The disallowance of mute in security and the opinionated reasoning behind it.

Unified DevForums for Citadel Station Main
Post Reply
Seffira
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2019 1:25 am
Contact:

The disallowance of mute in security and the opinionated reasoning behind it.

Post by Seffira »

Hello, I used to play a mute security officer who goes by the name 'Leandris Ash' on main before being told to stop due to her having the 'mute' trait. the reasoning given was that speaking in comms is an absolute requirement for security, as well as head positions, and regardless of the requirement, is simply inconvenient to others. another arguement I can remember being made against it is there simply being no justification for NT hiring a mute security officer. lastly, some have argued that sec is a teamwork-oriented division and mute goes against that. I would like to take the opportunity to argue against these statements in an attempt to change these opinions.

Firstly, as a mute, you can in fact speak. through the circuitry system, you can create a text to speech device in about 30 seconds, that converts whatever is typed on it into hearable words. Second, the station-bounced radio is available in every single security checkpoint, alongside two sec headsets to extract keys from, and a screwdriver. beside that, you have the ability to PDA message, as well as emote or write on paper, and paper is available in the loadout menu. your pda contains a free pen.

Regarding mute being inconvenient, deaf, nearsighted, blind, pacifist, brain tumor, blood deficiency, and simply sucking at your job, are all equally if not moreso inconvenient. RDS is not mentioned as according to some admins, that is already disallowed in head and sec positions. The inconvenience argument also doesn't make much sense to me, as ss13 is designed to throw many inconveniences at you, and this one can be worked around quite easily. practically all negative traits are inconvenient to the player and those around them by design, and yet many are still allowed.

Tackling the 'NT would not hire you' argument. This one probably makes the least sense of all to me. The whole theme of NT is a giant, bureaucratic mess of incompetence and getting away with being as cheap as humanly possible. It is not unbelieveable that they would hire a security officer that cannot speak, considering they hire traitors, changelings, revolutionaries, etc despite all their background checking, crazy complicated soul-binding contracts, and so on.

Finally, regarding the teamwork argument, EVERY single role on the station barring assistant and their side roles (clown, mime) can be argued to also require teamwork and communication. mute does not prevent this in any capacity, it simply adds complexity to it. That itself is not against the rules, and if you're going to disallow mute on those grounds, it would stand to reason that every negative trait should be disallowed in every division by that same argument.

and to add another point onto this post, I was under the impression that main was supposed to be a rather unbelieveable, non-serious station where you can do many inconvenient and dangerous things as long as you are doing your job to the best of your ability and have good intentions. I hope to get this decision reversed, as this was an instance where a character I created was genuinely engrossing to play, and it hurts to be disallowed from doing so, especially on such opinionated, debatable grounds.

Also, demotion exists as a mechanic that can easily tackle this issue. if an HOS or captain believes you are not good enough to be sec, wether by competence or disability, they can just demote you. there's simply no solid argument to outright disallow it.

side note: a round in which I was told that I could not play mute sec anymore, and was therefore my last round as security with this character. me and a few other friends of my character helped me petition for my job, and we gained approval from the captain to do so, who was also fine with my character's condition. the result was as follows https://imgur.com/a/xuzFV7G

I hope you'll consider how I feel about this situation and my desire to play my character again as well as getting more trait diversity for others in the same kind of situation. Thank you for listening.
Last edited by Seffira on Mon Mar 25, 2019 5:03 am, edited 4 times in total.

Cameron Lancaster
Junior Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2017 3:18 pm
Contact:

Re: The disallowance of mute in security and the flawed reasoning behind it.

