Upcoming rule rewrite, Administrator Code of Conduct and 'FAQ'

Discussion in 'Announcements' started by Taicho, Sep 9, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Taicho

    Taicho Director of LS13 Staff Member

    Hola folks.

    Since the initial announcement, Wellington and I have been quite quiet regarding our personal goal to rewrite the rules among other things. This is simply due to the necessity of addressing other issues regarding the administration team, which range from dealing with outstanding complaints, to simply shuffling the team around and managing this months promotions (congratulations to Mulder, Coolpres and Juicy). All very tedious tasks that have indeed hindered our progress, but nevertheless, we are ready to continue with developing the resources promised.

    There is no real order for the release of these resources and updates, though I suspect the rule rewrite and Code of Conduct will take priority, as the FAQ will be constantly updated (as realistically 'constant' as it can be) as questions are presented and clarifications made. For the sake of simplicity, I will briefly explain the three tasks in topic title order.

    Rule Rewrite
    The full rewrite and update of our rules is probably the most time consuming and admittedly important change we plan to immediately make. They are unclear. They are vague. In some cases, they are badly written. This is the result of two primary factors:
    1. The development of the current set of rules was primarily managed by an individual who did not share the same sort of ideals and beliefs we would like to promote, and apply to how we deal with cases. A lack of competence from the administrator in question -- who is no longer with us -- and an attempt to push the server in a direction we weren't particularly comfortable with, through the use of the rules in question, has led to a multitude of issues which have resulted in the necessity of this rather urgent action of a complete overhaul.
    2. Dilutions and addendum's in the creation of these rules, similarly to the first point, managed to skew things to the point wherein we've been put in a position that prevents us from interpreting or simply enforcing the rules in a way we believe correct, because the rules currently are far too ingrained into the server and community in their current state for us to easily change our stance on things without creating further confusion and inconsistency.
    Nevertheless, we would like this to be a community effort. Whilst Wellington and I will be taking the lead in personally writing this new set of rules, taking into consideration input from Senior Administration and the administration team at large, we encourage you, as the community who will be effected by these rules, to put forth any suggestions regarding things you believe need a ruling and to be properly enforced. Do note that not all of these suggestions will be considered, and it ultimately falls down to the judgement of Wellington and I as to whether they make it into the new set of rules.

    Code of Conduct
    This is exactly what I say it is: a public copy of the 'unwritten' (mostly) administrative Code of Conduct, policies, and general etiquette. A lot of the time, we run into Player vs Administrator scenarios that usually result in the player yelling something along the lines of, "FUCK YOU FUCKER TELL ME EXACTLY WHERE IT SAYS YOU CAN/CAN'T DO THAT!" This should hopefully enlighten people in regards to what administrators can do in responses to your pleas for help, and should make the overall process of things a lot more clear and a lot less secretive for everybody in general. ​
    FAQ
    With the recent debate regarding the need for clarity on the topic of 'excessive force', it did occur to me that a lot of our rulings, especially in regards to the tricky topic of 'grief', are quite unclear. The FAQ will serve as a resource to clear a few things up; individuals will ask questions regarding certain scenarios, or our ruling towards certain issues our cases, and we will try to come to a general consensus and present an answer. Each question and response will be added to the FAQ, which should hopefully provide some clarity when it comes to these things, but should also reduce 'inconsistency' when it comes to some administrators believing one thing, and some players and administrators believing another, etc. I'm hoping this will server as a helpful tool to clear a lot of things up and keep our decisions on these things noted permanently. When the thread pops up, we encourage you to ask away.​

    Though churning out these things in a relatively short space of time is an ambitious task, we hope it will benefit the community and administration quality as a whole in the foreseeable future. I encourage you to inform us of your grievances towards our currents rules so we can avoid making similar mistakes this time around, as well as present suggestions for things that would benefit the overall environment in prohibiting. You may post all of this below!

    As always, thanks for your time!
    daddysds1, Fatman, IMVader and 12 others like this.
  2. NoFaceMan

    NoFaceMan Guest

  3. IMVader

    IMVader Well-Known Member

    I... I'm in love. :')
  4. Fatman

    Fatman Active Member

    This should be interesting
  5. Flavo

    Flavo Well-Known Member

    To be honest, i was expecting more input from people on this thread. everyone seems to have a opinion but now that opinions are being considered i see nothing.
  6. NoFaceMan

    NoFaceMan Guest

    Shhhhhh dunt kill good threads.
  7. General_Battier

    General_Battier LS13 Admin

  8. Flavo

    Flavo Well-Known Member

    Ok i'll start then:

    Clarification on the grief rule, there seems to be a big confusion of what it even covers to the point where no ahelps cause "admins will just tell me legit". the way i look at it is its the person behind the computer doing the action, not the character there playing. sure at liberty we give you the freedom to play how you want if you wanna be lawful and get that hypospray for whatever reason you could ask the CMO if you can have it or you can take it by force. but there is a difference between that and the guy behind the computer wanting to take it to be a dick to the player.
    --
    There seems to be an idea from some players that those who get into fights and win are banned, the losers of the fight ahelp that they were killed. more clarification on self defence and levels of force for both admin and players would be great. Personally i use wellington's
    Some factors should play into it too such as Who the aggressor is and various other things flat talks about in this post http://www.llagaming.net/forums/threads/use-of-force-in-self-defense.2727/

    Yes force can be excessive sometimes but if they were the one defending themself maybe talk them into a few alternatives for if it happens again as well as talking to the aggressor who let it get to that point.
    --
    Another complaint i see is that the some players find IC excuses to dick over other players, i'm not sure how that can be rectified but eh. I've noticed some players have "stopped playing because other players are dicks".

    Just a few things ive overheard.
  9. Tharinoma

    Tharinoma LS13 Admin

    I think Grey-tiding and harassing security to the point that they can't maintain order shouldn't be allowed. Looting the armory is fine, messing with an officer is fine, and starting revolutions might be fine, but security gets griefed too much and it usually breaks the balance of the rounds, allowing antags to roam free.

    I like the rule on heads of staff and sec being positions of authority, but it isn't being enforced, admins don't step in before it becomes obvious grief.

    I'll read our rules again, carefully and see if I can think of anything else.
    NoFaceMan and Flatoftheblade like this.
  10. LemonSoup

    LemonSoup LS13 Admin

    Reposting what I put in the feedback thread a while ago. Remains relevant.

  11. Cody522

    Cody522 Well-Known Member

    I think the rule on murder should be revised completely. It was never really changed last time, it was left as it always was. Very open. It mainly talks about self defense, a subject I'm currently having a problem with.
    Self defense has always been a scary topic for admins, many like to crush the idea of doing harm to others. Which makes it harder to defend actually legitimate murders, not when admins are always pleading for non-lethals. I'm not talking about my recent ban, but admins have always argued their hardest about every Unreasonable option to persuade someone from a key part of the game. Killing. Murder is so touchy but the current rule does not explain what the policy actually is.

    I would like a rule where you are able to use force without an admin begging you to pull down your pants and let people screw your over. I've had many discussions with admins where they want to suggest something non-lethal but even they don't know what it is. They wanted a scenario where I couldn't hurt somebody, but that somebody would have screwed my round over. You would be stuck between a rock and a hard place.

    I like the idea of wellington's stages but it wouldn't work well in a game where people hold grudges. Would you really want somebody revived who wants you dead? When security aren't able to restrain them and they will come back for round 2? Fights are escalated strangely as well, you just don't hit somebody in the head and be like "OK that will teach you huh? Don't try that again".
    "You hit me, challenge accepted."
    Then the original aggressor doesn't back down, he WANTS to win the fight. Even if people nearly die, they just don't give up. It's equivalent to running repeatedly into a spear in the wall.

    Roleplaying would have to be included to make aggression and fights work realistically if you want realistic rules. Rules like "Naturally you want to avoid pain. So don't do something you plainly wouldn't do in real life"
    Like not attacking security during a riot when they're using lethals.

    I've enforced anti-stupidity like this when I was an admin. I think it was Cactus who once was harassing a hulk on the escape shuttle. Going at him, punching him, and whatever. The hulk would just stun-punch him then throw him out of his range. The aggressor would run right back and fight again. Being stunned and thrown back repeatedly. Even when he was near DEATH. He even adminhelped he got griefed by this hulk and I told him otherwise. I always had zero-tolerance for adminhelpers who did the escalating and are fully responsible for getting themselves killed. It's the way things should be.

    I agree that greytiding should be against the rules too if you're just doing it for kicks.

    For admins, I think idea of intent should be ingrained into them. If you acted within your best following of the rules versus intentionally breaking them.
    QuantumWings and Infernus44 like this.
  12. Infernus44

    Infernus44 Well-Known Member

    Yeah, but admins clearly don't check the OOC intent. If a guy breaks brig, loots armory every now and than, while fighting with security and taking away their round time, that is an IC issue by the senior ruling, however, it is clear that they have no reason to do anything productive other than ruin others rounds. It is easy to see if he is doing it for IC, or OOC reason. They always get away with this because they give some IC reason to do it.
    "I want guns" "I want his ID" and so on...

    One player, who you probably know, was permabanned few months ago for having 20+ notes dating from when I was an admin. However, he was unbanned and was set for 6 months probation, where he got more than 10+ notes for the very same things he did in the past. 3 of them which were in 2 rounds, one after another. He stole valuable anti-borg equipment on confirmed rogue AI round, ran to engineering, and set it on fire because he was chased by an officer, exposing the whole area to space, and killing that officer. He got "dealth with" by admins, however, the very next round, he came and stole the captains ID, looted armory for "IC reasons", and got into the firefight with officers again. Another problem with him is that he often stirs grey tides into ruining security rounds, as he was arrested for above things. If you really can't see that he is not doing this for IC reason, nor any similar guy, than what the fuck?

    I also agree with Cody with self defense rules. If you punch someone when they harass you, you can expect someone to die, and someone to be banned. Either kill and get banned, or be killed and wait your round out if no security is around.
    The "Deal with it" strategy doesn't help here...
    Flatoftheblade and QuantumWings like this.
  13. WellingtonTheThird

    WellingtonTheThird Well-Known Member


    How many times do I personally have to debunk this same myth across multiple threads? This isn't true. Please stop spreading this misinformation as fact. The senior ruling as I've said before is that it isn't an IC issue if they're clearly doing it just for their own personal amusement and benefaction and their actions are overall detrimental to the state of the server. That is the senior administration's ruling. I ask that instead of continually posting this same thing that you actually make a report on the administrator them-self whether it is on the forums or by contacting me or Taicho on Skype.

    EDIT:

    I acknowledge that this belief is born of administrators who are afraid to act because of constraints the current rules impose upon them and they fear repercussions if they take action outside of the rules and rid the community of a terrible individual who is ruining the experience for everyone "within the rules". I apologize for this and I just want you all to know:

    We are not going to allow one person to ruin it for the group because of the wording of the rules.

    It is frustrating that this has happened in the past and we're rewriting the rules now to get away from that, but it would be completely stupid of us to allow one negative player to drive away our wonderful playerbase. Before measures weren't being taken to fix this because of restrictions of power within the hierarchy and a lack of direction. It wasn't because we didn't want our players to enjoy the server nor that we believe that being a jerk is okay as long as it is within the rules. Ultimately the rules are a guideline and serve the purpose of outlining the values and principles our community promotes.

    My skype is: Ofarrogantmenandmodestmice

    Any of you are free to contact me and I urge it if you feel that you've been wronged in a case. We deal with each of these with impartiality because our community is more important to us than one individual person.

    Thank you.
  14. Legato_frio

    Legato_frio Public Relations


    Is it cool if I print this post in large font and hang it up in my bedroom as a wall poster? If so I will because this post is F****ING awesome.

    When working on the rules we have to work on a balance between getting rid of the trouble players yet at the same time proving that they are indeed trouble players. I do remember a number of players and admins that would go out of their way to be troublesome to other players while still maintaining with in the rules. They would get close to breaking the rules without crossing the line. Walking a line between breaking the rules and being innocent yet still pissing of the other players at the same time. We need to put some serious though into how we can judge on such a person. Now what if that person is great the next round, helping other players playing a role of a productive employee. I hate the fact that right now notes seem to only be used when there are issues with a player. Why can't we put in notes also every time a player does something helpful. You cannot judge someone only on their faults; It is both the good and the bad that make a person.

    I remember hearing, adding good notes can look bad on a person's record but I question that because if someone would read them it would benefit the player when they make a "mistake". Accidents happen in ss13 if a player has a good repore making one bad choice shouldn't lead to a ban right away.
  15. General_Battier

    General_Battier LS13 Admin

    These words are so inspiring, oh how I love this community ;)
  16. Cody522

    Cody522 Well-Known Member


    I believe recently I adminhelped a person that was actively greytiding security for no reason like this and was just told it is an IC issue. Possibly by lemonsoup.

    These kind of policies just flip on and off don't they? Or from person to person? Gotta get that stuff ironed out. Going by word of mouth isn't enough. Hopefully when Taicho writes his 10 commandments this will be better.
    QuantumWings likes this.
  17. Flavo

    Flavo Well-Known Member

    IC issue means the situation was looked into and a valid IC reason was determined for the players actions. this COULD mean a assortment of things most of the time its because they are an antag.
  18. Cody522

    Cody522 Well-Known Member

    Being immediately told IC when you adminhelp it? Unlikely. Also being told it's an allowed thing anyway, and that it's been that way for awhile.
    QuantumWings likes this.
  19. WellingtonTheThird

    WellingtonTheThird Well-Known Member



    The only way we can iron this out is if people actually bring these issues straight to us. Here at LLA we have what is called an "Open Door Policy" in professional workplaces. From to new player to veterans of multiple years you're allowed to come straight to the guys in charge with your concerns.

    Once more I apologize for this, but it is a vicious circle we're making a conscious effort to break right now.

    Because of the current rule-set administrators are/were afraid of overstepping them to deliver justice. It doesn't mean that these administrators were bad people or admins. Unfortunately players have become accustomed to these rulings and accept them for what they are further perpetuating these beliefs despite our attempts to quell them. This attempt isn't a policy that flips off or on. I've repeated this same message multiple times with different words.

    It won't be solved overnight, but that doesn't mean we're going to give up.

    We reeducate our administrators, we weed out bad admins, and we try to reeducate the players who have been victimized by these rulings.

    This is just a process that takes time and I thank you for your feedback.
    Infernus44 likes this.
  20. Cody522

    Cody522 Well-Known Member

    It would be great if we knew the ruling was bad in the first place. Hence the problem with the lack of written down policies. Otherwise you can have people reporting bad conduct left and right.
    Because we wouldn't know if an admin was correct every time he tells us how something is.
    Infernus44 and QuantumWings like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page