"Entertaining the idea of a lynchmob"

[chesquatt]

Basically, Saegrimir or however you spell it made an OOC announcement that "Entertaining the idea of a lynchmob" is now bannable. I wans't sure totally what that meant, so I sought clarity.



/discuss.

Edit: I later mentioned there should be a thread made about this new rule, so at the very least people know who were not on or weren't paying attention when that rule was made.

[Saegrimr]

This is not the first time this has been a problem, or been the solution.

Screaming "RIOT RIOT RIOT" over the radio has gotten people banned before, and i'll gladly ensure the same happens on anybody promoting greytide bullshit. Even more so on stupid "KILL ALL LIZARD" lynch mobs, which is what this entire situation was about originally. I'd also like to note you have a pretty nice history of stupid lizard racism/greytiding gimmicks.

[chesquatt]

I'd also like to note you have a pretty nice history of stupid lizard racism/greytiding gimmicks.

Great, this isn't what we are talking about. This is a policy discussion.This is all more reason for me to seek clarity.
You should define the parameters of what constitutes "entertaining a lynchmob"
Is is "entertaining a lynchmob" to read WGW? Is it "entertaining a lynchmob" to kill Ian and invoke a lynchmob? Or is it "entertaining a lynchmob" to call for either of those lynchmobs, which has happened on this station for as long as I can remember.

I'm not saying your wrong. I am saying you should define CLEARLY what is allowed and what is not allowed. Because someone saying "Murder the Librarian, disgusting literature." could be considered "entertaining a lynchmob" if we remain this vague.

[Saegrimr]

I'm not saying your wrong. I am saying you should define CLEARLY what is allowed and what is not allowed. Because someone saying "Murder the Librarian, disgusting literature." could be considered "entertaining a lynchmob" if we remain this vague.

Then you should provide the same context that everybody else in the round got. Taking one reply out of context accomplishes nothing.

You and several others had been screaming to lynch all lizards throughout the round, succeeded in a few of them. Had I not actually been in the round and de-adminned at the time there would have been multiple bans that round. That is just plain not acceptable. Whether or not you were the ones to actually throw them out the airlocks, starting the riot will net you the same punishment.

[chesquatt]

I'm not saying your wrong. I am saying you should define CLEARLY what is allowed and what is not allowed. Because someone saying "Murder the Librarian, disgusting literature." could be considered "entertaining a lynchmob" if we remain this vague.

Then you should provide the same context that everybody else in the round got. Taking one reply out of context accomplishes nothing.

You and several others had been screaming to lynch all lizards throughout the round, succeeded in a few of them. Had I not actually been in the round and de-adminned at the time there would have been multiple bans that round. That is just plain not acceptable. Whether or not you were the ones to actually throw them out the airlocks, starting the riot will net you the same punishment.

Fairly sure that this is a place for policy discussion, not discussion about a round.
But that's not what we are talking about at all. Are you going to clearly define what "entertaining a lynchmob" entails, and what is not "entertaining a lynchmob." Is a bunch of people getting the cold and yelling "FUCKING VIRO, KILL HIS ASS" bannable now? ACtually killing the viro, maybe, actually lynching him, maybe, but "entertaining a lynchmob" is vague as fuck and should be clearly defined for others. People who were not IN that round don't have any context, either.

And your representation of what I did that round is actually pretty wrong, but we are talking about server policy, not this round. You should obey the board's rules like everyone else
"3.) This is not the place to discuss bans requests, appeals, administrators or other players; that belongs in the FNR section"

[Saegrimr]

I'm not saying this shouldn't be a discussion, but that you should provide the proper context if you're gonna straight namedrop me like that.

If you are screaming about killing people/group of people and you have no legitimate reason to do so then you can go in the trash with the dude who assumes there is a good reason to do so.

On a relevant note, from silicon policy.

1. Declarations of the silicons as rogue over inability or unwillingness to follow invalid or conflicting orders is a violation of Server Rule 1. The occurrence of such an attempt should be adminhelped and then disregarded.

This exists because if you scream BORGS ROGUE, someone else will assume they are rogue, ask about it, someone ELSE will hear that and continue to parrot it and the borgs WILL be blown because you implied it and they have no reason to distrust you.

