Alert procedure change

[Anticept]

There's little point between blue and red, since most of the time it's next to impossible to actually enforce half the SOP items on the list.

I would like to propose a change to alert procedure.

Green:

• Same as it is now

Blue:

• Essentially, is the red alert that we have now.
• For threats or suspected threats to the station.

Red:

• Martial law. Screwing with security forces allows them to respond with any force warranted, including outright lethal if needed. They can brig indefinitely as well until the alert level is lowered.
• This is for station-wide emergencies, such as: widescale bombings (welder bombs don't count, nor do single bombs), blob, nuclear emergency, wizards, large scale violent riots, final stages of shadowlings. The key here is that actively impeding security or response forces itself creates more danger. Don't fuck with them.
• That doesn't mean security can just go around killing people at will. They must be actively impeding. But it does significantly remove barriers on security forces.
• Since it takes two swipes to use, it helps curb crazy captains anyways. Isn't crazy proof, but working around getting two head authorizations should result in CC crackdowns.

The rest of the alerts stay the same, with gamma getting the same treatment as red with the extra equipment.

Edited June 14, 2017 by Anticept

[SomeGuy9283]

This is prolly the redshirt in me talking, but I think this will be very useful.

Captains always jump to the current Code Red over every little thing, which gives security powers that really aren't that great and a mandate to keep everyone indoors without getting called shitcurity. It really should be code blue.

Martial law really is what red was meant to be, IMO, and will really cut down on superfluous shuttle calls and red declarations.

I expect a lot of pushback against this, but when we have 30 assistants and 12 traitors in any given round, a sterner hand is needed to put things back in order. I stand by code red truly being the HOLY SHIT EVERYTHING IS CRAZY, SECURITY DO SOMETHING alert level.

Hail Brigston.

Edited June 17, 2017 by SomeGuy9283

[Anticept]

It's not to deal with traitors unless there's SIGNIFICANT damage or outright, blatant mass murder.

Code red could also be called later in rounds on shadowlings, signifying when command has decided to go lethal on thralls. Edited that bit in.

Abuse of code red could be met with warnings and further corrective action if it continues to be abused.

Edited June 14, 2017 by Anticept

[SigholtStarsong]

I'd much rather we change Blue to Yellow in this case - I never understood why we went Green/Blue/Red/Gamma. It's kind of a nonsensical escalation. 

[SomeGuy9283]

@SigholtStarsong

Blue is a cool, sterile color, perhaps indicative of: "Hey, things are not all rainbows and puppies; I should be careful."

[Dumbdumn5]

Seems alright, maybe, just want to clarify that lethal force should only be permitted in the case of physical blockage and resistance, and that verbal resistance should probably not be grounds for such excessive force. However, I'll state that I'm incredibly uncomfortable granting additional reasons to kill off nonantags or create issues between nonantags that result in additional in-depth ahelps and investigations. I'd be worried about the ways people might try to weasel around specifics to off people disagreeing with them on a command or idea on the grounds of impeding security, a requirement that all uses of lethal force be reported to sec or notification of medical staff be necessary either in-field or after the danger has passed to minimize casualties and reduce the amount of people taken out of the round. RP-wise, I worry that this might cause more issues involving a more wordless security body during emergencies than we might already have. 

This is not to say, however, that this is completely out of the question or unnecessary, as those intending to impede sec 'for the lols' and just try to act like a nerd towards sec should have some consequence involved, I just don't personally believe that lethal force is the answer they should necessarily receive. In any case, I'd like to see a bit of discussion on this and more feedback, as I'm curious to see if this is seen as excessive or acceptable.

[SigholtStarsong]

6 minutes ago, SomeGuy9283 said:

@SigholtStarsong

Blue is a cool, sterile color, perhaps indicative of: "Hey, things are not all rainbows and puppies; I should be careful."

I'd argue that yellow, as a brighter and more vibrant color, is a better indicator of "Something's wrong, I can feel it."

[Dumbdumn5]

Spoiler

Behold, this OSHA chart of different color meanings in the workplace, do try to stay on topic though.

[Enginseer-42]

22 minutes ago, SigholtStarsong said:

I'd much rather we change Blue to Yellow in this case - I never understood why we went Green/Blue/Red/Gamma. It's kind of a nonsensical escalation. 