Post by Cameron Lancaster »

Seffira wrote:
Mon Mar 25, 2019 1:47 am
Regarding mute being inconvenient, deaf, nearsighted, blind, pacifist, brain tumor, blood deficiency, and simply sucking at your job, are all equally if not moreso inconvenient. RDS is not mentioned as according to some admins, that is already disallowed in head and sec positions. The inconvenience argument also doesn't make much sense to me, as ss13 is designed to throw many inconveniences at you, and this one can be worked around quite easily. practically all negative traits are inconvenient to the player and those around them by design, and yet many are still allowed.
This is a good reason to disallow all debilitating traits, not a good reason to allow being mute. In addition, SS13 is a game where you may be inconvenienced by circumstance, the actions of antagonists, or in-character conflict like breaches of corporate regulations. People may also be inexperienced or out of practice with their job--it happens, but it's not on purpose. Taking the mute trait makes you a less effective member of your team by virtue of a choice you made. You are purposely hampering your team, regardless of what efforts you may go through to partially make up for that disability.

It would absolutely not be a pleasant experience to work under a deafmute Head of Security, or go on patrol with a pacifist Security Officer who can only watch while you get attacked due to their trait choice. When you are a member of Security (or any Head of Staff), you are an important member of your team and others in your department rely on you to be effective. Purposely making yourself weaker for snowflake points or !FUN! is unfair to the rest of your teammates who do not get a say in that decision and are forced to suffer because of it.

kevinz000
Senior Member
Posts: 523
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 11:37 am
Contact:

Re: The disallowance of mute in security and the flawed reasoning behind it.

Post by kevinz000 »

Seffira wrote:
Mon Mar 25, 2019 1:47 am
Hello, I used to play a mute security officer who goes by the name 'Leandris Ash' on main before being told to stop due to her having the 'mute' trait. the reasoning given was that speaking in comms is an absolute requirement for security, as well as head positions, and regardless of the requirement, is simply inconvenient to others. another arguement I can remember being made against it is there simply being no justification for NT hiring a mute security officer. lastly, some have argued that sec is a teamwork-oriented division and mute goes against that. I would like to take the opportunity to argue against these statements in an attempt to change these opinions.

Firstly, as a mute, you can in fact speak. through the circuitry system, you can create a text to speech device in about 30 seconds, that converts whatever is typed on it into hearable words. Second, the station-bounced radio is available in every single security checkpoint, alongside two sec headsets to extract keys from, and a screwdriver. beside that, you have the ability to PDA message, as well as emote or write on paper, and paper is available in the loadout menu. your pda contains a free pen.

That is not a roundstart item and it's quite clunky to use, the difference between life or death in an emergency. Also, gets fried by EMPs and can easily get lost.
A roundstart item or headset TTS needs to be coded, and even then ti's still a significant disadvantage as people can just steal it to render you unable to communicate/call for help.


Regarding mute being inconvenient, deaf, nearsighted, blind, pacifist, brain tumor, blood deficiency, and simply sucking at your job, are all equally if not moreso inconvenient. RDS is not mentioned as according to some admins, that is already disallowed in head and sec positions. The inconvenience argument also doesn't make much sense to me, as ss13 is designed to throw many inconveniences at you, and this one can be worked around quite easily. practically all negative traits are inconvenient to the player and those around them by design, and yet many are still allowed.

It's not just inconvenient to you, it goes against the bsaic functions of your job. You need to talk to do your job as security. It's not like a job where you have some piece of machinery to work with, or for medical, a patient that's basically a piece of machinery (hah) that you have to fix.
Security is a social job and not being able to talk hampers it massively. Further, not being able to cry for help and communicate efficiently makes you a bad team player, if you were one to begin with.
Why should we make an exception for you? You're not the only player here, and you're definitely not the only one we're giving weight to. People being mute security officers make the existing problem of security not talking so much worse.


Tackling the 'NT would not hire you' argument. This one probably makes the least sense of all to me. The whole theme of NT is a giant, bureaucratic mess of incompetence and getting away with being as cheap as humanly possible. It is not unbelieveable that they would hire a security officer that cannot speak, considering they hire traitors, changelings, revolutionaries, etc despite all their background checking, crazy complicated soul-binding contracts, and so on.