If you're sneezing and not dieing, and you're trying to form a lynch mob on the virologist, you need to rethink which server you're playing if you can't contain your bloodlust over a sneeze.

[chesquatt]

If you're sneezing and not dieing, and you're trying to form a lynch mob on the virologist, you need to rethink which server you're playing if you can't contain your bloodlust over a sneeze.

Your not understanding what I am saying here. If this is going to be a server policy, don't make it so vague. You are talking about people saying something over the radio, and getting bant for it. If your going to make a rule pertaining to speech and not actions, you should be clear and not vague. This will save you and the server a headache, or cause one. Seriously.

[Saegrimr]

Your not understanding what I am saying here. If this is going to be a server policy, don't make it so vague.

This is the server where the main rule is "Don't be a dick", I don't know how much more vague you can get than that.

You are talking about people saying something over the radio, and getting bant for it. If your going to make a rule pertaining to speech and not actions, you should be clear and not vague. This will save you and the server a headache, or cause one. Seriously.

How about this.

"Don't try to start riots, promote greytiding, or form lynch mobs against any player unless you and the people participating have a damn good reason to do."

If you want something more clearly defined than that, then i'll have to direct you to

1. We’re all here to have a good time. If you’re intentionally trying to ruin everyone else’s good time, you won’t have a place here. Being a jerk in-character is fine to a point, but being a jerk out of character is not welcome at all.

and the numerous other instances where its impossible to list every single thing that you can do that will get you in trouble, because it would be absolutely huge and then open up ways to toe the line around it.

Just don't be a dick, otherwise i'll wait for headmin/SoS to come around and say otherwise (which i'll be linking them this thread now.)

[Timbrewolf]

We actually don't need to clearly define this because it just gives people something to toe around.

If you incite a mob and it causes a bunch of nations/lynching/whatever you'll get in trouble for it.

What EXACTLY is okay to say and not okay to say? We can't spell it out for sure, but you'll know (and we'll know) when you've screwed up.

Safest course of action: don't try to randomly rally a bunch of players together to be violent and disruptive because you think it's a fun gimmick. It's just Grey-Tide by another name.

[chesquatt]

"towing the line around"
"politely disrupt kevin's shift"
This is not murdering someone for honking someone with the rubber duck. This is someone saying something over the radio and getting bant for it. I have been here since 2012 and have seen well reputed players say shit like "grey tide world wide" in jest. I have seen rounds where admins divide the station into many "lynchmobs." I have seen assistants form gangs and get in turf wars with other grey gangs. this was all interesting and creative RP that could, depending on the admins judgement be seen as a "lynchmob."
So maybe what we really need is a clear definition of what a lynchmob is and is not. Clearly a lizard lynching tide is a lynchmob. But I was also told my "party" that went into their HQ and trashed it at the end of the round after the shuttle left was also a Mob. Which seems off to me. But again, this is NOT a discussion about a round or other players, its about policy. I bring this up as an example where clear policy (maybe general) is okay. Is forming associations of crewmembers with ulterior motives now considered a "greytide" by a different name, or does it only become one once you do -insert activity-
It would be clear to an admin if someone was toeing the line, people get bant for that shit. I don't see that as a reason not to draw one.

[Saegrimr]

this was all interesting and creative RP that could, depending on the admins judgement be seen as a "lynchmob."

Greytiding is neither interesting or creative, sorry.

[chesquatt]

this was all interesting and creative RP that could, depending on the admins judgement be seen as a "lynchmob."

Greytiding is neither interesting or creative, sorry.

Is two groups of people (assistants) forming gangs and getting in turf wars between the two of them, NOT hurting anyone else, is that a greytide? seriously.

[Ahammer18]

Your question has been answered by a headmin, this also isn't a place for senseless argument-- you guys could keep going forever.

Chesquatt, if you honestly can't tell when your "creative RP" crosses the line we're going to need to have a different discussion.

[Ahammer18]

We ban for words all the time, words along with actions can get you banned. Yelling graytide worldwide is enticing a graytide, and you should be punished if things go sour.

[Saegrimr]

Once again Saegrimr is advocating banning people for words instead of actions.

