You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Ask and discuss policy about game conduct and rules.

Moderator: In-Game Head Admins

onleavedontatme
 
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:26 pm
Byond Username: KorPhaeron

You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby onleavedontatme » Thu May 17, 2018 2:14 pm #411037

CitrusGender wrote:
Fatal wrote:Perhaps as an improvement, this could be changed to "You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?" or something along those lines, meaning you can't pull out a weapon and hit someone into crit for it when they punch you once? Seems like it might be an improvement to me, as many real world self defence laws are of similar wording I believe


I should add this though, this has been a problem for awhile.



Forgive me for making yet another policy thread but

How am I supposed to figure out, as a player, what the intent of the other player is, and what the admin online thinks the intent of the other player is, and what the other player and what the admin (of which we have ~40, and new ones weekly) consider "reasonable equivalent" all within half a second of being attacked by another player?

Is it reasonable equivalent or intent to kill a player when they trash my workplace?

To kill a player when they push me down and space my backpack unprovoked?

When they chase me into maint and hit me with a circular saw?

If an assistant randomly starts punching me and I beat them to death am I in trouble now?

Can a player acting in good faith possibly know their options in responding to these situations and ten thousand more all in real time if you add a vague clause like that to the rules?



User avatar
D&B
 
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 2:23 am
Location: *teleports behind you*
Byond Username: Repukan

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby D&B » Thu May 17, 2018 2:16 pm #411038

It all comes down to whether the admin that handles your situation wants to see you shitcanned or not.
Spoiler:
[20:26:02]ADMIN: PM: [censored admin]->[censored]: Welp. It was just a prank bro isn't a very good excuse when it comes to unprovoked nonantag murder, but since this is your first time doing it and you seem to understand the problem instead of a bannu I'm just going to leave you with a warning. Please PLEASE don't do this again in the future, as funny as crackhead broken bottle memes can be. Alrighty? Do you have any input on this?
[20:26:39]ADMIN: PM: [censored]->[censored admin]: Alright, no problem. I have some input. Fuck my boy pussy.
[20:27:06]ADMIN: PM: [censored admin]->[censored]: Okay then. Have fun.
[20:31:29]ADMIN: PM: [censored admin]->[censored]: Excuse me?

J_Madison wrote:that's a stupid fucking stat
you don't play, you've never played
lying little shit with your bullshit stat
fuck you

ColonicAcid wrote:and with enough practise i too could blow my own dick so well that only the gods know how it feels.

onleavedontatme
 
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:26 pm
Byond Username: KorPhaeron

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby onleavedontatme » Thu May 17, 2018 2:17 pm #411039

Furthermore is there any actual value to splitting hairs over "reasonable equivalent intent" and providing an OOC safety net when an assistant randomly attacks you or smashes up your workplace? If they don't like being dead they shouldn't go around provoking fights.

"Will I get banned protecting myself" is not the kind of paranoia we should have running through the playerbase

User avatar
BeeSting12
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2016 1:11 am
Location: 'Murica
Byond Username: BeeSting12
Github Username: BeeSting12

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby BeeSting12 » Thu May 17, 2018 2:23 pm #411042

I'm not a fan of the idea of people "deserving" to live and play in the round, in other words, everyone has an entitlement to stay in the round. If you start attacking people unprovoked, trashing workplaces, etc, I think you lose that entitlement as you have shown your only intention is to make others angry.

Basically reasonable equivalent is dumb. It should be "start shit get hit" instead.
Stickymayhem wrote:you're right!

Edward Sloan, THE LAW
Melanie Flowers, Catgirl
Borgasm, Cyborg
Spoiler:
OOC: Hunterh98: to be fair sloan is one of the, if not the, most robust folks on tg

DEAD: Schlomo Gaskin says, "sloan may be a faggot but he gets the job done"

DEAD: Rei Ayanami says, "YOU'RE EVERYWHERE WHERE BAD SHIT IS HAPPENING"
DEAD: Rei Ayanami says, "IT'S ALWAYS FUCKING EDWARD SLOAN"
oranges wrote:Bee sting is honestly the nicest admin, I look forward to seeing him as a headmin one day

Click here to make incoherent rants about my badminning.