Almost like it's theoretically possible for antags to camofladge and if you can't TALK during an interview without a TTS device it'd be noticed off the bat?! No. This is a weak argument from an OOC perspective too, since I don't like making IC realism arguments on main rather than RP, but no.

Finally, regarding the teamwork argument, EVERY single role on the station barring assistant and their side roles (clown, mime) can be argued to also require teamwork and communication. mute does not prevent this in any capacity, it simply adds complexity to it. That itself is not against the rules, and if you're going to disallow mute on those grounds, it would stand to reason that every negative trait should be disallowed in every division by that same argument.

Not every role is as crucial as security to stay in touch with teammates. We're finding it against the rules for your character to be a mute as a security position because they can't nearly as effectively do their jobs even if you want to. You don't need to communicate at a moment's notice as medical/engineering/science/mining/assistants/anything else to do your job effectively, and you definitely aren't a loot pinata that can't yell for help if you're mute as one of those jobs (unless you're powergaming in which case yeah everyone's a loot pinata haha)

and to add another point onto this post, I was under the impression that main was supposed to be a rather unbelieveable, non-serious station where you can do many inconvenient and dangerous things as long as you are doing your job to the best of your ability and have good intentions. I hope to get this decision reversed, as this was an instance where a character I created was genuinely engrossing to play, and it hurts to be disallowed from doing so, especially on such opinionated, debatable grounds.

Main is a MRP server. Arguing that things are to be unbelievable and non serious is a nil point. Your character is fun for you, but not for others who have to deal with mutecurity.

Also, demotion exists as a mechanic that can easily tackle this issue. if an HOS or captain believes you are not good enough to be sec, wether by competence or disability, they can just demote you. there's simply no solid argument to outright disallow it.

People shouldn't have to consider having to play with security that can't talk to justify themselves or yell for help or coordinate vocally with teammates every single round.

side note: a round in which I was told that I could not play mute sec anymore, and was therefore my last round as security with this character. me and a few other friends of my character helped me petition for my job, and we gained approval from the captain to do so, who was also fine with my character's condition. the result was as follows https://imgur.com/a/xuzFV7G

Your friends petitioning for things IC and some IC captain giving IC approval isn't relevant to this discussion.

I hope you'll consider how I feel about this situation and my desire to play my character again as well as getting more trait diversity for others in the same kind of situation. Thank you for listening.
I actually think mute security would be interesting. I really do. It's silly but when done well it can be interesting, but the simple fact of the matter is. I'm fenced on it, I think being mute is one of the most dibilitating things in the game other than if you wanted to be physically handicapped and confined to a wheelchair, but hey. It's interesting, even if it makes you far less useful than a normal officer.
But there's asnother issue:
Why should we make exceptions when most can't do it right? Where does the line end? What happens if we let you do it and lots more others decide to jump on the train? Why should we sacrifice the experience of others to let you play as one of the most important jobs on the station with a character that is not at all effective in said role?

More importantly: The answer has already been no for about more than a day now. Constantly bringing it up in adminforum instead of going to the forums at the start when you were told to does not look good on you. Constantly bringing the topic up in admin forum doesn't look good on you. Constantly arguing against rulings after what I'd consider the majority of the administration have looked at it and said "nah" doesn't look good on you. Constant complaints and arguments will not help your case after a ruling has been made, by multiple admins AND headmins.

So in no uncertain terms:
Get over the character and move on, wait a while, and then have TTS devices added for mute trait + loadout, and try again, and next time, argue why it's good for the server, not why it's good for you.

Also if you name a thread "the flawed reasoning behind it" I'm honestly not going take it well because our reasoning isn't flawed just because it's not your reasoning lmao.

Seffira
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2019 1:25 am
Contact:

Re: The disallowance of mute in security and the flawed reasoning behind it.