It's a star trek thing. In Star Trek it was for non-human/alien threats like engine malfunctions, docking, power failure, that seperation thing they do with the two halfs of the enterprise splitting apart. Basically. Blue Alert was for environmental and technical hazards that weren't going to destroy the entire ship.

Red Alert was for 'we gotta fight people now.' or 'Oh shit, the entire ship is about to explode.'

[SomanB]

21 minutes ago, Dumbdumn5 said:

Seems alright, maybe, just want to clarify that lethal force should only be permitted in the case of physical blockage and resistance, and that verbal resistance should probably not be grounds for such excessive force. However, I'll state that I'm incredibly uncomfortable granting additional reasons to kill off nonantags or create issues between nonantags that result in additional in-depth ahelps and investigations. I'd be worried about the ways people might try to weasel around specifics to off people disagreeing with them on a command or idea on the grounds of impeding security, a requirement that all uses of lethal force be reported to sec or notification of medical staff be necessary either in-field or after the danger has passed to minimize casualties and reduce the amount of people taken out of the round. RP-wise, I worry that this might cause more issues involving a more wordless security body during emergencies than we might already have. 

This is not to say, however, that this is completely out of the question or unnecessary, as those intending to impede sec 'for the lols' and just try to act like a nerd towards sec should have some consequence involved, I just don't personally believe that lethal force is the answer they should necessarily receive. In any case, I'd like to see a bit of discussion on this and more feedback, as I'm curious to see if this is seen as excessive or acceptable.

You're overblowing the issue of death her, I feel. 

 

It is, after all, a video game.  The actual "loss" involved in dying in spessmans is minimal.

 

I see no problems with indef brigging on red, for people committing crimes during red alert. Nominally, Red Alert means "everyone on this station has a good chance of dying in the short term".  If your dumb ass thinks that "We're all going to die" is a good time to get in a fist fight over a toolbox, then yep, you deserve to sit in time out until the crisis is over.

 

Further, if you decide it's a good time to actively hamper sec in saving everyone's lives, you deserve lasers to the face.  Cloning is a thing, you can be brought back after the issue is over.

[alexpkeaton]

I'll withhold judgment for now, however I do have some serious concerns with the potential of a change to a more Gamma-esque Red.

PROS OF A CHANGE:

• Blue and Red are basically the same right now.  
• There is little to no incentive to drop red once activated right now.
• A Green>Blue>Yellow>Red>Gamma progression can provide a more exciting scale of danger level

                    -Blue: Activated like it is now

                    -Yellow: Activated like Red is now (2 swipes)

                    -Red: Activated with 3 swipes

                    -Gamma: Activated like it is now (CC only)

CONS OF A CHANGE:

• Improve SoP for codes, and SoP for executions basically goes out the window.
• Shitcurity.  Why tase when you can laze?
• Shitcurity. Indefinite brigging cause I don't like your face. Also, Code Red.
• Shitcurity. Make shitlords great again!
• Shitcurity. Seriously, think of a recent shitcurity player. Now think of them with a riot shotgun with buckshot and a license to kill.
• Shitcurity. Did I mention shitcurity? This is a shitcurity officer's wet dream realized...

Edited June 14, 2017 by alexpkeaton
Accidentally hit submit before finishing

[Anticept]

That's what jobbans are for.

Just as well, there doesn't need to be an incentive to drop alert levels if it's enforced at CC level. There's no justification to stay red a whole shift under this system.

We could playtest this for a couple weeks and see how it plays out.

Again: I repeat:

THIS IS NOT A LICENSE TO KILL

They must actively be impeding security. It's not "turn it into an excuse to manhunt". This is widespread, station ending danger. Not threat to a few individuals or command staff, but large scale, indiscriminate destruction.

If this were implemented, I'm sure there would be more ahelps for a while, until people learn don't fuck with sec during a red alert. They SHOULDN'T BE FUCKING WITH SEC DURING A WIDESPREAD EMERGENCY PERIOD.

Edited June 14, 2017 by Anticept

[GunDOS]

13 hours ago, Anticept said:

THIS IS NOT A LICENSE TO KILL

They are going to take it as a licence to kill. Quoting "Martial law". I'm in agreement bar those two words.

[ZN23X]

I love this with some specific notes regarding each alert. Currently, Blue Alert is basically useless, which is why we go to Red so fast and so often, and tend to stay there for the duration of the shift. Current Red Alert is a bit abraisive to crew under what are fairly normal circumstances due to the power it gives security.

