the_furry

heh I knew this would be an issue, one thing I do want to point out. These reports are all during my time on the station. before hand travis had a clean record. granted I agree with you, the only thing that has kept him from bring fired is both circumstances are unique, the first was he saved people doing it because security disabled at the time and It was later it would be recognized that he acted correctly. it would still be a report because security did get involved. the second he did not actually commit the crime(as far as anyone can tell), its a report as a warning because of a crime that was committed

OOC: So I want peoples opinions on my security reports for the game. I’ve never done a report and could not find any references on how to do them so I took the critical incident template and tweaked it. I tried to make the punishments realistic and to that I do want to explain two things (because I’m sure someone is going to say something about it). The two major events involving grand theft, the first one is noted there that it is purely circumstantial evidence against Travis. He has contributed a lot to NT and so they do not want to outright fire him on purely circumstantial evidence but they do want to rule out any safety issues so I thought tracking implants was fair. Also would be fun considering any HOS on shift at that time can demand it randomly. Figured any officers that hate Travis could have fun with that. The second major incident Travis was found to be vital and saving the lives of a few people and thus was acquitted of the charges. The reports doesn’t go into in-depth detail because I thought that these reports where more of a summary as the full report would be held in centcom (that and for max character reasons). *edit 1/24/2015* Nanotrasen Security Report Active Posting: Telescience Date of Incident: 15112456 Employee: Travis Davis Charge: Grand theft, damage to NT equipment Summary Using Telescience Travis Davis stole security items including body armor, emp grenades and stun batons then attempted to use them to disable a security droid. He states he did this due to an ongoing emergency and the droid was accidentally made rouge. He states the droid posed a danger to the crew and needed to be destroyed. ERT responded and disabled the droid. Camera feeds did show the droid harming several crew members. Sentence: absolved due to extenuating circumstances. Nanotrasen Security Report Active Posting: Telescience Date of Incident: 17102456 Employee: Travis Davis Charges: Grand Theft Summary Travis Davis is a suspect of an ongoing investigation of grand theft concerning the disappearance of secure items held within the vault. The details of the thefts are classified however it is known that Travis was working in Telescience at the time and teleporters were involved in the theft. However camera footage shows that the teleporter in the telescience lab and Travis appears to not have been involved. Considering his previous suspensions Travis is allowed to work with the agreement that he receives tracking implants and random searches if the current HOS deems it necessary during any shift. Failure to comply will result in immediate suspension until the investigation on Travis clears him of any charges. Sentence: Tracking implants decided upon by the current HOS. Nanotrasen Security Report Active Posting: Telescience Date of Incident: 01102456 Employee: Travis Davis Charge: minor theft neglect of duty Summary Travis Davis using Telescience had taken a security circuit board from tech storage and built a security computer in the Telescience lab without the authorization from a head Sentence: doc in pay Nanotrasen Security Report Active Posting: Telescience Date of Incident: 23092456 Employee: Travis Davis Charge: Trust Passing Summary Using the telepad and the assistance of a droid, Travis accessed tech storage without permission from a head. His stated reason was that he was improving the map of the station. He states we will gain permission from a head from now on. Sentence: Temporary suspension and doc in pay.

I'm so not getting involved with this again but I do suggest people read my forum suggestion outlining why harsh punishment is a bad idea

I acknowledged the second arrested and sentence for perma was valid. What I am upset by is how I was thrown into perma right off the batt for the first arrest

Heh Eliot we have not been on the station together in a while. I actually rarely get into trouble any more but you do outline quite well what I get into trouble for. Now, as for what lady has said. Neb outlined a hasty value statement quite well. I’m sure holes can be poked in it. The idea of a guideline is to give leeway because a perfect rule set cannot exist (a perfect ruleset would end up just being a change to the sop) with a valued guide line the hos can choose to ignore it if needed because of its imperfections. I do have the fear that most hos will choose to ignore a valued guideline but it appears to be the best suggestion for improving the server. I am no longer passionate about this as I have been convinced by you that an sop change is not the best thing for the server. It’s not required that I play as an officer considering I’ve already conceded this point. I am mostly trying to wrap up things. I don’t like when someone says ‘all of my points have been addressed’ when hardly any of them have. At this point I am asking if we should continue this discussion specifically on making a valued guild line for hos’ to follow or not.

