/tg/Station 13

We had a thing about disallowing random searches during Code Blue. here
It wasn't added to the rules page though. After talking to the admins I learned that apparently enforcing this fell out of fashion. It is relevant only when sec searches people at roundstart/HoP line randomly.

This is the current code blue text:
"Attention! Security level elevated to blue:
The station has received reliable information about possible hostile activity on the station. Security staff may have weapons visible. Searches are permitted only with probable cause."

According to the headmins this is just IC and has no importance.

Anyway, for example one round I went AFK in a dorm room, by the time I came back the HoS hacked his way in and wanted to search me, I told him I don't consent to searches, then he stunned me and did it anyway. (According to him being alone in a dorm room is suspicious)
I dont really think this is the quality of sec play we should be striving for.

another related discussion: link

(please note that the poll is only about RANDOM searches, being searched for suspicious behaviour/investigations is ok)

I'd like to point out that I had probable cause for every search in the related thread.

What constitutes valid cause is entirely on a case by case basis and is subjective to the person.

You literally cannot regulate this to be honest.

I'm pretty sure I was the HoS there.

And yeah, I think that bolting yourself in a dorm room without being braindead (I didn't know if you were really afk, and you responded to my question immediately), plus refusing to show your backpack, I think that's a pretty clear indication that you have something to hide. Therefore search.

The funny thing is, the contents of his pockets and the backpack were eaten by nearby BoH singularity before I managed to take a look at them, so I just released the guy. Not really sure this is such a big issue.

Tornadium wrote:I'd like to point out that I had probable cause for every search in the related thread.

What constitutes valid cause is entirely on a case by case basis and is subjective to the person.

You literally cannot regulate this to be honest.

I linked it to show both sides of this.

Lo6a4evskiy wrote: And yeah, I think that bolting yourself in a dorm room without being braindead (I didn't know if you were really afk, and you responded to my question immediately), plus refusing to show your backpack, I think that's a pretty clear indication that you have something to hide. Therefore search.

>If you dont agree to a random search, you are suspicious, therefore need to be searched, its not even random anymore!
wow

leibniz wrote:>If you dont agree to a random search, you are suspicious, therefore need to be searched, its not even random anymore!
wow

"Why are you arresting me?"
"For resisting arrest."

...but it wasn't random. You were bolted alone in the dorms room. Yes, that seems suspicious to me as there was no indication of you being afk.

If it hadn't been bolted, I would have moved along. Bolting it means you don't want anyone to see what's going on inside. That does seem like a valid reason for a search to me.

Lo6a4evskiy wrote:...but it wasn't random. You were bolted alone in the dorms room. Yes, that seems suspicious to me as there was no indication of you being afk.

Remember kids:

"Light" "RP" server.

Saegrimr wrote:Remember kids:

"Light" "RP" server.

"Sir, may I see what's in your bag?"
"No"
"Oh. Okay."
Mindblowing arr pee.

Refusing a search is suspicious... but you need a reason to perform the search in the first place. I'm not sure being in a dorm room alone qualifies as anywhere near suspicious behaviour. You could always ask "Well, well, well, what've we got 'ere, then?" first.

"Probable cause" should probably be changed to "reasonable suspicion," which seems to be admin/player precedent for how it's interpreted.

Trying to enforce this would be horrible. It will just mean security players will be forced to explain themselves all the time.

Almost nobody performs truly random searches on blue. Doing random searches as sec is a pain in the arse.

There is always some sort of suspicion, having to defend that suspicion OOC all the time is just shit.

>code blue
>find person you dislike
>search them
"WELL WELL TRAITOR GEAR INTO THE PERMABRIG WITH A STRAIGHTJACKET YOU GO"

The security level codes were added purely as fluff.

What may be considered reasonable cause for me may not be sufficient for you and vice versa.

Asking to police this behaviour, pardon the pun, is simply asking for a lot of trouble for both admins and security players.

Do we really need to return to the SoS-era of security scrutiny? Where security firing a warning round at a Cyborg spacing a corpse is sufficient to adminpm and slap a note on the officers account?

I don't think random searches happen nearly as often as people say they do. It may be random for the person being searched, but the likelihood is, they're probably just one of several suspects in a case - so even though they dindu nuffin, running away won't help them one bit. Truly random searches do happen, but from Security's perspective, most of them have justification (Labcoat and nitrile gloves on an emagged APC, search the MDs, for example).

Lo6a4evskiy wrote:

Saegrimr wrote:Remember kids:

"Light" "RP" server.

"Sir, may I see what's in your bag?"
"No"
"Oh. Okay."
Mindblowing arr pee.

I think saeg meant to point out that locking a private dormitory should be a perfectly normal thing to do. Do you not lock your own dorm/apartment/house/toilet stall?

It's just that simply because of the game the players just have to see what's behind every locked door, and what should be perfectly normal things are regarded in suspicion.

