New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Ask and discuss policy about game conduct and rules.
Forum rules
Read these board rules before posting or you'll get reprimanded.
Threads without replies for 30 days will be automatically locked.
Post Reply
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by sinfulbliss » #646603

The new escalation policy confuses me and I'd like to open a discussion about it to get clarification.
Sec Policy wrote:If an arrest is not obviously valid, it follows standard escalation [...] Non-antag players may lose any OOC and IC protections if they choose this path and should consider ahelping if they believe they did nothing to warrant being arrested.
Sec Policy wrote:In resisting arrest, non-antags should not loot officers and should not detain or incapacitate officers any longer than is necessary to escape or explain themselves.
These two statements seem to conflict. If an invalid arrest follows standard escalation, then non-antags would be able to loot some of the officer's items. If a random player tries to stamcrit you with a baton, standard escalation would allow you to cuff them, take their baton and disabler, and then escape. But this is not allowed against officers, so it must not be standard escalation. If officers have metaprotections that afford them these special protections, then that makes perfect sense, but this would be an exception to normal escalation.

To make this more concrete I'll use an example that is incredibly common as security:

Suppose you get a report or have reason to believe a non-antagonist (although their status as such isn't known to you) has committed a capital crime, and opt to arrest and search them. Suppose also you, despite due diligence, are operating on misinformation, so the arrest is invalid. You walk up to them and explain that they are under arrest for [invalid reason here]. They deny the accusations, as anyone would, and refuse a search, as they committed no crime to be searched for. You choose to pursue them. As is their right, the nonantagonist resists nonharmfully, and restrains you. They explain to you, restrained, that you are mistaken, and escape.

The officer has no reason to believe they are telling the truth, although it would be prudent to assume they are nonharmful since they didn't kill him, he still has reason to believe they committed a serious crime that he wanted to arrest them for earlier. After several more failed attempts to restrain them nonlethally, the officer decides to use lethals. They cuffed him, after all. What's more is they have "lost their OOC and IC protections by choosing the path of escalation instead of ahelping." Does this mean the officer can now lethal them, based on misinformation, and the non-antag isn't allowed to do anything more than to run away?

Suppose the officer is more cool-headed and opts instead to forgo lethals. Inevitably, he catches them, with the help of the rest of the security team, who heard the officer's cries for help while cuffed. The non-antag is then perma'd by the security team.

My question is basically this: how would this be handled administratively? If you spark a 20 minute chase over a crime you were suspected of, slipping and restraining officers all the while, it doesn't seem you'd be given much sympathy in an ahelp for being perma'd, and this is implied in the new escalation rules. But then what are your options here as a nonantagonist being pursued over misinformation, other than to ahelp and have admins artificially inform security you're innocent? This seems like a very bad solution and ruins the conflict and misinformation that's part of the game.
Last edited by sinfulbliss on Thu Sep 22, 2022 11:54 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Imitates-The-Lizards
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2021 2:28 am
Byond Username: Typhnox

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Imitates-The-Lizards » #646608

You're mistaking "invalid arrest" and "arrest based on misinformation". An arrest based on misinformation is still valid, it's up to the warden, lawyer, etc. to determine your innocence in a court of law.
User avatar
sinfulbliss
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
Byond Username: SinfulBliss
Location: prisoner re-education chamber

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by sinfulbliss » #646635

Imitates-The-Lizards wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 1:03 pm You're mistaking "invalid arrest" and "arrest based on misinformation". An arrest based on misinformation is still valid, it's up to the warden, lawyer, etc. to determine your innocence in a court of law.
I don’t think that’s what is meant. If you’re saying an invalid arrest is just a bad-faith (or grief) arrest, then he’d lose his metaprotections and the nonantag could retaliate without risk of losing their OOC and IC protections by doing so.
Spoiler:
Image
Image
User avatar
Itseasytosee2me
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2021 1:14 am
Byond Username: Rectification
Location: Where the north wind blows

