Remove security's uniform regulations

[Kintsugi]

What it says up there. Frankly, at the moment, security's uniforms are a highly contentious thing to talk about in regards to our community. This topic is not about whether or not they're good. It is about how this regulation arbitrarily restricts security from enjoying the same freedom of loadout use as the rest of the jobs on the server. I don't need to write up an essay justifying my position on why this is bad: It's just not fair. The regulation isn't enforced as it is, with most command characters wisely avoiding bothering to force officers to wear uniforms that don't aesthetically match half of what we have on offer as far clothing sprites on the server are concerned.

Change the regulation. Officers are no longer strictly required to wear their exact uniforms - instead, business-appropriate attire along with being identifiable as a member of security at a glance should be enough.

[RisingValiant]

I think there's a very simple solution to this, attachable security patches and badges exist, make it mandatory to wear either a uniform, or one of those, within reason, of course

[WickedCybs]

I would echo the above. As long as it could be said there's some identification there I don't think whether the uniforms are worn really matter much honestly. It's quite easy to identify any member of security just based on their equipment too, like the vests or belts and everything else.

[Owen]

I agree. The uniform regulations could use with some loosening with Security. It is rarely enforced, but when it does come up it is fairly restrictive. Most outfits that Security players choose to wear are within reason--and as long as they are identifiable as Security, I have no issue with there being some customization. If people start wearing pajamas or whatever, then obviously you can crackdown on that, but in general Security wears appropriate clothing, and the regulations should reflect what occurs already. 

6 minutes ago, RisingValiant said:

I think there's a very simple solution to this, attachable security patches and badges exist, make it mandatory to wear either a uniform, or one of those, within reason, of course

This essentially.  

[Faye <3]

I agree with this. As long as the worn clothing is appropriate for security work (no pyjamas, etc) and they wear a badge, belt, etc, I think it's fine.

[Dreamix]

Absolutely not. It makes sense both ICly and OOCly for officers to have to wear their uniforms.

> It's just not fair
It's very fair. Pretty much every other department has no problem with wearing their uniforms and standard gear/clothes, and staying identifiable as, well, members of their department.
Hell, they do it with pride, even. Engineers wear their huge bright yellow industrial backpacks, orange berets, brown work boots. Science, and especially also medical, almost always wear their labcoats or scrubs or whatever. Hangar techs wear their orange ponchos and caps. Bridge crewmen almost always wear their default uniform, just with accessories like capes. Etc, etc. Uniforms are very much a matter of identity of a department. It's like, a part of the whole job, to look like the position that a character is supposed to be representing

Only some officers absolutely must have to wear not even one item of their security officer uniform, and have to look like they're taking a casual walk in the part. Ripped jeans, deep v-neck shirt, designer leather jacket, sneakers.
Most officers that I've seen, have no problem with this. Like, zavod and idris are especially drippy and swaggy. And like, I made an idris sec officer char, just so I could wear that awesome jade-green labcoat.


> security patches or badges
No. Full uniforms, or at least the zavod/idris/pcmg accessories, or at least their colors. Security should be easily identifiable for other crew, and also for antags (this is the OOC part).
If they don't have to be easily identifiable, then they don't even need badges or patches either, cause you can just examine and look at their ID.

Edited June 2, 2022 by Dreamix

[Kintsugi]

9 minutes ago, Dreamix said:

It's very fair. Pretty much every other department has no problem with wearing their uniforms and standard gear/clothes, and staying identifiable as, well, members of their department.
Hell, they do it with pride, even. Engineers wear their huge bright yellow industrial backpacks, orange berets, brown work boots. Science, and especially also medical, almost always wear their labcoats or scrubs or whatever. Hangar techs wear their orange ponchos and caps. Bridge crewmen almost always wear their default uniform, just with accessories like capes. Etc, etc.

No, it isn't fair. Whether or not the rest of the crew wears their uniforms is not relevant. Every player for every other department in the game could happily wear their uniforms, and it would still be irrelevant to the point this thread is making. There is no regulation requiring other departments to wear their uniform. They have the freedom to choose, security does not. Ergo, not fair. It is not fair to force security to wear their uniforms, when every other department has the choice between loadout items and their job uniforms.

9 minutes ago, Dreamix said:

Only some officers absolutely must have to wear not even one item of their security officer uniform, and have to look like they're taking a casual walk in the part. Ripped jeans, deep v-neck shirt, designer leather jacket, sneakers.
Most officers that I've seen, have no problem with this.

Again, not relevant. This thread is suggesting that the requirement be changed so that:
1. Security is allowed to wear business-appropriate clothing

2. As long as they are easily identifiable as security.

Clearly, your examples run contrary to the suggestion made by this thread.

9 minutes ago, Dreamix said:

No. Full uniforms, or at least the zavod/idris/pcmg accessories, or at least their colors. Security should be easily identifiable for other crew, and also for antags (this is the OOC part).
If they don't have to be easily identifiable, then they don't even need badges or patches either, cause you can just examine and look at their ID.