I think it'd be cool if you could speak through doors if you were close enough to them, though.

Remember Seclings the teachings of old earth cops - memorise the following words:
"Is that dank I can smell?"

LiamLime wrote:The security level codes were added purely as fluff.

No they weren't.

They were added to give security an excuse to be searching people, which is why the alert level always jumps to blue when the command report comes in (which actually used to have a chance of being accurate!)

Malkevin wrote: (which actually used to have a chance of being accurate!)

I actually had a lot of fun with that. It gave me a list of names for people to stalk as detective, and often got me under suspicion because "Tam Lin" is a changeling name.

Ikarrus wrote:I think saeg meant to point out that locking a private dormitory should be a perfectly normal thing to do. Do you not lock your own dorm/apartment/house/toilet stall?

It's just that simply because of the game the players just have to see what's behind every locked door, and what should be perfectly normal things are regarded in suspicion.

I think it'd be cool if you could speak through doors if you were close enough to them, though.

Look, this is not an issue of roleplaying. Because in that case security officer should act according to his personality traits, his past, etc, etc. And by the way I can totally envision paranoid security officer searching someone because they didn't like the look on their face, so let's may be not even go into that area.

Oh and I'm pretty sure I opened the bolted door because I had a reason to believe there were ERPers around. It was an uneventful low pop round, damn it.

In any case, I'm not sure I want to pretend they were there to "change underwear" or something like that. Also, the issue is blown way out of proportion. Yes, sure, random search, especially from suspect's perspective. I don't, however, go around hallways picking targets to check. I had a reason to open the bolted door, even if it was a stupid one, and then I found something I didn't really expect, which is why I went for "just in case" search to make sure that everything's peachy. Frankly, rude response didn't help in the same way "AM I BEING DETAINED" doesn't really help.

For fuck's sake, can't you be locked up for up to 10 minutes and it's almost 100% of the time IC issue if you did SOMETHING to warrant time in brig? Why should this warrant admin attention?

Lo6a4evskiy wrote:...but it wasn't random. You were bolted alone in the dorms room. Yes, that seems suspicious to me as there was no indication of you being afk.

If it hadn't been bolted, I would have moved along. Bolting it means you don't want anyone to see what's going on inside. That does seem like a valid reason for a search to me.

FYI in the US "Probable Cause" has a very clear legal meaning, which means you have credible, specific articulable reason this person could have committed a specific crime. Simply being suspicious is not probable cause. Reasonable Suspicion is a lesser standard for a credible articulable reason a person may be doing anything illegal. Searching someone for being a locked dorm room alone would not meet either, unless maybe if you found the most right-wing judge in the heart of Texas maaaaaaybe it'd meet the Suspicion standard.

Lo6a4evskiy wrote:Look, this is not an issue of roleplaying. Because in that case security officer should act according to his personality traits, his past, etc, etc. And by the way I can totally envision paranoid security officer searching someone because they didn't like the look on their face, so let's may be not even go into that area.

Oh and I'm pretty sure I opened the bolted door because I had a reason to believe there were ERPers around. It was an uneventful low pop round, damn it.

In any case, I'm not sure I want to pretend they were there to "change underwear" or something like that. Also, the issue is blown way out of proportion. Yes, sure, random search, especially from suspect's perspective. I don't, however, go around hallways picking targets to check. I had a reason to open the bolted door, even if it was a stupid one, and then I found something I didn't really expect, which is why I went for "just in case" search to make sure that everything's peachy. Frankly, rude response didn't help in the same way "AM I BEING DETAINED" doesn't really help.

For fuck's sake, can't you be locked up for up to 10 minutes and it's almost 100% of the time IC issue if you did SOMETHING to warrant time in brig? Why should this warrant admin attention?

Probable cause is a real definable thing, but hey just like real cops, people will try anything to get around any legal definition of anything, no matter how flimsy their reasoning.

Malkevin wrote:

LiamLime wrote:The security level codes were added purely as fluff.

No they weren't.

They were added to give security an excuse to be searching people, which is why the alert level always jumps to blue when the command report comes in .

Incorrect. They were added because of a system used on one of the stations from the OpsnSS13 era (2007/08), which had this exact same thing. The difference is however that the display for this alert level thing is on fire alarms, whereas originally there were extra displays all over the station called "Self destruction indicator", which was ominous as all hell. Switching between alert levels also brought up different messages. I don't remember the actual messages though.

Back then you actually needed either red or delta alert to enter the teleporter, even if you had an ID. I never got to see the teleporter when I played back then.

LiamLime wrote:Incorrect. They were added because of a system used on one of the stations from the OpsnSS13 era (2007/08), which had this exact same thing. The difference is however that the display for this alert level thing is on fire alarms, whereas originally there were extra displays all over the station called "Self destruction indicator", which was ominous as all hell. Switching between alert levels also brought up different messages. I don't remember the actual messages though.