Post by Seffira »

kevinz000 wrote:
Mon Mar 25, 2019 4:22 am
Also if you name a thread "the flawed reasoning behind it" I'm honestly not going take it well because our reasoning isn't flawed just because it's not your reasoning lmao.
changed to opinionated, as you are correct that 'flawed' is subjective.

Redtail
Member
Posts: 118
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 10:04 am
Contact:

Re: The disallowance of mute in security and the opinionated reasoning behind it.

Post by Redtail »

It feels like if you’re just going the TTS route, you’re defeating the purpose of the mute trait to begin with. And no one’s saying you’re -bad- at acting it out. It just puts the rest of the security team at a distinct disadvantage considering one of their officers are unable to reliably communicate with the rest of the team.

Regarding “inconvenience”. There’s a distinct difference in the “inconveniences” the game throws at you mid-round through character interactions or you doing something wrong compared to choosing to disable yourself and negatively impact the experience of the rest of the sec team.

Regarding teamwork and your comparison to other jobs. I can’t think of another job that carries as much dangerous equipment as sec does. Handcuffs, stunbatons, and tasers. Science, chemistry, and botany can make some dangerous stuff. Most of the other departments have access to obtaining dangerous things as well, that’s just part of the game. Most of the time the other departments shouldn’t be handling such dangerous equipment [at least out in the open]. Either way, security carries incredibly dangerous tools on their person out among everyone else in the station. That makes them prime targets for traitors, and changelings and all the other dangers onboard the station. Communication is key in keeping yourself, and everyone else on the sec team [and of course the whole station] safe. If within one slip or fall you lose access to most if not all forms of communication [whether to dropping what’s in your hand, or having someone take your PDA off your body], that’s putting dangerous tools in people’s hands -and- everyone else at risk. Then you have no easy way of alerting the rest of your team.

Sure, mute adds more complexity to communication. More complexity that an already fairly hectic job, security, doesn’t need considering everything else they have to deal with. Sure, I’ll concede that it’s “interesting” in the sense that it’s different from the norm. But different from the norm isn’t always a good thing, especially with something that can easily get in the way of your job and hurt everyone else.

Most of the other jobs also don’t require the same level of communication that security does. Cargo might just need to say they’re ordering a crate, or what bounties they’re looking for. Miners might let folks know of important structures are finds. Engineering can let folks know about breaches, but they’re typically informed of breaches before heading out to fix them so , they don’t necessarily -need- to talk. Scientists typically are doing, well, whatever science does. Research things. Security needs to keep an eye on the entire station to protect themselves, their team, and every other non-hostile member on the station. That requires coordination with the rest of sec and general information about the going-ons regarding sighted EoCs, people dropping off the crew monitor, and other similar incidents. Being mute throws an unexpected wrench in that, as they have to take their PDA out, find a sec officer or AI or -whatever- to send a message to, then they have to hope that the person still has their PDA on them. A TTs might alleviate but at that point, with all the effort to go -around- the mute trait, just cut out the middleman and take the mute trait off.

Sure, demotion exists as a mechanic. But if you’re playing a character that gets demoted every round for being unfit for duty due to being mute…you might as well get rid of the trait to begin with and save everyone the hassle of going through the motions to demote them.

You should consider how everyone else feels about the situation, and how your actions impact them. What may be a neat character for you may be a pain for everyone else who has to work with you. It’s interesting in the sense that it’s not used often, and for good reason.

Weirn
Junior Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2019 5:29 am
Contact:

Re: The disallowance of mute in security and the opinionated reasoning behind it.

