Kill Baiters

[Fido 69]

Description: Allow players to kill those who intentionally shoot at them (whether it be to bait them or in a missed attempt in doing damage) so long as said player can prove it with video.

 

Reasoning: I am told that there is a problem with people intentionally baiting players into killing them by shooting around them or at them (but missing) to get them in trouble for RDM. This can be mitigated by considering any and all fire that is clearly intended to reach the victim as an attempt at their life, thereby granting the victim the right to defend themselves. To  do this, the victim must have video evidence which shows:

• The RP name of the person shooting at them
• The person facing at their direction
• The fire being in proximity of the victim
• Obvious intent to either do damage or bait the player

We already require video evidence for various admin situations- such as proving there was no KOS sign up before someone got shot to death inside a base. This would actually be beneficial to the team as we'd be taking on and dampening the baiting issue. Players would no longer get in trouble for reasonably perceiving threats against themselves, and minges will not get away with trying to get others in trouble for RDM.

 

 

Example situation-

https://medal.tv/clips/61196999/d1337wj8iwdB

In this situation, the person who I was chasing turned around and missed their noscope. As I can prove that they were trying to kill me, this should be considered self defense. 

 

 

The standard should always be- play stupid games, win stupid prizes. 

 

Additional Information: None

Edited August 11, 2021 by Fido

[ShankNinja 801]

9 minutes ago, Fido said:

Description: Allow players to kill those who intentionally shoot at them (whether it be to bait them or in a missed attempt in doing damage) so long as said player can prove it with video.

 

Reasoning: I am told that there is a problem with people intentionally baiting players into killing them by shooting around them or at them (but missing) to get them in trouble for RDM. This can be mitigated by considering any and all fire that is clearly intended to reach the victim as an attempt at their life, thereby granting the victim the right to defend themselves. To  do this, the victim must have video evidence which shows:

• The RP name of the person shooting at them
• The person facing at their direction
• The fire being in proximity of the victim
• Obvious intent to either do damage or bait the player

We already require video evidence for various admin situations- such as proving there was no KOS sign up before someone got shot to death inside a base. This would actually be beneficial to the team as we'd be taking on and dampening the baiting issue. Players would no longer get in trouble for reasonably perceiving threats against themselves, and minges will not get away with trying to get others in trouble for RDM.

 

The standard should always be- play stupid games, win stupid prizes. 

 

Additional Information: None

-1 this would be too hard to enforce. This server easily has over 100 people on it at any given time, so people are going to shoot in the direction of others all the time.

The rules specifically state "Disrespect, mic spam, or anything that would not result in damage being taken is not RP reasons to kill someone." this is because the logs cannot show intent, only results. You cannot prove intent to RDM if they never did any damage to anybody.

Why would there be a need to kill someone shooting next to you but doing no damage? If they aren't shooting you, you shouldn't be shooting them unless given an actual reason. Seems like this would cause more conflict than it would solve.

The main reason that might make sense to everyone: You should not have to attempt to 'prove' you didn't RDM someone and that they had probable reason to kill you. You having a video of 'intent to hurt' without taking any damage won't be enough, and your bullet-point list is not sufficient in my opinion.
 

• Obvious intent to either do damage or bait the player

Can you give me a couple examples that you think would be 'obvious intent'? If they aren't adverting Mug, Raid, Steal, etc. or actually harming anyone, how can you tell if they have intent? If I shoot my Ares Shrike at a wall should I have to worry that I might have scared someone into 'self defense' because they were nearby it? Rules shouldn't be vague, they should be as black and white as possible.

Edited August 11, 2021 by ShankNinja

[Fido 69]

1 minute ago, ShankNinja said:

-1 this would be too hard to enforce. This server easily has over 100 people on it at any given time, so people are going to shoot in the direction of others all the time.

The rules specifically state "Disrespect, mic spam, or anything that would not result in damage being taken is not RP reasons to kill someone." this is because the logs cannot show intent, only results. You cannot prove intent to RDM if they never did any damage to anybody.

Why would there be a need to kill someone shooting next to you but doing no damage? If they aren't shooting you, you shouldn't be shooting them unless given an actual reason. Seems like this would cause more conflict than it would solve.

The main reason that might make sense to everyone: You should not have to attempt to 'prove' you didn't RDM someone and that they had probable reason to kill you. You having a video of 'intent to hurt' without taking any damage won't be enough, and your bullet-point list is not sufficient in my opinion.
 

• Obvious intent to either do damage or bait the player

Can you give me a couple examples that you think would be 'obvious intent'? If they aren't adverting Mug, Raid, Steal, etc. or actually harming anyone, how can you tell if they have intent? If I shoot my Ares Shrike at a wall should I have to worry that I might have scared someone into 'self defense' because they were nearby it? Rules shouldn't be vague, they should be as black and white as possible.

