[Deleted] Security protections and responsibilities

Resolved.

Moderator: Board Moderators

User avatar
Arathian
 
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:02 pm
Byond Username: Arathian

Security protections and responsibilities

Postby Arathian » Wed Aug 28, 2019 6:19 am #511010

Security enjoys unique OOC protections not enjoyed by any other job, save perhaps the captain. Attacking or defending yourself against sec as you would do to other greytide is treated much more harshly. When security wants to arrest you, defending yourself with deadly force is generally banned.

At the same time, security has no special *responsibilities* to act above the standards of your average greyshirt.

This leads to scenarios like the follow scenario:

Sec number one enters departments, starts stunbatoning randoms in the departments "for fun", breaks a couple things etc

Department treats him as they would treat anyone else (aka beat up and throw out mostly)

Sec 1 cries to his team. Suddenly 10 seccies are inside your department, stunbatoning everyone and draggining half your department to the brig because they "attacked" one of their own.

You are not allowed, in any way, to defend yourself from the sec swarm invading your workplace because their arrest is "legitimate" even though the "legitimate arrest" was generated due to sec 1 acting like a greytider in the first place.


--------------------

The above scenario has happened to everyone who has played for more than a week I think.

As I see it, there are 2 solutions:

1) Remove the special OOC protections from sec. Treat them as any other job, despite the meta-knowledge that they can't be antags. If they act like antags, they should be treated as antags. If sec swarms you for something sec caused, you are allowed to defend yourself with relative force.

or

2) Enforce stricter rules on sec behaviour. Sec should be required to uphold the law and to be "lawful good". That means that a sec, f.ex. stunbatoning a clown randomly 'for the lolz' or a sec breaking into places he doesn't have access to without a good cause would be warned or job banned.

Do you agree that this is an issue? Do you agree with any above solutions? If not, what is your solution and perspective?
Iron, blood and spider armies



User avatar
MortoSasye
 
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:05 pm
Byond Username: MortoSasye

Re: Security protections and responsibilities

Postby MortoSasye » Wed Aug 28, 2019 6:38 am #511013

You should ahelp situations like this, security shouldn’t be stunbatoning everyone ‘’for fun’’ and breaking things. They’re held to a higher standard than other jobs like the head of staffs because they are also protected more than normal (You can’t kill security for doing their job coming to mind for this).

Now, to each proposal:

1) Again, security has this protection because they’re held to a higher standard.
2) This is unacceptable behavior but sure, maybe we could add a more clear ruling on it in security policy.

To your questions: Yes, it’s an issue if this is going unpunished. I agree with the second solution partially, but not entirely.

I would resolve it with a more clear ruling in security precedents for it, and offer the idea to the players before running it for a test.
Bella Rouge; no, it's not Rogue
DICK PILLS HERE
Image
NSFW:
Image

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Security protections and responsibilities

Postby Shadowflame909 » Wed Aug 28, 2019 6:38 am #511014

This security officer would most definitively be reprimanded without escalation.

But fought back against and killed? Certainly not, unless an antag was toying with things.

In the normal work environment, the game would be leaning towards without escalation. This sec officer would very quickly get a buttload of complaints sent up to the heads of staff. HoS, Cap, HoP. Anyone of these guys can take all the complaints and deal with him.

Or you can challenge him to a fight in the holodeck, rage-cage.

But I don't think he's going to get a chance to loophole escalation any longer.

Also, rule 1 would be enforced more. So if a sec officer is getting ahelps left and right about being a greyshitting asshole. Which most definitively will happen more, because they have no escalation to loophole out of. You can best believe they'll be weeded out of the role.

Escalation is a loophole that required these protections and responsibilities. Otherwise, any assistant minor-griefer would be murdering security every damn round.

Remove the rule, you remove the loophole. Now security is going to be wise about trying to abuse it themselves.

Thanks for the question, Arathian. You'd definitively see some improvement.

Spoiler:
Image

ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
terranaut
TGMC Lead
 
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Security protections and responsibilities

Postby terranaut » Wed Aug 28, 2019 6:44 pm #511142

The rules state that 'security is held to a higher standard'.
Personally I have not seen this rule enforced.

I've said my piece on bans in the ban length thread in the subforum here; Security players are one of those special cases. Their OOC protection and role on the station puts them in a unique position of power and importance. Often new players are drawn to it, unaware of a lot of basic game mechanics, causing them to make awful decisions, backed by strong weaponry and a department that tends to think in very tribal terms when it comes to "us and them".
As of yet I'm undecided and still deliberating but I am considering jobbanning players from security who show a gross lack of understanding of the game and make rash decisions, leading to very, very avoidable mistakes to force them to catch up on direly required game knowledge for a while.

People who do know better and abuse their position of power are the reason people give a cautious trust at best to security in general will definitely receive jobbans.
Image

Tell me I'm a good monki: viewtopic.php?f=75&t=24558


Return to Archived/Deleted

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron