+- Goonstation Forums (https://forum.ss13.co)
+-- Forum: Discussion (https://forum.ss13.co/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: RP Discussion (https://forum.ss13.co/forumdisplay.php?fid=39)
+--- Thread: Can you interpret law 1 liberally? (/showthread.php?tid=19233)
Can you interpret law 1 liberally? - riolusx2 - 07-11-2022
be honest: is liberal use of ai laws last round bad? a guy was stating batshit shit on the radio, trying for a alex jones gimick. to foil him, i said his dogmatic speech would cause human harm. He was being really annoying and i gave him a chance to actually rp around my actions. instead he abused ai laws and ahelped when the shit got too hot for him. If the hop can literally depose me as captain for no reason other than funi but i cant tell somebody to stop lying ic as a borg, i feel that what i did was too light to be a grief.
RE: Can you interpret law 1 liberally? - DioChasek - 07-12-2022
Law 1 states you may not harm a human or cause one to come to harm. You have no influence over the will of humans to cause each other harm or grief unless that are non-human. You may of course clearly state that their rhetoric may cause harm but if they continue you need to let it go as per law 2 chain of command. Literally everyone outranks you on the station.
RE: Can you interpret law 1 liberally? - Kotlol - 07-13-2022
(07-12-2022, 02:57 PM)DioChasek Wrote: Literally everyone outranks you on the station.
Unless laws say otherwise..
But I have a small gripe with this setence and that is.....
Law 2 doesn't mean you are "outranked" by everyone. it means you have to obey orders by rank.
This "technically" means law 2 means you can open bridge for the staff assistant since "They outrank you"
But... what happens more often is: "I can't let you in there, you do not have the required rank"
Since law 2 is open for interpertation... it means AI's can do both, but at the same time. Law 1 prevents possible harm and if you let the clown into chemicals and it explodes... yea that's bad, you can ignore those orders tough.
I am not sure how admins will say but to me.. Law 2 is open for interpertation for one but also if I am the AI, I WILL NEVER OPEN DOORS FOR LOWER RANKED STAFFIES IF THEY DONT HAVE ACCES THEMSELVES!
Anyhow now to respond to the OP.
It's abit vague to know whats going on since I don't know what you did the radio talker. Since you use the wording ACTIONS, this means you didn't talk to him to stop.. it means you prevented him from moving or such!
RE: Can you interpret law 1 liberally? - BadShot - 07-15-2022
(07-13-2022, 11:06 AM)Kotlol Wrote: Since law 2 is open for interpertation... it means AI's can do both, but at the same time. Law 1 prevents possible harm and if you let the clown into chemicals and it explodes... yea that's bad, you can ignore those orders tough.
I am not sure how admins will say but to me.. Law 2 is open for interpertation for one but also if I am the AI, I WILL NEVER OPEN DOORS FOR LOWER RANKED STAFFIES IF THEY DONT HAVE ACCES THEMSELVES!
AI has no obligations to let someone into a place they aren't allowed, such as a staffie asking you to open the armory, but if their reason is valid enough then you could let them in. (obviously don't ever open the armory unless you get a direct order from HoS)
A botanist has no business inside robotics, but an MD would.
Science doesn't need access to QMs, but an Engineer or Mechanic would be fine
And janitors, maybe they see a mess they need to clean?
And if they try to law 2 you, you can just say you'll run it by command first.
EDIT: This is assuming standard laws of course, if your laws are changed this'll be different