User avatar
Qbopper
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2015 6:34 pm
Location: Canada
Byond Username: Qbopper
Github Username: Qbopper

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby Qbopper » Thu May 17, 2018 2:26 pm #411044

BeeSting12 wrote:I'm not a fan of the idea of people "deserving" to live and play in the round, in other words, everyone has an entitlement to stay in the round. If you start attacking people unprovoked, trashing workplaces, etc, I think you lose that entitlement as you have shown your only intention is to make others angry.

Basically reasonable equivalent is dumb. It should be "start shit get hit" instead.


I think it isn't as clear cut as you describe but I agree people who are obviously only there to make things unfun for others should be spaced with extreme prejudice
Limey wrote:its too late.

User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby Arianya » Thu May 17, 2018 2:32 pm #411048

I thought we removed reasonable equivalent retaliation clause with nuEscalation

Also does this technically count as a second policy thread spawned by my actions or is this just a offshoot of my first.
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg

onleavedontatme
 
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:26 pm
Byond Username: KorPhaeron

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby onleavedontatme » Thu May 17, 2018 2:36 pm #411052

Citrus mentioned readding the line so this is an offshoot

It'd be particularly depressing if "you can only respond with equivalent reasonable force" was added because someone tried four separate times to vigilante murder people over moving their own department gear and died for it.

User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby Arianya » Thu May 17, 2018 2:54 pm #411067

Citrusgender wrote:
Fatal wrote:Perhaps as an improvement, this could be changed to "You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?" or something along those lines, meaning you can't pull out a weapon and hit someone into crit for it when they punch you once? Seems like it might be an improvement to me, as many real world self defence laws are of similar wording I believe


I should add this though, this has been a problem for awhile.


To respond to the thing that spawned this thread then, no, don't add (or re-add) this line. Intent in our shitty atmos simulator is incredibly difficult to perceive, from the guy who shoves you and drags you into maint (Murder or just a prank?) to the guy who shoots you with a syringe (deathchem or virus cure?) and this just leads to long ahelp chains with both sides trying to retroactively justify their actions.

It was a key improvement that nuEscalation made, since it was now clear cut: start shit, get hit.

Sure we'll occasionally end up with edge cases where this rule seems to do more harm then good but this wasn't such a case and it would be stupid to half-ass our escalation rules because of one poorly conceived complaint about being murdered by a traitor.
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg

Dr_bee
 
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:31 pm
Byond Username: DrBee

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby Dr_bee » Thu May 17, 2018 4:04 pm #411081

Arianya wrote:It was a key improvement that nuEscalation made, since it was now clear cut: start shit, get hit.


Problem I have been running into has been the old kill-baiting problem returned, someone starts shit and then dunk you when you fighting back or try to defend another person and admin helping just gives you a flat "IC issue" because you threw a punch.

If escalation was judged by some sort of in character roleplay standards it might be easier to enforce.

Problem of de-escalation is still an issue as well, there is no reason to not murder the dude if he is allowed to kill you for punching him.

User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby Arianya » Thu May 17, 2018 4:13 pm #411084

Dr_bee wrote:
Arianya wrote:It was a key improvement that nuEscalation made, since it was now clear cut: start shit, get hit.


Problem I have been running into has been the old kill-baiting problem returned, someone starts shit and then dunk you when you fighting back or try to defend another person and admin helping just gives you a flat "IC issue" because you threw a punch.

If escalation was judged by some sort of in character roleplay standards it might be easier to enforce.

Problem of de-escalation is still an issue as well, there is no reason to not murder the dude if he is allowed to kill you for punching him.


If someone starts shit with you and ends up killing you (even if you retaliate!) then they should be trying to revive you, per the escalation policy. If they're not it's an ahelp situation.

