Remove Borging as a Punishment and change "execution" guidelines

[Fluffy]

1 hour ago, N8-Toe said:

Being near the end of round should have zero bearing on anything. Do we relax our standards for the Antag when the rounds close to an end? Is it suddenly  Ok for me as an antag to just start murdering people with less RP? If I'm a traitor can I just.. lob a nade into a lobby? or just start capturing and killing cuffed people with a minute or two of roleplay? No? Than why is the crew who has a higher standard of play, why is command who has the highest standard of play, suddenly given the excuse to kill and remove players from the round with a lower barrier of entry because "Well the rounds almost over". The Crew is not entitled to "Win". The antag is not bound to loose to them, to sacrifice their fun, and their RP as a player, just so the crew can get their greentext.

Coming out of nowhere to gank people is very different from marooning or borging someone after 2 hours of escalation, with a crime being committed and all the bolts and crannies that justify a marooning or borging.

1 hour ago, N8-Toe said:

Well I have to by the OOC rules follow commands and they told me we're killing this guy so my options are mutiny as a non antag or do it

There is no such OOC rule, we had a canon mutiny a year or so ago, you would of course be against the IC regulations, but this being spurred by antagonist actions (quite literally) would make it non-canon, so it would be limited to the current round only

1 hour ago, N8-Toe said:

Would you have gotten better RP if he had been brigged, investigated fully, and you got to interact with them until the end of round as he tries to clear his name? Or was the few minutes of RP with them in cuffs before they got killed better? Do you think the player who went from accusation to dead within a 10 minute period, who also yes you're right was innocent, had a good time? Do you think they felt they got good RP getting railroaded to the machinist shop, not getting an investigation, interogation, or even processed? I was in that round, I was an officer who was present when the HoS died and I told the Captain the person who was borged wasn't a party to it. And the player got killed anyway. This isn't a player complaint because as the current rules and policy stand. the Captain was allowed and in their right to make that decision, thus the suggestion I've made to change that.

Picture this: The person is indicated as being innocent on comms, the unreasonable Captain wants to borg it anyways, the Dominia consular plead against it, the Captain refuses to listen, various Dominians line up around the Machinist workshop in protest, the Machinist resign in protest, the Captain gets an off-duty Machinist to perform it, various people join the protest and start banging on the windows, the Captain deploy Security with batoons and shields to disperse the protest, yada yada it blows up into a full scale protest, the Captain tries to get reign of the situation, the anti-borging side lead by the Dominian consular starts to put forth demands, the Captain refuses to cede, molotovs starts being thrown [...]

You get the gist

Would this be more interesting? Yes, IMHO it would, more interesting than an interrogation or brigRP

Is borging what prevents this from happening? No, in fact the existence of borging enables this situation from happening, other things get in the way of this interesting and fun situations to develop

[N8-Toe]

27 minutes ago, Fluffy said:

Coming out of nowhere to gank people is very different from marooning or borging someone after 2 hours of escalation, with a crime being committed and all the bolts and crannies that justify a marooning or borging.

There is no such OOC rule, we had a canon mutiny a year or so ago, you would of course be against the IC regulations, but this being spurred by antagonist actions (quite literally) would make it non-canon, so it would be limited to the current round only

Picture this: The person is indicated as being innocent on comms, the unreasonable Captain wants to borg it anyways, the Dominia consular plead against it, the Captain refuses to listen, various Dominians line up around the Machinist workshop in protest, the Machinist resign in protest, the Captain gets an off-duty Machinist to perform it, various people join the protest and start banging on the windows, the Captain deploy Security with batoons and shields to disperse the protest, yada yada it blows up into a full scale protest, the Captain tries to get reign of the situation, the anti-borging side lead by the Dominian consular starts to put forth demands, the Captain refuses to cede, molotovs starts being thrown [...]

You get the gist

Would this be more interesting? Yes, IMHO it would, more interesting than an interrogation or brigRP

Is borging what prevents this from happening? No, in fact the existence of borging enables this situation from happening, other things get in the way of this interesting and fun situations to develop

1: No it isn't that much. In the examples I gave, the crew offered no escalation once captured. it was in cuffs, boom zoom, off to the machinist. And that escalation to.. what? in the first example there was escalation and a climax to the conflict. the warden got shot and arrested. Borging them, with no announcement, no fanfare, heck I didn't know they where being borged and I was a sec officer. That isn't escalation thats just valid hunting. And again not a player complaint as the rules and IC regs allow it. There is nothing saying they need an announcement or fanfare, or even processing, or even anything. They can just take them from medical and just silently have them borged. That is allowed. And is what happened, and what has happened before and will happen again. The antag escalates and RP's and has all of these burdens to reach for violence. yet the crew is not bound by that it seems as they can just kill them in effect once captured and in cuffs. they might as well, just put the cuffed antag to the wall and shoot them at that point. And again how is that fair to the antag who again has all this restriction and pressure on them to escalate and build over those 2 hours... just to be killed while in cuffs, black screened on an operating table right after capture? how is that fun, or fair to that player. And on ganking, do again remember, its often 5 v 1. Why is it ganking and an issue when its the antag at a disadvantage. but built up conflict when its the armed sec team with crew support killing their cuffed prisoner with minimal RP. Why does the antag have more burden to their decision to kill than the whole ass crew and whitelisted command.

 

2: Try to perform your job to a satisfactory standard is a rule. I would get IR'ed and bwoinked faster than my head could spin if I was consistently refusing orders by the captain as security. And again people have stated over and over on this thread mutiny is a borgable offense and "rightfully so". So... what am I just to do? as again As the rules are written, and policy and IC regs. the Captain can just have my ass killed if I try and make some grandstand and encourage others to refuse. So it really does come down to "Do it or die" or "Do it or have to explain to an admin why im starting a mutiny that will very likely turn violent and hijack the round". I don't think the staff want me starting an armed revolt every forth round as a sec officer.

 

  3: Thats a cool scenario. it doesn't happen. As again, if you do that, you are as the regs, policy, and examples will show, next on the table. All as a non antag. That is a stars align moment. But almost every round will not have that star align moment. People are not going to often throw molotovs at the captain as a non antag, especially to stick their neck out for the antag who very likely may have been shooting at them 5 minutes ago. as others have said, people are really hard on, and sometimes just, mean, to the antag and its player. I dont see riots to help them unless its some beloved character.

