/tg/Station 13

Atlanta-Ned, diligent lad that he is, recently updated the Headmin Rulings page on the wiki. One of these edits, however, gave me pause.

The new 10-codes ruling consists merely of a Discord screencap. Every other ruling links to a forum post. The 10-codes ruling is the first ruling to not be written down in the forums. Granted, with a little effort, the veracity of Discord screencaps can be verified. However, I believe it is more reasonable to require all policy rulings to require a post in the forums. The forums are more permanent, and the context of rulings are more easily discerned in forum posts compared to Discord conversations.

Regardless of my personal thoughts on the matter, it would be good to have an official policy regarding admin rulings made on Discord.

I think it's okay since the page is moderated, but i'm also fine if it changes

I think the real loss here is that all the forum links are for full threads where discourse can be read to provide context for decision-making.

it should at least be transcribed to text

that ruling seems a bit bananas without context and should have been documented somewhere public

also it would have been nice to see it in the policy bus channel if it was discord-y

best wishes,
bobbah 'bee' brown

SpaceManiac wrote:it should at least be transcribed to text

Done.

>security can't use codes as shorthand to refer to crimes
dumb and overbearing

Guess someone should remove the crime codes from the space law page.
I know space law is just a roleplay suggestion, but we really shouldn't be suggesting something that is outright against the rules.

I'm curious about:
a.) what prompted this (is people saying "10-4" over the radio really a big problem? Can't people who don't understand just google it, or ask what it means? Is this any more obscure than half the unexplained game mechanics that you have to look up on github to really understand?)
b.) what channel/discord this was posted in (I searched it up and couldn't find it)
c.) where (if anywhere) this new ruling that can get you noted or banned was announced aside from a silent edit to the hidden extra rules page (and why was it done like this?)

Yenwodyah wrote:I'm curious about:
a.) what prompted this (is people saying "10-4" over the radio really a big problem? Can't people who don't understand just google it, or ask what it means?

It's not just 10-4 it's about 50 security codes

dumb ruling because security codes are in the wiki and only newfigs read the wiki

pugie wrote: It's not just 10-4 it's about 50 security codes

Are you talking about the space law codes? In all the SS13 I've played I've probably seen anyone use those like, twice total.

what next? will these disgusting jannies stop me from using actual binary in .b to troll silicon mains?

Yenwodyah wrote:

pugie wrote: It's not just 10-4 it's about 50 security codes

Are you talking about the space law codes? In all the SS13 I've played I've probably seen anyone use those like, twice total.

no hes talking abour irl security codes police uses

Yenwodyah wrote:I'm curious about:
a.) what prompted this (is people saying "10-4" over the radio really a big problem? Can't people who don't understand just google it, or ask what it means? Is this any more obscure than half the unexplained game mechanics that you have to look up on github to really understand?)
b.) what channel/discord this was posted in (I searched it up and couldn't find it)
c.) where (if anywhere) this new ruling that can get you noted or banned was announced aside from a silent edit to the hidden extra rules page (and why was it done like this?)

The argument is basically that having a list of several dozen codes you can use as shorthand for most possible incidents as a security team gives the metagang a large advantage over everyone else, while also not effectively communicating in a way other people can understand.

On the other hand, police codes is clearly roleplaying and adds some depth to interactions with security on manuel. I could see it actually being fun to have a new green officer on the team that you have to teach the codes too.

On the consequentialist side, I think letting security have their own language that's not penetrable by syndie comms without meta knowledge and allows them to make rapid complex communications possible would probably fuck over antags more than is reasonable.

Yenwodyah wrote:

pugie wrote: It's not just 10-4 it's about 50 security codes

Are you talking about the space law codes? In all the SS13 I've played I've probably seen anyone use those like, twice total.

Referring to manuel sec players trying to instill actual police code systems then getting executed by admins which is sad improvements to immersion far outweigh the possible metacliqueness which can be remedied through use of the wiki or integrating codes properly in game.

like there is a need of codes when most shit you scream on radio is "help maint" , "john trator", "bob in sci", "its revs"

doesn't https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Space_Law have a list of codes to use instead of 10 codes? just use them I suppose.

cybersaber101 wrote:doesn't https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Space_Law have a list of codes to use instead of 10 codes? just use them I suppose.

I was under the impression this banned the use of those.

Keep in mind that this is a thread about Headmin Rulings made on Discord, not necessarily the 10-code ruling itself. However, I think that the active discussion highlights how confusion is created when rulings are made on Discord without a corresponding policy thread. Discussion gives context.

cybersaber101 wrote:doesn't https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Space_Law have a list of codes to use instead of 10 codes? just use them I suppose.