Here's the changes I think are necessary...

Code Red: Very similar to the current red alert, with a bit softer gloves.

Parameters for raising to Blue are verification of a threat on the station.

Take current Red Alert policies and alter the following to make it a bit less heavy handed:

-People ARE allowed to be outside of thier department (currently you aren't supposed to be and security can use it as an excuse to detain, search you, and even brig you for workplace hazard). Any alert rules regarding people being outside thier department are void because of this.

-Security is still allowed random searches, with certain conditions. First, the officer must attempt a peaceful search. *point at whoever* "Can I search your bag please?" Instead of tase, cuff, search. If the person refuses the search, acts aggressively, and/or attempts to flee, the officer may then stun and cuff. For the sake of expediting the process, the peaceful searches are to be done in the field, on the spot. Only bring them to the brig if they needed to be forcefully detained. This process will ideally lead to a better relationship between crew and security. Cooperation leads to less time and energy being wasted on both ends. This will also lead to more competent officers because they'll be forced to become more familiar with what people can and cannot have.

Code Red: Nearly identical to Anticeps with a few specific parameters. This is only to be activated when there is any mix of multiple command dying, severe casualties to civilians or sec, and severe damage to the station. Similar to when we would currently request ERT.

Here are the clauses for lethal force at this level. Anyone who enters a restricted area can be subdued with lethal force. Preferably only until they are critical. If you are dumb enough to march on the bridge or start running around the brig as a civilian at Code Red, you put your life in your own hands. Lethal force may be used on anyone who is actively impeding or being aggressive towards security or command. Also, this will vary depending on the antag, but if it's code red and you are dumb enough to say...walk around dressed as a wizard when there are aggressive wizards on the station, security can use lethal force on you.

Yes...I agree this Red Alert is every shitcurity officers dream, and probably an admin nightmare to start. Shitcurity will get job banned, or outright banned, just as people who greytide too hard currently get banned. Everyone will learn how to properly behave during the new alerts and it will level out.

The biggest problem I see is the initial wave of shitcurity that will quickly get banned, and civilians who intentionally get in securities way for the sake of dying and potentially respawining as an antag.

[Kyet]

ZN23X:

- I do think there is value in having a "threat is suspected, but not confirmed yet" alert level. It encourages people to investigate and confirm/deny. If you eliminate that level, people will just loosen their definition of "confirmed" and jump up to the "confirmed" level instead. Because there won't be a "suspected" level anymore.

- Security NEVER sends people back to their workplaces on red. EVER. I have never seen it happen even once. This provision of red alert is completely ignored, by everyone, all the time. This is one of the pieces of SOP that may as well not exist, because literally nobody ever heeds it, nor cares to enforce it. You wouldn't want to enforce it anyway, as it is anti-fun.

- Often, people will try to run away from you if you want to search them. Yes, this includes non-antags, with no contraband on them. I don't know why they do it. It happens a lot though.

- Searching people in the halls, rather than bringing them to the brig, is also impractical in many cases. Just last shift I was playing a sec officer, I tried to do exactly this (search someone in a hallway) and within seconds a random crew member (neither were antags) grabbed the person I was searching, and legged it. Both of them got away. Sure, they were arrested later, but this sort of thing is common. Sadly, as a sec officer, often you cannot afford to search people in public spaces simply because random crew will try to steal them away from you while you are busy with the search. Taking them to the brig for a search is one approach. If that's far away, at the very least you should avoid searching them in a public area.

- IMHO, the biggest problem with how security works now is that often, crew who screw with security can't be charged with anything at all. Covering the brig lobby with 'shitcurity!' graffiti, thus ensuring that anyone who is brought in gets encouraged to take an anti-sec mindset right away? Graffiti is not a crime. Constantly complaining about 'shitcurity' over radio, such that the crew stop wanting to help security? Not a crime. Stealing someone away from sec custody while they're being searched? (as happened in my last shift).... you can only charge them with the same sentence as the original criminal. Which, if you're just doing a random search and they don't have anything on them.... is nothing. I actually had to let both of those idiots go, last time I played security, because although they were consuming sec's time, triggering manhunts, etc, I did not think I could actually charge either of them with anything. The ultimate example of this sort of thing is the clown trying to slip security on red alert, with confirmed cult/shadowlings/etc. From the Sec Officer's point of view, they have no idea if the clown slipping them is going to get them killed, yet, despite the stress this causes the officer, its hard to charge the clown with anything in cases like this. Even if they do it constantly and you can find something to charge them with, it usually isn't worth the cries of "SHITCURITY ARRESTING ME FOR SLIPPING!" and inevitable IAA hassle you get as a result. 

