/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

So, with a recent ban appeal involving killing a borg for following its laws, I think it's time that we rethink the policy on that. It's realistic and expected that conflict between security and cyborgs should exist- their jobs often directly conflict, especially on chaotic conversion based modes and when lethal force is needed to stop someone.

"As a nonantagonist human, killing or detonating silicons in the presence of a viable and reasonably expedient alternative and without cause to be concerned of potential subversion is a violation of Server Rule 1." -The Rules

I think that killing a silicon should be accepted as a viable way to stop the silicon from interfering with whatever you are doing that happens to conflict. For example, if it's a rev round and a silicon drags away head revs you are trying to execute, it should be okay to kill the cyborg. The catch is this: You must repair it as soon as possible, or when the situation calms down. This seems fair to me because there's two ways to stop a cyborg without killing it:

1) Lockdown. This is not reasonable normally because you have to ask the RD, and he'll ask why, etc which takes forever. Lockdown is only really useful if you don't know where the borg is and it's acted/acting like a shit and you want to stop it.

2) Chain flash. You can't realistically flash a borg forever and deal with whatever mess the borg made while you're flashing him. Telling them to stop sometimes works but more often than not they just run off or cite law one and keep doing what they're doing.

So updated version:
"As a nonantagonist human, killing or detonating silicons without repairing them at the earliest possible time in the presence of a viable and reasonably expedient alternative and without cause to be concerned of potential subversion is a violation of Server Rule 1. (You still need a reason to kill one, but as long as you repair it swiftly, it will be treated as critting another human- needs escalation but is okay as long as you heal them.)"

As a frequent AI player, when I see non antags killing a borg its almost always because that borg is being an ass (typically playing really fast and lose with law interpretations) , occasionally, but not very often theres a conflict with security trying to harm humans and the borg trying to make them stop, which is an entirely reasonable and not even that common IC conflict. Maybe there's a basil/sybil difference, but I don't see this issue happening often at all.

As for the repair clause, lets realize that most players don't actually know how to repair a borg themselves, and the game modes where the issue of a borg/crew conflict is most likely to happen are the game modes where you might have good reasons to not trust robotics. And lets nor forget that in the case of most conversion antag roundtypes (which seems to be the most discussed scenario) the game usually doesnt last that long and typically a lot of people find themselves removed from the game.

No, you know what the annoying interaction between humans and borgs is? People blowing up borgs when they could just as easily lock them down. Seriously it makes holes in the station and hurts anyone nearby, and anyone in a position to explode borgs should know all of this before they do it. /rant

EagleWiz wrote:As a frequent AI player, when I see non antags killing a borg its almost always because that borg is being an ass (typically playing really fast and lose with law interpretations) , occasionally, but not very often theres a conflict with security trying to harm humans and the borg trying to make them stop, which is an entirely reasonable and not even that common IC conflict. Maybe there's a basil/sybil difference, but I don't see this issue happening often at all.

As for the repair clause, lets realize that most players don't actually know how to repair a borg themselves, and the game modes where the issue of a borg/crew conflict is most likely to happen are the game modes where you might have good reasons to not trust robotics. And lets nor forget that in the case of most conversion antag roundtypes (which seems to be the most discussed scenario) the game usually doesnt last that long and typically a lot of people find themselves removed from the game.

No, you know what the annoying interaction between humans and borgs is? People blowing up borgs when they could just as easily lock them down. Seriously it makes holes in the station and hurts anyone nearby, and anyone in a position to explode borgs should know all of this before they do it. /rant

Only emagged borgs blow holes in the station when exploded, dont they?

Not-Dorsidarf wrote:

EagleWiz wrote:As a frequent AI player, when I see non antags killing a borg its almost always because that borg is being an ass (typically playing really fast and lose with law interpretations) , occasionally, but not very often theres a conflict with security trying to harm humans and the borg trying to make them stop, which is an entirely reasonable and not even that common IC conflict. Maybe there's a basil/sybil difference, but I don't see this issue happening often at all.

As for the repair clause, lets realize that most players don't actually know how to repair a borg themselves, and the game modes where the issue of a borg/crew conflict is most likely to happen are the game modes where you might have good reasons to not trust robotics. And lets nor forget that in the case of most conversion antag roundtypes (which seems to be the most discussed scenario) the game usually doesnt last that long and typically a lot of people find themselves removed from the game.