 

We circle back to again. Borging, and also the loose standards to enforce an execution, are the problem. While they may be a symptom of a great problem. they themselves are still the problem. We as a community expect the antag to do alot, we expect them to drive conflict, be robust, while also RP'ing and giving us a fun scenario. We often as a community let them down or are harsh on this pressure.. So why should the crew not be expected to RP back with them, and provide them content once they have the upper hand. Its wildly unfair for the crew to just be killing them once captured, and especially with the excuse of "its the end of the round". What I hear is "the crew/sec needs their cookie for playing, and should get to just ice the antag with minimal RP so they get to win".

[N8-Toe]

On 01/10/2023 at 08:02, Ramke said:

I will give my thoughts as I tend to have to deal with this as CCIA.

Cyborgification is used as a last resort and on the scale of execution, when:

• The person has committed a very severe crime, refused to de-escalate, was threatened by it, remained uncooperative in custody and still continued without seeking compromise.
• The person is uncontainable (escaped several times, or in the event of i.e. changeling/vampire who veil walks/armblades out of cuffs and slices through walls, antag who shoves C4 out of their ass multiple times, etc.)

The last few canonical cyborgifications resulted in severe pushback from certain crew, so I disagree on the apathy. I can imagine as an antagonist you may face less care than canon cyborgification, but I would assume this is because either nobody knows your character, you've (or your goals have) been difficult or impossible to sympathise with, or haven't interacted with the crew in a positive light at all. This builds up a negative opinion of you, so from a bystander that may have a negative view on cyborgification, they may dislike it. But why would they try to actively intervene against someone who is, from their IC view, an antagoniser who's not a good presence aboard the ship, has no relation, and committed severe enough crimes to warrant it?

While it may be un-fun for the antagonist, this is the same as getting marooned or executed. You're being removed from the round. You can still play as a cyborg, or ghost out. It is to my awareness (I may be wrong) that if cyborgification is used without a viable reason, or you've offered viable alternatives that aren't being entertained (i.e. promising to spill the beans, cooperate fully, etc.) this is something that can be ahelped. All of the above applies for marooning as well.

As for adding anything, I believe it adds quite a lot to the setting and the lore. As Aphelion stated, many different factions and characters have a strong opinion on cyborgification, and the conflict that plays out regarding this is a direct contributor. The fear of cyborgification should be present, and contributes to the setting knowing that corporate forces are ever-powerful, can and will exercise the power to perform it if you are considered too much of a waste. It's a realisation of corporate power, and feeds into every character's opinion of the corporations. If you say the last canon mutiny's outcomes of cyborgifying the worst suspects did not add anything to the server and setting, I don't know what to tell you.

I'm also going to reply directly to this

 

This isn't the rules. This isn't on the wiki under regs or SOP. This is, and I am sorry, just kinda.. hopeful thinking? A crewmember can be borged on first offense for "Attempted murder" on the captains order, essentially summarily. There is no requirement of multiple escapes, there is no requirement for them being uncooperative. None of this is on the wiki or mentioned anywhere. If this is the policy, it is unenforced, not promulgated anywhere clearly for the playerbase to see. And is not the standard this suggestion should be judged against. It is per regulation, allowed, for the Captain to order someone who shoots at or stabs at security during an arrest, which could be called attempted murder. To just be taken from medical and borged. There is nothing aganst any IC regulation or policy stopping them. Again why the examples I listed are not being made a player complaint is they are 100% allowed to do that.

 

I also find the implication of "either nobody knows your character, you've (or your goals have) been difficult or impossible to sympathise with, or haven't interacted with the crew in a positive light at all." To be bad coming from a staff member. "be more popular if you want people to not let you get executed right after arrest" is a bad take and implication. The antagonist is also there to provide conflict, of course its hard to sympathize with them. They're almost supposed to be. Which is why we then have OOC and IC rules and guidelines stopping the crew from just lynching them, because that gets old after awhile, and isn't really fun.

 

Edit:

 

this is what wiki says on borging

 

Regarding cyborgification

The SCCV Horizon is registered as a Biesel ship, and therefore Biesel laws apply aboard. Biesel law does not consider cyborgification capital punishment, making it an optional punishment.

If Nralakk Federation citizens have a Do Not Borgify order in their records, their punishment becomes holding until transfer instead of cyborgification.

If a captain is not present to authorize cyborgification, the command staff must pass a majority vote to authorize it.

 

and marooning

 

An individual being marooned will have their employment considered terminated, their person stripped of all workplace equipment and left on the nearest celestial body or current port of call with their personal belongings. Humans, Tajara, Skrell and IPC are to be given a basic softsuit, oxygen (or a suit cooler unit) and a GPS. Vaurca and Diona are to be given k'ois or a source of light instead. A majority vote is required to pass a marooning unless a Captain is present, at which point the Captain may call for a marooning without Command support. An after-action report must be faxed to Central after a marooning has occurred

 

There is NO stated requirement for anything beyond it being ordered by command.

Edited October 2, 2023 by N8-Toe

[Fluffy]

8 minutes ago, N8-Toe said:

No it isn't that much. In the examples I gave, the crew offered no escalation once captured. it was in cuffs, boom zoom, off to the machinist. And that escalation to.. what? in the first example there was escalation and a climax to the conflict. the warden got shot and arrested. Borging them, with no announcement, no fanfare, heck I didn't know they where being borged and I was a sec officer. That isn't escalation thats just valid hunting. And again not a player complaint as the rules and IC regs allow it.

The crew respond to the escalation, the escalation in a round is global: If an antagonist is shooting people up for example, the crew does not need to perform any escalation to shoot him, the antagonist escalated the level of conflict to the "shooting" bar, so to say

It doesn't need the crew to also go through the escalation, because each side contribute to a global escalation level, they aren't each bound to a dedicated escalation level, if the antagonist bring the escalation to, let's say, 70/100 (imaginary scale), the crew is well within their right to employ reasonable measures for the 70/100 scenario, they don't need to go through another escalation to reach 70/100 themselves

 

15 minutes ago, N8-Toe said:

There is nothing saying they need an announcement or fanfare, or even processing, or even anything. They can just take them from medical and just silently have them borged. That is allowed. And is what happened, and what has happened before and will happen again. The antag escalates and RP's and has all of these burdens to reach for violence. yet the crew is not bound by that it seems as they can just kill them in effect once captured and in cuffs. they might as well, just put the cuffed antag to the wall and shoot them at that point.

This proposal is about removing borging as an option, I would agree with you that it would be more interesting and fun if said thing was announced and given time for people to form a protest etc., but that's a different proposal than removing the option

 

17 minutes ago, N8-Toe said:

And again how is that fair to the antag who again has all this restriction and pressure on them to escalate and build over those 2 hours... just to be killed while in cuffs, black screened on an operating table right after capture? how is that fun, or fair to that player. And on ganking, do again remember, its often 5 v 1. Why is it ganking and an issue when its the antag at a disadvantage. but built up conflict when its the armed sec team with crew support killing their cuffed prisoner with minimal RP. Why does the antag have more burden to their decision to kill than the whole ass crew and whitelisted command.