 

Yeah, it would be nicer if there was a larger gap between blue and red, but we shouldn't eliminate blue, and I am skeptical that the issue of people acting like jerks to security will be solved easily.

Edited June 15, 2017 by tzo

[Jared12100]

I agree with the idea, just not the method. What you're describing is basically code blue becomes red, red becomes gamma and gamma becomes free gear. Gamma is very rarely called, and when it is you KNOW shit is bad. Here's what I think: Gamma doesn't require CC, but requires 4 heads of staff swipe. Yes. Four. Which is the majority of the command team (6 heads of staff, 2 VIPs that can swipe, VIPs can swipe but don't have a say in the vote. A head of staff being dead is a presumed yes.) Because shit needs to be really fucking bad for martial law. It can still be called by CC via fax however. The Gamma armory wont open without a fax to CC, but all Gamma SoP is still in play.

 

Gamma would need a  REALLY good reason to be called: Mass casualties, extreme station damage, un-containable threats, etc. When you have a population of over 100, the halls are covered in blood and comms are really quiet, might be time to call gamma (or the shuttle, but sometimes you can't because of directives most people forget about)

 

The only other change I'd like to see is the code red lock down actually get enforced: SoP says being outside of department or bar without very good reason is a workplace hazard, which can be brigged for up to 10 minutes. How often is this enforced? Very, VERY, rarely. At least, in my experience. Hell, I'll ask the warden/hos while playing a secborg "Should this unit detain anyone found in maint as per code red SoP?" and you know what they say to me? "No." 

 

I also think syndicate declaration of war should instantly and automatically move the alert to red. Because you know, declared war and all.

 

Overall I don't see any issue with the SoP of the current alerts. I do see a problem in how people act during them, and a problem with security not enforcing it properly. And sometimes the fucking admins CC wont respond to your faxes while 50% of staff are dead.

[ZN23X]

@tzo I use red alerts "stay in your department" protocol and encourage it's use to the rest of sec all the time. I don't escort people back to thier departments, I use it as an excuse to search them, and if they refuse or resist in any way  (like say, the clown slipping me) I book them for workplace hazard, possibly resisting, possibly 25% extra for being uncooperative. This IS allowed per code red SOP, and is an unbelievably powerful tool sec can abuse regularly because we always go to red so quickly. It can literally be used on anyone who refuses to follow secs orders, which could be as simple as "let me search your bag". If they say no, put up chase, scream shitcurity all the way back to the brig, we can give them 15 minutes easy.

Mind you I only reccomend this stern method of handling people be utilized at red...and only on people who don't have the awareness to stay out of security's way because there is a major threat on the station. If an officer can't handle being slipped, called names, or seeing graffiti in the floor then they need to toughen up. I know it takes some time  to break that threshold of not caring, but it's necessary if you want to work sec without going nuts. If the clown slips me at code green or blue, I laugh, stand up, and either get in a playful push fight with him or grab an extinguisher and chase him shooting him with it.

My thoughts come from my experience playing warden alot. When people are cooperative I'll regularly let them off with a warning for minor crimes and a parole for medium. I'll give minimum sentences for medium and max if. I explain to them that I did this cuz they aren't being an asshole, and it tends to lead to them acting better going forward. On the flip side, if I just book everyone for everything regardless of context, it leads to more people hating security and wanting to get revenge.

Now...that doesn't work on everyone, because quite frankly some people are just here to be trolls and chuckle fucks. I do also book for the maximum for people who ARE being assholes and explain to them how much thier sentence could have been reduced if they weren't an asshole. This tends to lead to them attempting to break out of thier cell over and over, me resetting thier timer repeatedly because of it, and them eventually committing suicide or going SSD because thier own antics have led to thier boredom. I've literally has 2 people brought in for the same crime at the same time, one was very cooperative, the other was volatile as can be. One got parole one got 20 (which turned into about 40 + SSD). Both were completely legal sentences per space law.