And if you're worried about kill-baiting, call security or use non-lethal means (push/shoving). Using "in character roleplay standards" isn't any easier to enforce because it ends up at the old bugbear of identifying intent in our game where a toolbox is a deadly murder weapon that can kill you dead within a few seconds with some good hits.
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg

Dr_bee
 
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:31 pm
Byond Username: DrBee

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby Dr_bee » Thu May 17, 2018 4:22 pm #411086

Gives me an idea, a "de-escalation" point that the character sets in character set up, a question of how ruthless the person is. low levels can mean no harm at all, to critting, to cloning, to no mercy.

That is as far as the character can go against other people and as far as other people can go against them before the escalation is "solved"

info would be listed in security and medical records in an in character way.

person who started shit wouldnt be protected but the person who responds would be protected up to the point of their de-escalation point, going beyond it would mean they are subject to admin reprimand for shittily role-playing and the conflict protection switches to the instigator. So if you want to start and end shit with violence, you dont get any protection, if you show mercy you do get some protection, but you lose it if you roleplay poorly and murder the dude.

It is a shitty, clunky system but it is at least somewhat clearcut and consistant as opposed to Liberarian NAP murderfest that is entirely based on the whims of individual admins that we have now.

Arianya wrote:
If someone starts shit with you and ends up killing you (even if you retaliate!) then they should be trying to revive you, per the escalation policy. If they're not it's an ahelp situation.

And if you're worried about kill-baiting, call security or use non-lethal means (push/shoving). Using "in character roleplay standards" isn't any easier to enforce because it ends up at the old bugbear of identifying intent in our game where a toolbox is a deadly murder weapon that can kill you dead within a few seconds with some good hits.


If that is the case then escalation is just shittily enforced.
Shit probably should stop at the crit stage and not the death/cloning stage. There is a 100 hp buffer between neutralized and dead that needs to be considered by admins, and soft crit makes that level a bit more obvious. you dont "oops I accidentally the whole murder" someone with a toolbox, it takes actual intent to hit them the extra 6-7 times needed to instakill.

User avatar
Nilons
 
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2016 5:38 pm
Location: Canada
Byond Username: NIlons

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby Nilons » Thu May 17, 2018 4:24 pm #411088

How are even admins going to figure out a players intent besides asking them let alone players

>random greyshirt attacks me with a toolbox
>have to ask "Are you gonna kill me, crit me, or just hit me in the head a few times" to determine their intent so I can respond
I play Ostrava of Nanotrasen (good name) and Rolls-The-Bones (Crag Given name god bless)
Signature Memes
Image
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEVd4c1SV2g
Image
Image

User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby Arianya » Thu May 17, 2018 4:27 pm #411090

If you believe someone's handling of a ticket was improper to the rules, you should contact the headmins or open an admin complaint.

We can't fix rules being enforced improperly by adding more rules that will still not be enforced properly, and especially not with an awkward, clunky system that tries to blend RP with rapid paced combat.
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg

User avatar
imblyings
 
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:42 pm
Location: >using suit sensors
Byond Username: Ausops

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby imblyings » Thu May 17, 2018 4:46 pm #411101

Kor wrote:How am I supposed to figure out, as a player, what the intent of the other player is, and what the admin online thinks the intent of the other player is, and what the other player and what the admin (of which we have ~40, and new ones weekly) consider "reasonable equivalent" all within half a second of being attacked by another player


are they meant to do all that though

the first thing I think most players who aren't burned out decade old policy thread makers is probably to fight back first, it's a question of what they do later and whether they get outrobusted or not that admins start to get involved in, granted that might not be any less stressful but still

>Is it reasonable equivalent or intent to kill a player when they trash my workplace?
admins/most players should know already its ok to dunk invaders

>To kill a player when they push me down and space my backpack unprovoked?
any good admin is gonna ask what is in the bag etc and any good player shouldn't be confused about whether they can kill someone or not over an empty bag + internals box

>When they chase me into maint and hit me with a circular saw?
pretty obvious

>If an assistant randomly starts punching me and I beat them to death am I in trouble now?
deja vu, admins shouldn't be punishing them unless it was one punch and they gibbed and ate the assistant in return and even then, the admin should be asking a lot about the context

>and what the admin online thinks the intent of the other player is,
I think an important concept admins need to consider is the art of shouldering things on behalf of players, misunderstandings and misinformation happens, if all admins are different, then all admins need to give some leeway to players, so unless there is some clearcut malice or extreme negligence going on, the players can be assured they're not walking on a tightrope
The patched, dusty, trimmed, feathered mantle of evil +13.