It isn't. It's part of a larger issue, but it's separated from borging as an option. That isn't to say that they aren't connected, but they aren't equivalent.

 

19 minutes ago, N8-Toe said:

Try to perform your job to a satisfactory standard is a rule. I would get IR'ed and bwoinked faster than my head could spin if I was consistently refusing orders by the captain as security. And again people have stated over and over on this thread mutiny is a borgable offense and "rightfully so". So... what am I just to do? as again As the rules are written, and policy and IC regs. the Captain can just have my ass killed if I try and make some grandstand and encourage others to refuse. So it really does come down to "Do it or die" or "Do it or have to explain to an admin why im starting a mutiny that will very likely turn violent and hijack the round". I don't think the staff want me starting an armed revolt every forth round as a sec officer.

You have no OOC obligation to follow every order no matter what, you have an obligation to perform your job to a satisfactory standard, but nothing prevents you from resigning or refusing to perform a procedure if it makes sense for your character to not do it. It is a very different thing than doing eg. surgeries and botchering them without purpose.

 

1 hour ago, N8-Toe said:

Thats a cool scenario. it doesn't happen. As again, if you do that, you are as the regs, policy, and examples will show, next on the table. All as a non antag. That is a stars align moment. But almost every round will not have that star align moment. People are not going to often throw molotovs at the captain as a non antag, especially to stick their neck out for the antag who very likely may have been shooting at them 5 minutes ago. as others have said, people are really hard on, and sometimes just, mean, to the antag and its player. I dont see riots to help them unless its some beloved character.

That comes down to your narrative; yes if you shoot them they will not come to help you out of becoming a borg, if your narrative is more agreeable it's more likely characters will also want to side with you

We had a rev round not long ago where the Horizon was sold to Dominia for example, characters fought against command and sided with the revs

Why this interesting things happen rarely is, I believe, due to various reasons that are mostly unrelated to borging

 

1 hour ago, N8-Toe said:

as a community expect the antag to do alot, we expect them to drive conflict, be robust, while also RP'ing and giving us a fun scenario. We often as a community let them down or are harsh on this pressure..

That is indeed part of the larger issue I was indicating, removing borging would not address it, it would just become marooning next, being left stuck in communal, and so on and so forth

You would not solve the issue with removing borging, you would just move the symptom that people notice to something else, and lose something that would work well if not for the issue being present

To make a figure of speech, it would be like trying to avoid a carpet from develop mold with an antimold treatment, then with a bucket, then change the carpet with another carpet, while the rooftop is dripping water down; it would never solve the problem, only move what you see it manifest as; the solution is to fix the rooftop

[N8-Toe]

19 minutes ago, Fluffy said:

The crew respond to the escalation, the escalation in a round is global: If an antagonist is shooting people up for example, the crew does not need to perform any escalation to shoot him, the antagonist escalated the level of conflict to the "shooting" bar, so to say

It doesn't need the crew to also go through the escalation, because each side contribute to a global escalation level, they aren't each bound to a dedicated escalation level, if the antagonist bring the escalation to, let's say, 70/100 (imaginary scale), the crew is well within their right to employ reasonable measures for the 70/100 scenario, they don't need to go through another escalation to reach 70/100 themselves

 

This proposal is about removing borging as an option, I would agree with you that it would be more interesting and fun if said thing was announced and given time for people to form a protest etc., but that's a different proposal than removing the option

 

It isn't. It's part of a larger issue, but it's separated from borging as an option. That isn't to say that they aren't connected, but they aren't equivalent.

 

You have no OOC obligation to follow every order no matter what, you have an obligation to perform your job to a satisfactory standard, but nothing prevents you from resigning or refusing to perform a procedure if it makes sense for your character to not do it. It is a very different thing than doing eg. surgeries and botchering them without purpose.

 

That comes down to your narrative; yes if you shoot them they will not come to help you out of becoming a borg, if your narrative is more agreeable it's more likely characters will also want to side with you

We had a rev round not long ago where the Horizon was sold to Dominia for example, characters fought against command and sided with the revs

Why this interesting things happen rarely is, I believe, due to various reasons that are mostly unrelated to borging

 

That is indeed part of the larger issue I was indicating, removing borging would not address it, it would just become marooning next, being left stuck in communal, and so on and so forth

You would not solve the issue with removing borging, you would just move the symptom that people notice to something else, and lose something that would work well if not for the issue being present

To make a figure of speech, it would be like trying to avoid a carpet from develop mold with an antimold treatment, then with a bucket, then change the carpet with another carpet, while the rooftop is dripping water down; it would never solve the problem, only move what you see it manifest as; the solution is to fix the rooftop

The Crew is 100% as responsible for escalation as the antag. arguably more so as they have more resources to bring about. The crew can turn a 20/100 situation into a 100/100 situation and the antag can do nothing about it. If I as an antag am say, dealing drugs. Maybe I got a knife or a pistol.. well security can go to code blue, fully gear, and jump me 1 v 5. They have chosen to escalate and I am at their mercy of either I escalate and fight, or I capitulate. From experience, if I capitulate I will often end my round in a cell as they'll try and keep me there.

 

Now lets use the example case 1. The mutinious warden. The Antag drove escalation for the round, there was good RP, with crew escalating as well. No one died. Ian died, and I think they exchanged some laser fire with a bridge crewman. So They are shot, and captured. the situation has gone from 50/100 back to 10/100. It is ON THE CREW. To escalate their RP, to act reasonably and in effort of a good story. In this instance the crew just took them from medical and borged them within minutes of capture. That is going 100/100. The crew escalated a situation needlessly. The traitor was disarmed, and cuffed to a bed. Would you consider it proper escalation for an antag who captures and cuffs a sec officer... to just, after a minute or two walk over and kill them. Probably not no.. The crew should be held to a HIGHER STANDARD when it comes to violence and force than the antag. If they are not, the antag is screwed in all forms, and we hurt our chance to make a good story.

 

2: Again in my example.. the options you have given are "resign" which again I will get IR'ed or bwoinked if I am quitting every fourth round over something that is legal and allowed by regs. I will be told "your character signed up for this". I will get sanctioned by the staff for that. My other option as said.. is armed mutiny, which again, I will get in trouble for if I am always doing that. There is no way to consistently as a sec impede or get in the way of borging or make a grand stand.. without it getting old and me sanctioned. I guarantee it with every fiber of my being. Borging is not some one in a 100 round thing. It happens kinda often I'd say.