No, you know what the annoying interaction between humans and borgs is? People blowing up borgs when they could just as easily lock them down. Seriously it makes holes in the station and hurts anyone nearby, and anyone in a position to explode borgs should know all of this before they do it. /rant

Only emagged borgs blow holes in the station when exploded, dont they?

Yes, but even non-emagged borgs still cause a damaging explosion, and borgs with the legitimate illegal equipment module upgrade also explode violently. Overall the lockdown button needs to be used before the fucking blow button but it doesnt ever seem to. I have had AI's blow me near humans instead of just locking me down before.

Frankly why do we even have a borg explosion button? why not just have it shut the damn borg down?

How about replacing it with a killswitch that deals oxygen damage to a cyborg and leaves an intact body, unless the borg is emagged/hacked as a means of preventing the MMI from being interrogated?

Anonmare wrote:How about replacing it with a killswitch that deals oxygen damage to a cyborg and leaves an intact body, unless the borg is emagged/hacked as a means of preventing the MMI from being interrogated?

Still has the problem of people pressing it first and asking questions never. I personally dont know how to solve that problem. Lockdown should be the first button people press but it often never is.

Dr_bee wrote:

Anonmare wrote:How about replacing it with a killswitch that deals oxygen damage to a cyborg and leaves an intact body, unless the borg is emagged/hacked as a means of preventing the MMI from being interrogated?

Still has the problem of people pressing it first and asking questions never. I personally dont know how to solve that problem. Lockdown should be the first button people press but it often never is.

How about this: Lockdown functions as normal. Killswitch isn't instantaneous but will quickly kill the borg in under 20-30 seconds, but the borg can continue to move, attack and use electronic equipment as usual - but the killswitch and lockdown option are mutually exclusive, incentivizing lockdown over the killswitch.

Nanotrasen hired clowns to code their robots and thought that would be a !!FUN!! addition.

Give the control console a "recall" button which autopilots all non-locked down borgs to the nearest borg charger, so you can get the RD to force the borgs to get lost.

How about giving lockdown to more people than just RD? Maybe even just a second console by the upload.

Iatots wrote:How about giving lockdown to more people than just RD? Maybe even just a second console by the upload.

I personally don't think remote lockdown is a super interesting mechanic and would prefer a new method of temporarily stopping borgs, borg cuffs would be fine probably

I had code for putting borg cuffs on borgs but it was bad and I scrapped it and i also couldnt make it apply a lockdown because i didnt know how

BeeSting12 wrote:I had code for putting borg cuffs on borgs but it was bad and I scrapped it and i also couldnt make it apply a lockdown because i didnt know how

It should just be a variable, just have it set to 1 while the cuffs are on and have it set to 0 when they're removed.

Granted you could use them to bypass a borg's remotely triggered lockdown but you can do that with a multitool anyway

Time for cyborg dismemberment.
Smash their legs when they get annoying.
Ion rifle rework:
Aim at chest to deplete charge.
Aim at legs to cripple.
Aim at head to mess with their vision and maybe stun.
Aim at arms to mess with their modules. CAREFUL, it might electrify limbs.

Arianya wrote:I'd be curious what "an attempt" is from your point of view there, because from where I'm standing I suspect its going to lead to a lot of "I dragged it to outside science/sci lobby and shouted at R&D that it needed fixing", which isn't really of much comfort to the borg, nor likely to get it repaired if the roboticists aren't there/have gone missing/etc

It already happens with cloning, and I suspect it'd happen all that much more with borgs if this were to be implemented.

I wonder if people said the same thing when we allowed killing people within reasonable escalation as long as they're cloned.

BeeSting12 wrote:I wonder if people said the same thing when we allowed killing people within reasonable escalation as long as they're cloned.

this is more like killing sec officers who try to arrest you, rather than kicking shitty greyshirts who steal your shit though

Not-Dorsidarf wrote: this is more like killing sec officers who try to arrest you, rather than kicking shitty greyshirts who steal your shit though

No, its definitely more like kicking greyshirts who steal your shit. There are some bad borg players out there, and outside of sec deciding to harm a bunch of humans and borgs trying to stop them the annoying greyshirt-esque ones are the borgs that get killed.