Gee golly its almost like there isn't precedent for this already.
OH WAIT.

1. Declarations of the silicons as rogue over inability or unwillingness to follow invalid or conflicting orders is a violation of Server Rule 1. The occurrence of such an attempt should be adminhelped and then disregarded.

WORDS

[cedarbridge]

Saying "greytide worldwide" over the radio doesn't make you a grey tider. Once again Saegrimr is advocating banning people for words instead of actions.

If you can't understand the effect words have on others, I don't know what to tell you.

[chesquatt]

Chesquatt, if you honestly can't tell when your "creative RP" crosses the line we're going to need to have a different discussion.

It should be clear as fucking crystal that I am not talking about ME or things I have done, I am talking about a policy here. I am obeying rule 3, discussing policy and you are all bringing up things another player has done. CLEARLY my RP has crossed the line, I received a ban for it. But that's not what the discussion is about though, is it?
What I am saying is that "Enticing a greytide" is as general as saying "enticing violence" or "encouraging disorder." People are not telepathic. BUT just the other round someone said "greytide worldwide" over a comm station, it was a captain, literally nothing of the sort happened. Did he "entice a greytide," sure as shit, did the station fall apart and did people get lynched? nope.
I am saying if you are going to make a rule pertaining to just speech, you shouldn't be general, similar to the not yelling that borgs are rogue rule. That's specific and thus functional. If you make a rule that is general in this context, you are going to stop nothing from happening, but you will end up banning people who read the rule differently than you.

[cedarbridge]

Chesquatt, if you honestly can't tell when your "creative RP" crosses the line we're going to need to have a different discussion.

It should be clear as fucking crystal that I am not talking about ME or things I have done, I am talking about a policy here. I am obeying rule 3, discussing policy and you are all bring up things another player has done.
What I am saying is that "Enticing a greytide" is general as saying "enticing violence" or "encouraging disorder." People are not telepathic. CLEARLY my RP has crossed the line, I received a ban for it. We know that already. BUT just hte other round someone said "greytide worldwide" over a comm station, it was a captain. I am saying if you are going to make a rule pertaining to just speech, you should be general, similar to the not yelling that borgs are rogue rule. That's specific and thus functional. If you make a rule that is general in this context, you are going to stop nothing from happening, but you will end up banning people who read the rule differently than you.

What we're getting at here is you are the only one who seems to have this strange issue with not knowing when what you're doing is crossing this line.

[chesquatt]

Chesquatt, if you honestly can't tell when your "creative RP" crosses the line we're going to need to have a different discussion.

It should be clear as fucking crystal that I am not talking about ME or things I have done, I am talking about a policy here. I am obeying rule 3, discussing policy and you are all bring up things another player has done.
What I am saying is that "Enticing a greytide" is general as saying "enticing violence" or "encouraging disorder." People are not telepathic. CLEARLY my RP has crossed the line, I received a ban for it. We know that already. BUT just hte other round someone said "greytide worldwide" over a comm station, it was a captain. I am saying if you are going to make a rule pertaining to just speech, you should be general, similar to the not yelling that borgs are rogue rule. That's specific and thus functional. If you make a rule that is general in this context, you are going to stop nothing from happening, but you will end up banning people who read the rule differently than you.

What we're getting at here is you are the only one who seems to have this strange issue with not knowing when what you're doing is crossing this line.

I think someone else also commented here. And even if that was true, thats no reason to attack me personally or nit pick me rather than having an actual discussion of policy.

The Rule Saegrimir is bring up as precedence is VERY specific. That is why it works. This other rule is very general, and I see it resulting in a lot of bans without any actual positive results.

"1. Declarations of the silicons as rogue over inability or unwillingness to follow invalid or conflicting orders is a violation of Server Rule 1. The occurrence of such an attempt should be adminhelped and then disregarded." Pretty little room for misinterpretation.

[cedarbridge]

Chesquatt, if you honestly can't tell when your "creative RP" crosses the line we're going to need to have a different discussion.