 

3: Ok.. sure it'd be more fun. go back to previously said.. what is the crew to just have a mutiny every other time someone is borged? going to the other thing that is said here, people might not have much sympathy for the antag.. so we need to have OOC steps taken to protect the antag from just being lynched or otherwise having their round ruined because they're on the "other team" and may be outnumbered 30 to 1 counting the whole crew.

 

4: Yes it is part of a larger issue of people expecting much from antags, while giving them little, and operating under the assumption the crew and SCC must win every conflict. Now if you have a solution to all of this, I am all ears. but I view over borging and executing as a part of this, and have made this thread to hopefully treat a symptom. Will it fix everything? no, will it at least help, absolutely,

 

5: The antag is here to antagonize. They will use violence, they will subterfuge, they will sabotage the ship, they will kill peoples friends, they will make threats, they will grandstand for terror groups. They will steal your christmas cookies and set whoville on fire. they are the bad guys. We cannot say they deserve to have their round needlessly ended, or treated poorly because "well you did bad things". Of course they did, infact they did us all a solid by readying up and enabling antag so we all can play the fun gamemodes. If their reward for doing that, and taking on all the pressure that comes with that... is we just killed them the moment they're captured without fanfare. I can't imagine they'll keep playing antag. Why do we have interogation, cells, investigators and all of that if the cap can just say "borg em" and they go from medical, to machinist, to beep boop or ghost out.

 

6: Borging sucks compared to marooning because of how simple it is.. you are taken in cuffs, usually from medical.. and just thrown on a table with a suppressor black screen.. and now your forced to be a borg.. or just ghost. you die while sedated with nothing you can do to stop it. no counter play, no appeal. Often if you've fought the crew you've by now been in medical so any freedom implants gone. This whole process from "borg them" to you being brainless can be five minutes. and often is. Marooning is a whole process, your awake, and you can wander the astroid or atleast bitch about it. 

 

I think borging should go, and the thresh hold to maroon raised to "they are an uncontained threat or otherwise the mere act of keeping them on the ship will gravely endanger the lives of the crew". It should be uncommon, and if its used as a "I want to win/not deal with you button" start stripping whitelists. This solves the problem of the crew executing antags on capture, and forces them to actually RP with them and play ball. And assures antag players they wont just be killed

[Duthco]

7 hours ago, N8-Toe said:

Being near the end of round should have zero bearing on anything. Do we relax our standards for the Antag when the rounds close to an end? Is it suddenly  Ok for me as an antag to just start murdering people with less RP? If I'm a traitor can I just.. lob a nade into a lobby? or just start capturing and killing cuffed people with a minute or two of roleplay? No? Than why is the crew who has a higher standard of play, why is command who has the highest standard of play, suddenly given the excuse to kill and remove players from the round with a lower barrier of entry because "Well the rounds almost over". The Crew is not entitled to "Win". The antag is not bound to loose to them, to sacrifice their fun, and their RP as a player, just so the crew can get their greentext.

The argument I make with Example 2 is not the borging was only acceptable as a result of a round being OOCly almost over, but that the story therein was concluding, and some form of Capital punishment was a next narratively-natural step after such a 100/100 point of escalation, as a gunfight in the Captain's quarters that left a member of Command dead on the floor.

• The crew is not entitled to win, as was said. However, the crew does have the deck stacked in their favor in many ICly and OOCly ways such that a complete crew loss is a statistically unlikely outcome.
• I agree wholeheartedly with the notion that, crew should not be needlessly escalating just to "win" and kill the antagonist.
• I also agree that Borging should not be used except in the most dire of circumstances.
• But, I have yet to see any evidence in this thread that supports anything but a more judicious use of that punishment. 

 

7 hours ago, N8-Toe said:

You got like, a few minutes of RP and was it really good RP if in your own words when you questioned it the answer from command was essentially "shut up". thats not good RP, thats just "Well I have to by the OOC rules follow commands and they told me we're killing this guy so my options are mutiny as a non antag or do it". Would you have gotten better RP if he had been brigged, investigated fully, and you got to interact with them until the end of round as he tries to clear his name? Or was the few minutes of RP with them in cuffs before they got killed better? Do you think the player who went from accusation to dead within a 10 minute period, who also yes you're right was innocent, had a good time? Do you think they felt they got good RP getting railroaded to the machinist shop, not getting an investigation, interogation, or even processed? I was in that round, I was an officer who was present when the HoS died and I told the Captain the person who was borged wasn't a party to it. And the player got killed anyway. This isn't a player complaint because as the current rules and policy stand. the Captain was allowed and in their right to make that decision, thus the suggestion I've made to change that.

A Captain would not be in a position that they hold, if they are easily shaken from their convictions by the words of a relatively recently hired Security Cadet. Moreover, they trusted the word of other members of command in disregarding what a bottom-rung subordinate said, even though I was right to have doubt, and that doesn't get more realistic. 

Personally, RP is more than an exchange of words. In those moments, I had some IC internal conflict. I was thinking ICly what I could do, and arrived at a defeated conclusion, that there was nothing I could do, which was a character decision. Before any OOC notions, my Cadet is a kind of person who has a hard time questioning authority, which is part of his personal journey. 

• I will say I would have preferred that the Second On the Table was brigged, and talked to, before any punishment, but that didn't happen. Would the RP have been better? It would have been different. Potentially better, but also potentially less impactful.
• As per the question of whether or not Second On the Table had a good time, that is something neither you nor I can answer. We might make assumptions given how we imagine we would feel, but I don't believe either of us are that player.
• I think this thread would be benefitted immensely to hear more opinions from those who have been borged, especially where they believe it cut their gimmick short or happened unnecessarily.

 

7 hours ago, N8-Toe said:

it doesn't matter what the SCC or any other IC entity thinks or cares. It's a game and we're discussing the dynamics of it OOC'ly. Borging as it is, as it is used, is bad for the game full stop is my opinion. We should have marooning as the last resort. As marooning gives you something, and you if you die, its not dying while already black screened and cuffed to an operating table. which isn't fun. And again on the charges. Attempted murder can carry a sentence of borging. The vast majority of antag gimmicks can be construed to be attempted murder. So suddenly our "action of last resort" can be applied nearly every round.