I also search people in the halls all the time to save them time, and they usually appreciate it. Especially if you lay out the options to them. We can either do this here or tase, cuff, and go all the way to the brig. Then they make the choice by either handing me thier bag or running off. My field searches also are usually a bag only, so being cooperative would allow antags that aren't KNOWN antags to possibly slip by me with contraband in thier pockets or elsewhere. Again, rewarding good behaviour  (even if the reward is letting an antag away...antags are allowed to win sometimes too).

I'm very gentle when appropriate, merciless when necessary. It's shouldn't be securities goal to brig everyone for every crime all the time, it should be thier goal to keep peace. Constantly being heavy handed does not accomplish this.

The reason for my proposed changes is because as things currently are, we go to red too quick. The early stages of the current code red are too advantageous too security, the fact that there isn't any protocol beyond code red aside from rarely used codes only activated by central  is disadvantageous to security once the situation is becoming too out of control.

Edited June 17, 2017 by ZN23X
Spelling and grammar corrections. Added the end part about field searches.

[Someonewithapen]

I'm all for a 'cold' code red, like a yellow or somesuch, something where security can basically say; "We have a confirmed threat, it's not doing much and we're trying to contain/track it down. Please remain calm and cooperate with your friendly security officer.". As of right now, not many officers utilize the red alert protocols to their advantage, either herding the tide into the bar, rifling through their pockets if they're acting shady, throwing the goddamn assistants out of maintenance, either in favor of just filling the offending crew member with lead or tasing and brigging without so much as a "Hello." Honestly, I think separating the investigative powers of red alert from the "Crush, Kill, Destroy" mentality of red alert could do us some good in the long run because @ZN23X has some excellent points. The random search is security's most powerful weapon, and I encourage and utilize it myself. If someone has nothing to hide, assumedly they would cooperate with the search and it would take one-two minutes tops, then it's a pat on the back and a "Have a nice day citizen". If they resist, tase, cuff, drag to processing (or out to the hall if it's a bit of a walk) and search. Simple, clean, elegant.

Herding people into their departments/bar is a useful tool, but honestly I would keep that to Red Alert and not our proposed 'Yellow Alert'. Sure if the law-abiding citizens are all huddled away, then in theory only the criminal scum would be in the halls, but that doesn't work. If we can get 'Yellow' to mean "We're actively searching for a confirmed threat" and Red to mean "We are in an combat situation.", then that would give civilians more reason to clear the halls, and security more reason to shove their asses into the bar on Red Alert, you're simply keeping them safe from friendly fire. The only exception I would make is for maintenance explorers. If we're on Yellow alert, that means we're investigating any shady characters, if you're not Engineering/Janitorial/The Paramedic and you're in maintenance? You're shady. Get out.

 

What some fresh security members fail to get (and what I failed to get the first time around) is that cuffing, processing, and brigging prisoners requires at least some level of social tact. If you're Judge Dredd for every crime between Vandalism or Murder, you're not going to make friends, you're going to get shitcurity yelled in your ear, and the clown is going to slip your ass. If someone's not a confirmed threat, and they're just causing a ruckus, pause a moment. Question them in the hall, ask what's going on, are they being antagonistic or are they getting back at someone who wronged them? Give the station a reason to cooperate with you, I cannot stress this enough as HoS or Warden to fucking smile for once.  Any of the usual suspects will know, Tony will sit down on scene and get their testimony if nothing seems off, if it's just some rowdy boys being rowdy.

[Tomar_Brindsbane]

On 6/15/2017 at 8:20 AM, tzo said:

- IMHO, the biggest problem with how security works now is that often, crew who screw with security can't be charged with anything at all. Covering the brig lobby with 'shitcurity!' graffiti, thus ensuring that anyone who is brought in gets encouraged to take an anti-sec mindset right away? Graffiti is not a crime. Constantly complaining about 'shitcurity' over radio, such that the crew stop wanting to help security? Not a crime. Stealing someone away from sec custody while they're being searched? (as happened in my last shift).... you can only charge them with the same sentence as the original criminal. Which, if you're just doing a random search and they don't have anything on them.... is nothing. I actually had to let both of those idiots go, last time I played security, because although they were consuming sec's time, triggering manhunts, etc, I did not think I could actually charge either of them with anything. The ultimate example of this sort of thing is the clown trying to slip security on red alert, with confirmed cult/shadowlings/etc. From the Sec Officer's point of view, they have no idea if the clown slipping them is going to get them killed, yet, despite the stress this causes the officer, its hard to charge the clown with anything in cases like this. Even if they do it constantly and you can find something to charge them with, it usually isn't worth the cries of "SHITCURITY ARRESTING ME FOR SLIPPING!" and inevitable IAA hassle you get as a result. 

