:The real question that needs to be answered from this thread is: When are ban requests being re-opened?

When I get elected headmin

With the change of repurposing it to only be used for ahelps that were never replied to/properly investigated instead of just asking to ban people you don't like

Tbh that sounds pretty fair.