• We lose significant context and motivation for actions by considering only OOCly, as player choices are made as a result of OOC and IC information. Aurora wouldn't be an RP server if IC information didn't matter to player choices.
• As was said, it is a game, and the OOC dynamics are extremely important to making such a round-ending decision for any player and particularly an antagonist.
• I do wish we saw less of a preference for borgings over maroonings lately, but that is ultimately up to players and characters. I would rather there be a choice than not one.

 

• Regarding attempted murder, it may result in borging, and it may result in marooning, which also takes the antagonist out of the round.
• As I understand, a desire to avoid unnecessarily removing an antagonist player from the broader round is the crux of the complaint against Cyborgification in this thread. 

The problem, again, does not appear to me to be cyborgification itself, (as without it, I would extrapolate we would see a far greater number of maroonings); it seems to be what is being perceived and asserted throughout this thread as a lack of restraint by those who order it.

• That seems to me to be a matter of OOC policy for Command and Security players to not opt first for Capital punishment where it isn't warranted, which should be most of the time.

 

As a final note for this post of mine, N8-Toe, I commend you for posing the original thought. I imagine it to be a fairly difficult position, responding to several different thought threads simultaneously, so thank you for the discourse. 

[Ublicto]

To add to N-8's point, I feel as if server culture incentivizes antag play which is generally unfun and places unreasonable burdens on antags while permitting what in any other circumstance would be ganking on security's part. The antag is expected to put a lot of effort into a gimmick, to engage as many people as possible, and to also avoid killing those people for as long as possible. Security is downright valid hunting a lot of the time and frequently opens fire on antags with little escalation or in fact to de-escalate the situation which is what realistically they should try first.

An example of poor antag play caused by server culture is the reason why I received a note in a ninja round and a week long antag ban. When I was a ninja hunting people and aiming to take trophies I killed a janitor by essentially just running out from maints, bringing him down, and removing his hand for a trophy. This got me a bwoink because I prioritized game play over role play - however at the same time I thought doing something like that was necessary because all the janitor has to do to ruin my game is run away from me or yell out "SEC HELP" and I am through. The standard for me is much higher in this situation than the standard for them.

Similarly the reason I received an antag ban was because as a ninja leading a team of traitors we were detected breaking into the crew armory and security was arming up. In order to stop us from being rolled by sec I immediately led the antag team to stop sec. We encountered the warden on the third deck and tried to hold them up but they simply ran away. Then we went below decks and tried to hold up the warden and other officers in the armory again but the warden picked up the nearest gun and started shooting at the five or six antags arranged against them. They were only "spoken to" for this while I received a ban for doing the reasonable thing and ensuring the antag team was not totally obliterated less than halfway into the round. This type of culture makes it impossible for me as an antag to rely on other players for telling a story.

This is a cultural issue in general. I think some players are correct when they say borging is a symptom of a larger issue. The solution I suggest to this is an announcement similar to what solved a related cultural problem about command staff sending confirmation faxes too often. There could be an announcement that crew are expected to "let the antag cook" or otherwise engage in storytelling rather than simply valid hunting the antag which is what seems to happen a lot of the time. This way antags can point to something concrete when crew makes an unfair choice and the standard of behavior is changed. It has worked in the past, it will work again.

It is very difficult to engage with crew if a random assistant or barkeep will say "heavily armed boarder next to me" whenever I show up. This is why antags are so evasive and tend to avoid confrontation and make the round less fun for everyone - they simply can't count on people "letting them cook"!

[Fluffy]

50 minutes ago, N8-Toe said:

The Crew is 100% as responsible for escalation as the antag. arguably more so as they have more resources to bring about. The crew can turn a 20/100 situation into a 100/100 situation and the antag can do nothing about it. If I as an antag am say, dealing drugs. Maybe I got a knife or a pistol.. well security can go to code blue, fully gear, and jump me 1 v 5. They have chosen to escalate and I am at their mercy of either I escalate and fight, or I capitulate. From experience, if I capitulate I will often end my round in a cell as they'll try and keep me there.

I did not say that the crew can't escalate, that is part of the fun; I said that the escalation level is global and that they don't need to escalate independently: If you shoot them, level 70/100 in the example, they can shoot you back, because it's appropriate for that level to do so, they don't need to justify independently a response via another escalation on their part, they can employ appropriate measures to face a 70/100 situation

Generally, they cannot on their own jump from a 20/100 to a 100/100 unilaterally. If you are running around the ship naked, they can't pull out rifles and shoot you down. They can ask you to stop, you say no, level 30/100, they try to grab you to bring you in custody, you escape it, 40/100 - they try to tase you, you punch them down and hide in maintenance, 50/100 - they find you in maintenance, you pull out a gun and shoot at them, 70/100, take out rifles and try to stop you - you pull out a machinegun and mow down the Captain and some bystanders, 80/100 shoot on sight - you reveal to be an SRF survivor that is going to kill everyone, make some wall explode, phoron flood some areas or whatnot, 100/100 all hands grab a weapon and kill on sight

As you can notice, they can escalate but only if the antagonist follows up the escalation, and in small part by themselves; it would to me be totally unexpected if you threatened the Captain to punch him and he were to unleast security in full gear with a kill on sight order. I would expect such a thing to be bwoinkable.

This is my understanding of the gist, at least. Administration is free to correct it if I got it wrong.

Another thing I would like to point out: Generally, noone wants to keep the antagonist in a cell. That is why by and large Wardens/Officers "forget" to take away / fail to find weapons, uplinks, tools etc. They want you to break out, they want the fun to continue

 

1 hour ago, N8-Toe said:

Now lets use the example case 1. The mutinious warden. The Antag drove escalation for the round, there was good RP, with crew escalating as well. No one died. Ian died, and I think they exchanged some laser fire with a bridge crewman. So They are shot, and captured. the situation has gone from 50/100 back to 10/100. It is ON THE CREW. To escalate their RP, to act reasonably and in effort of a good story. In this instance the crew just took them from medical and borged them within minutes of capture. That is going 100/100. The crew escalated a situation needlessly. The traitor was disarmed, and cuffed to a bed. Would you consider it proper escalation for an antag who captures and cuffs a sec officer... to just, after a minute or two walk over and kill them. Probably not no.. The crew should be held to a HIGHER STANDARD when it comes to violence and force than the antag. If they are not, the antag is screwed in all forms, and we hurt our chance to make a good story.

This, I fear, is mostly misunderstood: If you committed a 50/100 level of escalation, the crew can deploy a 50/100 response to that, indifferently if you got captured, the escalation level doesn't go backward. They can of course choose not to use all the tools available to them for that level, but you being captured doesn't ameliorate that those tools are on the table now, otherwise they should by the same logic let the antagonist walk out of the brig if he promises to be nice. As much as the antagonists have to agree with the escalation, the crew have to agree to a deescalation.