I think this is the result of this is because of the limited scope of Space Law to begin with. I understand that Space Law is limited because it's supposed to fit the limitations of the playerbase and not be too OP by giving security too many privileges to arrest and brig but I can't help but feel that Space Law is simply too limiting and needs to be expanded, preferably with the help of people who understands the difficulties of playing Security such as @tzo for instance.

But also the behavior that you describe where greyshirts are griefing security is something I would actually interpret as people self-antaging. While shitcurity can develop over a match - much more commonly the issue relates to people coming in and being pre-disposed to hating security. I feel that coming in and deciding to screw with security from the get go is self-antaging and should be banned.

Also another issue with security is that the maximum security force is too small for the physical size of the station and that not a lot of people like playing security so security is undermanned very often, leaving them ill equipped to deal with bored civilians, mimes or clowns causing chaos in addition to the antags.

[whiskeyfur]

Bottom line for me is this: Too many people think it's 'fun' to grief security and ignore what they say when the real problems happen. And this breaks immersion for those who really want to get serious about it.

The usual response? "It's just a game..."

Well, sorry. Common sense here... if you see a bunch of cops surrounding a building in a standoff, guns drawn... do you walk up to those cops and start messing with them?
No. And anyone who says yes to this needs their head checked... sadly it seems in game, the standing answer is yes. This is not acceptable.

[necaladun]

On 6/14/2017 at 9:39 AM, Anticept said:

 

• Martial law. Screwing with security forces allows them to respond with any force warranted, including outright lethal if needed.

Sec are always allowed to respond with any force warranted, by definition. Nothing about red alert here changes that. What "screwing with" is would obviously need more definition, and what force is warranted to stop that (Can I lase someone to death to stop them shouting about shitcurity?).

 

On 6/14/2017 at 9:39 AM, Anticept said:

They can brig indefinitely as well until the alert level is lowered.

This I see as very, very prone to abuse. With no guidelines as to how or when it's meant to be properly used, and the tendency to stay on red alert, this would be a huge problem.

 

Overall, while i'd like some method by which sec can crack down on people being shitty to them 4thelulz, this also has to be balanced with the potentials for abuse.

[Sothangel]

Mhm, power to brig indefinitely is going to throw evidence out of the window and render a lot of things pointless.

[ZN23X]

I'd just be super psyched if non antags would have the self awareness to stop wasting security's time when half of sec is dead and the station is near critical due to powerful violent antags on the loose. They are essentially being a self antag at that point by actively aiding the real antags, even if only by distracting security. 

Edited June 17, 2017 by ZN23X

[EvadableMoxie]

I'd like this, assuming the Admins will be policing it and preventing the "Go red 15 minutes into the shift and never change." issue.  Red Alert (or more specifically the departmental lockdown) is where fun goes to die. At the same time, security and command benefit so much from it that they'll go red as soon as they possibly can, as long as they possibly can. I see potential problems in that since this new red alert provides even more power to security and thus even more incentive to be on it as much as possible.

I also support the idea of changing Blue alert to Yellow Alert.  It's more intuitive. Green means things are good, Yellow means there is a threat, Red means things are bad. 

Edited June 17, 2017 by EvadableMoxie

[ZN23X]

3 hours ago, EvadableMoxie said:

I see potential problems in that since this new red alert provides even more power to security and thus even more incentive to be on it as much as possible. 

Part of the reason for the station currently going to red so quickly is because the required threshold for red is unbelievably low. Green is no threat, Blue is potential threat, Red is confirmed threat. As soon as one antag does something that confirms what type of threat we are dealing with, we are allowed to go red. The goal of this isn't just to give security more flexibility at code red, it's to raise the threshold required to reach red to compensate for the increased power. The station wouldn't go to red unless all hell was breaking loose, so security wouldn't be able to abuse red as much as they currently can.

Edited June 17, 2017 by ZN23X