It should be clear as fucking crystal that I am not talking about ME or things I have done, I am talking about a policy here. I am obeying rule 3, discussing policy and you are all bring up things another player has done.
What I am saying is that "Enticing a greytide" is general as saying "enticing violence" or "encouraging disorder." People are not telepathic. CLEARLY my RP has crossed the line, I received a ban for it. We know that already. BUT just hte other round someone said "greytide worldwide" over a comm station, it was a captain. I am saying if you are going to make a rule pertaining to just speech, you should be general, similar to the not yelling that borgs are rogue rule. That's specific and thus functional. If you make a rule that is general in this context, you are going to stop nothing from happening, but you will end up banning people who read the rule differently than you.

What we're getting at here is you are the only one who seems to have this strange issue with not knowing when what you're doing is crossing this line.

I think someone else also commented here. And even if that was true, thats no reason to attack me personally or nit pick me rather than having an actual discussion of policy.

The Rule Saegrimir is bring up as precedence is VERY specific. That is why it works. This other rule is very general, and I see it resulting in a lot of bans without any actual positive results.

"1. Declarations of the silicons as rogue over inability or unwillingness to follow invalid or conflicting orders is a violation of Server Rule 1. The occurrence of such an attempt should be adminhelped and then disregarded." Pretty little room for misinterpretation.

An0n3 has already stated why we aren't going to go through and codify every single instance and every possible permutation of greytiding and inciting a mob. If we were to do so, there would be a neverending tide of "but it isn't on the list!" line-towing bullshit. The quoted rule there just says "X is a violation of rule 1" which you should already know, but it was coded as an example. You'll note, rule one is "Don't be a jerk." Its a bit hard to get more vague than that. You'll also note that there are no corollaries to that rule. It is what it is and it outlaws a million shitty things. If you cross the line, we tell you. If you keep crossing the line or do it again, you catch a ban. Two people with reading issues is not a failure of the rules to communicate, its a failure of two people to take "No, stop" as "No, stop."

Having your own actions called onto the carpet for this shouldn't be taken as an insult as it was you, quoting an ahelp discussion about this exact issue, who started the namedropping and cited the incident that you're now complaining about being discussed.

If you are not an antag you should not be:

1) Killing people (unprovoked or who aren't obvious antags)
2) Forming groups of other people with the express purpose of killing people (unprovoked or who aren't obvious antags)
3) Inciting others over the radio or other communications tools to kill people (unprovoked or etc)
4) Doing anything that will get others killed through negligence or indirect action

If the question arises in your head, "Would an antag do this?" and your answer is yes, you probably shouldn't be doing it. This is not some new policy. This is not isn't some gotcha ruling.

[Steelpoint]

There are situations where a "lynch mob" may be valid. Say a traitor who is killing everyone and some crew fight back, or the Captain is being crap and people revolt his command.

This is something I don't think can be codified.

[chesquatt]

IF the new policy is "don't entice a riot, this includes statements like "greytide worldwide." Then thats cool, make the rule clear and let people know about it. Because I have been seeing people say these things that will now get them banned for a couple years now. Making a rule against a regular behavior on the station is fine, if you are going to make the rule clear and make sure people now about it.

1) Killing people (unprovoked or who aren't obvious antags)
2) Forming groups of other people with the express purpose of killing people (unprovoked or who aren't obvious antags)
3) Inciting others over the radio or other communications tools to kill people (unprovoked or etc)
4) Doing anything that will get others killed through negligence or indirect action

If the question arises in your head, "Would an antag do this?" and your answer is yes, you probably shouldn't be doing it. This is not some new policy. This is not isn't some gotcha ruling.

Would an antag say "greytide worldwide?" Maybe, lots of people say that, as I stated earlier a captain said it. Dunno if he got Bwoinked for it, but it would be out of the ordinary for anyone who has been playing this server for any amount of time to get boinked for that. But as Saegrimir stated above, statements like that are now bannable.

[paprika]

This new policy is bullshit. I think we should riot about it.

[chesquatt]

This new policy is bullshit. I think we should riot about it.

Very productive thanks.

[Saegrimr]

There are situations where a "lynch mob" may be valid. Say a traitor who is killing everyone and some crew fight back, or the Captain is being crap and people revolt his command.

This is something I don't think can be codified.