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Itseasytosee2me » #646684

Imitates-The-Lizards wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 1:03 pm You're mistaking "invalid arrest" and "arrest based on misinformation". An arrest based on misinformation is still valid, it's up to the warden, lawyer, etc. to determine your innocence in a court of law.
How is the person being arrested supposed to know the difference?
- Sincerely itseasytosee
► Show Spoiler
Imitates-The-Lizards
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2021 2:28 am
Byond Username: Typhnox

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Imitates-The-Lizards » #646705

sinfulbliss wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 9:28 pm
Imitates-The-Lizards wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 1:03 pm You're mistaking "invalid arrest" and "arrest based on misinformation". An arrest based on misinformation is still valid, it's up to the warden, lawyer, etc. to determine your innocence in a court of law.
I don’t think that’s what is meant. If you’re saying an invalid arrest is just a bad-faith (or grief) arrest, then he’d lose his metaprotections and the nonantag could retaliate without risk of losing their OOC and IC protections by doing so.
That's exactly what is meant. The assumption should be that 99.9999% of arrests are valid, and the only circumstances whereby an arrest would be invalid is if the person who is arresting you is merely pretending to be a security officer (ie, they're a changeling, or an antagonist who killed, stripped and disguised themselves as a secoff), or they are a real secoff breaking the rules. You only lose your IC and OOC protections if you had no logical basis to believe the arrest was invalid. Frankly this thread is the equivalent of asking "What should I do if I'm hit by a meteor?", it's something that should happen so infrequently as to be almost moot to discuss it.

The security officer's job is to arrest you and bring you to the brig. The Detective's job is to gather evidence. The Lawyer's job is to prove your innocence. The Warden's job is to set your sentence. This doesn't often pan out due to not all roles being filled, so job's often have to take on other job's responsibilities, but this is how the system is SUPPOSED to work.
Itseasytosee2me wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 11:22 pm
Imitates-The-Lizards wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 1:03 pm You're mistaking "invalid arrest" and "arrest based on misinformation". An arrest based on misinformation is still valid, it's up to the warden, lawyer, etc. to determine your innocence in a court of law.
How is the person being arrested supposed to know the difference?
There are 3 ways that come to my mind immediately, but there are probably more:

1- You know (or have a reasonable inference) the person who is trying to arrest you is not a security officer. For example, The ((("""officer"""))) trying to arrest you is named, I don't know, Smaxle Bradley, but earlier in the shift you happened to go to lavaland because you wanted to take the donk pockets that spawn there, and you saw Smaxle Bradley's corpse thrown in the lava and burning. You would be quite reasonable in assuming the person trying to arrest you is a changeling, or a syndicate agent in disguise.

Or, say you examine the security officer and notice that instead of a security officer's jumpsuit, they're wearing a gray jumpsuit.

2 - You know for a fact the officer is lying about their basis for arresting you. For example, the following conversation happens:

Secoff Bradley: "Hey! You, wait right there!"
Greytider Jim: "Yes?"
Secoff Bradley: "You're wanted for murder! Staticname Jones the Station Engineer told me he saw you kill the Clown in Hydroponics 5 minutes ago!"

However, you know full well this is bullshit because you saw Staticname Jones die and go soulless/DNR a half hour ago, so you know the secoff is not acting on misinformation, they are willfully lying to you. (Please pay careful attention to the exact wording in the conversation! The secoff specifically said Staticname Jones "told me", meaning the secoff was not acting on information from a different party, like say if the Warden had told him he had received a report Greytider Jim murdered the Clown, then the arrest would be valid! Catching out contextual clues is the name of the game!)

Or 3 - They are blatantly playing in bad faith - they are a troll griefer because there are no admins on, and they are just arresting people to be a funny troll redditor for their le epic youtube montage, and are not even pretending to be playing in good faith.
User avatar
Mothblocks
Code Maintainer
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:33 am
Byond Username: Jaredfogle

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Mothblocks » #646706

In case it is not obvious--"valid arrest" refers to an arrest placed on you when you have not committed a crime. This can easily happen when the security officer is playing in good faith given the dynamics of Space Station 13.
Shaps-cloud wrote: Mon Dec 07, 2020 7:59 am May eventually become one of the illusive maintainer-headmins if they choose to pursue that path, having a coder in the senior admin leadership has usually been positive for both sides in the past.
Head Coder of /tg/station, hi!