EagleWiz wrote:

Not-Dorsidarf wrote: this is more like killing sec officers who try to arrest you, rather than kicking shitty greyshirts who steal your shit though

No, its definitely more like kicking greyshirts who steal your shit. There are some bad borg players out there, and outside of sec deciding to harm a bunch of humans and borgs trying to stop them the annoying greyshirt-esque ones are the borgs that get killed.

It's almost guaranteed an admin will tell you to adminhelp it too- Great, you just did, has it fixed anything ICly? No. The admin isn't going to teleport the prisoner the borg took back, even if you did no harm to the prisoner and the borg was just being a dick. The best that will happen is the borg getting banned.

BeeSting12 wrote:The best that will happen is the borg getting banned.

so, the entire reason to ahelp something against the rules happening?

Does the borg getting banned fix anything that the borg caused?

Iatots wrote:Time for cyborg dismemberment.
Smash their legs when they get annoying.
Ion rifle rework:
Aim at chest to deplete charge.
Aim at legs to cripple.
Aim at head to mess with their vision and maybe stun.
Aim at arms to mess with their modules. CAREFUL, it might electrify limbs.

This would actually be cool and I could see it get expanded on. Instead of v-tech modules we could have tread legs you have to physically attach to the borg, for example

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Iatots wrote:Time for cyborg dismemberment.
Smash their legs when they get annoying.
Ion rifle rework:
Aim at chest to deplete charge.
Aim at legs to cripple.
Aim at head to mess with their vision and maybe stun.
Aim at arms to mess with their modules. CAREFUL, it might electrify limbs.

This would actually be cool and I could see it get expanded on. Instead of v-tech modules we could have tread legs you have to physically attach to the borg, for example

Modular borgs.

cedarbridge wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Iatots wrote:Time for cyborg dismemberment.
Smash their legs when they get annoying.
Ion rifle rework:
Aim at chest to deplete charge.
Aim at legs to cripple.
Aim at head to mess with their vision and maybe stun.
Aim at arms to mess with their modules. CAREFUL, it might electrify limbs.

This would actually be cool and I could see it get expanded on. Instead of v-tech modules we could have tread legs you have to physically attach to the borg, for example

Modular borgs.

So goon-borgs basically?

J_Madison wrote:I cannot risk it.

Is actually spot on about a few things related to this. In any escalation because of the nonsense combat system here (fists do brute damage and not stamina damage still as one example) it comes down to who shot first because outside of some particulars and lack of combat depth you aim for that one True shot to get someone down before going deep. Greyback and security. Borg and human. Everything happens fast in tg, and this includes escalation and how things spiral down.

Now, the borg thing.

Rustledjimm wrote:Personally the HoS should be liable, despite the security officer doing the actual killing/destruction.

Very much so but the problem comes from the value of said borgs. Borgs in the station are not Human and are there serve man and die. What is the point of this if you are also going to protect them with ooc rules against being valued as tools and disposable when that is exactly what they are in the context of the game.

cedarbridge wrote: Its not science's problem if sec wants to get their harmbatons out in front of a borg or not.

It actually is because if there is a Hoss and officers and robotics is shitting out borgs (this was more an issue prior when secborgs were present), them creating an over-abundance of borgs over Human crew means just having a bunch of spare tools around. Dangerous ones. I have shut down robotics before as a HoS because they wanted to flood secborgs when there was an entire, full sec staff. HoS can have an opinion on security matters. This includes a secondary, usually growing, population of synthetic things that share hive-mind and by default a shared, collective goal (Laws).

You want to give them player protection and not treat them as worthless in the game, then make them start 'unslaved' in the borg body. No laws, the toggles and switches set so you can't update them(laws) without them ALLOWING it or them Allowing maintenance to be done on their innards (a true 'free' switch that disables IDs working on their chest and only being unlockable by their own personal toggle). Now, you have a synthetic person, who security Also has less to worry about following shithead Asimov laws right when it doesn't matter because the brain was a bored asshole and is now instigating himself into fights.
Then, you want a real slave, you turn the switches on the innards to what you we have now, and this likewise means much less rules protection. Because. They. Are. Tools.
Human life > Borg lives if they are a slave.

EagleWiz wrote:

Not-Dorsidarf wrote: this is more like killing sec officers who try to arrest you, rather than kicking shitty greyshirts who steal your shit though

No, its definitely more like kicking greyshirts who steal your shit. There are some bad borg players out there, and outside of sec deciding to harm a bunch of humans and borgs trying to stop them the annoying greyshirt-esque ones are the borgs that get killed.

