[Reach the highest number without an admin posting]

Hey are we making a push today?

[Reach the highest number without an admin posting]

[Admin Complaint against: Coolrune206]

Hey there, I'll give my version of events.

I arrive to see an unorthodox public execution taking place by way of public guillotine. While prisoners are able to request custom executions, it is up to sec to be reasonable in granting them. For a public-facing corporation like Nanotrasen that should give some of a damn about reputation, I figured this was a bit much, as there's a reason they have an execution room (that very conveniently has no cameras in it). I asked in admin-chat what was going on and if the Magi signed off on it - the first answer I received was "apparently" followed by "No, Magi is yelling at Command". At some point during this I sent a CC announcement mentioning that Executions should be conducted in Execution where possible (as every legal execution is listed as taking place within execution), and request procedure to investigate.

The Magistrate, after investigating, comes to the conclusion that a public guillotine is a workplace hazard. This is a very reasonable verdict, and as such he orders the arrest of the Warden on grounds of Workplace Hazard. Up until now, everything is fine, even if SOP or Space Law has been violated in a place or two nothing rules-wise is amiss.

The problem begins when the Warden actively refuses this, declares their intent to arrest the Magistrate (for falsely enforcing space-law, which isn't even something you can arrest someone for). Then they later do actually detain the Magi and refuse instruction from the HoS. At this point is when I begin messaging you, because it's clearly gone too far.

Before we begin to touch on the contents of the message, let's clarify the Space Law end of it.

Executions can be done only by electric chair, lethal injection, firing squad, gas inhalation or asphyxiation.

Other means of Execution are illegal, constituting a charge of 5-02 - Murder, unless a prisoner explicitly requests them.

I believe this is the section of space law you lean upon when you say Security can do as they please to grant executions, but that is not what this implies. This simply clears officers of a murder charge for an unorthodox execution, so long as other execution procedure is followed. It does not give a free pass on any other crimes committed in the process of enacting the execution. For instance, if a prisoner requested to be executed by asphyxiation in the public hallway, this would not give an officer a clear pass to turn this section of the station into a vacuum to meet the request - it would still constitute the creation of a workplace hazard.

That said, Officers can commit minor crimes and you will see them sitting in brig for battery, workplace hazard, et cetera on occasion. That's all fine! What is less fine is directly refusing to carry out legal arrests or comply with them as ordered by a Magistrate, and instead opting to arrest the Magistrate. While Magistrate players are as fallible as anyone, they are also expected to be very knowledgeable on Space Law, and they are given the full final say on it for station affairs. If a Magistrate is deliberately misapplying Space Law, it's a good idea to ahelp it instead of going rogue and mutinying against legal orders.

This, combined with the attitude you'd displayed (such as having a nip at the HoS for being "new" in your eyes when he chose to comply with the Magi's orders) led me to PM you. I'd initially been pondering placing a secban for blatantly going against the Magistrate's legal verdict as a roundstart sec officer, but once I'd noticed it had been around six months since your last note I figured I'd leave it at a warning. However, I know I am as fallible as anyone and it does no good to just silently place notes on peoples' accounts without ever mentioning it to them so I reached out to you.

Hoo boy.

It was quite the acerbic interaction altogether, with you opting to ignore the point on several occasions to, as you put it, "continuously prod him for an answer as he stalls for time". In all honesty I should have probably wrapped this up a lot sooner and told you to place a complaint if you disagree, but I did actually hope you might get what I was trying to say. I will try to say it again here, where I am not being interrupted frequently:

There is no rules issue with creating a guillotine and carrying out an execution request using it. However, it is also worth noting that just because an execution would not constitute murder does not make it legal in all accounts - it still qualified as causing a workplace hazard, and detaining the Magistrate for attempting to correctly apply Space Law was going beyond what you should have. As the Magistrate is effectively the chief judicator of Space Law on the station, refusing a legal sentence from them and instead opting to arrest them (through no legal channel) would count as Mutiny, which non-antagonists should not be doing without damn good reason. If at any point you suspect the Magistrate is deliberately misapplying Space Law, you are free to ahelp for clarification - would have helped a lot in this situation. Choosing to go rogue was your own decision and it is why you were spoken to.