Post by Weirn »

While I do understand the points you are making this does not necessarily change how I feel about the decision. Not only do I feel that there are other ways to deal with the problem at hand that was not being considered. Another solution is to simply have the mute officer have a partner to work with. A practice that law enforcement does all the time and a practice that should be done and encouraged all the time with sec officers on the station. This is because mute or not it is not hard to jump a lone sec officer and drag them off into maint, and steal their stuff while people stare or yell it into comms. That happens it is a fact of the game. Saying a TTS defeats the purpose of being mute is like saying prescription glasses and goggles defeats the purpose of being nearsighted. Being mute is nothing like being a pacifist it is an inconvenience of a trait that has simple solutions that are preset in the game. There are also bounce radios something sec officers should be carrying. Bounce radios can pick up the sound of a TTS and can have their own frequency so that sec can talk in private. Bounce radios are available in every sec security outpost and office because comms being down is considered the most dangerous time for a reason. Bounce radios are not hindered by this and I know some CEs who tell their engineers to always carry one since engineering needs the same level of communication sec does.

I feel most strongly at the complete disregard of the petition that I held. You say I should consider how everyone else feels about the situation even though this was the very purpose of the petition. This was done so that other players know the situation and if they support mutes being in sec they would sign it. I answered their questions about it and for the most part the answers I provided them made them agree, support, and sign the petition. The petition was even signed by other sec officers showing that nobody is as bothers by a mute in sec as you may believe they would be. So when I assumed the captain contacted you the admins about it and it was announced that Ash could be a sec officer regardless of her being mute I thought it was over with. Then when I hear the following day that she is not allowed to be a sec officer anymore not only did I feel like it was a wasted effort it felt like you the admins do not care about what we the players think. I even brought this up with other players and they felt like you had the final say and nothing they could say would have a sway on the decision made here. I reached out to Drewfus about this so I can state my case and I even made it clear if we need to have a conversation about it one on one I am open to talk and all you have to do is reach out to me. I am willing to answer questions and concerns about it and even have a serious debate about the issue, but instead I have to make an account for the forums so that I can have this talk. I am trying to find a compromise and so far I am feeling like there has only been resistance. I ask of you that if you want to talk about this further that you reach out to me and we can talk about it in private. I am Weirn on discord I am the only one that exists, and my email MHickmanC@yahoo.com I really do hope we can come to a compromise to this that we can be both satisfied with instead of having to discuss like this.

kevinz000
Senior Member
Posts: 523
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 11:37 am
Contact:

Re: The disallowance of mute in security and the opinionated reasoning behind it.

Post by kevinz000 »

I've already addressed the bounced radio/TTS points. Having a partner is fine until you have more than one mutecurity officer and it becomes a handicap.

Your petition is an IC petition. Don't assume it was brought up to admins. Don't assume it means everyone who signed it OOCly cares enough to support this. Your petition doesn't mean we're going to change the rules. Don't feel insulted by it, it's just how it is, we usuaully don't change/make rules based on an IC petition rather than things being brought up OOCly. We care about what players think, but a few people signing an IC petition isn't going to exempt someone from the rules alone or make us bend over backwards. Yeah ofcourse there's going to be resistance when people want one person to be a specific exception to a long time held rule, one that's there for a good reason.
If they want to post their thoughts here, this is the place. I'm not going to be DMing someone over it, and haha hell no I'm not going to use email for an admin conversation. If they have something they can say to me they can say it here. Other staff can always act differently from me but this is what I recommend for everyone and this is how I've always handled things.

Burger
Junior Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2019 9:00 am
Contact:

Re: The disallowance of mute in security and the opinionated reasoning behind it.

Post by Burger »

Honestly it would be nice if sec players were held to some degree of standards but I think this can really only be an issue if the security slot was a highly sought after role. On most shifts, there aren't any security until 30 minutes in, and where there is, it's usually an officer, a detective, and a warden.

I've seen a lot of shitsec players such as those who don't wear shoes, who don't wear their uniform, are pacifist, are mute, have a phobia of security... ect. These are usually deemed IC issues, which is ultra unfortunate as there is no Head of Security or Captain, or they're both retarded.

User avatar
moltoretardo
Junior Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu May 16, 2019 12:33 pm
Contact:

Re: The disallowance of mute in security and the opinionated reasoning behind it.

Post by moltoretardo »

Not wearing your uniform means that you’re a shitsec? Shiiiiiet
:woozy_face:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest