/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.

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.

We already have a rule against this. "Don't be a dick". Giving someone 10 minutes for loitering is being a dick. Stealing Sec's taser when they try and arrest you is being a dick. Shooting someone ten times for possession of a camera bug is being a dick. Smashing into a department when people work there is being a dick.

Conclusion? Don't be a dick.

TheNightingale wrote:We already have a rule against this. "Don't be a dick". Giving someone 10 minutes for loitering is being a dick. Stealing Sec's taser when they try and arrest you is being a dick. Shooting someone ten times for possession of a camera bug is being a dick. Smashing into a department when people work there is being a dick.

Conclusion? Don't be a dick.

Really makes you think.

Atlanta-Ned wrote:

TheNightingale wrote:We already have a rule against this. "Don't be a dick". Giving someone 10 minutes for loitering is being a dick. Stealing Sec's taser when they try and arrest you is being a dick. Shooting someone ten times for possession of a camera bug is being a dick. Smashing into a department when people work there is being a dick.

Conclusion? Don't be a dick.

Really makes you think.

That lazy post of"why cant this entire complex game of dozens of modes and thousands of items with 90 strangers pursuing often contradictory goals be governed by a single vague rule" made you think?

TheNightingale wrote:We already have a rule against this. "Don't be a dick". Giving someone 10 minutes for loitering is being a dick. Stealing Sec's taser when they try and arrest you is being a dick. Shooting someone ten times for possession of a camera bug is being a dick. Smashing into a department when people work there is being a dick.

Conclusion? Don't be a dick.

The problem is that almost every interaction in the game consists of varying degrees of being a dick.

Security tazing you before talking? Dick move (but a very logical one)
Science refusing to give you the equipment you request? Dick move
janitor making floors wet in highly trafficked areas? Dick move
Clown slipping you? Dick move
Buying asteroid shuttle? Dick move
AI refusing lizard requests? Dick move

Which is basically the reason why it is such a shitty rule.

Except I've never seen sec getting into trouble for rule 1 don't be a dick. Hell I haven't even had an admin give a sec player a warning because of horrible abusive behavior. It's always IC issue deal with it.

As an admin, I don't tell all parties involved about every single warning I issue because A) that'd be ridiculous fast, because I tend to give a lot of warnings, and B) it usually just makes salty people even more salty. I suspect most people probably underestimate the amount of warnings sec gets. The problem is that I don't think a lot of these are recorded, so it's harder to discern what's a pattern.

if only there was some kind of ban request forum for things like this

Jembo wrote:Except I've never seen sec getting into trouble for rule 1 don't be a dick. Hell I haven't even had an admin give a sec player a warning because of horrible abusive behavior. It's always IC issue deal with it.

I've never EVER seen anybody get a ban for rule 1.

FantasticFwoosh wrote:

Jembo wrote:Except I've never seen sec getting into trouble for rule 1 don't be a dick. Hell I haven't even had an admin give a sec player a warning because of horrible abusive behavior. It's always IC issue deal with it.

I've never EVER seen anybody get a ban for rule 1.

I guess it must not happen then!

Uh rule 1 is regularly given as a banning reason.

Sometimes rightfully so, other times I find it dubious.

Yeah but it's not for a player being a dick, or abusing their position. They get rule one banned for murder someone as a non antag, over escalation, actively making secs job harder by breaking in and stealing stuff. Rarely is it, this person was just a complete dick to everyone involved fuck 'um.

FantasticFwoosh wrote:

Jembo wrote:Except I've never seen sec getting into trouble for rule 1 don't be a dick. Hell I haven't even had an admin give a sec player a warning because of horrible abusive behavior. It's always IC issue deal with it.

I've never EVER seen anybody get a ban for rule 1.

Hi

Jembo wrote:Yeah but it's not for a player being a dick, or abusing their position. They get rule one banned for murder someone as a non antag, over escalation, actively making secs job harder by breaking in and stealing stuff. Rarely is it, this person was just a complete dick to everyone involved fuck 'um.

Point and case. Its a additional clause to get longer bans. (X broke 1 rule = a dayban but because they were a dick about it and to staff, upgraded to a weekban) i mean, solely for just being a insufferable dick by yourself would be a hard to do (or not hard to do if the admins weren't so tactile and triggered)

Then of course, anti sec perspective comes into play, and people just trying to manage a hectic round by extreme means are called out as shitcurity institutional bias and therefore the 'dickishness' is amplified, hence why older players stay in sec roles don't do very much or as least effort as nessecary and keep their jobs, while new harsher players are ousted very quickly.

You can't impose your authority on others because the roles carry no weight in low RP when every assistant sees themselves as a king, it only works on respectable medium RP upwards. Older players rely on respect and meta-familiarity with characters to command any form of authority, very rarely any actual show of force such as ordering a entire station wide shake-up.