User avatar
Grazyn
 
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:01 am
Byond Username: Grazyn

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby Grazyn » Thu May 17, 2018 6:24 pm #411134

If someone hits me once out of the blue with lethal damage (punches, toolbox) I try to disarm or run away, if they keep hitting me I fight until they're in crit then I leave them there. If they come back I kill them and hand them over to the chef. This is what I've done the few times it happened to me (unless I died in the fight) and I didn't get banned. One time I did it to one guy who was hitting me with boxing gloves but I didn't realize that because CHAT TOO FAST and non-lethal damage looks the same as lethal on the health bar. He got into crit and came back but we de-escalated and no one was bwoinked.

The problem with taking them to cloning as you can see is that they will almost always come back. The reason is the following: if they're an antag, they're obviously going to come back and kill you because they can. If they're non-antag, they'll come back because they think they're in the right and of course, they're not gonna clone you if they win.

As far as interloping is concerned, I've been instakilled in the past (thank you steven seagal PR) and gibbed for hopping the chef counter, but I've always operated under the assumption that once you break into someone's place you're free game because normal people as opposed to sec don't have a reliable non-lethal way to stop you

User avatar
Screemonster
 
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 7:23 pm
Byond Username: Scree

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby Screemonster » Thu May 17, 2018 7:14 pm #411162

I didn't know that sally put my marble in the box instead of the basket where I left it, therefore I looked in the basket when I came back into the room

I didn't know that that guy that started hitting me with a fire extinguisher out of nowhere wasn't a traitor trying to kill me, therefore I assumed he was one

Dr_bee
 
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:31 pm
Byond Username: DrBee

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby Dr_bee » Thu May 17, 2018 7:15 pm #411163

There is still a big difference between critting and killing. It isnt hard to stop beating a man to death.

User avatar
PKPenguin321
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:02 pm
Location: U S A, U S A, U S A
Byond Username: PKPenguin321

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby PKPenguin321 » Thu May 17, 2018 7:33 pm #411169

of course you should be allowed to respond to implied intent. misdirection and misinformation are a major part of the game. if a traitor hijacks the HoS PDA and tells you that the captain is a ling and you believe it, and the captain takes you aside to his office, and you shoot him, that would be reasonable even though the captain did nothing wrong because you perceived the captain's intent as malicious.

determining if you actually held that intent is up to the investigating admin. admins should make a strong effort to see things from the perspectives of all sides, especially the person who's being bwoinked. you have logs for this to help you with it even further. it's not always clear and sometimes you'll only have the word of the person you're bwoinking to go off of, but in my opinion it's better to let a guilty player go free than to ban an innocent one.
i play Lauser McMauligan. clown name is Cold-Ass Honkey
i have three other top secret characters as well
tell the best admin how good he is
Spoiler:
Image

onleavedontatme
 
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:26 pm
Byond Username: KorPhaeron

Re: You are allowed to respond with reasonable equivalent retaliation or intent?

Postby onleavedontatme » Thu May 17, 2018 7:53 pm #411172

Dr_bee wrote:There is still a big difference between critting and killing. It isnt hard to stop beating a man to death.


It's even easier to not start throwing fists or swinging toolboxes or breaking into departments if you don't want to end up dead.

Sure it's great if a chef refrains from turning the assistant into burgers and takes them to medbay instead, but that shouldn't be an OOC obligation, and players shouldn't, as beesting said, feel entitled to an admin safety net when they start violence.

Which is really what this boils down to, entitlement to get their way. You're not entitled to security arresting someone, and you're not entitled to killing them if security won't arrest them, and you're not entitled to the admin banning them if you fail to kill them, and you're not entitled to