 

 

I respect your opinion, but I disagree with a few of your points. 

 

Quote

this would be too hard to enforce. This server easily has over 100 people on it at any given time, so people are going to shoot in the direction of others all the time.

This would not be an appropriate line of logic when it comes to dealing with staff sits. As I stated, there are situations for which video evidence is required in order to disprove or prove someone's guilt. If the player has the ability to get a clip for us to view, then it's considered evidence that we must look at before making a conclusion. 

 

 

Quote

The rules specifically state "Disrespect, mic spam, or anything that would not result in damage being taken is not RP reasons to kill someone." this is because the logs cannot show intent, only results. You cannot prove intent to RDM if they never did any damage to anybody.

This is a good argument when it comes to current enforcement, as the rules clearly state there needs to be damage done for one to defend themselves. However, the suggestion is for us to change that policy to what is being recommended. 

You can prove intent if there is video evidence, as shown. 

 

 

Quote

Why would there be a need to kill someone shooting next to you but doing no damage? If they aren't shooting you, you shouldn't be shooting them unless given an actual reason. Seems like this would cause more conflict than it would solve.

Clearly shooting around you is one thing, but clearly trying to kill you but missing is another. Hence video.

 

Quote

Can you give me a couple examples that you think would be 'obvious intent'?

See video.

[Glorbnob 260]

-1 not needed it would cause more issues then it would solve

Edited August 11, 2021 by Glorbnob

[smileeface 447]

still at the end of the day you’re going to need video evidence, majority of the time the person doesn’t have video proof so what if you kill the person trying to “bait” you, just looks like rdm then. -1 this will be too hard to enforce just as shank said.

[Fido 69]

Just now, smileeface said:

still at the end of the day you’re going to need video evidence, majority of the time the person doesn’t have video proof so what if you kill the person trying to “bait” you, just looks like rdm then. -1 this will be too hard to enforce just as shank said.

Respectfully and again, the suggestion is to allow video evidence if it is clear the person meant to kill the victim but just kept missing. We already need video evidence for various sits, not terribly sure how we can't look at video for this as well.

[ShankNinja 801]

11 minutes ago, Fido said:

You can prove intent if there is video evidence, as shown. 

 

Clearly shooting around you is one thing, but clearly trying to kill you but missing is another. Hence video.

 

See video.

So the guy shoots one bullet in the direction of two people chasing him... does no damage... and then gets RDM'd. That's what I'm seeing in this video.

This player is not baiting you, this is not an example of baiting. He's defending himself from the police:

• You may not kill civil protection while wanted unless they are making an attempt to actively arrest you.
• Disrespect, mic spam, or anything that would not result in damage being taken is not RP reasons to kill someone.

What I am getting from this video and suggestion is the following:

• You RDM'd a player and want to have that RDM be posthumously justified.
• You want Police to have the option to strip all Citizen's ability to defend themselves from a group of arresting officers due to their inability to actually carry out an arrest, if they are recording.

Looks to be a bit of an edge case man.

50 minutes ago, Fido said:

Reasoning: I am told that there is a problem with people intentionally baiting players into killing them by shooting around them or at them (but missing) to get them in trouble for RDM.

Who told you this? If it's a problem, then I'd like to see a video of an actual baiting occur. If it's just a problem because you got baited and didn't know the rules, then I'm sorry man: I don't think changing the rules is going to help anyone out here.

[aidanpoppas123 512]

Shank said it all

-1

[tdizz 1,061]

-1

no need to add on, shank pretty much covered this.

[UrdnotWrex 94]

I agree with @ShankNinja but sort of for the opposite reason. If the person is intending to RDM you and missing, or even putting on a convincing enough act to make it appear as such, and you kill him in self defense while recording it, then I'd argue the opposite -- shooting them would seem justified and not RDM. But the burden would likely have to be on you to prove it if you get reported. Logs won't back you up, and on the surface it will look like RDM. Too much of a sticky and unnecessary effort for what likely is at best an edge case.

Either way, fundamentally I have to -1 for this reason alone:

1 hour ago, ShankNinja said:

Rules shouldn't be vague, they should be as black and white as possible.

 

[Fido 69]

Just now, UrdnotWrex said:

I agree with @ShankNinja but sort of for the opposite reason. If the person is intending to RDM you and missing, or even putting on a convincing enough act to make it appear as such, and you kill him in self defense while recording it, then I'd argue the opposite -- shooting them would seem justified and not RDM.

 

That's the suggestion- to allow us to submit video so we aren't in trouble for rdm. 

[Guest proggy]

 
Denied

We don't plan on changing any rules regarding self-defense at this time.