Back then you actually needed either red or delta alert to enter the teleporter, even if you had an ID. I never got to see the teleporter when I played back then.

I think we're thinking about two completely different systems here, because I clearly remember our alert level system just being added mostly for fluff reasons. Before that we had nothing similar to what you describe.

Ikarrus wrote:Didn't they still announce the same message before alert levels were around?

I think so. I don't remember what the actual message was though. If I remember right, the original blue alert message was just a rewording of what was sent when the intercept message thing gets printed. But the blue alert message was changed over the years, so I don't know whether the current one reflects the one from before alert levels.

Ikarrus wrote: I think we're thinking about two completely different systems here, because I clearly remember our alert level system just being added mostly for fluff reasons. Before that we had nothing similar to what you describe.

Merely writing the inspiration for it. The system I'm describing existed on a station 2 or 3 years before TGstation became a thing. You are also correct in saying the alerts thing on TGS was added for only fluff reasons.

This is a pretty silly distinction to make anyways. Only the shittiest of shitcurity actually randomly search people, it was merely called random search so that the suspicious fucker you are searching does not try to lawyer his way out of it or ahelp because mad. Also saying it is suspicious to lock the door to your bedroom because you are not braindead is the most meta bullshit i have ever heard and you should feel awful for it

Lo6a4evskiy wrote:

Saegrimr wrote:Remember kids:

"Light" "RP" server.

"Sir, may I see what's in your bag?"
"No"
"Oh. Okay."
Mindblowing arr pee.

Do you think it's suddenly great RP if the security officer whips out his taser on the dude and loots their bag while they're twitching on the ground, all because they were standing around by themselves (without being AFK of course, as if that distinction matters IC). Going out of your way to harass people who aren't doing anything doesn't seem very peacekeeper-ey to me

Just in general, snooping around and trying to hunt traitors before they can even do anything is boring as hell for everyone involved except the officer who gets a free kill, until an hour later when everyone's standing around doing nothing because all the antags have already been perma'd or executed

>Peaceieeper
Sec are literal jackbooted goons that are there to prevent corporate espionage and workers taking the piss on their breaks.

Shaps wrote:

Lo6a4evskiy wrote:

Saegrimr wrote:snip

snip

snip

Actually keeping the peace doesn't exist on a lightRP server. If you want sec to not be shit and not Meta, and not "powergame" then we need a higher standard of RP, because as it stands most people value being able to continue to play the game rather than being nice to that one guy that one time.

The "probable cause" thing should just stay because it works fine in real life and would prevent shitcurity stuff. It's just that most people don't know what it means. You just need a reason that they could be up to a specific crime that can be clearly stated for the search: "Wearing a mask," "Has a non-matching ID," "In the wrong department," "carrying an improvised weapon," or "carrying gear he shouldn't have access too" are all great Probable Cause examples. "Locking his door" is not probable cause.

Also, resisting ANYTHING sec does unless it's clearly unlawful is a crime in itself, but players and some admins don't seem to get that. If a security guard orders you to stop and you don't, doesn't matter if you weren't doing anything then, you are now.

Of course, if Security infringes on the few rights crew have - for instance, barging into a department without Captain's permit or pressing evidence - things get interesting.

Zilenan91 wrote:Actually keeping the peace doesn't exist on a lightRP server. If you want sec to not be shit and not Meta, and not "powergame" then we need a higher standard of RP, because as it stands most people value being able to continue to play the game rather than being nice to that one guy that one time.

99% of security officers do just fine without breaking into private areas to harass people just for standing around by themselves without being AFK, it's not really asking that much

I think you messed up the quote there a bit but yeah, you're right. The problems start when someone is alone in a dorm room, which from an OOC perspective, you know that nobody ever has a reason to be unless they're afk, so you search them because there's a 99% probability of them buying syndi stuff if they're an antag

rdght91 wrote:FYI in the US "Probable Cause" has a very clear legal meaning, which means you have credible, specific articulable reason this person could have committed a specific crime. Simply being suspicious is not probable cause. Reasonable Suspicion is a lesser standard for a credible articulable reason a person may be doing anything illegal. Searching someone for being a locked dorm room alone would not meet either, unless maybe if you found the most right-wing judge in the heart of Texas maaaaaaybe it'd meet the Suspicion standard.

Neither am I from the US nor is the game set in the US. I don't see how this is supposed to be both known and applicable.

And Jesus, this incident, for one, has nothing to do with powergaming, and for two, is a complete and total nonissue. Good god.

Yeah, it's pretty unlikely that most searches are actually random 99% of the time, since by the time code red comes around sec are too busy with obvious threats.