Head Admin of /tg/station Feb 2022.

Mothblocks everywhere, >>> Say nice things about me <<<
User avatar
Mooshimi
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2018 11:25 pm
Byond Username: Mooshimi

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Mooshimi » #647042

Most of the time the secoff will give the arrestee no information and tell the warden a time, and the warden either doesn't talk or just sets the timer and doesn't know why.
From my experience this is because if you stop for any length of time with a person in cuffs behind you in public, they will be taken from you and it leaves very little time to speak. And 9/10 if the secoff tries to chat before the arrest the person will run.

Overall, I think they should just allow for a search if they have done nothing wrong to avoid causing misunderstandings and undue grief.
Zybwivcz
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:30 am
Byond Username: Zybwivcz

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Zybwivcz » #649005

Mothblocks wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 6:11 am In case it is not obvious--"valid arrest" refers to an arrest placed on you when you have not committed a crime. This can easily happen when the security officer is playing in good faith given the dynamics of Space Station 13.
It would be nice if this policy covered the common situation of "I've committed a crime but I don't think it's worth being arrested over" given I have it on good authority that someone who is actively committing a crime can resist a nonlethal arrest attempt if they think(or an admin a week later thinks they thought, but that's another issue) the punishment will be too harsh.
iain0
In-Game Admin Trainer
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2019 6:23 pm
Byond Username: Iain0

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by iain0 » #649048

Zybwivcz wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 3:30 am the common situation of "I've committed a crime but I don't think it's worth being arrested over"
This situation is indeed fairly common, however not in the direction you're talking about. Probably daily and probably multiple times a day there will be some kind of ticket about people doing things that are definitely arrestable but the player doesn't think they should be, these people are generally "playing a conventional computer game" rather than roleplaying. It's like playing GTA and mowing down all the pedestrians, then hiding behind a pillar until everyone forgets. That works in GTA because GTA is a silly game that embraces that side of things over realism/RP. We can all clearly agree that if you behaved like this in real life your story would be over, you'd be in perma for multiple life sentences or executed depending on your jurisdiction. GTA isn't a realistic RP game and doesn't want to be.

SS13 on TG is an RP game and e.g. breaking into armory, caps office, etc, are all valid arrestable offences. However tickets come up very regularly that show some players simply don't get this and dont have the RP game mindset on. "but the door was open". Okay? You think this works on the cops in real life when you get arrested for entering a marked restricted area? Maybe we just have a whole bunch of people who would struggle to fit into a society, but actually I think they just think its all okay because its just a game at the end of the day. And while it is, that game here includes IC and potentially OOC consequences for your actions.

So, given the frequency of people thinking things are not worth being arrested over, but getting it wrong, I think you'll need to demonstrate that your concerns lying in the other direction are actually a common occurrence in the first place, as well as trying to formulate a policy that covers off whatever you're trying to get covered off here (?), but ideally without giving the more common "doesn't quite get it" player a length of rope with which to further hang themselves (by taking action assuming their arrest is 'not worth it' when an admin later disagrees)
Zybwivcz
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:30 am
Byond Username: Zybwivcz

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Zybwivcz » #649144

iain0 wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:27 am
Zybwivcz wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 3:30 am the common situation of "I've committed a crime but I don't think it's worth being arrested over"
SS13 on TG is an RP game and e.g. breaking into armory, caps office, etc, are all valid arrestable offences. However tickets come up very regularly that show some players simply don't get this and dont have the RP game mindset on. "but the door was open". Okay? You think this works on the cops in real life when you get arrested for entering a marked restricted area?
Maybe I was unclear in explaining myself. I've been told by a certain headmin that someone trespassing in a 'marked restricted area' can forcefully resist arrest if they* think the punishment they will suffer if they're arrested would be unfair.

So the policy should be explicit on "I've committed a crime but I don't think I deserve to be arrested for it, how can I resist?" rather than just "I'm completely innocent, how can I resist?"
iain0
In-Game Admin Trainer
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2019 6:23 pm
Byond Username: Iain0

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by iain0 » #649202

Zybwivcz wrote: Tue Aug 09, 2022 4:59 am Maybe I was unclear in explaining myself. I've been told by a certain headmin that someone trespassing in a 'marked restricted area' can forcefully resist arrest if they* think the punishment they will suffer if they're arrested would be unfair.

So the policy should be explicit on "I've committed a crime but I don't think I deserve to be arrested for it, how can I resist?" rather than just "I'm completely innocent, how can I resist?"
Ah, I read a difference in "don't deserve to be arrested for" and "punishment would be unfair".

The "punishment would be unfair" lets people tide into e.g. engi secure storage and 'forcefully resist arrest' if they're threatened with say perma gulag for it, but not if they're going to get 2 minutes in the brig.
The version you write as "don't deserve to be arrested for" literally means people can tide engi storage and then forcefully resist the 2 minute brig sentence because, in their opinion, they don't deserve to be arrested, at all, for any length of time.

The last part is where my concerns about problematic tiders come in.

Least thats my reintepretation of your interpretation of what someone else said :)
User avatar
Lacran
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:17 am
Byond Username: Lacran

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Lacran » #649238

Zybwivcz wrote: Tue Aug 09, 2022 4:59 am
iain0 wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:27 am
Zybwivcz wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 3:30 am the common situation of "I've committed a crime but I don't think it's worth being arrested over"
SS13 on TG is an RP game and e.g. breaking into armory, caps office, etc, are all valid arrestable offences. However tickets come up very regularly that show some players simply don't get this and dont have the RP game mindset on. "but the door was open". Okay? You think this works on the cops in real life when you get arrested for entering a marked restricted area?
Maybe I was unclear in explaining myself. I've been told by a certain headmin that someone trespassing in a 'marked restricted area' can forcefully resist arrest if they* think the punishment they will suffer if they're arrested would be unfair.

So the policy should be explicit on "I've committed a crime but I don't think I deserve to be arrested for it, how can I resist?" rather than just "I'm completely innocent, how can I resist?"
Sounds more like the situation is the player trespassing had reasonable grounds to believe the punishment they'd receive would be disproportionate to the trespass
Zybwivcz
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:30 am
Byond Username: Zybwivcz

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Zybwivcz » #649646

Lacran wrote: Wed Aug 10, 2022 9:44 am
Zybwivcz wrote: Tue Aug 09, 2022 4:59 am
iain0 wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:27 am
Zybwivcz wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 3:30 am the common situation of "I've committed a crime but I don't think it's worth being arrested over"
SS13 on TG is an RP game and e.g. breaking into armory, caps office, etc, are all valid arrestable offences. However tickets come up very regularly that show some players simply don't get this and dont have the RP game mindset on. "but the door was open". Okay? You think this works on the cops in real life when you get arrested for entering a marked restricted area?
Maybe I was unclear in explaining myself. I've been told by a certain headmin that someone trespassing in a 'marked restricted area' can forcefully resist arrest if they* think the punishment they will suffer if they're arrested would be unfair.

So the policy should be explicit on "I've committed a crime but I don't think I deserve to be arrested for it, how can I resist?" rather than just "I'm completely innocent, how can I resist?"
Sounds more like the situation is the player trespassing had reasonable grounds to believe the punishment they'd receive would be disproportionate to the trespass
In this situation the admin never talked to the player trespassing, and instead made a mistake based on their own ignorance of how SEC works and just doubled down by ascribing it to the player in question when they got called out on their screwup.

And in this situation the player trespassing had extensive experience on the station in question, including as SEC.

But let's pretend for our theoretical example that we're talking about a player who actually had a reasonable belief they feared what they thought would be disproportionate but explicitly nonlethal arrest. And that the admin actually bothered to do their job and talk to that player before taking action. And that admin actually understood how SEC works.

Can the theoretical trespassing player forcefully resist arrest? Because the wiki talks about responding to grossly excessive sentences by petitioning, and how forcefully resisting arrest if you've committed a crime isn't legitimate escalation. Hence the confusion.
User avatar
Lacran
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:17 am
Byond Username: Lacran

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Lacran » #649689

People can resist arrest in most cases, but they aren't allowed to be cruel or hurt you severely if the arrest/punishment was legitimate and you took the steps required to establish it as such.

If someone is trespassing and you tell them you are going to arrest them for trespassing they can flee or stun you but something like beating you into crit, stealing all your gear or kidnapping would not be appropriate responses.
Zybwivcz
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:30 am
Byond Username: Zybwivcz

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Zybwivcz » #650267

iain0 wrote: Tue Aug 09, 2022 6:58 pm The version you write as "don't deserve to be arrested for" literally means people can tide engi storage and then forcefully resist the 2 minute brig sentence because, in their opinion, they don't deserve to be arrested, at all, for any length of time.

The last part is where my concerns about problematic tiders come in.

Least thats my reintepretation of your interpretation of what someone else said :)
I'm not concerned about rules involving completely innocent crew who've been wrongly accused resisting. For example a chemist who's been peacefully sitting in medbay all round being arrested and perma-gulaged because a ling disguised as him has been killing people.

To expand on your example, can that tider respond to a nonlethal attempt to arrest them when they're caught in the act trespassing by escalating against the arresting SEC by stunning and stripping them? Can they ahelp if they get gunned down later by claiming their escalation was legitimate because they were resisting what they imagined would be an unfairly long sentence?
iain0
In-Game Admin Trainer
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2019 6:23 pm
Byond Username: Iain0

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by iain0 » #650301

Zybwivcz wrote: Sat Aug 20, 2022 6:48 am To expand on your example, can that tider respond to a nonlethal attempt to arrest them when they're caught in the act trespassing by escalating against the arresting SEC by stunning and stripping them? Can they ahelp if they get gunned down later by claiming their escalation was legitimate because they were resisting what they imagined would be an unfairly long sentence?
I actually wrote a long winded list of hypotheticals, think i've been answering too many headmin election questions :D

As ever the context is the key.

The short form is if the tider played absolute best faith, i'd be between noting through to role and even server banning the sec who started it all off ; probably note if they played it as a joke and had no relatable prior history, role ban if any other poor choice sec plays, server ban if they've any history thats directly comparable, for derailing another persons round entirely. This assumes the tider did everything right, and had some strong reason to believe they were about to be screwed over from the very start, and sec did nothing right.

It can also turn into the exact opposite and the tider can be done for self-antagging and possibly kill/ban baiting if they played particularly clearly poorly and then ahelped anyway with a poor representation of events.

Somewhat easier option is just to take the sentence then ahelp it if its significant enough to be ahelpable.
Zybwivcz
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:30 am
Byond Username: Zybwivcz

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Zybwivcz » #650333

iain0 wrote: Sat Aug 20, 2022 2:41 pm I actually wrote a long winded list of hypotheticals, think i've been answering too many headmin election questions :D

As ever the context is the key.

The short form is if the tider played absolute best faith, i'd be between noting through to role and even server banning the sec who started it all off ; probably note if they played it as a joke and had no relatable prior history, role ban if any other poor choice sec plays, server ban if they've any history thats directly comparable, for derailing another persons round entirely. This assumes the tider did everything right, and had some strong reason to believe they were about to be screwed over from the very start, and sec did nothing right.

It can also turn into the exact opposite and the tider can be done for self-antagging and possibly kill/ban baiting if they played particularly clearly poorly and then ahelped anyway with a poor representation of events.

Somewhat easier option is just to take the sentence then ahelp it if its significant enough to be ahelpable.
Still some confusion over what constitutes some "strong reason to believe they were about to be screwed over".


For example: The tider doesn't say in-game they're escalating because of an excessive sentence. They don't say in ahelps that's why they escalated. They weren't clearly threatened with an excessive sentence. Per recent headmin decision their escalation is still acceptable and they're not self-antagging. How much lower than that is the bar for "strong reason"?
iain0
In-Game Admin Trainer
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2019 6:23 pm
Byond Username: Iain0

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by iain0 » #650345

Zybwivcz wrote: Sat Aug 20, 2022 7:18 pm Still some confusion over what constitutes some "strong reason to believe they were about to be screwed over".


For example: The tider doesn't say in-game they're escalating because of an excessive sentence. They don't say in ahelps that's why they escalated. They weren't clearly threatened with an excessive sentence. Per recent headmin decision their escalation is still acceptable and they're not self-antagging. How much lower than that is the bar for "strong reason"?
If no-one ever mentions the sentence, who can say it's excessive.

Also if when asked 'why did you do that to the sec officer' they make no mention of thinking its due to an excessive sentence then they'd better probably add that in the appeal, expecting telepathy is a little difficult, nor is every ticket going to result in a end to end log analysis of the entire round to catch things the player doesn't mention ever.

Not really sure what your edge case is here, sounds like you're almost arguing that anyone can resist and loot sec at any time for any reason. Which is about where I objected in the first place.
Zybwivcz
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:30 am
Byond Username: Zybwivcz

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Zybwivcz » #650353

iain0 wrote: Sat Aug 20, 2022 10:22 pm If no-one ever mentions the sentence, who can say it's excessive.
An admin, who claims it could have been implied.
Also if when asked 'why did you do that to the sec officer' they make no mention of thinking its due to an excessive sentence then they'd better probably add that in the appeal
In the example given the tider doesn't make that claim because the admin never even tries to talk to them. The admin just decide the tider's escalation was acceptable because that theoretically could have been their reason.
Not really sure what your edge case is here, sounds like you're almost arguing that anyone can resist and loot sec at any time for any reason. Which is about where I objected in the first place.
To be clear I don't think criminals being detained should have much ability to invoke escalation policy against SEC.

Per recent headmin decision, a tider who escalates against SEC during a valid arrest without an explicit threat of excess punishment is following escalation rules and isn't self-antaging. This is still the case even if the tider never actually gives that reason, the admin involved can simply assume that's what happened and act on that basis. Given that what's the minimum bar someone has to clear to escalate against SEC?
iain0
In-Game Admin Trainer
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2019 6:23 pm
Byond Username: Iain0

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by iain0 » #650361

Okay, I guess you're digging up something very specific while I'm just talking generally, since you keep adding new previously unmentioned layers to the interaction. Since I don't have the full context you do and I'm not here to rehash another admins ticket/position I guess I'm out. I thought we were talking about general policy points (or, more specifically, I was, when discussing how the 'average player' may interpret the wording you originally applied, we seem rather off that topic by this point somehow)
User avatar
Lacran
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:17 am
Byond Username: Lacran

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Lacran » #650370

Zybwivcz wrote: Sun Aug 21, 2022 12:32 am Given that what's the minimum bar someone has to clear to escalate against SEC?
Escalate and kill aren't the same thing here, Escalation has tiers, if the offier is arresting non lethally, you don't have grounds to escalate to lethally unless you have reasonable grounds to assume the arrest is injust or invalid.
Zybwivcz
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:30 am
Byond Username: Zybwivcz

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Zybwivcz » #650461

Lacran wrote: Sun Aug 21, 2022 3:19 am
Zybwivcz wrote: Sun Aug 21, 2022 12:32 am Given that what's the minimum bar someone has to clear to escalate against SEC?
Escalate and kill aren't the same thing here, Escalation has tiers, if the offier is arresting non lethally, you don't have grounds to escalate to lethally unless you have reasonable grounds to assume the arrest is injust or invalid.
What is an unjust arrest?

90% of tiders who get arrested will probably insist their arrest was unjust. That obviously shouldn't mean they can escalate.
iain0 wrote: Sun Aug 21, 2022 1:37 am Okay, I guess you're digging up something very specific while I'm just talking generally, since you keep adding new previously unmentioned layers to the interaction.
What's needed is a good general rule, and a good general rule is one with as clear lines as possible. Since the current policy is very vague we're left to try to extract general principles from specific admin decision which can often be contradictory. A policy should have clear answers to at least the following sort of questions:

1- Can someone who is being arrested in the middle of committing any crime escalate against the arresting SEC officer, where escalate means using disabling force not strictly necessary to escape(like batoning them and leaving them stripped and cuffed in maint, as compared to shoving them into a wall and running)?
2- Is an overwhelming reason to believe they'll be executed if they're arrested nonlethally grounds for escalation?
3- Is an overwhelming reason to believe they'll be perma'ed or gulag'ed if they're arrested grounds for escalation?
4- Is merely suspicion rather than overwhelming evidence sufficient for either of those?
5- If grounds for escalation aren't met but the arrestee escalates anyway, does that make them valid for SEC as a self-antag?
User avatar
Lacran
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:17 am
Byond Username: Lacran

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Lacran » #650463

Zybwivcz wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 5:45 am
Escalate and kill aren't the same thing here, Escalation has tiers, if the offier is arresting non lethally, you don't have grounds to escalate to lethally unless you have reasonable grounds to assume the arrest is injust or invalid.
What is an unjust arrest?

90% of tiders who get arrested will probably insist their arrest was unjust. That obviously shouldn't mean they can escalate.
[/quote]

The admins do and there's general community standards, its not up to the shitter to decide, its up to the admin to decide.
Zybwivcz
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:30 am
Byond Username: Zybwivcz

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Zybwivcz » #650560

Lacran wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 7:12 am The admins do and there's general community standards, its not up to the shitter to decide, its up to the admin to decide.
This leads to a situation where whether or not a particular action is bwoinkable or perfectly acceptable varies wildly depending on which admin responds and how they're feeling.

It should not be a roll of the dice, that's the entire point of having actual policies.
User avatar
Lacran
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:17 am
Byond Username: Lacran

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Lacran » #650580

Zybwivcz wrote: Tue Aug 23, 2022 7:55 am
Lacran wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 7:12 am The admins do and there's general community standards, its not up to the shitter to decide, its up to the admin to decide.
This leads to a situation where whether or not a particular action is bwoinkable or perfectly acceptable varies wildly depending on which admin responds and how they're feeling.

It should not be a roll of the dice, that's the entire point of having actual policies.
That's not how reasonable grounds works, as a community we all have a metric for what reasonable grounds would be, and when it is challenged it is discussed.

Putting an officer into crit because you think you might get an unfair sentence requires evidence that the officer intends to give you that sentence, and that the fairness of it would be considered unfair by most people in the community.

Putting someone into perma for littering would be considered generally unfair, assaulting someone with a baseball bat and getting 3 or so minutes would be considered pretty damn fair.
Zybwivcz
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:30 am
Byond Username: Zybwivcz

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Zybwivcz » #650707

Lacran wrote: Tue Aug 23, 2022 1:13 pm That's not how reasonable grounds works, as a community we all have a metric for what reasonable grounds would be, and when it is challenged it is discussed.

Putting an officer into crit because you think you might get an unfair sentence requires evidence that the officer intends to give you that sentence, and that the fairness of it would be considered unfair by most people in the community.

Putting someone into perma for littering would be considered generally unfair, assaulting someone with a baseball bat and getting 3 or so minutes would be considered pretty damn fair.
Resisting SEC lethaling you when you've done nothing wrong? Fine.

Letting nonlethal arrests turn into an ahelpathon over what an 'unfair' sentence is and what constitutes 'evidence' is a terrible idea. The old rules where you couldn't escalate valid arrests(where you had committed a crime) but could ahelp grossly excessive sentences was the superior one.
User avatar
Lacran
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:17 am
Byond Username: Lacran

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Lacran » #650773

IDK, most people don't resist if you explain the situation and are fair. otherwise just be prepared to arrest people, its what sec does, its pretty understandable to resist arrest to some degree even when guilty.
Zybwivcz
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 5:30 am
Byond Username: Zybwivcz

Re: New Sec Escalation Policy Clarification

Post by Zybwivcz » #650838

Lacran wrote: Thu Aug 25, 2022 9:34 am IDK, most people don't resist if you explain the situation and are fair.
Exactly zero tiders really do this, I don't know where the fantasy that they do come from. Is it some manuel thing?
otherwise just be prepared to arrest people, its what sec does, its pretty understandable to resist arrest to some degree even when guilty.
There's "resist" in run away, maybe slip the chasing SEC or shove them onto a table, and there's "resist" where you pull out a stunbaton and try to cuff them so you can steal disabler and id.

The first should be fine, the second should clearly be defined as self-antaging.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users