Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors

Locked
GPeckman
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2023 5:19 am
Byond Username: GPeckman

Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors

Post by GPeckman » #669014

As I'm sure most people familiar with Sybil are aware, security on Sybil tends to use lethals far more often than nonlethals. So, this leads to a question: can an Asimov AI refuse to reveal the name of a human traitor to security based on that trend and law 1? There's an argument that it would be considered metaknowledge, but players are allowed to know the precise details of game mechanics, including things like antags, so why would this be any different?
User avatar
CPTANT
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors

Post by CPTANT » #669022

I personally only do this when witnessing security being harmful. Assuming either traitors or security to be harmful when they haven't done anything is super lame I think.
Timberpoes wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 3:21 pm The rules exist to create the biggest possible chance of a cool shift of SS13. They don't exist to allow admins to create the most boring interpretation of SS13.
User avatar
The Wrench
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2020 4:06 am
Byond Username: The Wrench

Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors

Post by The Wrench » #669075

CPTANT wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:31 pm I personally only do this when witnessing security being harmful. Assuming either traitors or security to be harmful when they haven't done anything is super lame I think.
Generally I agree with this, but the moment one security officer punches a human all bets are off.
Image
Jonathan Gupta wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 6:32 pm all you godamn do is whine and complain come up with ideas, stop bitching for christs sake.
Flatulent wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 1:02 am You and anyone who supports the rule 3 as described by mso is simply put not an lrp player
Image

Image

Image

Image
User avatar
vect0r
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2022 12:37 am
Byond Username: Vect0r
Location: 'Murica 🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥

Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors

Post by vect0r » #669139

same here
VENDETTA+Cecilia Vujic
Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Pandarsenic
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:56 pm
Byond Username: Pandarsenic
Location: AI Upload

Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors

Post by Pandarsenic » #669149

You can also make demands of them as a condition to giving the name, then go to town if/when they break the terms
(2:53:35 AM) scaredofshadows: how about head of robutts
I once wrote a guide to fixing telecomms woohoo
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors

Post by sinfulbliss » #669157

This is definitely an issue on Sybil at least. AIs will help sec validhunt and even if sec uses lethals, if an admin asks they can say something like they didn't notice or they only bolted the traitor into the room to stop them from harming, etc. Most of the time it isn't even ahelped because the antag doesn't have access to sec comms where the AI is giving all of the updates.

But this isn't a good solution because it's pretty metagamey as you said. How do they know sec is going to harm someone? A better solution would be to whitelist AI ban this sort of excessively validhungry AI playstyle under something like rule 12 or rule 1.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Vekter
In-Game Admin
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:25 pm
Byond Username: Vekter
Location: Fucking around with the engine.

Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors

Post by Vekter » #669199

You can't take information from previous rounds and use it in the current one. If you've seen evidence that sec tends to harm humans that they catch, then yes, otherwise you should be assuming they won't.

If there's a general issue of security escalating improperly to lethals, that needs to be brought up on a case-by-case basis with the admins.
AliasTakuto wrote: Thu Jan 04, 2024 1:11 pm As for the ear replacing stuff, you can ask Anne but I don't think this is what I was banned for. If I was all I can say is "Sorry for being hilarious"...
Omega_DarkPotato wrote:This sucks, dude.
Spoiler:
Reply PM from-REDACTED/(REDACTED): i tried to remove the bruises by changing her gender

PM: Bluespace->Delaron: Nobody wants a mime's asscheeks farting on their brig windows.

PM: REDACTED->HotelBravoLima: Oh come on, knowing that these are hostile aliens is metagaming

[17:43] <Aranclanos> any other question ping me again
[17:43] <Vekter> Aranclanos for nicest coder 2015
[17:44] <Aranclanos> fuck you
User avatar
vect0r
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2022 12:37 am
Byond Username: Vect0r
Location: 'Murica 🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥

Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors

Post by vect0r » #669245

Vekter wrote: Sat Mar 11, 2023 5:02 pm You can't take information from previous rounds and use it in the current one. If you've seen evidence that sec tends to harm humans that they catch, then yes, otherwise you should be assuming they won't.

If there's a general issue of security escalating improperly to lethals, that needs to be brought up on a case-by-case basis with the admins.
It's not "improperly" it's just not law 1ed.
VENDETTA+Cecilia Vujic
Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
kieth4
In-Game Head Admin
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2020 6:17 pm
Byond Username: Kieth4

Re: Law 1, Security, and Revealing Traitors

Post by kieth4 » #670555

Ai players should not use examples of harm that existed in previous rounds to deny orders on the basis of law 1. These denials should be based on reasoning from the current active round.

P.s validhunter ais are lame
Image
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DrAmazing343