Lastly, regarding Guillotines being workplace hazards - of course they are. They are a device literally and solely designed to decapitate people. The argument that "people need to put themselves in it" to be killed could also be said of rage cages or rooms full of plasma, but they'd still constitute a workplace hazard (unless for instance the plasma room was deliberately designed to contain only plasma and had been engineered specifically for that purpose). There's also the consideration that people can be placed into a guillotine against their will - when I gave this point to you, you dismissed it as being murder on the count of the person, not workplace hazard on your count - sure it'd be murder but it'd also be workplace hazard because you had the guillotine installed. Hell, Space Law even notes that Workplace Hazard that leads to death can be considered manslaughter. It's also worth noting that in the minute or two you were conducting the execution for, several people that were not the executee were buckled in, either by themselves or others, and one of them was almost beheaded (even though I'm pretty sure he was trying to be decapitated). If you saw an Engineer install a public guillotine, I'd hope you'd detain them for a workplace hazard - and the same standard carries over to Security.

[Reach the highest number without an admin posting]

[Note Clarification]

Good day,

As this is a note clarification request, I will speak as the noting admin. The subject for clarification is the nature of the note relating to the helping of the hijacker.

For starters, I'll cite the rule clarification I was referring to in this case:
Rule 6: Play Antagonists Responsibly
Antagonists are permitted to assist other antagonists with their objectives. They must tell you what their objectives are, before you can help them. They cannot simply request 'help'. They have to be specific about what the objective is, e.g: "The Syndicate asked me to kill X. Will you help?". This does not entitle you to mass-murder, or take other hijack-only actions, unless the person you are helping clearly tells you that they have hijack. If they do tell you that they have hijack, and you plan to help them by doing hijack-only actions, please ahelp this to let us know;

 

For starters, if you want to jump in and help antags with security, it's fine to do it to rescue them - however, you should also remember that you're a traitor there to do your own objectives and that throwing out your cover and jumping into an ongoing murderball to save someone to no clear benefit to your objectives is not the best way to do it. That's not to say you can't try to rescue a traitor you see getting captured, but if you see someone trying to kill the entire security force, jumping in to "rescue" them might not be the most prudent idea. 

To your point of not knowing Capella was a hijacker, I will then ask - why help? If you haven't reached out to them, established some point of mutual interest via objectives, why break cover to help? Heck, you established that they had been unwilling to help you in the past. It would be one thing if you were using the chaos caused by another traitor to snipe an involved objective but from what was communicated to me, this was done for the sole purpose of helping them, as you made the distinction to me that you were going to do this then go about your objectives. As such:

1 hour ago, Komrad822 said:

Should I ahelp every single time I think about assisting another tot in a similar situation JUST incase they are hijack?

You should probably talk to the traitor yourself to determine this. If it's someone you've made no prior contact with or don't know what they're going for, what do you stand to gain by helping them? You made no indication to me that attacking security here was to your benefit when I spoke to you in the round. I might have understood if you tried to pick off a single security officer in the chaos for their gear but like you said were just taking potshots instead into the fray. Your grabbing of an officer for loot seems to have been an afterthought as you were chased off with lethals. 

Remember, while traitors can work together, they are not team antags that are obligated to work together - generally, working together should be to some ends of mutual benefit. Philanthropic does not generally describe a terrorist.

As for the rest of the complaint, your confusion is actually quite understandable, because it seems the note has been modified somewhat before being delivered. Here is the full note:

Quote

Neutral Note - as a non-hijack Antagonist, jumped into a fight between a Hijacker and their allies vs Security, engaging officers with a mini e-bow. They did not ahelp to get permission to help the hijack, but their intent seems to have been to rescue a fellow antag and it just got out of hand. They've been spoken to about ahelping to help hijackers and when it's appropriate to gun down security in the future.

I believe this more accurately describes the situation, and I understand how the note got mistranslated between contacts - they recorded your attempt to rescue an antag as assisting them, and you interpreted that as being a more long-term assistance. The note is also directly preceded by the phrase Neutral Note, for a few reasons:

1. I believe that your intention was ultimately not to just murderbunga security, and that you just over-eagerly jumped into a situation without considering the results. Intent means a lot in situations like these, which is a key part of why the note was neutral. I still felt relevant to reach out to you to explain why not to assist hijackers without ahelping as that was what was happening, though your claim that you didn't know they were hijacking was a surprise - why be helping them if you didn't know their objectives? In the future, I hoped you'd be more cautious when helping and establishing proper communications with them first.

2. Admin rulings in this kinda situation will differ. You suspected that I'd reached out to other admins to confer about this and you were right - the consensus was that it was probably a bit far, though the general idea of "how much is too far" isn't clearly defined. As such, this contributed to the fact that the note was recorded neutral.

So if it's a neutral note, why leave it at all? Because I did reach out and contact you and establish that, so it got noted down. If we talk to players about things, we generally slap a note there to clarify it's been talked about with them in case it happens again in the future. 

Does this explain my end of things? If there's something else you'd like me to go into further detail over, please inform me and I'd be happy to do so.

[Senior roles]

Unfortunately from what I've heard these types of roles play very heavily into elitism.

[Reach the highest number without an admin posting]

[Reach the highest number without an admin posting]

Back to zero.

[Reach the highest number without an admin posting]

On 7/2/2023 at 1:09 AM, Spacemanspark said:

Go back to zero

 

I am no admin, but I smite thee anyways

Ten

[Addition to Chemistry]

Interesting, but why?

[Rule 5 Clarification: "Mute"/Disabled Command Members]

This AC is relevant and recent to your post.

To summarise, all Command members should be expected to be able to communicate with their departments and with Command itself over radio. 

[Revert Slowdown on Pulling (Balance)]

I personally feel this change has been beneficial to combat. However, if people dislike this PR's effects, I think there could be other options to consider as alternative implementations. For instance, what if dragging a large object like a locker needed your hands to be free to drag it, otherwise it would be slow? That fixes the dragging issue for people using it out of combat, and it also prevents people from comboing it with weapons like the e-bow or 357 as effectively. I'd also argue it makes sense - how the hell are you pulling a supposedly bulky locker or crate with your hands full of guns? 

However, I would like to note the current implementation does not entirely kill the environmental combat bonuses offered by lockers and especially crates. You can still run past a locker or crate, drag it a single tile just to be inbetween you and your target, and then release it so you keep running at full speed and there's now an obstacle inbetween yourself and your pursuer - they'll open it and run through if it's a locker, but it still blocks shots, and if it's a crate they'll have to move it or climb over to pursue.

[Widescreen Feedback Thread]

Another thing I heard from the Spriter-Man himself @McRamon was that any changes to screen size would require changes to things like cinematics, which play over the full screen - this means that if we did go for the "opt-in" wide-screen of 17x15 or 19x15, spriters would have to do thrice as much work to accommodate.

6 hours ago, dhu said:

Awesome change, really excited about it. I run a pretty standard setup with a 1920x1080 display resolution, hopped on for a few rounds and the game just feels SO much better to play without the chat window taking up an unnecessarily large portion of my screen. I heard some people had concerns about playing on lower resolution displays, so I tried hopping on on my laptop as well, at 1366x768, again, pretty standard resolution for most modern laptops.

It's less about lower resolution displays and more about aspect ratio. 1920x1080 and 1366x768 are both in 16:9 aspect ratio. This works well with the widescreen design. However, an aspect ratio of 16:10 has a slightly taller screen than a 16:9, and as such the window needs to stretch further to the side to accommodate this. With widescreen, this ends up with the chat box getting smooshed to the far right. For contrast with your images, this is how the widescreen TM appears on a 16:10 monitor:

Not much space to work with, which is inconvenient for doing things like reading mentor tickets (I can only imagine the suffering admins will be having using a small window like this), and it also cuts off half the buttons in the top right. How am I supposed to see the beautiful Donate button like this

[Widescreen Feedback Thread]

I'll echo my thoughts from the Discord and Git here,

I currently prefer the current implementation over the widescreen option, mostly due to my 16:10 monitor not playing as well with the Widescreen (either having large black bars if I resize the viewport or a severely squished chat/verbs tab otherwise). If the widescreen PR does get merged, I would sincerely appreciate it having a toggle back to 15x15 for folks with monitors like mine, but if I had the choice overall I'd rather just stick with the 15x15 option for everyone. There's a few reasons - tanking either a screwy UI or a vision malus doesn't feel great for a feature that doesn't really seem beneficial (at least to me), plus my bias towards the square viewport - it makes sense to see equal distance in each direction.

The consensus I've heard from folks around is that this feels satisfying for combat, but less so for RP due to the squishing of the chat box. I personally lean more towards the RP side of things, so that may also affect my opinion.

[deleted]

I know you said you don't want to make an admin complaint, but this still probably belongs in this section - you can use the "seeking clarification" tag if you'd like, as it seems you want some clarification about the events of the round. From my experience with the admins, it's unlikely you were deliberately singled out.

[PURGATORIO Casting Call]

1. Sciencetist Scientist

2. JSON:

Spoiler

{"type":"/mob/living/carbon/human","icon":null,"name":"Wendy Anderson","limbs":{"chest":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/chest","dir":4,"icon":""},"groin":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/groin","dir":4,"icon":""},"head":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/head","h_grad_style":"Reflected","h_grad_colour":"#c40000"},"l_arm":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/arm","dir":4,"icon":""},"r_arm":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/arm/right","dir":4,"icon":""},"l_leg":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/leg","dir":4,"icon":""},"r_leg":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/leg/right","dir":4,"icon":""},"l_hand":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/hand","dir":4,"icon":""},"r_hand":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/hand/right","dir":4,"icon":""},"l_foot":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/foot","dir":4,"icon":""},"r_foot":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/external/foot/right","dir":4,"icon":""}},"iorgans":{"heart":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/heart"},"lungs":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/lungs"},"liver":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/liver"},"kidneys":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/kidneys"},"brain":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/brain"},"appendix":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/appendix"},"eyeballs":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/eyes"},"ears":{"type":"/obj/item/organ/internal/ears"}},"equip":[{"type":"/obj/item/storage/backpack/satchel","content":[{"type":"/obj/item/storage/box/survival","content":[{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/mask/breath"},{"type":"/obj/item/tank/internals/emergency_oxygen"},{"type":"/obj/item/reagent_containers/hypospray/autoinjector"},{"type":"/obj/item/flashlight/flare/glowstick/emergency","color":"#6496fa"}],"slots":7,"max_w_class":2,"max_c_w_class":14}],"slots":21,"max_w_class":3,"max_c_w_class":21},null,null,null,null,{"type":"/obj/item/storage/belt/utility/full","content":[{"type":"/obj/item/screwdriver","icon_state":"screwdriver_blue","pixel_y":2},{"type":"/obj/item/wrench"},{"type":"/obj/item/weldingtool"},{"type":"/obj/item/crowbar"},{"type":"/obj/item/wirecutters","icon_state":"cutters_yellow"},{"type":"/obj/item/stack/cable_coil/random","color":"#ff00ff","pixel_x":-1,"pixel_y":-2}],"slots":7,"max_w_class":2,"max_c_w_class":14},{"type":"/obj/item/card/id/research","name":"Wendy Anderson's ID Card (Scientist)","sex":"Female","age":26,"btype":"A+","dna_hash":"bc5ae2211f3730f829c23f33a0815b5a","fprint_hash":"943f8819a186d72e5d998f81b1a7255d","access":[29,7,8,47,55,65,76],"job":"Scientist","account":9533010,"owner":"Wendy Anderson","mining":0},{"type":"/obj/item/radio/headset/headset_sci"},{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/glasses/sunglasses"},null,{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/head/beret/sci"},{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/shoes/jackboots"},{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/suit/storage/labcoat/science","dir":1,"pockets":{"type":"/obj/item/storage/internal","name":"scientist labcoat","content":[],"slots":2,"max_w_class":2,"max_c_w_class":4}},{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/under/syndicate/tacticool","accessories":[{"type":"/obj/item/clothing/accessory/stripedredscarf"}]},null,null,null,null,null,null,{"type":"/obj/item/pda/toxins","name":"PDA-Wendy Anderson (Scientist)"},null,null],"implant_list":[],"dna":{"UE":"bc5ae2211f3730f829c23f33a0815b5a","SE":[950,661,1021,867,348,56,542,219,945,960,404,495,631,58,82,592,611,413,592,594,690,423,900,961,902,102,207,202,806,338,911,777,380,555,1,393,692,1006,926,661,259,20,152,668,544,745,180,362,891,248,745,883,967,41,809],"UI":[3275,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,223,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,16,640,67,1984,4095,157,2843,2843,2843,3841],"species":"/datum/species/human","blood_type":"A+","real_name":"Wendy Anderson"},"age":26,"ushirt":"Nanotrasen Shirt","socks":"Knee-high White","uwear":"Ladies White Alt"}

3. 26/02/2023

4. She's got no tail, cap'n!

[Changeling hivemind discussion thread]

https://github.com/ParadiseSS13/Paradise/pull/20375 has been made with the intent to address some of the problems with Changeling Hivemind, please leave any feedback you may have there.

[Changeling hivemind discussion thread]

I'm not a fan of the Hivemind in its current implementation at all, for a few reasons. The first and most importantly is its tendency to lead Clings into a team death-ball scenario, where they just group up and plow through any opponents (because several people who can revive any time you manage to take any down and can prevent you from perma-killing any if they fall is a massive pain to deal with for anyone). Secondly, Changelings already have a generally decent way to locate each other in a more natural way that requires them to actually do something, by stinging someone to no effect - similar to how Vampires can locate each other with ineffective glares. Thirdly, it just makes no sense at all - these creatures aren't actually hivemind entities, visible from how they act on entirely different objectives and quite frequently in opposition to each other. It's more like just chemical signaling but rangeless.

My suggested alternative, if simply removing it (which I'm also down for) is off the table, would be a more limited hivemind where Changelings have to physically establish it with each other and it deteriorates over time or perhaps distance. A similar form of this already exists in the weird ability to jam someone into the Cling Hivemind, I think reworking this to be how the Hivemind works properly would be a decent way to do it code-wise, so you actually have to locate a fellow cling in the field then jack them into your own communications.

[remove totcling]

39 minutes ago, Shadowradar1212 said:

honestly if changlings are ever to be buffed to stand alone as an antagonist in their own right, clingtot will inevitably have to go anyway, especally now we've moved past stun combat and changlings actually don't have to worry about immedate stunlock in melee before they can crit the secoff batoning them. moreso their stun resist actually does anything now.

trust me, a changling with an agent ID is, very very powerful. one with a dsword or literally just a chainsaw is a curbstomp and that was just old balance, new balance with say... a chainsaw and its complete 100% stun resistance plus gibbing plus damage reduction on top of fleshmend, immortality and unstrippable armor that needs a saw to remove is just proof the two don't work together as conventionally rolled antagonists anymore, at least barring hijacks.

 

 

to be honest, with the old meta

I've always been on edge that clingtots used to be usually the only changlings that stood a chance in a round. But now its viable just as a ling to do so anyway.

Good news then, the PR to remove them went through a few weeks ago :)

[remove totcling]

Funnily enough, I didn't even see this post before making https://github.com/ParadiseSS13/Paradise/pull/20106, but :)

[A Revenant Addition]

If we go down this route, perhaps we would tie the remains to the Revenant's natural essence regeneration instead. Right now it will regen up to its cap, perhaps this regeneration would only function with the remains placed, so crew could find and destroy it to cripple the revenant's regeneration. It could still re-gain essence after this by absorbing bodies, and perhaps eventually re-place its remains, but it would significantly impede progress.

[Posibility to Name and Disguise person who took Xenomicrobes.]

4 minutes ago, FloPerfecto said:

 

Technically, it seems that eating xenomicrobes makes you an antag. Crew would have plenty of reason to shoot you to death.

I do not think giving normal crew a "become antagonist" button is a good plan. It'd result in a lot of people seeking this out specifically to become an antag for free, or a whole host of other undesirable behaviour for an MRP environment. 

[The State of Space Law]

5 hours ago, Joey said:

Simply, in regard to stun weapons, you have the SAME tools as the antag regarding prods, disablers, and batons.

And I am going to be taking them in alive if I disabler them down excepting if they're a changeling or have anti-stuns, because sec is supposed to bring people in alive if possible. The other lad almost certainly won't be giving me the same treatment once he has me down.

[The State of Space Law]

What I'm going to say here is that the general shift in Security's lethality to antags has come about as a response of the combat changes as of late. As things like Meth, CNS, and Stimulative Agent works on stamina now, and the officer's primary non-lethal arresting tools being based on stamina damage, they're not given that many options with how they interact with people on any form of anti-stun. Back in the days of instant stuns, if someone had CNS which made the Golden Bolt unable to stop them, you could swap to the disabler and still manage to arrest them (with some difficulty, granted). Nowadays, your only hope is either waiting out the antistun (not always an option), or hope that it's both a chemical that tranq darts works effectively on AND have Tranq darts on-site AND hit them with the darts. So I definitely believe you should continue to use lethals on individuals who use antistuns in combat. 

As for individuals with stun weaponry, the situation really depends. Sometimes it's easier to take them down nonlethally but you have to remember that frequently, security getting proper stunned is how they die, and stun weaponry is the opener to that. Not every situation with a hostile having a stun weapon calls for them to be shot but it's also something which should be open to security as an option for handling it. Remember - a disabler is more dangerous than most actual weapons, because if an antag gets you down with four shots of it they can kill you easily afterwards (and honestly usually do). 

I think a far better way to address this all would be stricter handling of armory weapons. Once the threat that caused them to be distributed is addressed, they should be recalled much sooner than they often are - as of present, if the armory is opened it's rare for all the guns to be back in it by the end of the round, let alone the end of the threat. 

[Make Amber ERT the standard over Red ERT]

Exactly as it says on the tin. The default ERT sent by admins seems to be the Red ERT, while I feel the Amber ERT serves as a better baseline for responses to most normal antagonists. I believe Red ERT would serve better as a response to entrenched threats, like an established cult or most biohazards. For your regular Joe Schmo Traitor who kills a few officers, Amber would be a much better base level response. Most of the time, the critical resource contributed by an ERT is simply more bodies rather than gear. 

This suggestion is really more about admin policy than anything else, but I do feel it would be a lovely change to see.