That there is SPECIFICALLY the problem. Because there are valid reasons for doing so, and tone cannot be derived from text very easily especially when its scrolling by, someone saying "BORGS ROGUE" can and WILL be taken as legitimate even if "it was just a joke!"

"LYNCH THE BARTENDER" Why? I don't know, but it must have been bad "LYNCH THE BARTENDER!" Two people screaming it now? He is definitely up to no good, I need to help people "LYNCH THE BARTENDER".

[chesquatt]

There are situations where a "lynch mob" may be valid. Say a traitor who is killing everyone and some crew fight back, or the Captain is being crap and people revolt his command.

This is something I don't think can be codified.

That there is SPECIFICALLY the problem. Because there are valid reasons for doing so, and tone cannot be derived from text very easily especially when its scrolling by, someone saying "BORGS ROGUE" can and WILL be taken as legitimate even if "it was just a joke!"

"LYNCH THE BARTENDER" Why? I don't know, but it must have been bad "LYNCH THE BARTENDER!" Two people screaming it now? He is definitely up to no good, I need to help people "LYNCH THE BARTENDER".

If it's valid at times why is "Entertaining the idea" against the rules?
Maybe there should be outlined (in the rules) situations where it is clearly okay to form a mob and kill someone? I can think of a dozen situations that I have been lynched, or I have seen others lynched for pulling bullshit where I have been like "that was totally a good reason to lynch that person." (like the janitor back in the janicart days getting space lube, and sec not doing anything about it.)

[Saegrimr]

"Don't try to start riots, promote greytiding, or form lynch mobs against any player unless you and the people participating have a damn good reason to do."

Keep up.

[chesquatt]

"Don't try to start riots, promote greytiding, or form lynch mobs against any player unless you and the people participating have a damn good reason to do."

Keep up.

Cool, now tell me what the admin staff considers a "damn good reason."
We are on the same page now, that's really good. Please address my question.

[Saegrimr]

"FUCK LIZARDS, DIRTY CUNTS, LYNCH EM ALL" is not a good reason (or gimmick).

"SHITASS MCGREYSON JUST THREW A BOMB IN MEDBAY" is probably a good reason.

[Vekter]

We actually don't need to clearly define this because it just gives people something to toe around.

This is why you will almost never hear any admin EVER tell you where the line is. We've had too much trouble with people toeing the line over the years.

[paprika]

We should remove 145.9 then nobody will be able to start riots

Suppress the people!

[chesquatt]

"FUCK LIZARDS, DIRTY CUNTS, LYNCH EM ALL" is not a good reason (or gimmick).

"SHITASS MCGREYSON JUST THREW A BOMB IN MEDBAY" is probably a good reason.

My gimmick isn't what we are discussing, and Tommy Chav is dead forever.
Cool, what about when it's okay to lynch someone for eating Ian, or reading WGW, or if captain is stunning sec and not doing his job, or if there is some over the top creepy shit going on in the holodeck? I have seen people lynched or beat within an inch of their life for literally every one of those things, all of them were totally okay. Thus I can say logically that a lynchmob is often a VALID form of justice on the station in certain situations. So to say do not "entertain the idea" leaves a lot of that out in the cold, its like saying "don't even entertain the idea of executing someone."

This is why you will almost never hear any admin EVER tell you where the line is. We've had too much trouble with people toeing the line over the years.

See borg rule (the one about crying rogue)
How does one toe the line on that?
"This borg is treating me poorly and disregarding my orders to it" ... ?
I get what you are saying, but;
1. it is in the rules that you can and will be punished for toeing the line
2. I am not demanding a "line" I am asking for clarification. I have been banned for my "greytiding bullshit" in the past, so clearly that is over the line. But if we are going to make it against the rules to "entertain the idea of a lynchmob" then these are questions we need to ask.
3. You can make a functional rule that is hard to toe the line on. IE; "If a crewmember is causing a major disruption in communication, or functionality of the station and security either fails or refuses to properly handle the situation, the crew can take it into their own hands" (I don't mean this as a draft bill or some shit, but as what it might look like)

[Aurx]

We actually don't need to clearly define this because it just gives people something to toe around.

This is why you will almost never hear any admin EVER tell you where the line is. We've had too much trouble with people toeing the line over the years.

The only time there even CAN be a fixed line is when it's a pure binary zero-tolerance issue. Like ban evasion. Either you're ban evading, or you're not ban evading. There's no grey area or speculation or maybes.

[jyxpe]

If you cannot use your common sense to know what is 'black and white' wrong, then you shouldnt be provoking an argument about policy.
If, in-game, you are unsure, ask a bloody admin.
If there are no admins, don't do it.

[Trognar]

If you are not an antag you should not be:

1) Killing people (unprovoked or who aren't obvious antags)
2) Forming groups of other people with the express purpose of killing people (unprovoked or who aren't obvious antags)
3) Inciting others over the radio or other communications tools to kill people (unprovoked or etc)
4) Doing anything that will get others killed through negligence or indirect action

If the question arises in your head, "Would an antag do this?" and your answer is yes, you probably shouldn't be doing it. This is not some new policy. This is not isn't some gotcha ruling.

I am pretty sure everyone here knows that the things on this list are shitty. From what I can see the problem lies in the loose definition, which changes from person to person admin or not, of when forming a group gimmick is considered greytide. Calling lizards filthy subhumans or getting a group of like minded players together to have a pro/anti lizard club could, in essence, be considered ban worthy. From what I have seen lately, some admins seem to think even speaking a few things constitutes to forming a lynch mob.

There are so many things that could happen. If the mob gets violent who gets banned? The person who started the mob even if they explicitly state that they wanted it to be peaceful or openly try to stop any violence? Do the people who enact violence get banned? How about everyone gets banned? Would the group all get warnings/notes for simply being part of a non violent group who goes around doing whatever gimmick is chosen? When does it become too much?

I get the idea behind relatively vague rules, but at least most of them have some sort of ground rules to go off of.

Having your own actions called onto the carpet for this shouldn't be taken as an insult as it was you, quoting an ahelp discussion about this exact issue, who started the namedropping and cited the incident that you're now complaining about being discussed.

Whatever Chesquatt has done is kind of irrelevant to this discussion as it effects more people than just him. An admin makes up a vague policy presumably after a shitty round and now someone wants clarification as to what is and isn't okay. That doesn't mean you use one persons ban history to just dismiss them. I wouldn't call it namedropping when said admin decided to make up a policy as vague as this in the middle of OOC without any prior discussion, as far as I am aware of at least. Also from the looks of it whoever took the picture wasn't getting boinked so much as asking some questions, which in turn translated over to the forums for further discussion, the picture was merely relevant.

[Saegrimr]

My gimmick isn't what we are discussing, and Tommy Chav is dead forever.

Funny thing about that, its exactly what that round in particular was about. Again, context. Large group of people screaming "lynch the lizards" and guess what happens? Escape airlock has 8 dead bodies in it. (Amusingly, only two of them being lizards)
When I mention how this will get people banned, this screenshot comes about.

Cool, what about when it's okay to lynch someone for eating Ian,

Does not make you valid.

or reading WGW,

If this hasn't been changed yet, will no longer be considered "valid" soon due to prior/ongoing discussion about the topic between admins.

or if captain is stunning sec and not doing his job,

That sounds like either something sec should be handling, or an admin should be handling.

or if there is some over the top creepy shit going on in the holodeck?

You should ahelp that so they can get banned, but again, context. This doesn't make someone valid either.

If you cannot contain your bloodlust, you should find another server to play on.

This is why you will almost never hear any admin EVER tell you where the line is. We've had too much trouble with people toeing the line over the years.

See borg rule (the one about crying rogue)

There is functionally zero difference between that rule and the statement I made.

[chesquatt]

My gimmick isn't what we are discussing, and Tommy Chav is dead forever.

Funny thing about that, its exactly what that round in particular was about. Again, context. Large group of people screaming "lynch the lizards" and guess what happens? Escape airlock has 8 dead bodies in it. (Amusingly, only two of them being lizards)
When I mention how this will get people banned, this screenshot comes about.

Cool, what about when it's okay to lynch someone for eating Ian,

Does not make you valid.

or reading WGW,

If this hasn't been changed yet, will no longer be considered "valid" soon due to prior/ongoing discussion about the topic between admins.

or if captain is stunning sec and not doing his job,

That sounds like either something sec should be handling, or an admin should be handling.

or if there is some over the top creepy shit going on in the holodeck?