 

In regards to "Would you consider it proper escalation for an antag who captures and cuffs a sec officer... to just, after a minute or two walk over and kill them.", this is what the rules say about it:

Spoiler

Antagonists are allowed to execute someone only if this is driving forward their narrative, or if leaving them alive would pose a risk to the antagonist's short-term safety. Executions are also allowed if an antagonist's orders are expressly ignored, such as a hostage being executed if security rushes into the room ignoring the antagonist's warnings, or if someone calls for help after being told not to. An execution can also be justified depending on emotional context, such as a downed security officer taunting the antagonist. With sufficient escalation in the round, antagonists may execute threats that would prove to be a threat to their long-term safety if left alive.

So, it would be really hard for me to address that point without knowing the context. If an antag captures and cuff a sec officer, orders him to stop resisting, and the officer keeps spamming the resist to break out of the cuffs, by rules, the antagonist can shoot him dead, indifferently if it's a minute of two of talk.

 

1 hour ago, N8-Toe said:

Ok.. sure it'd be more fun. go back to previously said.. what is the crew to just have a mutiny every other time someone is borged? going to the other thing that is said here, people might not have much sympathy for the antag.. so we need to have OOC steps taken to protect the antag from just being lynched or otherwise having their round ruined because they're on the "other team" and may be outnumbered 30 to 1 counting the whole crew.

I agree, that is why we have code green/blue/red, the crew armory is locked behind severe situations, and security does not roam in heavy armor and rifles with the order to kill everyone who doesn't comply. That is the OOC steps.

Could borging benefit from having more steps? Possibly, sure

Is it a reason to remove that option? No

1 hour ago, N8-Toe said:

Yes it is part of a larger issue of people expecting much from antags, while giving them little, and operating under the assumption the crew and SCC must win every conflict. Now if you have a solution to all of this, I am all ears. but I view over borging and executing as a part of this, and have made this thread to hopefully treat a symptom. Will it fix everything? no, will it at least help, absolutely,

Problem is: I don't think it would

What I suspect it would happen is, we remove borging, months or perhaps even years go by, people get acclimated to the new balance, the fundamental problem is not solved, and a new thread will pop up on the lines of "Remove marooning as a punishment", rinse and repeat over and over on whatever is the most evident symptom of the issue

We keep losing fun and potentially engaging option and things, both in mechanic and lore, due to a problem that manages to remain unaddressed not only in spite of, but enabled and thanks to, measures like this that masks the illness for a while, without ever curing it

How to solve it definitely, I would love to know too but I do not, I think it would require a wider conversation, trial and errors, etc. etc.

[GeneralCamo]

I'm going to be honest. As an inactive antag main, I will admit that the bar of effort required for antagonists compared to crew is lopsided. And this is bad, as we have no growth of antagonists.

I feel both sides have a point here. I have witnessed nonsense borgings contrary to CCIA and administrative statements on that matter, ones that do not make sense in our lore and in the gameplay sense. On the other hand, I do see this turning into a slippery slope where in a few months we get back to this but with the current maximum punishment. And I see value in having extreme punishments. 

I believe we need to take a step back as a community, and ask ourselves: what do we want from antagonists? What do we want from the server? These are questions that have been asked for a long time, but with no definitive answer in sight. This thread is a symptom of that problem honestly, and I don't see it improving unless we tackle it directly. 

[Flpfs]

I don't know if anybody shares my train of thought, but I have always seen borging as a way to deal with OOC dickhead antagonists. Like, if they keep escaping and instantly try to kill everyone, have slaughtered many crew, etc.

My opinion is that this should be left to the senses of the command WL holders who invoke it.

As it is pretty much a method to perma delete an antag from the game, could it not be replaced with forceful cryogenics? The person would be frozen in cryo until transfer off-ship. This way, there are no more executions and the mechanic still remains.

 

 

[Boggle08]

13 hours ago, GeneralCamo said:

I believe we need to take a step back as a community, and ask ourselves: what do we want from antagonists? What do we want from the server? These are questions that have been asked for a long time, but with no definitive answer in sight. This thread is a symptom of that problem honestly, and I don't see it improving unless we tackle it directly. 

I think the core issue is that antagonists and crew are held to different conflicting standards.
We expect crew to create characters. They obey fearRP, they interact with a setting beyond a basic level of just a single, self contained round. They have to monitor their behavior in canon interactions, because consequences follow them.

Antagonists are the complete and total opposite. They don't have the same tethers that ground them in the setting like crew characters; or at the very least, they aren't "mandatory." They don't have the threat of canonicity to protect what people do to them either. They are not beholden to concepts like fearRP that regulate their behavior, and it is practically a necessity for them to cede such things in order to frag better, carry a gimmick, or just to stay active in the round when everyone's hunting them. FearRP is ultimately the biggest regulator on species related mechanics, and the closer someone is to outright ignoring it, the more of a balance concern it becomes.

Every round that doesn't immediately kick up into high escalation when the antag shows up is engaged in a cortisol inducing byzantine OOC trust game, where the antag is expected to spread around engagement while at the same time dealing with people who don't want to or refuse to play along; Even while that's happening, they have to build or retain what little credibility they have with command/security or else they'll escalate when the antag isn't ready yet. And that's all assuming the Antag is going in with the expectations of being a storyteller, because if you're new or acting in bad faith, getting antag just gives you an uplink full of guns and unshackles you from the accountability of HRP to do whatever.

The solution as I see it is to bring antagonists under the same HRP standards, and redesigning them to behave like third party ships with different directives. Borging an antagonist is small potatoes. Meanwhile, we haven't even borged a third party actor yet, and it'll likely be a point of contention if we ever get there.

[Fluffy]

12 hours ago, Flpfs said:

As it is pretty much a method to perma delete an antag from the game, could it not be replaced with forceful cryogenics? The person would be frozen in cryo until transfer off-ship. This way, there are no more executions and the mechanic still remains.

This would not solve the posited issues, it would just trade a procedure with different one (stuck someone in the cryocell instead of a borg)

This would also remove the choice to keep playing as a borg (and maybe get emagged by another antagonist and pulled back into the loop), essentially forcing the player to do something he already has the option to do: ghost

 

50 minutes ago, Boggle08 said:

The solution as I see it is to bring antagonists under the same HRP standards, and redesigning them to behave like third party ships with different directives. Borging an antagonist is small potatoes. Meanwhile, we haven't even borged a third party actor yet, and it'll likely be a point of contention if we ever get there.

