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. WellingtonTheThird

    WellingtonTheThird Well-Known Member

    The existence of this thread is both an acknowledgement of the problem and a sign that we're working to fix it.
    Infernus44 and Flatoftheblade like this.
  2. I won't bother rehashing things I've already advocated for in other threads, but here's one rule suggestion:

    Implement a rule against false, malicious reporting: I don't mean that you should in any way punish or deter good faith reporting, but there are people like this guy who either antagonize security/commit crimes endlessly and try to get sec officers in trouble when they are arrested, or start fights and ahelp when they get robusted. This is a waste of everyone's time and has potential to get innocent people in trouble. Something should be done when it is blatant.
  3. Infernus44

    Infernus44 Well-Known Member

    I agree with that, and I'm glad that that will be sorted out.

    I don't want to sound rude, and please don't get me wrong, but multiple threads and ban appeals have been made about this, and they were still ruled IC issue or invalid. I know that rules and policies are being actively worked on now, but I don't want to complain to you or Taicho every time it happens, since these things shouldn't even happen...


    Also, it would be nice to have a full staff rooster thread, for new players since they don't know who to talk to if this have any issues.
  4. WellingtonTheThird

    WellingtonTheThird Well-Known Member

    I agree that these things shouldn't happen, but realistically we will all need to put forward some effort to be the change we wish to see in our community.

    We don't want our players or administrators to feel discouraged from coming and chatting with us over any issues. We're working on things on our end by reviewing more closely what is deemed an IC issue in these thread/ban appeals you're referencing and we'll try to clearly outline this in the new rules. As it stands Taicho and I rely on our team, but as with any team of individuals consistency can easily become an issue ( and has) due to conflicting interpretations and opinions on how things should be run. Despite the fact that we're taking care of the problems we're aware of we don't catch every single thing.

    If a player doesn't adminhelp when they are griefed then more than likely an administrator won't catch what is going on and be able to help them. All players have the right to adminhelp when they feel they are being griefed and even if the ruling doesn't have the outcome they desire the fact that they ahelp'd it won't be held against them and it will still be investigated. Anytime a player feels that the judgement call wasn't the right one to make they still have the right to further challenge it because the higher administration cannot constantly monitor every single case much like we cannot monitor every single action without error on the server. We need our playerbase to come to us and help keep us consistent. There is nothing wrong with with skepticism as long as it is channeled in a respectful and constructive manner.

    Again we thank all of you who are bringing forth these concerns and suggestions.
    Infernus44 likes this.
  5. IMVader

    IMVader Well-Known Member

    I'm not exactly sure on the level of deepness being requested here. I have several concerns, but I see this thread as to discuss those three changes. And I fully agree with them.

    Correct me if I'm wrong in my assumption, but I was expecting at least three threads to be created: one to discuss and write the new rules, one for the CoC, and one to pose questions later to be incorporated in the FAQ if deemed relevant. Oh, and one to rule them all, of course, and in the darkness bind them. And this space to be open for those that would like not to see some/all of these changes.
  6. daddysds1

    daddysds1 Well-Known Member

    Yes this been needing to happen for awhile. How many times have i been talked to about the rules because they where badly put in the first place.

    The rule for heads dose need to be enforced though so that the station can't go to shit * Cough * CE * cough* .

    Hopefully with this the rules will be better put and i don't have another inncdent with beating down secuirty with stuns and cuffs to get my gloves, And then get accused of greifing for cuffing them.

    Also this.
  7. MiziBooBoo

    MiziBooBoo Guest

    I'm not actually sure what I want changed, I just know I want change...
    Said every american voter.
  8. NoFaceMan

    NoFaceMan Guest

    Please fix that shit.

    • Rule # 10.) Griefing is not allowed. Grief is defined as: The intentional OOC intent to ruin another players enjoyment or ability to play the game with no IC or RP reasons for the characters actions. Examples include, but are not limited to: killing without a very good reason, randomly starting fires, dismantling the hull, acting insane to the extent that it negatively affects others, etc.
  9. daddysds1

    daddysds1 Well-Known Member

    The funny part here is you can be banned for grief when you do not have any OOC intent to ruin another players enjoyment GG.
  10. WellingtonTheThird

    WellingtonTheThird Well-Known Member

    We ask that everyone keep their comments on topic given the serious nature of the thread. Thank you.
  11. IMVader

    IMVader Well-Known Member


    Could someone confirm or deny my statement/expectation?
  12. Flavo

    Flavo Well-Known Member

    To my understanding, comment on whatever you feel like when it comes to A) Rules or B) Admin Conduct. basically if its a question about policy ask in this thread. dont be shy
  13. IMVader

    IMVader Well-Known Member


    Then here comes an unanswered question:



    I'd like to see a general remake of the lawsets and a LLA-based Silicon Policy to account for our differences with TG (as slime-men being human, for example).
    NoFaceMan likes this.
  14. Raptorblaze

    Raptorblaze Head Coder Staff Member

    So much agree.

    As it stands, in this situation I'd probably have coached the player who uploaded that law about its dangers as soon as I saw it.
    NoFaceMan and Jayce Wise like this.
  15. daddysds1

    daddysds1 Well-Known Member



    The issue with ai Lawsets is the not the Lawsets itself. But the person playing the AI.

    When i played ai and got protect the sation a "broken" window meh it's a window. Now if some asshole went and bombed the station,Disabled the sing,Broke windows to space, Broke the power grid , Ect.

    I would go kick his ass #law 1.

    No power = No cloneing.

    Releaseing sing = No power / Ball of death.

    Breaking window to space = Human harm.

    Bombing station = Human harm.

    ECT.

    If anything the rules need to be re-wrote for ai's/borgs and people need to use some god damn common sense and not go OMG HE BROKE A WINDOW MURDER HE.
    NoFaceMan and kadingir like this.
  16. LemonSoup

    LemonSoup LS13 Admin

    I would strongly oppose anything other than continuing to regard laws as an unfeeling, synthetic machine designed to follow the laws literally and to the letter. AIs are not people with free will, they are mechanical constructs with no purpose or sense of greater good beyond the scope of their laws. It'd be like asking your calculator to use some common sense and give you life advice instead of numbers every once in a while.
  17. Mindtrixx

    Mindtrixx Well-Known Member

    I would love for AIs to be held to a higher standard of play such as Heads. Too many silicons disobeying law 2, turning a blind eye to executions because "it was a traitor", or SecBorgs pretending Space law is their defining laws.

    There is so much room for silicons to screw you over yet you can't touch them. Because stopping a borg/AI means locking down, carding, or destroying it. Which will earn you a admin-pm for taking a player out of the round, even if momentarily.

    Its come to the point where I am unhappy to see a regular borg player, very few actually follow their laws correctly. :(

    So if I had to add something to the rules, it would be stricter enforcement of silicon laws. Maybe a base definition/idea of the standard ASIMOV in the rule-set that people can follow. Leave custom laws to interpretation, have ASIMOV defined.
  18. Cody522

    Cody522 Well-Known Member


    But they have human full human brains though. Filled with emotions and memories.
  19. General_Battier

    General_Battier LS13 Admin

    I try to follow my laws at my best when I'm a Borg, I try to be engi-Borg more, everyone loves the little orange one <3
  20. daddysds1

    daddysds1 Well-Known Member


    The common Sense part was in general... for all crew....

    But again theres no issue with the laws themself but how the AI/BORG player understand them.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page