Again, not relevant. This is a strawman. See above: We are saying security should still be easily identifiable as security. One does not need to wear the uniform to be easily identifiable as security, as a plethora of items exist that make them identifiable as such, including:

Spoiler

Hats.

Berets.

Jackets.

Hazard vests.

Backpacks.

Satchels.

Messenger bags.

Belts.

Holsters.

Webbing.

Patches.

Armor.

Armbands.

Boots.

Pins.

Badges.

Among other things.

 

Edited June 2, 2022 by DanseMacabre

[Haydizzle]

Good suggestion. I don't really have much else to add. I always thought relaxing the security garments was a good idea provided there were some guidelines to prevent anything outrageous, and those are included in the initial suggestion.

My only note on this is that we should say what qualifies as being clearly identifiable or not.

[Kintsugi]

41 minutes ago, Haydizzle said:

Good suggestion. I don't really have much else to add. I always thought relaxing the security garments was a good idea provided there were some guidelines to prevent anything outrageous, and those are included in the initial suggestion.

My only note on this is that we should say what qualifies as being clearly identifiable or not.

Might be a little nebulous, but maybe a checklist of sorts? Otherwise I'd go for a clearly visible identifier of departmental affiliation, like an armband/badge/hat/other large clothing item in departmental colors.

[RisingValiant]

My position is that security patches and armbands exist, security badges exist, and your ID displays 'security' on it. If i can figure out you're an officer with a simple examine action, I think you should be within regulations. 

editing to add: Also, I think trying to make officers identifiable without an examine is a pipe dream anyways unless we entirely remove customization from their loadout in a lot of areas. Security webbing drastically changes the appearance of your uniform, security jackets do too, and are within regulations, you're allowed to just wear your plate carrier, entirely obscuring your uniform. 

Another point, why do we even have badges if we don't use them as a source of easy identification? Is that not the literal entire purpose of a police badge in real life?

Edited June 2, 2022 by RisingValiant

[Boggle08]

As long as I can tell you're an officer before you pack on the body armor, It's fine. I have a regional officer uniform that wouldn't work with the current paradigm.

The kind of work security does on green, you need people to understand just who they're talking to. Can't really do that with jeans and T shirt.

[SinfulBehaviors]

I'm not sure about this. Someone who has the power to arrest people and is generally a figure of authority shouldn't be difficult to identify. Even with badges, it'd be a bit difficult to identify them.

As far of the argument that it's unfair, that's being a security guard. We're an HRP server and we're supposed to be running with an air of realism, and if you worked as a police officer or security guard, you'd have to wear some sort of uniform. Construction workers, doctors, bartenders, etc. aren't as constricted, and that's reflected in current regs. 

[Bear]

It is a slippery slope the moment the set uniform is abandoned. People's interpretation of what's appropriate and what is not is often lacking. Especially considering the majority of our player base hasn't held a true corporate job.

The better option is as many have said, make the uniforms more appealing.

[Caelphon]

I am one of those who does not wear the uniform, and I've understood that not doing so can land me up in a heap of trouble - ICly, at least. I concur with what Bear has said regarding that people have different subjective interpretations of what is appropriate, and what is not, but I think that an outline on the "Security Officer" wikipage would help clarify the situation. We already have a clarification for Roboticists that refuse cyborgification, which we expect players to adhere to, so I do not think that it would be too difficult to do the same for the Security Officer role. 

[OffRoad99]

7 hours ago, Dreamix said:

Absolutely not. It makes sense both ICly and OOCly for officers to have to wear their uniforms.

> It's just not fair
It's very fair. Pretty much every other department has no problem with wearing their uniforms and standard gear/clothes, and staying identifiable as, well, members of their department.
Hell, they do it with pride, even. Engineers wear their huge bright yellow industrial backpacks, orange berets, brown work boots. Science, and especially also medical, almost always wear their labcoats or scrubs or whatever. Hangar techs wear their orange ponchos and caps. Bridge crewmen almost always wear their default uniform, just with accessories like capes. Etc, etc. Uniforms are very much a matter of identity of a department. It's like, a part of the whole job, to look like the position that a character is supposed to be representing

Only some officers absolutely must have to wear not even one item of their security officer uniform, and have to look like they're taking a casual walk in the part. Ripped jeans, deep v-neck shirt, designer leather jacket, sneakers.
Most officers that I've seen, have no problem with this. Like, zavod and idris are especially drippy and swaggy. And like, I made an idris sec officer char, just so I could wear that awesome jade-green labcoat.


> security patches or badges
No. Full uniforms, or at least the zavod/idris/pcmg accessories, or at least their colors. Security should be easily identifiable for other crew, and also for antags (this is the OOC part).
If they don't have to be easily identifiable, then they don't even need badges or patches either, cause you can just examine and look at their ID.

I second all this. We're playing an uniformed, corporate security force. Least one can do to look believable is to wear their uniform, and Security also needs to be easily identifiable when your screen is packed full of people.