I think this would become either very boring or very dissonant, very quickly

I think that it would be that pretty much nothing fun ever happens, or the Horizon gets canonically boarded/shelled/terrorist attacked/whatnot multiple times a day, every day, that even the most hardened 40k battle brother Sol Marine "I LOVE MISS MIRANDA I LOVE PHORON SIR YES SIR OORAH" would have to question what he's doing on such a ship, why it's so poorly defended and armed, not to mention all the issues that lore would have to deal with, etc.

[rrrrrr]

15 hours ago, Flpfs said:

I don't know if anybody shares my train of thought, but I have always seen borging as a way to deal with OOC dickhead antagonists. Like, if they keep escaping and instantly try to kill everyone, have slaughtered many crew, etc.

I feel like this is an absurdly bad-faith way to view the people who actually play antagonist. The idea that actually being antagonistic is an "OOC d-head" move.

Not a lot of people play antagonist. This is why "antag main" is a thing --- because so few people actually decide to play antagonist roles that just toggling it on is enough to consistently get traitor, changeling, rev, whatever. Keep in mind that these are the people who try to keep everyone entertained for two hours straight, for better or worse, with more limited abilities than staffers and little-no planning. Antagonists are not staff running an event. The best antag players can make what they're doing feel like that, but they're not.

Someone keeps escaping... okay. There are weak points built into the brig. Escaping means that the gimmick, whatever that may be, keeps going. Give the people who actually decide to play antag some grace, 'cuz they give everyone else a whole lot. I almost wrote a whole compare-and-contrast list, comparing how this server and another server that I won't name does this, but I'm not gonna post it, because it sounds negative. (I enjoy playing this server.)

[Bear]

On 01/10/2023 at 09:55, Arrow768 said:

Voting for dismissal.

I don't see a major issue with borgification.
There are not a lot of cases when you can borg someone according to the regs.

• (Attempted-)Murder
• Mutiny
• Terrorist Acts
• Espionage
• Escaping from a HuT sentence.

And even then borgification shouldn't be the first step in most cases.
As mentioned by @ramke: if you notice that command is pushing hard for a borgification when that might not be reasonable you can (and should) ahelp.

This.

There is little I can add that Ramke or Arrow have not already. There is no need to remove borging. If it is not your preferred method of punishment, we have now have marooning available as well.

[ReadThisNamePlz]

On 01/10/2023 at 10:55, Arrow768 said:

Voting for dismissal.

I don't see a major issue with borgification.
There are not a lot of cases when you can borg someone according to the regs.

• (Attempted-)Murder
• Mutiny
• Terrorist Acts
• Espionage
• Escaping from a HuT sentence.

And even then borgification shouldn't be the first step in most cases.
As mentioned by @ramke: if you notice that command is pushing hard for a borgification when that might not be reasonable you can (and should) ahelp.

Also voting for dismissal, for the same reason/reasons. 

This can be handled oocly and is a command WL issue more than anything else.

[N8-Toe]

If removing borging if off the table. Can we than discuss the IC/OOC standards to use these pseudo executions. What situations do we think should be appropriate then.

 

What standard do the staff judge as "reasonable and good play" to execute the antag? Again as I have pointed out several times the regs allow the summery borging of antags explicitly, so what situations should we consider ahelp or complaint worthy.

[ReadThisNamePlz]

45 minutes ago, N8-Toe said:

If removing borging if off the table. Can we than discuss the IC/OOC standards to use these pseudo executions. What situations do we think should be appropriate then.

 

What standard do the staff judge as "reasonable and good play" to execute the antag? Again as I have pointed out several times the regs allow the summery borging of antags explicitly, so what situations should we consider ahelp or complaint worthy.

We already have execution rules. 

Borging Antagonists is only applicable when they commit certain infractions/do certain things. 
Essentially if an antagonist kills one person? They could be borged, but it is discouraged unless it fits the round. (That is how I go about it). 
If they kill 3, 4, 5 people at thirty minutes in? I'll hold them until end of round - then probably borg them. 

But if someone just bombs a place, doesn't kill anyone, and can be held otherwise? They probably should not be borged. It is entirely case-by-case, and if you think it is wrong, just ahelp it. 

[lilahnovi]

Everyone's talked about this quite a bit, but I just wanted to add in my thoughts, at 4a.m. because why am I still awake? it's a mystery... Important TLDR bits are in Bold and COLOR!

I honestly think borging had been over-used and and used flippantly recently. I've been playing regularly in the last year and suddenly in the last few months it has ramped up. Especially with the event -- the pirates surrendered, and then they were borged in like a split second? That seems like a messed up decision to make (from multiple angles, trying to be grim or not). I'm not really sure what to make of it, and it doesn't make sense to me. It just felt rushed, I suppose-- though I am still rping the outcome on my character's poor little brain.

A character of mine pointed out that this does another thing: Borging punishes a mechanist with a kind of trauma they may not be able to handle and should not be forced to undertake. They didn't do anything wrong. Honestly, realistically, it would take a special kind of person to do this task.
The fact that I had some command member say to my psyche "Hey, check on the mechanist btw, that was really hard on her" after they were ordered to borg someone is evidence enough that something about this feels kind of odd. OOC, even. It frustrated me as a player.
Saying, "well, that's their job" is a little bit insane because you can work as a mechanist wherever and never have to basically murder-imprison a person ever in your life. It would be exceedingly rare, I would imagine.
Like, we live in super future land -- make a machine that does it for you if it's so vitally important to make your brain robots, or have synthetics whose entire existence is to do this task (maybe run by a ghost or an admin or something. The borging crew lmfao)

But on an OOC level... something about borging just makes me sick. Something about it is so icky (perhaps the same way lobotomies really fuck me up, especially because it's something that many women had to endure.) There's just also some level of weird consent things around it that really make me drastically uncomfortable. Maybe it's supposed to feel like that, but it's not treated that way at all. 
It's honestly never felt fun when it happens, though perhaps others disagree (except I believe in one circumstance where someone was turned into a borg by an antag, and that was really interesting for them)
It feels like a "Fuck you, wipe your brain, but you're not dead, and now you have to serve me!" cop-out or something. ( I can't help but think it's like the ultimate example of 9 year olds playing pretend cops and robbers and then powergaming/godmodding, and going, "nuh uh, you're dead and now you're my zombie that has to do everything I say!") I will note, I've never been ICly borged or anything like that.

