Verbal and Siren Initiation Improvement

[...]

Verbal Initiation:

Is it possible to mandate that all forms of verbal initiation, from both civ and cop, require that the "target" of the initiation must be verbally spoken?

For example: 

• If someone would like to initiate on everyone, then they would say "Everyone, hands up or die."
• If someone would like to initiate on everyone in a specific group or gang (cause they appear the same on names), then they would say "Everyone in 'Your Group Name', hands up or die." or "Everyone in Farmersville, hands up or be downed".
• If someone would like to initiate on a specific person, then they would say "Maric, Hands up or be shot".
• If someone was wearing a mask and their name was "unknown", then a specific description could be used since getting names can be difficult.

The general "Hands up or die" or "Hands up or be downed" is a bit too vague and opens up a lot of confusion to players in terms of whether or not an RDM occurs.

Going forwards since many players may continue to use "Hands up or die", it should be assumed that it means "Everyone, Hands up or die".

If such rules are already in place, then there needs to be further explicit clarification about this in the two threads that cover RDM in the rules section. 

Note: These changes do not effect initiation via texting.

Cop Siren Initiation:

In the case of the APD, it should also be deemed as an unacceptable form of initiation to use sirens in a busy town to initiate on everyone. It happens all too often that a cop will speed through a town with sirens on to initiate for other cops when attempting to target a specific group, gang, or person.

In specific vehicle pursuits, it should be accepted to siren but using sirens to initiate on people on foot, especially when there are multiple parties around, is extremely problematic. I understand the need to siren a civ on cop when you're driving around due to a lack of time to text or get out and verbally initiate. However, when there are multiple "known" parties in the area and the goal is to target a specific party, then a lot of confusion occurs.

Edited January 4, 2021 by Maric

[•ÐŠ• Randy]

Wheres the "No change" answer? imo changing initiation rules that have already been around forever is just going to get more confusing.

 

[...]

3 hours ago, •ÐŠ• Randy said:

Wheres the "No change" answer? imo changing initiation rules that have already been around forever is just going to get more confusing.

I know that the decrepit state most dick suckers members are in would make such a change inconceivable. To be more accommodating, maybe they can make a brail or audiobook version of the rules for you all.

Edited January 4, 2021 by Maric

[Bag Of Funyuns]

4 minutes ago, Maric said:

I know that the decrepit state most dick suckers members are in would make such a change inconceivable. To be more accommodating, maybe they can make a brail or audiobook version of the rules for you all.

You’re using too big of words, you may want to simplify it for them.

[...]

1 minute ago, Bag said:

You’re using too big of words, you may want to simplify it for them.

I was just trying to look out for them too. Help them out when it comes to figuring out if they're initiated on. I wouldn't want them to hurt themselves trying to figure out if that "hands up or die" was targeted towards them.

[danile666]

One sides poll.  No change is needed. Should have that as an option.

[Mason]

I do not think the rules need to be changed but if clarification needs to be added, we can take a look at the wording and make a public clarification in the rules update log. Ill get with Leady this weekend.