FantasticFwoosh wrote:You can't impose your authority on others because the roles carry no weight in low RP when every assistant sees themselves as a king, it only works on respectable medium RP upwards. Older players rely on respect and meta-familiarity with characters to command any form of authority, very rarely any actual show of force such as ordering a entire station wide shake-up.

Even on medium-up, imposing your authoritah for the sake of imposing your authoritah makes you generally resented and will often get you BTFO, and the older / more respected / meta-familiar players don't tend to make shows of force because they don't need to make shows of force unless the person they're making an example of is some newbie upstart who doesn't know who they're fucking with.

To paraphrase Lady T., if you have to go around telling everyone how powerful you are, you aren't.

FantasticFwoosh wrote:

Jembo wrote:Except I've never seen sec getting into trouble for rule 1 don't be a dick. Hell I haven't even had an admin give a sec player a warning because of horrible abusive behavior. It's always IC issue deal with it.

I've never EVER seen anybody get a ban for rule 1.

Well considering you don't get to see bans I guess that makes sense. :^)

captain sawrge wrote:

FantasticFwoosh wrote:

Jembo wrote:Except I've never seen sec getting into trouble for rule 1 don't be a dick. Hell I haven't even had an admin give a sec player a warning because of horrible abusive behavior. It's always IC issue deal with it.

I've never EVER seen anybody get a ban for rule 1.

I guess it must not happen then!

lol'd

TehPear wrote:

FantasticFwoosh wrote:

Jembo wrote:~snip~

I've never EVER seen anybody get a ban for rule 1.

Well considering you don't get to see bans I guess that makes sense. :^)

The logic behind banning people for being dicks so personally is also invisible and not based in any means of actual professionalism or adult manner, its actually short of draconic by admins. The admins are so varied on personal policy and tactility the rule ceases to be anymore relevant as a nail-head to hammer in exposure to position abuse & to lengthen bans superficially because it was in the serving admins ruling that "they were being a dick/they said something and were being a dick".

FantasticFwoosh wrote:

TehPear wrote:

FantasticFwoosh wrote:

Jembo wrote:~snip~

I've never EVER seen anybody get a ban for rule 1.

Well considering you don't get to see bans I guess that makes sense. :^)

The logic behind banning people for being dicks so personally is also invisible and not based in any means of actual professionalism or adult manner, its actually short of draconic by admins. The admins are so varied on personal policy and tactility the rule ceases to be anymore relevant as a nail-head to hammer in exposure to position abuse & to lengthen bans superficially because it was in the serving admins ruling that "they were being a dick/they said something and were being a dick".

I actually wonder if you even read the rules page on the wiki. The fact is rule one has the most rule precedents, which receive a large majority of warnings and bans from admins for violations. When a ban is levied it generally isn't a vague "You're a dick," but more player did X which is against this precedent.

TheNightingale wrote:We already have a rule against this. "Don't be a dick". Giving someone 10 minutes for loitering is being a dick. Stealing Sec's taser when they try and arrest you is being a dick. Shooting someone ten times for possession of a camera bug is being a dick. Smashing into a department when people work there is being a dick.

Conclusion? Don't be a dick.

Actually, stealing secs taser for trying to arrest you isn't being a dick, its being robust and teaching said officer to not use taser unless he's a distance away.

Honk

sirnat wrote:

TheNightingale wrote:We already have a rule against this. "Don't be a dick". Giving someone 10 minutes for loitering is being a dick. Stealing Sec's taser when they try and arrest you is being a dick. Shooting someone ten times for possession of a camera bug is being a dick. Smashing into a department when people work there is being a dick.

Conclusion? Don't be a dick.

Actually, stealing secs taser for trying to arrest you isn't being a dick, its being robust and teaching said officer to not use taser unless he's a distance away.

Honk

That's assault of officer, theft of brig equipment, possession of weapon.

That's a 6-10 'minute sentence right there. I'd gulag you for 600 points.

J_Madison wrote: That's assault of officer, theft of brig equipment, possession of weapon.

That's a 6-10 'minute sentence right there. I'd gulag you for 600 points.

6-10 minutes in the brig is not equal to 600 points from the gulag, considering how dangerous lavaland is.

cough no monsters on gulag side cough

Archie700 wrote:

J_Madison wrote: That's assault of officer, theft of brig equipment, possession of weapon.

That's a 6-10 'minute sentence right there. I'd gulag you for 600 points.

6-10 minutes in the brig is not equal to 600 points from the gulag, considering how dangerous lavaland is.

Iirc Gulag side has a lesser chance of normal fauna spawning.

Doesn't matter though, most people ghost or kill themselves upon touching ground.