In my opinion, it's too easy to do, and straight up, I don't think the only options should be 'marooning' or 'borging' and they are weighed equally -- because holy shit they do not feel equal. I feel like borging should be one of those fucked up taboo super final options. It's done in secret. You can't just watch it through a window (so weird) and honestly it should be taken as such a potentially unpopular action that command is hush-hush about it, because of the wider implications of what could happen. It should be something that they sweat and be nervous about doing. They SHOULD be nervous to do it. It should be done very carefully. You are doing something that is considered pretty evil by a large number of people. Even Dystopia tries to keep its dirty laundry out of view.

Doing it at the end of the round just because marooning would take too much time or something is also very frustrating, because you just get to be a helpless actor. It often sort of puts you in this place where the last 10 minutes of a round absolutely tanks, and people just feel bad and helpless and everyone's given up on trying. Don't do this, for the love of god. It just leaves a gross taste in everyone's mouth. Hold until end.

Anyway, please treat borging with the actual gravity it deserves, since I guess we're keeping this awful mechanic.
- Consider your mechanist, PLEASE.
- Consider the act itself deeply and potential ramifications on the vessel community that your character lives in.
- If you'd be better off just rping and questioning the antag or something, do that. 
- You DON'T have to end every round with the antags being given their ultimate punishment!! There is no reason to rush this. You don't have to actually carry out the act if some better rp can be had keeping them alive - and I can think of a million and one ways better rp would have been had with many of the borgings in memory.

My two cents turned into 20$. Go spend it on some fancy ice cream or coffee or something.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- I woke up and wanted to add something.

I wanted to add that I think Ramke makes it pretty clear and the perimeters are good (and genuinely not always considered or followed.)

Quote

Cyborgification is used as a last resort and on the scale of execution, when:

• The person has committed a very severe crime, refused to de-escalate, was threatened by it, remained uncooperative in custody and still continued without seeking compromise.
• The person is uncontainable (escaped several times, or in the event of i.e. changeling/vampire who veil walks/armblades out of cuffs and slices through walls, antag who shoves C4 out of their ass multiple times, etc.)

Please take note of the and in the first sentence. It should be treated as a "without a doubt" type of situation. I think this is a good measure to consider when deciding whether to ahelp or not. Was it a quick decision? Were witnesses saying 'wait, it's not like that'? Was the Captain acting on frustration or emotion? Or did it feel measured and reasonable?

I hope the "ahelp it" folks can understand that sometimes it's just a gut feeling, and getting strict "they did this wrong" boundaries may not appear. It may be harder to investigate a gut feeling, and that's why people may not be sure about ahelping it and instead just stew in their bad feels.

Edited October 6, 2023 by lilahnovi

[Carver]

15 hours ago, lilahnovi said:

A character of mine pointed out that this does another thing: Borging punishes a mechanist with a kind of trauma they may not be able to handle and should not be forced to undertake. They didn't do anything wrong. Honestly, realistically, it would take a special kind of person to do this task.
The fact that I had some command member say to my psyche "Hey, check on the mechanist btw, that was really hard on her" after they were ordered to borg someone is evidence enough that something about this feels kind of odd. OOC, even. It frustrated me as a player.
Saying, "well, that's their job" is a little bit insane because you can work as a mechanist wherever and never have to basically murder-imprison a person ever in your life. It would be exceedingly rare, I would imagine.

I'd really like to address this, when people say "that's their job" it isn't some off-handed comment. You're signing up to perform, and trained for, this exact procedure when you willfully work for the SCC. If you have deep personal issues with the procedure then working as a megacorporate-employed Machinist within Biesel may simply not be the ideal profession for you.

If you personally know the individual in question (and care about them), then I can more see your point. But otherwise, you should be somewhat desensitized to the concept because you're hired to do precisely that task. It would otherwise be akin to playing a Security Officer who's a pacifist, or a haemophobic Physician - if you're unable to perform a core part of your duties due to personal belief (again, not in the context of pre-existing personal attachment to the soon-to-be cyborg, as that case is very understandable), then you shouldn't be in that position.

[Ublicto]

13 hours ago, Carver said:

I'd really like to address this, when people say "that's their job" it isn't some off-handed comment. You're signing up to perform, and trained for, this exact procedure when you willfully work for the SCC. If you have deep personal issues with the procedure then working as a megacorporate-employed Machinist within Biesel may simply not be the ideal profession for you.

If you personally know the individual in question (and care about them), then I can more see your point. But otherwise, you should be somewhat desensitized to the concept because you're hired to do precisely that task. It would otherwise be akin to playing a Security Officer who's a pacifist, or a haemophobic Physician - if you're unable to perform a core part of your duties due to personal belief (again, not in the context of pre-existing personal attachment to the soon-to-be cyborg, as that case is very understandable), then you shouldn't be in that position.

Realistically a machinist will almost never have to borg someone and is there to maintain robots, not preform executions. Your argument would take a lot of the roleplay out of a borging and has a number of other implications I am sure you wouldn't like. If everyone is so "used" to doing evil things for megacorporations than it makes the game more boring and means players are essentially not allowed to have principles that might make them critical of anything.

[EJJ]

2 hours ago, Ublicto said:

Realistically a machinist will almost never have to borg someone and is there to maintain robots, not preform executions. Your argument would take a lot of the roleplay out of a borging and has a number of other implications I am sure you wouldn't like. If everyone is so "used" to doing evil things for megacorporations than it makes the game more boring and means players are essentially not allowed to have principles that might make them critical of anything.

"It is your job" has been stated by admins several times. People have received admin action and at least a talking to and such over refusing to borg people on canon rounds in the past. I believe admins can bwoink you if you aren't an antag for refusing to borg people even in antag/extended but that's probably something to ask an admin not me. Yes its traumatic, but you aren't going to sign up for Security if cuffing and smacking drunk Fisanduhians is going to be a problem for you. If a Surgeon refused to operate on someone and let them die there'd be as much OOC/IC action on them as there would be on a Machinist that refused to Borg someone.

This is such an issue that the Linton Borging had a ghost role roboticist brought in in case the machinists refused to borg Linton so it could be done. (They did not, for the record.) Several machinists also refused to borg people back on the Aurora during various canon rounds as well.

I'd also prefer things to not get gentrified to Medical and borging becoming only Medical's job.

 

Edit: If people are borging you for one or two minor actions and not brigging you ahelp that shit. Security's charges have big bold "DO THIS IF THEY DO THIS" things for a reason.

Edited October 7, 2023 by EJJ
added thing

[Arrow768]

This topic has been up for 7 days and received two votes for dismissal.

According to the forum rules this topic will be closed as “rejected”.
Given that this should have been a policy suggestion it’s moved to the policy suggestion archive.

In addition I would like to point out that the machinists are expected to Borg people unless there are exceptional circumstances. It is most definitely part of their job description.