However, there's a vast amount of reasons to search someone. Obvious examples are: use of a mask, presence of blood, wearing a crime-related item, appearing to have 'unusual'/stolen gear, hanging around a crime scene, trespassing in any way, appearing to actively avoid security, appearing to incite anti-security sentiment, and so on.

If you want to add probable cause as a thing, sure, do it, but add a clear definition of it in the rules. Many of us aren't from the US and aren't familiar with what would and wouldn't count. Some concepts those from the US might think fundamental are actually pretty alien to other cultures, like Double Jeopardy.

>using the privacy lock on a private room is suspicious

IC, it's not. OOC, you know that they're doing suspicious stuff in there and since we're lightRP you can go and check it out.

I'd hate to be in the same dorm as you.

Using OOC knowledge IC is called metagaming, isn't it? IC, you can safely assume the person inside wants privacy - and wanting to be alone isn't suspicious conduct. If they welded the door, that would be.

Except that argument goes right down the trash can since we're allowed to know what all antags are, and how they operate.

So can I ask warden to escort me to the toilet because I want to pee? You know, IC, one should think that it's plausible.

Zilenan91 wrote:IC, it's not. OOC, you know that they're doing suspicious stuff in there and since we're lightRP you can go and check it out.

Zilenan91 wrote:Except that argument goes right down the trash can since we're allowed to know what all antags are, and how they operate.

Zil, you have a habit of posting in a lot of FNR and policy discussion threads trying to pass off your opinions as absolute fact, when it's not. It doesn't matter if "we're a light RP server", if you run around as security and arrest/search people at random or for blatantly dumb/meta reasons, admins are well within their rights to step in and get involved. If some security officer runs around harassing people constantly for dumb/made up reasons, he can go in the trash

Lo6a4evskiy wrote:So can I ask warden to escort me to the toilet because I want to pee? You know, IC, one should think that it's plausible.

what point are you even trying to make here

What about using someone's department as a justification? I.E. one scientist is a confirmed cultist, so you search the rest.
You can take this into an extreme in the OP's case, and say that because an assistant broke into a department that day, they are searching them because they're also an assistant

Shaps wrote:what point are you even trying to make here

That either we're supposed to know game mechanics and use them accordingly or we're not. There's no particular reason to use dorms room unless you want to hide.

But okay, suppose I accept that it's not a good enough reason to warrant a search and I could have handled it better anyways. What I don't accept is that it's a big deal. Hell, I regularly die because I let someone slide for RP reasons. And that's totally fine, the social aspect is actually what enjoy most when playing security and command roles. I like interacting with people more than I like clicking on things. Yet the screams of "powergaming" are filling the air and for what? Because someone was searched during code blue for reasons that seemed good enough at the time but everyone decided weren't c':

^^^ that's basically what I was trying to say but couldn't articulate it

You're allowed to have some metaknowledge and be defensive in situations where your life is on the line, but trying to argue that that covers running around and arresting people for standing around and doing nothing is a pretty big stretch

Searching is a lot different from arresting people though. If I'm on the sec team and I want to search somebody, I'm gonna ask them first because I'm not an asshole. If they refuse or run away, I stun, cuff, then search them anyways and send them on their way. Even though there's no real choice for them most of the time, just making them think that you're not going to search them if they say no makes you seem a lot nicer than you actually are.

How is that relevant to the discussion on whether it's okay to stun and search someone for just standing in a room purpose built for people to stand in

It's relevant because the only reason someone is gonna be in the dorms is to ERP or doing illegal things. However if someone runs in there and immediately start stunning and searching before they've even said a single thing they deserve to get jobbanned. My story is saying that if people don't talk to the people they're arresting/searching, policy discussions like this happen because people feel as if they've been dicked on by a sec player. I feel like the issue here is sec players being dicks and not really rping at all

STORY TIME

Once upon a time I was traitor scientist. Me being the cool guy I am, and what with telescience being a newly implemented feature, I wanted to try my hand and telebombing the station. So, I made myself some bombs, stuffed them in my bag and got to work. Things were going great, and eventually the RD came in to check how I was doing, and murdered me with an esword.

Eventually, my body got found and he was thrown in perma. I got cloned and went back to telesci, and the warden and some lawyer were there for some reason. I asked them to leave, and the warden tazes me and goes through my shit, finding the bombs, and threw me in perma, all with no evidence to my guilt, only a random search.

Needless to say, I was assblasted to the MAX. Yelled at the admins that this was fucking bullshit and how he had no reason to search me. They gave him the all-clear and told me shit happens.

This is why I WANT THIS FUCKING RANDOM SEARCH BULLSHIT TO NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN. NOBODY should have their traitor round nuked because some mumblefuck guard decided to search you for no reason and finds traitor shit. NOBODY.

That sounds like a dickish thing for the Warden to do. At most he should've just confiscated them, not murder you because you worked in toxins and of course had bomb parts on you.