Space law has codes on crimes.
Manuel players went the next step and had them for most every situation e.g. officer down, all clear, current location just about anything you can imagine.

why dont we just add those codes to the wiki page

pugie wrote:Manuel players went the next step and had them for most every situation e.g. officer down, all clear, current location just about anything you can imagine.

Thats just metaganging. Ban em instead of making a headmin ruling to protect them.

Keeping rulings on forums over discord screenshots is probably a good idea. It keeps a better record of who the person writing the ruling is (nicknames and discord colors doesn't say that much since they can change), the date and time it was given and context is easier to read. If, god forbid, we are still here in 5 years, will anyone remember who this is?

The ten-codes in question are here:
https://pastebin.com/k6pBu5EE

They'll be receiving their own policy discussion thread in the next day or two.

Just FYI the codes referring to crimes on the wiki was clarified as ok since it’s been established on the wiki and isn’t some antag-oriented obscuring like the location codes people were trying to make for unofficial discords usage.

As for the thread in general it doesn’t matter to me because that page is not meant to be reactions to the forum, and policy *discussion* is NOT meant to actually house those rulings ever since we dedicated a wiki page for it (it’s why that wiki page exists cuz digging up the most recent relevant ruling is a mess even if everything is on the forums). If you see something (IE the topic we are talking about now) then you can make a thread on it otherwise you are going to get hidden policy because headmins told an admin this is how you are suppose to interpret a situation coming out of a quick bus convo instead of a thread and you are “not allowed” to post it.

The worst case is that someone who has access to the channel writes an “incorrect ruling” but it’s fully traceable and it should be checked regularly by literally everyone more so than going to the last post of literally every locked policy discussion thread. Reminder every policy there is subject to change anyways if deemed appropriate.

If you need context of the thread to understand the rule, the rule needs to be reworded so it can exist independently.

That said, there definitely should be some additional text tho if you are going to embed screenshots with funny names.

Rulings are usually made with some context in mind, and that context is often important to judge whether a ruling is applicable in whatever situation you are wondering about. That said, what I meant was just make a thread somewhere on the forums that states a ruling has been made and lock the thread. No discussion needed, and it is also going to be a lot more visible than changes to a wiki page.

Lets also not confuse case by case rulings that dont end up on the wiki page with the ones that do. We track the latter, not the former.

This is a generic non-nuanced ruling about non-canonical (IE language barriers/protected-page wiki "official") codes though. The situation is very binary (if you are using something other than the space law wiki code, you are bad!), and should not need any supplemental context to understand how that ruling is supposed to be enforced if it was written properly.

In general,

If the issue is "I dont like how this admin ruled a specific situation which is not explicitly covered by the rules", that should be on the forums through an appeal/abuse report so yes i agree completely those items should not be outside the forums because context in those is important to understand how the admin came to the decision and how the headmins are going to rule. I don't think we are talking about that here though and god forbid you guys actually look at appeals to get your rulings.

If you are making the situation generic enough to where it can be a more binary "can i do this" ruling then that should not need some supplementary context and therefore not need a forum thread, or else it was not written well enough to get the desired effect. If you ever put "this is case by case" in the headmin ruling thing u r cringe, case-by-case is explicitly NOT codifying do/donts so (head)admins can explore nuances of situations, which again the specific incident we keep falling back to does not need.

This is with the understanding the headmin ruling page acts as a way to help codify our more vaguer rules and not be just as vague and free-spirited as the actual rulelist, else we are just generating a second rulelist that will need yet another layer of codifying.

This thread isnt about the specific ruling in the OP, but if rulings should be recorded referencing only a screenshot from discord. I think taking the couple minutes to put something on the forums about it is well worth the hassle for the reasons given.

I was told by an administrator a week ago that the code ruling would be posted on the forums shortly.

It has now been posted on the forums by a random user wondering when it's going to be posted on the forums.

This was a temporary stop gap to handle the issue while we make a forum post to point to so all Headmin Rulings are consistent. Granted we did drag our feet on this and I apologize for any inconvenience.

Given the clout this current policy thread has made around the subject I will take the chance to knock this out and ratify it to omit space law codes.

The use of short-hand codes for communication in any department, specifically 10-10 codes, are not allowed. Our servers are English only which makes this style of codified speak subversive and makes the applicable channels too unfriendly to new or fair-weather players.

Edit: A policy thread to continue the discussion of this is more than welcome. This is our stance on the issue and we did not wish to wait for a full policy thread to place it into action. We understand this is not how things are normally done but we didn't wish to allow it be inaction on our part and apologize again for the inconvenience. If a new policy thread is created I see no reason to not make a second ruling to over write the current one depending on how the debates and conversations of that thread develop.