You should ahelp that so they can get banned, but again, context. This doesn't make someone valid either.

If you cannot contain your bloodlust, you should find another server to play on.

This is why you will almost never hear any admin EVER tell you where the line is. We've had too much trouble with people toeing the line over the years.

See borg rule (the one about crying rogue)

There is functionally zero difference between that rule and the statement I made.

The fact that the WGW rule exists, and the fact that Viro gets kicked down on the regular indicates lynching happens and its sometimes valid. You admitted this.
and stating "functionally zero difference between" is silly. "A DAMN GOOD REASON" -> "Don't say assimovs are rogue unless you got a damn good reason" is what the rule would sound like if you wrote it, to the same standards.
And I have been shying away from this quagmire about the round but I am just going to outline what actually happened so you can drop this badjacketing bullshit.
The round started, I had been doing something else when a BUNCH of people started yelling about "OVENING THE LIZARDS" and they called a meeting. So i attended the meeting, said some choice things over the radio and sat in their HQ for about 10 minutes. Just sat there. While this was happening, some people were killing each other.
I then decided "this is fucking up the station, I just got banned for this, and I realize why, maybe I as a player should use my powers for good" So I contacted the HoS and the Captain, and with the HoS's stamp of approval after being loyalty implanted, I formed the "unity party." The "Unity party" worked alongside sec to dismantle the "Greytiding shitty gimmick whatevers'" HQ. HoS gave me a hat for my fine work.
I don't think that most of the deaths that round were even connected to this string of events, as you mentioned most of them were not lizards, and the "Humanists" didn't have but 7 people and most were in the HQ (library) reading anti-lizard literature.
Not that ANY of that shit is even relevant, you should really stop bringing it up like it is. I for one, maybe you disagree think this is a place for discussion about policy, not an argument about what happened during the round. I will be saying nothing else on the matter of the round and will keep it within the confines policy discussion.

goondonutcrest2.0

[Saegrimr]

The fact that the WGW rule exists, and the fact that Viro gets kicked down on the regular indicates lynching happens and its sometimes valid. You admitted this.

Correct. It currently exists. And viro regularly gets lynched because people are vomiting up blood in the hallways. Not because of sneezing.

and stating "functionally zero difference between" is silly. "A DAMN GOOD REASON" -> "Don't say assimovs are rogue unless you got a damn good reason" is what the rule would sound like if you wrote it, to the same standards.

Correct. Do you need me to write it like the EULA that is Silicon Policy? Because thats basically the entire argument provided is "I can't think too hard about if the thing i'm doing is stupid or not, please spell it out for me word for word."
So here you go.

"Declarations of [party] as [marked for death] over [status] or [personal dislike] without significant reason to believe [party] has committed [executable offense] is a violation of Server Rule 1. The occurrence of such an attempt should be adminhelped and then disregarded. "

Or my favorite.

"DON'T BE A DICK"

"If you cannot contain your bloodlust, you should find another server to play on." A threat totally irrelevant to the discussion about this policy, lots of other players seem to be chiming in one way or another as well.

Consider it a general statement to the type of people who are looking to validsalid360toolbox anybody for random shit.

I then decided "this is fucking up the station, I just got banned for this, and I realize why, maybe I as a player should use my powers for good" So I contacted the HoS and the Captain, and with the HoS's stamp of approval after being loyalty implanted, I formed the "unity party." The "Unity party" worked alongside sec to dismantle the "Greytiding shitty gimmick whatevers'" HQ. HoS gave me a hat for my fine work.

Thank you for clearing the situation up, as I said I was deadminned and didn't get to witness the majority of that other than the radio comms of everybody screaming to lynch eachother, and then cleaning up the bodies afterwards.

[mrpain]

Ridiculous. You're acting as if the guy doing all the yelling is brainwashing everyone into murder. Hold the killers responsible for their actions. Telling someone to kill someone is different than actually doing it.

[Saegrimr]

Ridiculous. You're acting as if the guy doing all the yelling is brainwashing everyone into murder. Hold the killers responsible for their actions. Telling someone to kill someone is different than actually doing it.