600 points is maybe like 10-15 minutes if you have relatively poor luck, what with not having mesons

danno wrote:600 points is maybe like 10-15 minutes if you have relatively poor luck, what with not having mesons

What is sand

D&B wrote:

danno wrote:600 points is maybe like 10-15 minutes if you have relatively poor luck, what with not having mesons

What is sand

What is running straight across the lava to the mining shuttle

TehPear wrote:I actually wonder if you even read the rules page on the wiki. The fact is rule one has the most rule precedents, which receive a large majority of warnings and bans from admins for violations. When a ban is levied it generally isn't a vague "You're a dick," but more player did X which is against this precedent.

Rule 0 - "Chelp george melons griffin me TehPear! Come ambigiously roll HOS or like (HG/TechnoAlchemist) assume you are being funny and abuse your authority to 'make it all better' (summarily violating law 10 & 0 for a caught antag) because admins & coders are sometimes so out of touch with the player experience its embarrassing like your grandparents making racist slur jokes at a christmas get together.

Rule 2 - Everyone knows everything anyway and you're asking them to 'roleplay' forcibly its hard to enforce the abuse

Rule 9 - Nobody enforces this, we don't even check except to shut out squealing kids on OOC

---

Rule 5 & 7 - Relating DIRECTLY back to the argument of 'laid back experienced players in HOS' this basically exclaims that whichever way you play, either by not agitating anyone by being a passive HOS, or a super over the top new player in the role, you will get banned hence why barely nobody plays sec anymore (unless you are a meme and have admins in pocket or on your meta-friendlist to not enforce via rule 0)

Rule 10 - "Losing is part of the game." The most sensible of all the rules we should take into account more often and push for more priority, some people cannot handle being caught and admins oblige.

(TL; DR) the rules are garbage and mostly guidelines to common sense and manners, there are fringe activities you should really ahelp to ask about & hopefully get guidance if you need it but if you fail its your own fault. Some admins can't grasp rule 10 and some players take this salt and resentment to coderbus and degrade the game for everybody (Looking at you Cheridan trying to remove hulk vs clockwork)

callanrockslol wrote:

D&B wrote:

danno wrote:600 points is maybe like 10-15 minutes if you have relatively poor luck, what with not having mesons

What is sand

What is running straight across the lava to the mining shuttle

what is dying to the 80 burn and non removable burn stacks

Armhulen wrote:

callanrockslol wrote:

D&B wrote:

danno wrote:600 points is maybe like 10-15 minutes if you have relatively poor luck, what with not having mesons

What is sand

What is running straight across the lava to the mining shuttle

what is dying to the 80 burn and non removable burn stacks

What is epipen and stop-drop-and-rolling

Cw3040 wrote:

Armhulen wrote:

callanrockslol wrote:

D&B wrote:

danno wrote:600 points is maybe like 10-15 minutes if you have relatively poor luck, what with not having mesons

What is sand

What is running straight across the lava to the mining shuttle

what is dying to the 80 burn and non removable burn stacks

What is epipen and stop-drop-and-rolling

How is an epipen going to save you without someone to get you out of crit.....

well obviously, CP, that's why you breed a healing virus culture while in the gulag on your armpit hairs

CPTANT wrote:

Cw3040 wrote:

Armhulen wrote:

callanrockslol wrote:

D&B wrote:

danno wrote:600 points is maybe like 10-15 minutes if you have relatively poor luck, what with not having mesons

What is sand

What is running straight across the lava to the mining shuttle

what is dying to the 80 burn and non removable burn stacks

What is epipen and stop-drop-and-rolling

How is an epipen going to save you without someone to get you out of crit.....

Ive had people with nothing but epinephrine in their system that have gotten up from crit while spacewalking.

Having played as CMO before gets you some good experience.

Also knowing what epinephine does gets you some good experience.

"Has a chance of healing brute and burn each tick while in crit"

FantasticFwoosh wrote:

TehPear wrote:I actually wonder if you even read the rules page on the wiki. The fact is rule one has the most rule precedents, which receive a large majority of warnings and bans from admins for violations. When a ban is levied it generally isn't a vague "You're a dick," but more player did X which is against this precedent.

Rule 0 - "Chelp george melons griffin me TehPear! Come ambigiously roll HOS or like (HG/TechnoAlchemist) assume you are being funny and abuse your authority to 'make it all better' (summarily violating law 10 & 0 for a caught antag) because admins & coders are sometimes so out of touch with the player experience its embarrassing like your grandparents making racist slur jokes at a christmas get together.

