I know this has been less than 24 hours since the change, but I decided I needed to voice my opinion on a platform that won’t get buried by messages in 5 minutes and be forgotten.
Recently there was a change to BE Example Reasons, now listing “LRP”, “excessive harassment” and most notably “for the use of setting an example or for quelling personnel that are excessively disruptive to the operation”
My concern here is that the CO is slowly turning into literal Warhammer 40K Commissars where a Major can just round remove someone already in the custody of the law because they said “fuck you. you are dumb for letting 80 Marines die in a deathpush, eat shit and die”
Another concern I have that is likely a slippery slope, but one nonetheless is COs using the overtly vague allowance of “for the use of setting an example” to kill Marines that they may have a metagrudge against, or to kill a marine that harassed some friend of theirs. What does setting an example mean? An example for who, and an example for doing what precisely? And how does this actually give us a net-benefit for RP over the time tested solution of MPs processing issues they are more than capable of handling. This needs to be clarified.
Last concern I have, this ties in part to the previous paragraph. How is allowing BEs in the presence of an MP for “excessively disruptive to the operation” that let’s say already handled and processed them, a net a positive for the community?
It breeds resentment and untrust between marines that otherwise could have learned their lesson and been done with it (or stayed in brig for reoffending, that’s up to them) and COs all over what sounds like unjust reasons that could have entirely been solved without a 1 hour removal from the round.
That being said here are a few examples of things you can now BE people for under this clause:
• OOC in IC, disruptive meme references, R18/NSFW statements/allusions, metagaming, etc†.
• Anything that would normally be classified as Insanity under ML† (see below).
• Disrupting briefing.
• Sexual harassment (bye.)
• Shooting the walls of the ship.
• Cannibalism and mutilation.
• Creepy behavior that doesn’t fall into outright sexual harassment but still weirds you the fuck out.
• Anything you might classify as blatantly LRP in your minds or something that’d normally deserve an ahelp. It’s Big Iron time.
†In the event that there is no way to word your BE reasoning in a valid IC manner, you can state your reasoning for an LRP BE as “insanity” ICly – but remember that this is different from the ML definition of insanity and you can’t bypass the CMO/synth to declare someone as insane if they’re not acting in an LRP way.
As with all of our recent permission expansions, if you abuse this, you’ll go in the gutter. Your kind ain’t welcome here.
If you haven’t felt the need to open this topic in the last 2 years, then the problem you are talking about doesn’t actually exist.
And no, if a CO even thinks of punishing you with BE you should be punished without hesitation, no one has to call MPs and create special roleplay scenes for you, you will not get special treatment for being LRP. Treating LRP players specially means punishing the players who follow the roleplay rules and do not disrespect the people around them. That is the only group of players who should be rewarded here, not LRP players who think they are special.
COs have been able to BE for LRP for literal ages, just as Nessie said. The change was that in the PRESENCE OF MPS - not a person in the brig or in custody of MPs - BEs for LRP that is EXCESSIVELY DISRUPTIVE are permitted. COs were previously not allowed to BE at all in the presence of an MP, something that people have been spoken to for doing before.
I’ll give you an example of how this change in the policy is intended to be affected: Let’s say someone in the briefing hall screamed out “I want to huff my SL’s farts!” (this is something that has happened before, to me). Prior to this change the CO would be able to do nothing but berate that player if there were MPs in sight. Now let’s say this person continues on with this, escalating to saying it about the SO, then the XO, then the CO, even throwing the Synth in there. This person is now being excessively disruptive and excessively LRP! The CO, even if there are MPs present in the briefing hall, is permitted to round remove that person!
The example being set here is to not be ridiculously LRP because it’s lame, it’s immersion breaking, it’s not remotely clever, and everybody fucking hates it. And if COs were going around BEing people for a metagrudge, do you think they’d wait for us to make a change allowing them to do it when an MP is in sight of them?
I also have no idea where this notion that we should be granting clemency to people who are being LRP is coming from. If someone is being LRP in the first place it’s quite clear that they don’t have any interest in doing meaningful RP. As someone who has tried to humor people being LRP in the past, they always throw it back in my face and the faces of people who are trying to have a meaningful interaction with them. Do you think MPs want to sit in brig and watch fart huffer marine the entire round? Who is that fun for?
The reality of the situation is that this is an exceedingly minor change that allows the CO to exercise immediate quality control over people being weird LRP assholes. You’ll note that this has accompanied a change allowing COs to BE individuals that are hindering marine personnel via excessive harassment (note the term excessive, again). What this entire change is realistically meant to accomplish is a crackdown on people being weird, abusive, or harassing the CO and others. Because the CO has all access and all comms they’re in a better position than anyone to ahelp for situations like what I’ve described (which is encouraged), but for times where admins are unable to intervene by virtue of not being online, COs are able to step in to provide an in character solution.
I mean setting an example would be like >Bravo PFC says the briefing plan is dogshit in briefing so you blow his brains out because he won’t stop saying how suicidal the plan is.
I am not trying to be a contrarian, but the wording of it is sufficiently vague that someone could easily pass off a battlefield execution for a fairly minor issue, in the name of “setting an example”.
Being permad because CO wants everyone to shave their heads is actually ludicrous. That’s literary just powertripping. What the hell is the actual RP there?
unless I am misunderstanding some abysmal wording, here
by your own definition, “MP Presence” would include by technicality, Detainment under that blanket term. This is why I asked for clarification as to precisely what you meant by this from the beginning
This just means “MPs being in the area” rather than “The Marine has been detained by the MPs”. There is a significant difference.
Effectively as far as I read this, the intention is that if someone is being an absolute assclown during briefing and being intentionally disruptive you can shoot them without going to the MPs first (because we all know in briefing calling the MPs in just makes things massively worse).
This isn’t actually a recent change as far as I know. Just a clarification and legal padding. I think most COs have shot someone being an asshat in briefing.
This should have a footnote, or be edited to be more clear then.
If as long as it’s ONLY allowed when MPs are nearby, this is acceptable. Probably not the best solution imo but whatever.
I also still want clarification on what “setting an example” means
I thank you, on behalf of the Council, for being straightforward while voicing your concerns. We couldn’t agree more that, this is definitely not even close to the roleplay standards we would like to see from our COs. Therefore, I would like to inform you that this player has been removed from CO Whitelist recently. While we punish LRP behaviour against COs, we also punish COs when they’re being LRP to the players.
Current Council is very swift and decisive in administering punishment for bad faith BE’s.
I should say for the record, up until a few years ago. The rules for BE’s were very vague and were never clarified too much. This is the most definitive and clear its been since the rules have been made.