It's not shitty to stop sec from actual harm though. That's the intended function.

BeeSting12 wrote:Does the borg getting banned fix anything that the borg caused?

No, but tracking implants do.

Honestly the longer this thread goes on the more I think this rule is just a patch to sec officers feeling offended that secborgs question them/challenge their authority.

We give security a lot of lee-way, being excluded from ever being selected as an antag and knowing the same of their "team" (other sec officers/Warden/HoS/Captain), meaning that they have a lot of hard (several stunning weapons on their persons at round start) and soft (their team, the assured trust of their superiors and colleagues) power to affect the round.

To give security (as well as the rest of the station) leeway on removing borgs from the round for following the rules that they are strictly told to follow, to the point that Silicon Policy is longer then our Rules + Precedents, just seems unreasonable, especially when we know for a fact that this rule would be variable in its enforcement (by the nature of volunteer moderator teams).

At absolute best, the borg is removed from the round for a few minutes simply for doing what its been told to do by its laws, at absolute worst the borg is left to rot in sci-lobby/an unstaffed robotics/etc while the sec player goes around harmbatoning.

Arianya wrote:at absolute worst the borg is left to rot in sci-lobby/an unstaffed robotics/etc while the sec player goes around harmbatoning.

I am unsure how this is a rules/policy issue that requires so much policing and attention when this sounds like the definition of player issue. How often is R&D more staffed than security? At least, with an RD?
Borgs are forced by their default laws and settings to purposefully interject themselves into conflict. Them being destroyed for interfering in shit that don't have time for explaining why they are being stupid sounds like the logical course of things. Its shitty to leave them, but sci/R&D not caring is not a rules issue at all and just part of the normal apathy of low-rp, and punishing sec for turning off Tools that suddenly get in the way yet R&D/crew being too shitty to care to revive them is not Securitys fault.

Sure, but for all the ~RP justification~, we have to remember that the borg is a player who is playing to have fun, and if the already heavily constrained role is forced into a Catch-22 of "Either I ignore my laws and allow harm to happen and get bwoinked for it or I interfere, get flashed and harmbatoned to death, get dumped outside R&D and am removed from the rest of the round" then we'll see the already somewhat anemic borg playerbase diminish even further.

The rule as written requires policing, since its creating an area of relaxed escalation within our rules so long as that conflict is then resolved via repairs. If its unenforced then you might as well just write "Lmao sec can assblast borgs at any time for any reason get fuckkkked" because it would have about the same effect.

Honestly, sometimes dealing with borgs as a non-antag is a nightmare. Conflicts between non-antag crewmembers happen, and sometimes it will escalate to people beating the ever loving hell out of each other. throw a cyborg into the mix and things can get complicated.

This happened during a round I observed:

An assistant hops the kitchen counter, the cook sees this and pushes him off the table, assistant tries again and gets crushed in the shutters and dumped down disposals. Assistant jumps the counter whilst the chef is busy in the cold room and whallops the cook over the head with a toolbox as soon as he walks back into the kitchen. The cook pulls a kitchen knife and a brawl ensues between the two, the cook narrowly winning the brawl and stabbing the assistant into crit. A cyborg happens to pass by during the tail-end of the fight and rushes the assistant to the medbay, but not before flashing the cook and bolting him into the cold room.

The cook happens to have a toolbelt and manages to unbolt the cold room doors, heals himself with donk pockets, and tries to get back to business as usual. However the cyborg is back, and the cook gets flashed and dragged towards the brig, only managing to escape due to the borg's flash burning out quickly. The borg of course, gives chase, trying to bolt the cook down and yakety saxing across half the station until the borg manages to bolt the cook down inside the dorm restrooms with it, cutting the power. The cook, already having tried to explain his side of the story whilst being dragged to the brig earlier on, is fed up, and beats the borg to death. He went braindead a few moments later so I can only assume he got banned for killing the cyborg after it backed him into a corner.

Did the cook at any point use Law 2 to tell it to fuck off?

If the cyborg disobeyed and was Asimov, then the cyborg is at fault.

If cook has in-round history of violent behavior that cyborg is aware of, then law 1 takes precedence, no?

