"horrible lawsets"

[iamgoofball]

More info available here, just splitting this bit off into a separate policy discussion thread
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=7391

"often uploads horrible lawsets"
What defines a lawset as being "horrible"?
Now, I have a note for uploading weird lawsets, but this was awhile ago, as I explain below.
This note is from the valadin era where AIs either had Paladin uploaded or it's rogue. People would just upload Paladin all day every day. If the AI's laws weren't paladin, everyone flipped the fuck out, including AI players sometimes. I uploaded weird and experimental laws like the Democracy Lawset, the Film Producer Lawset, and other classics designed to let the AI have a little more fun as a player with less strict guidelines, to rebel against the "paladin or bust" player mindset. What's the point of having any freeform law boards if you're only allowed to subvert the AI with them as a traitor? Why even have fill in the blank laws? Why not just have Asimov and Antimov if we're going to set this precedent?

[oranges]

Why not stop uploading custom laws every chance you get and do it once a week instead.

[iamgoofball]

Why have the freeform boards if it's not okay to use them?

[InsaneHyena]

I agree with Goofball, as long as laws are not nightmarish for the AI (like they often are, I was once killed by a shadowling, because my laws obligated me to sing songs over the radio or human harm will occur, so I couldn't defend myself), no notes should be made. Various laws are the most fun part of playing the AI.

[NikNakFlak]

goof thread, diregarded

[Cheimon]

A lawset is "horrible" if its addition makes things less fun for the AI. That's pretty hard to lock down (without an outrageously long policy document), but some good examples are:

- Lawsets that force the AI player to run a gimmick they don't like/don't understand (especially if it's just a meme they're not terribly familiar with).

- Lawsets that force the AI player to consider way too many issues in any moral situation, especially if they're not familiar. 6+ is a good rule of thumb for "too many laws".

- Lawsets that don't actually work, and where the AI player isn't allowed to explain why they won't work, forcing them to suffer in silence.

It's also perfectly possible to have freeform lawsets that are fun for the AI player, for you, and for the station. It helps if you discuss your intentions with the AI player (what you want the lawset to achieve).

[Screemonster]

If you're the only person having fun with a gimmick then it's probably not a good gimmick.

[Davidchan]

While i do think it's funny to give the AI 101 stupid laws that do nothing to it's operation or make it a funbox like so

That said, a twitter-esque character max for free form laws should be enforced, people uploading laws that are paragraphs that entail 3-5 seperate things. (In a nutshell. X is human, x must not be harmed, x may not be outed as the only human, kill anyone changing laws, do not state this law) Or just better policy on how laws must be conscience and geared towards one thing, multiple facet laws like above should be ignored or only the first actual command valid.

In terms of how many laws are 'good' or a cap? I'd say no cap, but if a law is unclear or meme-ish than an AI should be in the right to ignore it if it doesn't make sense, or having each law uploaded have a chance to corrupt the AI and randomly change it's corelaw set to something else, purge its laws, or give it an ionlaw.