My major question on how harsher punishments would improve role play has not been addressed. My comments about rewards and punishments to lord has not been addressed. My comments on the quote “can’t do the time don’t do the crime” has in fact not been addressed. I’m sure I can find other things that have not been adequately addressed, so no baka all of my augments have in fact not been addressed. The only two that was was my request to provide examples of alternative role play situations and the discussion of responsibility among the players, those where the only two and they were addressed by lady raven; Who because of that, has convinced me to change my suggestion. Just because you state it was already addressed does not mean it actually was, do I need to copy and paste my questions again or will you just go back and read them to save me some time? Now I was convinced by lady raven so I no longer support a change to the sop. I think it’s still a worthy discussion to be had to see if we can improve security as a lot of people still complain about it. Now that lady raven has convinced me that my suggestion is not the best idea (whom I am grateful to that she took the time to deconstruct and address a major point I had), I am trying to switch gears from my suggestion to discuss if there is anything we can do to better improve security on the server. I still think that is a worthy discussion because security is one of the most complained about groups and finding a way to improve it would be helpful for everyone. You are still commenting as if I am only suggesting a change to the sop, please for the love of god catch up with this conversation. I am no longer supporting a change to the sop. I am attempting to ask what will improve security at this point (I honestly don’t know but I would like to try and find out), and I am making a suggestion to create a valued based guideline that hos’ and officers can choose to follow. Something lady raven seems appealed to but you have blatantly ignored.

Lady I will never support longer brig times because it would further hamper things during dead hour, however your assessment is pretty accurate for my other suggestions as I had come to a similar conclusion after I had posted them. At this point it seems the best consideration is perhaps making value statements and guidelines for HOS and other security members to follow. Other than that leaving things as is seems to be the best option of all.

Baka, If you could, please reread posts earlier in this forum. Through your statements and examples it appears that you either do not understand what I am trying to suggest or that you are deliberately not addressing what I am trying to suggest. Because I have high hopes in people I assume it is simply a misunderstanding and request that you reread previous posts to gain that understanding. I say this for three main reasons, first, your quote "If you cannot do the time, don't do the crime" Has already been directly addressed by me. In fact I primitively brought it up expecting someone to attempt to use that as an argument so that I could push it aside quickly. If you wish to bring it up now reread what I said about it and address my comments, please. Second your example does not reflect in anyway what changes I am suggesting. At no point ever have I said not to arrest people. In fact I have very specifically stated that people should be arrested normally or more often. So this idea that security will be helpless because someone is making happy pills is completely off base and irrelevant to what I am suggesting. The fact of the matter is not that security will be helpless and roleplay is ruined by the suggestions I am making and you have done nothing to show that it has. If you wish to argue against my points please take a moment to actually understand what it is I am arguing. The examples that you have given does not reflect what I am suggesting and if you are not addressing my actual suggestion then you are not furthering this discussion. Thirdly, I understand “they –security- have to gather the offender, take them to brig, process them, monitor them if there's no warden to make sure they don't escape” and I am not suggesting any changes to that procedure. The fact that you are arguing that we should not change that tells me you either do not understand what I am suggesting or are blatantly ignoring what I am saying. Finally “Try to see stuff from the other side of the coin” if you’ve read my previous post you will see that I am taking great strides to understanding your and securities sides of things. I go into detail on it and even admit that I am reconsidering some of the suggestions I am making. So that’s a thing.

Baka, that is a very oversimplification of what I am suggesting so I will gladly answer your question. Like I have stated this sop change would only effect nonviolent/minor violent crimes. So first its extremely hard to self-antag with nonviolent crimes only so it does not promote self-antagonizing. The overwhelming majority of self antagonizes will still end up landing themselves in full sentence because they will be committing major violent crimes. As for what we will be able to do, durgdealers/barfights is the first thing I can think of off the top of my head as has been sited before. Now to the main thing I want to talk about, Lady_of_ravens you are actually convincing me with your comments. It’s tough questions that you and baka pose that explores the depth and merits of my suggestion. I think I understand why we have a difference of opinion on the situation so I would like to expand upon it to see if we can come to any agreed upon conclusion. I would like to focus on your comment here “I'm not saying that your suggestion will turn aurora into a haven for criminals and delinquents, I'm saying that it already is one” because I think it’s the driving point that is causeing such a heated disagreement. You see lady I do not hold that opinion of the aurora station(I am not saying you are wrong). I think it’s a wonderful station full of excellent role-players that if given the opportunity to role-play further, they would take it. now If I am correct then a lighter punishment would open the doors to better role-play because according to me the players can handle the responsibility of not being a genius snowflake. However, If what you say is true then I can easily understand how my suggestion would in fact hinder the roleplay because it does leave more responsibility on the player themselves and if you have no faith in the player than it would be a better idea to take that responsibility away (as your idea suggests). So apparently comes down to whether we think the role player themselves can be responsible and not do self antag chucklefuck snowflake things. To which, I think both of our opinions are correct on this one. Allow me to explain. Lady I never or rarely see you playing this game. That tells me you likely play the game during the day any time between 12-12 central, standard hours when most people play. I mainly play 11pm-5am what most people call dead hour. I think this simple time difference is having an enormous impact on our views of the role players on the station. Playing in dead hours I rarely see a lot of chuckle fucks or snowflakes. Most of the players I interact with perform delightful RP and stick to their characters interactions always keeping in mind "what would their character do". In the end most times the role play is shut down during these hours by security barging in and briging everyone. This is why I vouch for my sop change. Now let’s examine your side. This is speculation but from what I’ve heard/seen/can imagine (I’ve been on a few times during active hours), there are many many more chucklefucks, bad role-players, and snowflakes on during active hours of aurora; which is why you hold the view point that the station is a haven for criminal delinquents. Of which I acknowledge, you are likely right that during these hours an sop change to the station will give these irresponsible players more power and would make the situation worse on the station. I think the viewpoint you hold is as accurate as the viewpoint I hold depending on the time you play this game (please tell me if you agree with my assessment of the situation). So now I can see why we have a disagreement, but we should try to come to an agreement on how we can handle this. I see now a total sop change (in either direction) will harm someone, either limit good role-players from having fun, or granting too much power to bad roleplayers and further harming the quality of the server. There is a couple of suggestions I can make to improve the situation. The first being make no change to the sop considering this might be the least complicated and easiest thing to implement. Another suggestion is perhaps a timed change, during daytime hours sop can be strict and after 11pm regulations are loosened to benefit the dedicated role players on the server (loose regs takes place at work all the time, technically I can’t have my phone out at work till after 5). Another suggestion is that perhaps we could create a whitelist of people who are known to value role-play and stick to character interactions over self-antagonizing and if you are on that list you can be shown favoritism by NT sec officers and be granted lighter sentences. The final is a reiteration of nebs. Rather than making any changes to the sop perhaps we could formulize value statements for hos’ to abide by. Values such as the integrity and appearance of NT is more important than arresting one employee for a dumb crime (NT would rather sweep it under the rug, happens all the time in corps and universities). These are just a couple of suggestions that we could follow through if we want to keep up this discussion and attempt to improve gameplay for all parties. I’ve not fully analyzed the merits of each one but please Tell me what you think. But I think we've also come to a better understanding of why we disagree so much so. (If I'm just completely off base please tell me)

that's actually a really good idea (the drug dealer roleplay) and I had not considered that, I still argue the harsh punishments limit a lot of roleplay but your suggestion does expand the ability to roleplay criminality in a way I had not really considered (i'll have to consider it more about to head out). however one thing I do want to say. I don't think the entire station would turn into a "work release program for criminals" by making a small adjustment on the way we treat nonviolent crimes. I still argue that harsh punishments still limit roleplay and have given a direct example of how on station the harsh punishments actually become a motivator to become unnecessarily violent. can you explain how harsh punishments actually encourage roleplay in anyway?

Ok first off you are a decade behind if you think being a Wikipedia link automatically makes it a “flimsy” reference. But fine here you go. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763403001374 http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/23321235?sid=21105650644323&uid=4&uid=2&uid=3739600&uid=3739256 http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2778382?sid=21105650644323&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739600&uid=3739256 http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3132122?sid=21105650644323&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&uid=3739600 (you’ll have to sign up for the free beta to read the full article) Don’t even begin to pretend you have an understanding of the way reward and punishment systems work until you read all of those (I’ll be grabbing more for you after work). You have child knowledge in a subject I have a degree in. this is especially apparent when you think a reward is the same thing as avoiding a punishment (something we know no to be the case). Don’t even attempt to discuss how things actually work in this aspect until you get on my level (read the links I’ll be sending). Second no rp and realism do not go hand and hand and we often forgo realism for the enjoyment of rp which is what I am suggesting here. I mean if we wanted to focus on realism then no one could be a head until they played this game for +10 years. You would be tossed out of med-bay immediately for smoking (hell I doubt they would even let cigarettes in a closed o2 environment). The Bar (something very RP oriented) would not exist on a station like this or at least not serve alcohol. So No we depart from reality to encourage roleplay on several aspects of this game and I am suggesting that we do it more when crime is involved to further encourage role play environments. so the idea that we support realism (is not true) because it supports roleplay(also not true) is not only wrong but if we did do so as you suggest it would limit roleplay even further. Third you (nor anyone for that matter) has addressed my question, how is harsh punishments conducive to roleplay considering it severally limits the roleplay options for criminals. Stop avoiding this, If I commit a crime what reason do I have not to become violent considering roleplay wise the moment I commit a crime I will likely be removed from the game anyway (thus ending roleplay). Fourth, that’s the second time someone has asked that I leave the server during these discussions. Now I was told rather than just up and quitting I should have open discussions to help improve game play and enjoyment. Is this not the case? Rather than attempted to make suggestions and backing it up with decent arguments should I just drop it and leave because there is an unwillingness to actually consider making a change? If that’s the case you could have told me a while ago and I would not have wasted so much time typing now a good 10 pages of text in defending my ideas. This is a consideration at this point. I’m heading to work now, I’ll have more later and more links for you later as well.

so your not reducing any time abut instead putting time back to normal if people go cooperatively... also that is my point with the drug dealer, this server is more realism based rather than role-play based. i say that because if it was role-play based it would suspend more aspects of realism for the potential for excellent role play.

Avoiding a punishment is not the same as gaining a reward. It’s the classical definition of avoiding a punishment. This is a major distinction because we know for a fact that people are better motivated with actual rewards rather than punishments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement). So no lord your thoughts that it will work is simply an unfounded thought with no support. In fact support counters what you are saying. So I can safely say you are wrong in the most straight forward way. It’s not even partially wrong but in fact the exact opposite of what you are suggesting is actually the case. I do appreciate your attempted to address my argument and I point out that your thought is an error because I have provided references and facts to counter what you “think” is the case and facts lord are always stronger than thoughts, thus my idea to improve role-play is more supported. Furthermore can you also address my counter to harsh punishments being a hindrance on role play? No one as address my biggest complaint and argument, how is permabrig or other harsh punishments conducive to good role-play. As I said what reason do I have to role-play an interesting cooperative arrest if I’m going to be effectively removed from roleplaying the rest of the game (or majority of the game).I have every motivation to fight as hard as I can and become violent. The other option is to not commit any crimes (I’ve heard people say “don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time”) however this is still majorly limiting role-play options (on a role-play server I might add). An example, say goodbye to anyone interested in roleplaying any sort of drug dealer (something that sounds fun and awesome). I say this because the dealer has three options, one deal and likely get perma for the first time offence (thus ending rp), two fight and become violent against security likely getting perma anyways (crappy roleplay and ending role-play), or three don’t become a drug dealer (which is not roleplaying at all). The options here very clearly limit role-play on a role-play oriented server. So please address how harsh punishments is conducive to a fun role-play experience considering the example I just gave (I can give others if needed). If I can have this question answered adequately then I will be convinced harsh punishments is ok.

Well, the way I'd do it is double the time in the regs and give a 50% off for cooperative, non-repeat prisoners. That sounds a little nicer than double-time. Of course, if it were up to me most of those people coming out of their double-time brig sentences would be heading to the escape shuttle to wait for the opportunity to seek employment elsewhere. lady perhaps I misunderstand you. when you say double time then 50% off is that 50% off being applied to the double time or the original time? example, if the normal time is 2 mins, and you resist you get 4 mins. but if you cooperate are you only going to get 1 min, or id the 50% applied to the double and you end up with 2 mins anyway.

Hmm I guess that makes sense. I thought it would be worth asking and provide a decent reason. The worse you can say is no. Thanks for explaining as to why it's a jo. The only thing I do want to say is I make sure to avoid meta. It's cannon that my character walked around to all the heads asking for permission to map their department. That was cannon interactions I took in game and thus far it's been ok. I also don't have the entire station there are parts that I have not been granted permission to access and thus cannot map. Planing to ask a head at some point

One I am not a problem player. So let’s break this down. I never said every game is tooled for fun and friendly environments and I understand some things will not be acceptable (please do not misconstrue or misinterpret what I say because that’s what you keep doing). I am also not vouching for being able to murder someone and only have 10mins (again do not put words in my mouth). I am arguing, like I do in the suggestions forum, that perma is something that should be used for violent crimes or at least used less often unlike the way so many bad security officers want to use it. Now, Here you go appealing to the way we treat reality again and saying it’s the rules of the game. I already explained the nature of this game can change if enough people on the server feel it should, I am further arguing that we have enough people (this has been voiced many times) to justify a change. Then you explain that perhaps I should simply leave the server if I don’t like it. Granted that might be a consideration at this rate, but I have been attempting to provide logical reasoning as to why the current sop is not useful so that we all may be happy. You are setting up the situation “my way or the highway” without discussion. Now I was told that discussion is encouraged (infact I believe we just lost other players because discussion was not had) now you are telling me that its law deal with it or leave. Well which is it? However I will continue to attempt to convince you why this sop is bad. If I play as an antag my only course of action is blowing up security because any thing I do that is less than that it will land me in permabrig(there goes 100 role play options for an antag). If this server is heavy roleplay then I would expect it to focus on roleplay encouraging systems. As an antag (whoes sole job is to provide something for others to rp with) how is being permabriged the moment they do anything, or having to blow up/kill sec officers to avoid it. encouraging roleplay (after all this is a heavy roleplay server). If I am an antag the only way I can avoid being permabriged is to blow up/kill security because the moment they get their hands on me I’ll be permabriged thus ending any roleplay for me and other players who wanted to roleplay with an antag. That is why I am suggesting this change. Because this server is a heavy roleplay server and I would it expect to take a moment and attempt to encourage roleplay.

Susan the entire point of this game is to create a ‘fun and friendly’ atmosphere that everyone can enjoy playing (that’s the point of most games). So my argument that further leeway is needed to create this atmosphere would be valid. I already recognized some leeway is given and I (as many others) have stated not enough leeway has been given. I also did not say we currently treat this game as if it where real life (infact I said the opposite of that). There are some aspects of this game that is still treated to a degree of realistic expectations that is causing problems and reducing enjoyment to the game (such as security sop). Because of the nature of this simi-realistic treatment and the nature of security it makes this part of the game not very enjoyable for anyone (players hate sec and sec hates players, I don’t know about you but that is a problem for me) As for your comments about “it’s the rules and you broke them”. That has been thrown around a lot and you know what’s amazing about this game? We can change the rules to better improve gameplay. Woah, that’s amazing. I understand it’s currently in the rules that technically sarah was in the right to perma brig me(already stated this). But as it has been voiced several times a lot of players think it should not happen and the rules should be adjusted to reflect this. So this idea that because it’s in the rules makes it right is bullshit. Being an evolving game we can change the rules to better suit the players enjoyment (not just mine but all players including sec officers). And infact when a rule comes up that does cause problems it should be adjusted so that everyone can be satisfied with its results. You are literally ignoring the desire for enjoyment of several members of this community when you try to brush this off as “it’s in the rules deal with it, ima perma brig you every chance you get’ Furthermore your comments tell me should I ever commit a crime, I should always resist and fight you to the fullest I can because I will likely be permabrigged anyway and removed from the game. How is that conducive to fun RP. I will need to attempt to kill your charater every time rather than attempt to go quietly and have enjoyable rp amongst security members because there is no hope to be able to continue playing and Rping within that round if you arrest me. That is what these harsh sentences get you. no rp, no fun, chucklefuckery.

BYOND Key: xXTheFurryXx Character name: Travis davis Item name: bag of telecrystals (crystals themselves is whats important) Why is your character carrying said item to work? Travis has worked in blue space research for years now. He has dedicated his life to it. While on aurora he has taken the time to map the entire station and discovered multiple things in space. It would make since that he would bring blue space crystals from centcom to power the telepad to continue his work. Item function(s): telecrystals have multiple functions including powering the telepad in telescience. Item description: a small blue crystal, 5 to 8 of them would be within the bag. Item appearance: it’s a telecrystal…. Additional comments: So heres where I want to put my primary reasoning for why I think I should get this. I already stated travis (and I) have dedicated a good month to mastering telescience in game. But there are other reasons as well. I think I am the only one with the feat(skills) that allows me to teleport objects without the use of a gps. I can only do this because of the time I have taken in perfecting this part of the game (ic I literally walked around the station for almost two weeks marking coordinates and built a map). I don’t know anyone else that is as dedicated to telescience as I am or anyone that even comes close for that matter. So I think I have earned the merits for it. The biggest downside I have right now is in game the telepad itself only has 3 crystals. This is useless as it doesn’t allow you to teleport things past science. The quickest way to obtain telecrystals is to spend approximately 30-50mins in mutating slimes. Once finally obtained it takes another 15-20 to actually set up telescience to be useful. This makes it’s department setup time one of the longest on the station (1hr 10mins). This majorly detracts its usefulness because by the time I’ve actually set up the lab the antags have already acted/blown up the station and the round is almost over. Granting travis with telecrystals would cut this time majorly. That is a major benefit not just to travis but the entire station. It would allow me as a character to rp and interact with others more often (rather than be isolated in xenobio half the shift) it would also open xenobiology up to other players that want to use it (as it stands now when I’m in there I only build blue space slimes then leave but my character is still taking up the slot). It will also allow me to make telescience more useful to the crew. Last night I got lucky and managed to get telesceince running within 40 mins (yes that’s lucky) and because of it I teleported eva suits and supplies directly to engineers that were fixing a breach. I want to make telescience more useful to the entire crew this way but the time it takes to actually set up everything because I do not start with extra crystals makes it damn near infeasible and useless to most of the crew most of the time. This change would cut setup time down to approximately 20 mins which is reasonable and what most of the departments take. ic it would make since for travis to have brought extra telecrystals from centcom considering his dedication to his work. It would also become a unique item because of its rarity and improve his story and make him recognized as truly a highly functional and useful telescientist. I have the desire to make telescience something useful to the crew rather than always looked upon as an antags tool and annoyance (as many people view it) the lack of crystals and time it takes to get them has been the biggest hurtle to cross and I feel my dedication to the lab should warrant this.

my biggest complaint in this is that it seems lately hos always extend this "right" and lock honest players who are just trying to rp for an unessecary long time. If it was a once in a while thing I can get that. But it seems every time an hos is locking someone up and it's a situation where they can extend it to perma brig, they almost always do ruining the game and fun rp the player could be having. The default should not be "can I justify perma brig then perma brig it is" it should only be if they are an actual active threat. But that is not what's going on and Sarah and many other hos' will alway escalate to perma brig for any excuse they can get. It literally ruining the game for anyone that finds themselves remotely in security's hands. Furthermore you've now had three or four dedicated players state they feel that this was too much. Even if it was within sop shouldn't that illicit a change of practice. if there has been multiple complaints by primary players about the security practice that I would hope would cause us to make a change so all players can be happy with the way security conducts itself. This idea that it's in the hos hands does not seem to work and has been voiced by several players. OK at the time Sarah was "by the books" right in the power she used. But that does not mean she was ethically right and its pretty clear by the comments here many players feel that. If we are getting this complaint from multiple players that the hos abuses this right. then the right and the books need to change. I think you got lucky with being put in perma, you helped break into a room with a NUCLEAR WARHEAD locked within, you should have had suspected terrorisim added. If it was say, Ana as HOS at the time, you probably would have been executed. Think about it this way, if you broke into the USA's nuclear warheads storage facility and then later surrendered, you'd still be either executed at a later date or taken to Guantanamo. Cooperation and surrendering does not guarantee alleviation from penalties, it is up to the HOS if you get the time reductions. Many of you seem to think that this game is some sort of realistic simulator that must adhere to real life situations at all times. Well it’s not. Yes if I broke into the US nuclear facility I would likely be jailed for my entire life. I am willing to bet that most people that play this game play this not because it adheres to the strict recourses of life but because it serves as an escape. Understanding this means that some leeway’s will be granted. If you want to talk about “realistic” situations then how bout we limit people that are in head positions to only people that have played this game 10+ years. After all you can’t actually become a head of anything in real life unless you do this. Why don’t we do this? Because we grant a leeway and depart from reality because it’s too inconvenient and not productive to a fun relaxing atmosphere. Likewise I argue that the severity of a crime should not be treated as if you committed the crime in real life (like many of you seem to want to do) but instead a punishment should encourage a fun and friendly atmosphere. The ability to enjoy the game by all parties and produce fun atmosphere should always have more weight than an attempt to simulate recourses of reality. do not misconstrue what I am saying, I am not saying we should completely depart from reality, a part of the enjoyment of this game is also based in its simi-realistic settings and situations. What I am saying is that leeways should be given (as they already are in many other aspects) to the justice side of this game and the way security conducts itself so that we may have a more friendly and fun environment enjoyed by all.

my biggest complaint in this is that it seems lately hos always extend this "right" and lock honest players who are just trying to rp for an unessecary long time. If it was a once in a while thing I can get that. But it seems every time an hos is locking someone up and it's a situation where they can extend it to perma brig, they almost always do ruining the game and fun rp the player could be having. The default should not be "can I justify perma brig then perma brig it is" it should only be if they are an actual active threat. But that is not what's going on and Sarah and many other hos' will alway escalate to perma brig for any excuse they can get. It literally ruining the game for anyone that finds themselves remotely in security's hands. Furthermore you've now had three or four dedicated players state they feel that this was too much. Even if it was within sop shouldn't that illicit a change of practice. if there has been multiple complaints by primary players about the security practice that I would hope would cause us to make a change so all players can be happy with the way security conducts itself. This idea that it's in the hos hands does not seem to work and has been voiced by several players. OK at the time Sarah was "by the books" right in the power she used. But that does not mean she was ethically right and its pretty clear by the comments here many players feel that. If we are getting this complaint from multiple players that the hos abuses this right. then the right and the books need to change.