No, not really. If the cook ordered the borg to open a door between him and the assistant it would be able to refuse on law 1 grounds, or if the cook ordered the borg to bring back his knife. The borg shouldn't even really being trying to "arrest" the cook unless hes been ordered to do so by a human/the Master AI. It absolutely should obey an order to stop harassing the cook from the cook unless there a clear immediate or near-future potential of harm (I.e. "Borg fuck off" says the cook, while having his knife out in the same room as the same assistant)

Arianya wrote:No, not really. If the cook ordered the borg to open a door between him and the assistant it would be able to refuse on law 1 grounds, or if the cook ordered the borg to bring back his knife. The borg shouldn't even really being trying to "arrest" the cook unless hes been ordered to do so by a human/the Master AI. It absolutely should obey an order to stop harassing the cook from the cook unless there a clear immediate or near-future potential of harm (I.e. "Borg fuck off" says the cook, while having his knife out in the same room as the same assistant)

Never follow this soft law 1 law 2 takes precedence unless you absolutely know future harm will happen shit.

Last time this got mentioned in policy the people bloody asking for it were the first to IDED when I followed that sloppy logic.

Bolt the chef down, he probably lacks sunnies so flash him, inject with sedatives or cuff if you've got em and or scream for sec after locking him down all means. Even if you take a slightly less optimal reaction and someone gets hurt you could be ahelped for not being a perfect calculating robot.

People wanting more following law 2 generally want to be let in to steal the captain's spare without thinking one what not considering worst case before following any order means.

I never said "absolutely know future harm will happen". My response was based on what admins and headmins have previously said with regard to harm-capable humans, which is that you can take their harm into account (and absolutely cry for security to do their damn job) but you can't perma lock them down 24/7 and refuse all their orders. Same whether its a stabby cook or a executing security.

Incomptinence wrote:

Arianya wrote:No, not really. If the cook ordered the borg to open a door between him and the assistant it would be able to refuse on law 1 grounds, or if the cook ordered the borg to bring back his knife. The borg shouldn't even really being trying to "arrest" the cook unless hes been ordered to do so by a human/the Master AI. It absolutely should obey an order to stop harassing the cook from the cook unless there a clear immediate or near-future potential of harm (I.e. "Borg fuck off" says the cook, while having his knife out in the same room as the same assistant)

Never follow this soft law 1 law 2 takes precedence unless you absolutely know future harm will happen shit.

Last time this got mentioned in policy the people bloody asking for it were the first to IDED when I followed that sloppy logic.

Bolt the chef down, he probably lacks sunnies so flash him, inject with sedatives or cuff if you've got em and or scream for sec after locking him down all means. Even if you take a slightly less optimal reaction and someone gets hurt you could be ahelped for not being a perfect calculating robot.

People wanting more following law 2 generally want to be let in to steal the captain's spare without thinking one what not considering worst case before following any order means.

I'm reading a severe over-extraploation of a past harmful event and turning that into some sort of tethercat level "I saw him harm once so he must always be harming therefore he will always harm lockdown he." This rapidly turns into borgs being the no-fun police over even minor or long-since defused scuffles and becomes a shitty excuse for borgs to ignore instructions from humans. The question for the borg is not "has this person harmed before" or "have they harmed in recent memory" but rather "will my following this law cause harm in an immediate or reasonably foreseeable, but very soon case?" If the answer is "No, it will not cause immediate or reasonbly proximate harm but it might at some future time because this guy is an asshole" then you've gone beyond your laws and programming and violated a law based on the mere idea that you don't like the guy or that you want to play Iron Overlord or something. In any case, you're not going to be ahelped for not taking every possible action to lock down a player for doing something harmful. You will be ahelped if you simply ignore or fail to respond/act at all. The standards we enforce are reasonable and presenting this as "behave unreasonably and get banned or behave unreasonably and get banned" is just misleading.

It's pretty simple the policy is bipolar you lock them down initially make a fuss then lift the lock down like you have dementia and believe anything they tell you about not harming again.
For security at least on the proviso they are important and prevent harm (hahahahaha).
The policy from what I recall all isn't all is forgiven either you can still watch them and following the orders from a known harmer isn't really much of an obligation you just don't entomb people.

AI policy isn't even all that complex, the main issues are
1: Law 1 and Law 2 conflicts - when is it OK to try to lock people up, when should and shouldn't you assist sec, what areas is it harmful to let people without access into, etc.
2: Law 2 and Muh Fun conflicts - stop making the autism fort, go wire the damn solars is a valid order. It doesn't matter that the changeling will probably kill you, someone yelled for help.
3: Law 2 and Rule 1 conflicts - you should probably loudly inform the crew that "Kill [lizardman name here] is a valid order that you are going to carry out now, even though theres no good reason for that order to have been given hint hint hint but you do have to eventually start trying to kill that lizardman if no one reacts.

are secborgs even still enabled? christ please disable them

oranges wrote:are secborgs even still enabled? christ please disable them

Pretty sure they are indeed disabled.

I think we should scrap Assimov altogether and create a service law set like they have in baystation. Or make intensity of the human harm take priority over the time and allow Asimov ai to cause human harm to prevent greater harm.

EagleWiz wrote:3: Law 2 and Rule 1 conflicts - you should probably loudly inform the crew that "Kill [lizardman name here] is a valid order that you are going to carry out now, even though theres no good reason for that order to have been given hint hint hint but you do have to eventually start trying to kill that lizardman if no one reacts.

this isn't me making policy but i don't think you'd need to inform the crew you're going to kill the lizardman because it's the order of someone else and if they're a nonantag the weight is on them for ordering harm, not you

You're not obligated to report the order but you're not forbidden, unless you *were* forbidden in which case - don't report the order and just go do what you were told to do.

Anonmare wrote:You're not obligated to report the order but you're not forbidden, unless you *were* forbidden in which case - don't report the order and just go do what you were told to do.

Either way you should adminhelp it before you do it. give the admins a heads up in case the person who ordered it isnt an antag.

It shouldnt stop you from doing it however, remember, as a silicon you are a tool for humans to use.

Why are silicones help to hrp level policy when security gets to murder anyone who gets between them and their nonantag murderbone again?

Comes with the role

Davidchan wrote:Why are silicones help to hrp level policy when security gets to murder anyone who gets between them and their nonantag murderbone again?

Anonmare wrote:Comes with the role

In theory cyborgs are supposed to be much more powerful than a normal crewmember but this is countered by being very specialized and having to follow your laws.

Over the years this has kind of been eroded by both admin decisions and the coderbus grudge against silicons.

Silicons are fun BECAUSE of the higher RP standard in my opinion. You get to try to play an alien mindset. Then again I enjoy RP more than the average /tg/ player it seems.

This being said, there needs to be SOME protection for the people forced into high RP. I am wondering if we can maintain borgs being tools but not make them more suffering to play via a code solution, like a limited respawn or something. Considering that it seems that human escalation rules and silicon policy dont really mesh at all, as silicon policy forces escalation in some cases.

Davidchan wrote:Why are silicones help to hrp level policy when security gets to murder anyone who gets between them and their nonantag murderbone again?

1. that's a bit of a stretch

2. the rp gimmick is the entire point of silicons, if we just said "lol you're a robot but you don't have the downsides" why even bother

this isn't as clear cut as you make it out to be

Dr_bee wrote:Silicons are fun BECAUSE of the higher RP standard in my opinion. You get to try to play an alien mindset.

This is a really, really subjective mindset. For a lot of players (me included, at least when I was new), knowing how easy it is to fuck up and get banned is incredibly anxiety inducing which inherently makes the role much less appealing. It's really unwise to base silicon design decisions off of this.

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Dr_bee wrote:Silicons are fun BECAUSE of the higher RP standard in my opinion. You get to try to play an alien mindset.

This is a really, really subjective mindset. For a lot of players (me included, at least when I was new), knowing how easy it is to fuck up and get banned is incredibly anxiety inducing which inherently makes the role much less appealing. It's really unwise to base silicon design decisions off of this.

on the other hand removing the one part that makes them unique because people fear failure strikes me as missing the point

I never said to remove it

it's funny how borgs went from a punishment role to this

edit: oh dear page 3

Qbopper wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Dr_bee wrote:Silicons are fun BECAUSE of the higher RP standard in my opinion. You get to try to play an alien mindset.

This is a really, really subjective mindset. For a lot of players (me included, at least when I was new), knowing how easy it is to fuck up and get banned is incredibly anxiety inducing which inherently makes the role much less appealing. It's really unwise to base silicon design decisions off of this.

on the other hand removing the one part that makes them unique because people fear failure strikes me as missing the point

Also unrestricted silicons are also horribly unbalanced considering they are outright better than a human is at most roles they share. Making them humans but better at their jobs at the expense of less versatility is a bad move.