I am not sure why people are agreeing with removing the rule, honestly. You get rid of that rule and you'll soon start seeing private cops with ripped jeans and other nonsense. That really doesn't help the supposed HRP nature of this server.

[WickedCybs]

1 hour ago, OffRoad99 said:

I am not sure why people are agreeing with removing the rule, honestly. You get rid of that rule and you'll soon start seeing private cops with ripped jeans and other nonsense. That really doesn't help the supposed HRP nature of this server.

If you believe that's what is actually being argued for, you may have missed the bit of the main post which still advocated for an overall business casual style. 

 

[OffRoad99]

6 minutes ago, WickedCybs said:

If you believe that's what is actually being argued for, you may have missed the bit of the main post which still advocated for an overall business casual style. 

 

Which is still an odd choice, unless you're working in Investigations.

[WickedCybs]

9 minutes ago, OffRoad99 said:

Which is still an odd choice, unless you're working in Investigations.

Considering we have oxfords, slacks, dress shirts and a tie as the standard for one of the current security megacorps (Idris) I don't really see it being an odd choice at all. It still effectively reflects the setting and the reality of the department.

[Lucaken]

If I have to go out of my way to inspect someone to check if they're an officer, that is a problem. You really can't compare it and other departments in terms of 'fairness' because there is a very clear need for officers to be identifiable. If we can't come up with a reasonable, highly visible list of items that are required for an officer to wear to be indentified, then the rule shouldn't be changed. 

[Faye <3]

3 minutes ago, Lucaken said:

If we can't come up with a reasonable, highly visible list of items that are required for an officer to wear to be indentified, then the rule shouldn't be changed. 

The belt with cuffs, flashes, spray, etc is very visible. Plate carrier too. 

[Omicega]

I haven't worn my uniform unless prompted on any of my security characters since NBT launched, as the uniform sprite quality took a massive dive round about then. I only ever had it directly pointed out to me once ICly; the other two or three times I just changed ahead of schedule because it was obvious an inspection or something was coming up.

I don't wear anything I'd call unreasonable in place of the uniform -- one character wears fatigues that are the same rough colour palette as Zavodskoi brown, and my Idris officer was using teal trousers and a shirt solely to get around no rolled-up sprites on the actual uniform -- but even so I don't really mind it staying as an IC violation if you're pulled up on it. I don't think people even noticed most of the time, since like I said I barely diverged from the existing palettes. I've had to change maybe three or four times out of God knows how many rounds as security, and frankly I don't trust the playerbase to keep their choice of clothing reasonable. You can call me a doomer, but it will lead to security showing up in short shorts and sandals once people feel the squeeze fading in earnest.

[Lucaken]

5 minutes ago, Faye &lt;3 said:

The belt with cuffs, flashes, spray, etc is very visible. Plate carrier too. 

I see your point, and the new belt is a lot more visible with all its gear, but I have seen cases where the jacket over it really distracts/hides it. I'd say the belt could easily be on the list I mentioned. The plate carrier in the meanwhile is a bit of a moot point, if sec is armouring up I'd say they're going to be very visible no matter what. I think the pre-approved list is the best compromise. Removing it completely is just opening the gates of Hades, like Omi said above me.

[MattAtlas]

To be clear, I think the identification argument is very overblown. Most of the time people look like officers no matter what they wear because of the belts, security-colored backpacks, sunglasses, berets and often boots. You can wear practically anything you'd want and people would still know you're an officer.

Secondly, I'm not really opposed to relaxing uniform regulations, but it must come with OOC action if the regulations are flaunted repeatedly (both for heads of staff that ignore enforcement and for players that keep flaunting the regs over and over again). This is because I have no doubt that people would eventually start to toe the line and go over it once the new regs settle in for good (so, after about three weeks to a month). I'd personally say that Security attire should be kept to ankle-length pants, a business casual look and colors must represent your contractor (so, no brown+red slacks for Idris officers). Additionally, I'd probably say that wearing identifying items should be mandatory (see berets, backpacks, boots, the belt, ...). I'm not sure about writing a list of pre-approved items, because it's further adding to the pile of wiki-only almost meme tier lists of random bullshit (like the 'who can do what surgery' chart).

In conclusion, I think the best bet is to wait for that other uniform PR that brings in the old uniforms to be merged and see if the situation gets better. If it doesn't, there's a tangible need for change and I think that relaxing the regulation should be considered, but overall my feelings are currently for the status quo with bigger involvement from the Security players' side regarding their uniforms.

[Boggle08]

If we do eventually relax uniform standards, I don't want it to happen for ZI units or IRU/ISU's.

[Marlon P.]

The visuals of our sprites is the most immediate way for a player to express their character, even more than flavortext. More control/freedom in how they dress will be good.

"Corporate regs say" is a misnomer because corporate regs can be whatever we want. NT is not real not does it have to follow 2022 american dress standards imagined by young adults. NT could be fine with skirts if we chose. For most of human history women wearing pants was a crime.

Culture changes.

Let our culture give security sweaters and flannel shirts.

NOW.