The best - and in my opinion most admirable - form of roleplaying and sending messages about your character is through their actions and inference, rather than being blatantly told details and information, which I see a lot. It's better if you're not told this because you'll use your OOC knowledge to influence your character IC. You should figure it out and discover ICly, not be spoonfed. oh I understand the idea. I actually deal with ooc/ic knowledge a lot playing DnD and other such games. I feel I am fairly good at not acting upon out of character knowledge and prefer to have that knowledge so I can enjoy the interactions and depth of motivations that push the characters to act a certain way. travis is a good example, I try to make him abit awkward in interacting with people, but the reasons for his awkwardness is his almost desperate desire for close friends. If someone else was playing travis I like knowing information like that because it lets me as a player appreciate the character more.

yeah, he saw that but thought nasir was being foolish. He couldn't accept if humans actually did that or oppressed tajaras to a large degree, so he doesn't really believe some of the rumors. Don't mistake it though, he doesn't deny it because he likes humans all that much, but because he loves tajaras so much. He'd feel responsible and terrible knowing he was apart of a race that harmed such beautiful creatures.

UH HUH. WHY DO YOU THINK SHE'S SO SKITTISH. .....And why the heck do all my characters end up with some kind of trauma? Lori is paranoid of AI, Rose has PTSD, and now Karima has disproportionate fear. I mean....wat..... bleh you should inform of this! he understands tajaras have fear but he doesnt really realize it. not in the real sence, he saw nasir talking about how tajaras where likely dissected by humans but thats really all he has seen. he remembered karima being terrified but she told him he was fine afterwards.

For myself, Karima did not want to risk a single piece of fur for helping charlie. And she made it clear to charlie, "She's doing this for Travis and Osric. Not Charlie." ICly Karima felt betrayed and used. The longer she was involved, the more she began to doubt Charlie's story, and if she was telling the truth. She actually did try and turn Charlie in. Turning charlie in was going to be her way of trying to save Travis from the system. Karima has a legitimate fear for security, and what might have happen to Travis - even if her fears are a bit out of reality. She was terrified of the time her antag plot went wrong, and ERT came, kicking open doors and guns pointed at her. They never laid a hand on her, but she was roughly handled, shoved around, and tossed into the back of the ERT shuttle. Her interrogation was laced with underhanded threats of being shipped to a 'non-human prison that's badly kept' / ERT asking for permission to use force (raising a hand to assumingly slap her, that made her cower in fear) / and forcing her to listen to her crewmates mourning the dead, and how much they hated the horrible tajarans, her especially. Oh, Karima was terrified. Looking back on that, I gotta tip my hat off to ERT. Karima almost confessed out of pure terror. A lawyer can say the actions were unjustified, blah blah, maybe that's why she was found not guilty, or whatever. But she's Tajara. She's at the bottom of the rung. She knows she has very little fighting chance against the human system. Whatever happens behind closed doors - who's gonna believe her over a well-respected ERT fella? That fear was used against her.And it was that same level of fear that pushed her to help Travis, because she didn't want him to get thrown around like she did. But hey, he's actually human, so he's got a better chance. wow that suddenly makes me/travis feel terrible

Hmm that’s actually a really good idea. If we could set up a guideline on the wiki for what makes a good officer and outline the values you stated I think that would be an effective tool for seeing the changes we want to make to security with out changing the law as I suggest. The only condition I would place on it is any current or future hos would be required to read understand and agree with the values stated in the guideline. I would be happy with ether of these two changes, what I suggest or what you suggest. I would like to see one happen though because as it stands there is no protection to none sec members. I can understand you not wanting the sop thrown around willy-nilly and I like your suggestion on how we can avoid that and still Improve security. However I would prefer granting this change so that players may use the sop to at least protect themselves from perma brig (at least in a small fashion) because currently it’s completely left up to the officers and they have a tendency to perma brig you no matter what.