Rule 2 - Everyone knows everything anyway and you're asking them to 'roleplay' forcibly its hard to enforce the abuse

Rule 9 - Nobody enforces this, we don't even check except to shut out squealing kids on OOC

---

Rule 5 & 7 - Relating DIRECTLY back to the argument of 'laid back experienced players in HOS' this basically exclaims that whichever way you play, either by not agitating anyone by being a passive HOS, or a super over the top new player in the role, you will get banned hence why barely nobody plays sec anymore (unless you are a meme and have admins in pocket or on your meta-friendlist to not enforce via rule 0)

Rule 10 - "Losing is part of the game." The most sensible of all the rules we should take into account more often and push for more priority, some people cannot handle being caught and admins oblige.

(TL; DR) the rules are garbage and mostly guidelines to common sense and manners, there are fringe activities you should really ahelp to ask about & hopefully get guidance if you need it but if you fail its your own fault. Some admins can't grasp rule 10 and some players take this salt and resentment to coderbus and degrade the game for everybody (Looking at you Cheridan trying to remove hulk vs clockwork)

I...I don't know how this response really relates as it's kinda like some old man rambling on about something completely wrong.

it's fwoosh

If this thread has convinced me of anything it's that sec antags need to be a thing again so they can turn their toxicity on each other.

Incoming wrote:Theoretically this is the lawyer's realm

Davidchan wrote:If this thread has convinced me of anything it's that sec antags need to be a thing again so they can turn their toxicity on each other.

At least with sec antags people would care and fight back when security was murdering everyone.

Wouldn't bringing sec antags at this point just feed into people resisting arrest and escalating what could be a simple search needlessly?

It would take away their non-antag assumption and probably encourage them to look over each other's shoulders to ensure the arrests and executions they are making are legit. You know, hold each other accountable and to the same standard they hold the rest of the crew.

Davidchan wrote:It would take away their non-antag assumption and probably encourage them to look over each other's shoulders to ensure the arrests and executions they are making are legit. You know, hold each other accountable and to the same standard they hold the rest of the crew.

I think its more likely to increase the ";SEC'S MURDERING ME" the second anyone gets tazed, while a swarm of everybody comes to beat eachother to death out of nowhere.

I think we should all just hug it out and be friends.

Saegrimr wrote:I think its more likely to increase the ";SEC'S MURDERING ME" the second anyone gets tazed, while a swarm of everybody comes to beat eachother to death out of nowhere.

This is the same argument trotted out every time people bring up sec antag. It has no effect. People who will scream over the radio will do so regardless.

Okand37 wrote:I think we should all just hug it out and be friends.

[center]KEEP IT CLEAN[/center]

bandit wrote:

Saegrimr wrote:I think its more likely to increase the ";SEC'S MURDERING ME" the second anyone gets tazed, while a swarm of everybody comes to beat eachother to death out of nowhere.

This is the same argument trotted out every time people bring up sec antag. It has no effect. People who will scream over the radio will do so regardless.

I think the issue is that with sec antag people can't just file it under "shitter" and ignore it

That's the whole problem. As it stands, the only reasons someone would complain about security are "antag" and "shitter." Which means security basically gets free reign to do whatever they want, unopposed.

Note: This is not an argument to go back to the SoS days where security couldn't take any action without being bwoinked. It's an argument to restore the IC checks and balances, and resulting uncertainty/conflict/paranoia, that the game is designed on.

bandit wrote:That's the whole problem. As it stands, the only reasons someone would complain about security are "antag" and "shitter." Which means security basically gets free reign to do whatever they want, unopposed.

Note: This is not an argument to go back to the SoS days where security couldn't take any action without being bwoinked. It's an argument to restore the IC checks and balances, and resulting uncertainty/conflict/paranoia, that the game is designed on.

Why don't we just ban shitty sec players, you know like we should have done to silicons before everybody got their nuts in a bunch and removed them.

If people are bad

why
bother
keeping them

Saegrimr wrote: Why don't we just ban shitty sec players, you know like we should have done to silicons before everybody got their nuts in a bunch and removed them.

If people are bad

why
bother
keeping them

Because it depends on the admin you get when you admin help shitty behavior from sec. There are no set rules in how to deal with a sec officer being assholes to other players for the sake of ruining another persons fun. Some people get off with warnings, but some admins don't keep track of warnings in admin notes so bad behavior often gets over looked. There are also some admins who view it as an IC issue, but will be quick to throw a ban at a player for enacting any sort of payback against offending officers. It's like you're fucked either way as a player. If a sec officer is being horrible, and you don't adminhelp and lock them in maint. Or just beat the shit outta them. Then they can adminhelp you, and it looks like you're just grey tiding sec despite their horrible behavior being the root cause of the situation.

If you adminhelp and you get an admin who doesn't agree with you, you're wasting your time because even though we have a rule that states don't be a dick. Their Opinion > Your opinion, suck it up butter cup but don't escalate the situation or you'll cop a ban.