You must not be familiar with (former) greytide mobs.

[mrpain]

Ridiculous. You're acting as if the guy doing all the yelling is brainwashing everyone into murder. Hold the killers responsible for their actions. Telling someone to kill someone is different than actually doing it.

You must not be familiar with (former) greytide mobs.

Perhaps not. Enlighten me.

[Saegrimr]

Ridiculous. You're acting as if the guy doing all the yelling is brainwashing everyone into murder. Hold the killers responsible for their actions. Telling someone to kill someone is different than actually doing it.

You must not be familiar with (former) greytide mobs.

Perhaps not. Enlighten me.

It was such a problem in the past that security are allowed to straight up lethal groups of assistants smashing up the brig.

https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Rules#Mob- ... raytide.22

You never wondered where the phrase "greytide" even came from? Waves of assistants smashing everything in sight.

[chesquatt]

"Declarations of [party] as [marked for death] over [status] or [personal dislike] without significant reason to believe [party] has committed [executable offense] is a violation of Server Rule 1. The occurrence of such an attempt should be adminhelped and then disregarded. "

Great, thats a good start. If this is going to be a rule then it should be added to the wiki and "executable offense" should be clear as crystal.

Also a Greytide=/= lynchmob

One has a purpose, even if "fackin izzards" is the reason. The other one is a nihilistic destruction of the station from an overcrowded staff.

One is the Ukrainian 2013 fascist coup, while the other one is the London Riots. Two very different animals.

[Saegrimr]

Great, thats a good start. If this is going to be a rule then it should be added to the wiki and "executable offense" should be clear as crystal.

Its not that fucking hard to understand, dude.

Speaking of that link. There's one that actually looks like I wrote it. Pointless swearing included!
>If a person is intentionally fucking with security is yelling "rogue sec" or something similar, adminhelp it. This can be punished with a rule 1 violation ban.

[chesquatt]

Great, thats a good start. If this is going to be a rule then it should be added to the wiki and "executable offense" should be clear as crystal.

Its not that fucking hard to understand, dude.

It's not for me, its for the clarity of others. "Executable offense" can't really be toed, either. You either fucked the Corgi or you didn't fuck the corgi, you either whipped hte captain to death or didn't. So making a clear definition or general indication of what is "Executable" via lynch mob seems appropriate.

[Saegrimr]

If they can't understand "don't be a dick" I doubt they'd last very long here anyway, with or without specifically worded rules on screaming about lynch mobs.

[chesquatt]

If they can't understand "don't be a dick" I doubt they'd last very long here anyway, with or without specifically worded rules on screaming about lynch mobs.

"Don't be a dick....You can be a dick IC to a point"
You are relying on all the dicks being banned to prevent the necessity of a lynchmob. Seems lofty at best.

[Loonikus]

I say its an IC issue. Inciting a riot is already against space law and a valid IC crime. If it gets to the point where things are getting really out of hand, send a Security ERT/ERP/ Whatever we're calling them to take care of the rioters.

Maybe instead of just saying "DING DONG BANNU END OF RINE" we could actually let things like this play out and see where they go. Unpredictability and chaos is what keeps SS13 fresh, even if it does mean that rounds don't go exactly according to plan. I'm not saying we should just let people greytide every round, but why not let admins use their own discretion in these cases so that maybe they can salvage an occasional riot into something fun instead of just banning everything that doesn't specifically comply with the gamemode?

And if the same people keep acting like shit and riot/greytide every round, just fucking ban them. Having a greytide try to lynch people once in a blue moon is one thing, spacing people every other round because "LE EDGY ANARCHY MAN XD XD" is another thing entirely.

[Saegrimr]

It used to be an IC issue, and then it got to the point where every round was stupid shit like that.
Then for the longest time nobody ever played security because greytiding was so rampant. It wasn't worth it and nothing could be done short of literally killing all assistants who show up in the northern hallways.

So now we're at "END OF RINE" because it legit ruins multiple people's rounds because "I want to act like an antag without actually being one."

So no, if you want to murder, smash, and riot, you can go be Ferguson in some other server.