Rules on contraband, validhunting/vigilantism & enemy of NT

[alexpkeaton]

 

I was the IAA that round, joined late, and started asking questions when I went to the holodeck and a borg said something along the lines of "everyone here is under arrest." That's the brig physician, blueshield, officer, CE and librarian (traitor). An admin then spirited everyone except me and the borg off to the Thunderdome, which confused me a moment as space-time anomolies occured right then and didn't see anyone move. Here's what I recall. When I got on comms, I engaged in a significant, at least 20-30 minute, discussion on comms about what the hell was going on/what just happened on the holodeck. The HoP, AI and bloodhound sec borg (keep in mind, home players, that there were 4, count 'em, 4 borgs when I joined up at 13:00, at least 2 of them sec borgs, so sec had support, as well as at least a second officer by the time the OK Corral went down) were the only ones communicating on comms, despite me asking the captain to chime in. And, as you pointed out, if the HoP's claims were true, only the officer was 100% culpable, and indeed I came to the same conclusion over comms. As I pointed out at the time, the brig physician and CE have zero arrest power or responsibility, and therefore the witch hunt against them should stop (however the HoP continued to lump all of them in the same basket and pass judgment in them collectively). As for the blueshield, while he has arresting power if necessary, it isn't his primary role (and Blueshields aren't issued a security channel on their headset for precisely this reason). I actually engaged with the vox sec officer on comms, who said he was "scardies" of the holoparisite and didn't get paid to die so he wasn't going to risk apprehending the guy. I responded sayng that really only the officer is at fault here, and to me, it was incompetence. But the HoP was most vocal on comms, throwing all of them under the enemy of the corp bus, saying all of them disobeyed orders. At no time did the captain chime in and confirm any of this. So, what am I supposed to think as IAA? Without any confirmation by the Captain, honestly, I was having doubts the HoP was loyal to NT. Here, three implanted people and a head minding his own business get called rogue by an unimplanted HoP, it's a perfect diversion to distract attention. The HoP is not a magistrate nor an officer, but was making the case against all of them nonetheless. And though I joined late in the round, the only evidence provided to me of any "protection" of the traitor going on at the holodeck was simple association. I asked for an explanation of the protection and got no other answer. They were all together looking to play basketball. The borg wasn't engaged and everyone looked peaceful on the holodeck.

 

Also, let's talk about jumping to kill-on-sight without cause for such an extreme reaction. That's a pretty hefty violation of SoP when there is no immediate threat, and with the traitor being 100% peaceful, there was no cause for that order whatsoever.

 

So, the way I see it, the CE and the brig phys were 100% falsely accused by the HoP. They had no police powers and to my knowledge no way of enforcing any alleged "protection" they were accused of (no weapons). I don't know what was going on over command comms, but the blueshield appears guilty of only minor dereliction, if that. As for the HoPcurity bit, while the OK Corral thing happened briefly, the HoP spent nearly a half hour acting as judge, jury and executioner to the four people involved when I was asking questions aboht the matter. If not HoPcurity, it's HoPgistrate and equally a no-no. And if I'm not mistaken, the HoP had a SMG as well. What the heck was the HoP doing with that weapon on blue alert? That takes a conscious decision to be armed with lethals when the HoP had a lethal-capable disabler in their locker. That's overkill and exceeding their authority, IMO.

 

 

 

As for vigilantism, I don't think it needs to be a crime so much as a clause. Basically, sec reserves the right to charge you with assault/murder in actions taken against an antag, and the burden of proof lies on the individual to prove (1) they became involved in the encounter by chance and not seeking it out, (2) their actions were reasonable under the circumstances, and (3) any harm done was in self-defense. If those three conditions are met, the charges are dropped. Kind of like how police officers in the US have to undergo a hearing if they ever discharge their firearm. Was it appropriate and necessary under the circumstances? If so, carry on. If not, disciplinary action and possibly prosecution.

 

[Professor Cupcake]

 

Policing is not for players, it's for admins.

 

Please, no player policing.

Oh, okay.

In that case, let's make all of Sec admin-only.

 

[Belario]

 

HoP's playing at being security are best dealt with by ignoring them in my experience, they usually end up getting brigged themselves.

 

The worst damage they do is spreading bad and often downright incorrect information, stuff like "CMO IS TRAITOR/HELP CULT IN CHAPEL/AI ROGA BLOW BORGS" when said by a HoP/member of command, even a bad one, is always taken seriously and ruins a lot of people's rounds.

 

There should probably be something in SoP IN BIGGER LETTERS about following the chain of command, the first thing you see when you join is which member of command you answer to, but people usually just defer to whoever is the loudest.

 

[Shadeykins]

 

Policing is not for players, it's for admins.

 

Please, no player policing.

Oh, okay.

In that case, let's make all of Sec admin-only.

 

You're conflating things.

 

This thread is about attempting to police a relatively OOC mentality in an IC fashion by forcing security to sit on the hands of over 50% of the playerbase on top of their regular job.

 

If people are being major dicks with validhunting, that's for the admins to resolve - not the players.

 

It's not nearly as big an issue as everyone likes to make out, and there are easier codeable alternatives to rectify it.

 

For instance, vamps not lighting on fire with holy water... Cultists not auto-deconv'ing and being able to make unholy water, etc.

 

[Twinmold]

 

I would like to point out one other thing I noticed while pondering what you propose towards contraband that miners/explorers get: Are you familiar with 'Aiding and Abetting'? Certain things can be found on the Asteroid, in the Gateway, and in Space, such as pistols and full Syndicate suits. What you are proposing is these explorers are exempt from retribution for having such things, but there's an interesting clause that is understood from 'Aiding and Abetting'.

 

Knowingly assisting a criminal is a crime. This includes but is not limited to: Interfering with an arrest, stealing a prisoner in transit, breaking a prisoner out of the brig/prison, hiding a fugitive, providing medical care (unless paired with a large dose of sleep toxins).

 

Sentencing is as followed: The same sentence as the original criminal.

 

Note it says "This includes but is not limited to:" - Hiding criminal equipment, or use thereof, can be and will likely be considered Aiding and Abetting, and Syndicate items, such as weapons and equipment, should be considered covered by this. Certain things are in-evident, such as the Red Balloon or articles of clothing (no-slip shoes, tactical turtleneck, etc), for the mere fact they can't be used for something practical. I would personally also consider the soap and cards in-evident, as well. At least in the case that no one seems you 'spawn' them out of nowhere. Witnessing someone using the PDA Uplink to get things would be witness testimony and evidence of potential link to the Syndicate.

 

Here's an example: You go to the gateway, it's the Xenomorph Research Facility, which has the pistol. You 'find' it (let's face it, it's going to be difficult or you purposely tried to go out to get it, so likely you meta'd it anyway). You bring it back to the station: You have two choices: Alert Security/Command that you have it or don't.

 

- Alerting: It is likely security will confiscate it, but by making its presence known, you will likely avoid jail time, accusations of being a traitor/terrorist, or accusations for assisting a traitor/terrorist. It is possible, though unlikely, the Head of Security or Captain will give you a permit to keep it.

- Hiding its existence: If you are caught with it, you will be charged with Possession of a Restricted Weapon, you may be accused of being a traitor (as bullet weapons outside of certain types of shotguns are associated with terrorist groups), or accused of holding onto a traitor's weapon, thus Aiding and Abetting (intentional or not), and be charged for the same crime they would have been.

 

Do recall, that will all Capital Crimes, you are allowed to talk with a lawyer, in private considered appropriate roleplay. However, having anything deemed only accessible to the Syndicate puts massive strain on your explanation. If it isn't yours, you hiding the evidence of Syndicate activity, wherever you found it, is arguably Aiding and Abetting. Also note that having things that are associated with antagonist groups makes you look like an antag and may lead people to believe you really are against the corporation.

 

If you see someone with a gun, are you not more cautious around them? If you see some with a knife, are you going to turn your back to them? Ponder that, a bit.

 

To clarify things, I believe a more up-to-date list of what is confirmed Syndicate or terrorist group equipment, weapons, paired with appropriate contraband should be listed.

 

[alexpkeaton]

 

If people are being major dicks with validhunting, that's for the admins to resolve - not the players.

 

You and I both know that isn't happening. That's why it's called "validhunting." The targets are antags and therefore valid. Difficult to pin down, maybe not rampant but a round-killer nonetheless, and the rules currently tie the hands of admins unless there's damning evidence.

 

Regardless of effect on OOC attitudes, what I propose is not inconsistent with reality.

 

Here is the proposal, spelled out:

 

Harmful actions taken against a suspect in a crime are briggable unless ALL of the following can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the charging officer or investigator:

 

1) The individual who caused the harm became involved in the encounter with the suspect by chance and not seeking it out,

2) The actions were reasonable under the circumstances, and

3) Any harm done was in self-defense

 

Rules in-game can certainly model player attitudes. A rule such as this is not unique to games or even to Paradise Station.

 

[Shadeykins]

 

If people are being major dicks with validhunting, that's for the admins to resolve - not the players.

 

You and I both know that isn't happening. That's why it's called "validhunting." The targets are antags and therefore valid. Difficult to pin down, maybe not rampant but a round-killer nonetheless, and the rules currently tie the hands of admins unless there's damning evidence.

 

Regardless of effect on OOC attitudes, what I propose is not inconsistent with reality.

 

Here is the proposal, spelled out:

 

Harmful actions taken against a suspect in a crime are briggable unless ALL of the following can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the charging officer or investigator:

 

1) The individual who caused the harm became involved in the encounter with the suspect by chance and not seeking it out,

2) The actions were reasonable under the circumstances, and

3) Any harm done was in self-defense

 

Rules in-game can certainly model player attitudes. A rule such as this is not unique to games or even to Paradise Station.

 

If it isn't happening, then maybe you need to adjust your outlook because clearly the administrators don't take as much of an issue with this as you do.

 

We're medium, not high.

 

This is not as big an issue as everyone is making it out to be.

 

I don't see nearly as many people going for "muh valids" as everyone here claims to be going on - and I play Paradise a lot.

 

Problem players will be dealt with by the administrators, we don't need player policing.