(Note. I am not assigning blame or pointing fingers at anyone. None of this is intended as argumentative or accusatory. This is merely to request clarification and to elucidate how certain behaviours were not entirely uncalled for and possibly provoke discussion on what behaviours are permissible. No one should take offense from this, and if you somehow do, I hope you will reread it and attempt to see how it was intended to be taken.)
So start of the round we get a communication from Nanotransen that there are enemies of the corporation onboard along with some broad info on whom it might be.
So then the captain is running around with gear that doesn't belong to him, the station is going to hell with fires, and the HoS is gone with his ID laying on a floor. People are supposed to just let that go when they're in a command position? No. Theft is still theft, even if you're the captain.
I'd also like to quote something from the op here
Roleplay is encouraged on Urist McStation, but players will not be punished for minor slips of character. For example, medical hacking doors is fine, security performing major surgery is frowned upon.
I'd say grabbing some handcuffs as the HoP in a potentially dangerous unknown situation is a relatively minor slip, if one at all.
In a case where the captain is acting suspiciously, the HoS is MIA, the HoP is the next in the chain of command and really the only head left with the authority to deal with it. In the case just explained a stun and search of the captain was totally in order. Now if there was a Warden or HoS around still, that would be different. Then the HoP should take his concerns to them and they decide what to do.
Also, under which space law does possessing traitor items fall? The only one it seems to me it could fall under is Enemy of the Corporation. Along with Possible Grand Theft for taking the HoS's things, that's one to two capital crimes. And in the absence of the HoS or warden and the Captain being the criminal I'd say the HoP was in their right to throw them in the permabrig.
And yes, you totally can permabrig without a trial. Trials are completely unnecessary, and are only to occur if the people in charge want it to. Says it right there on the wiki. This is a space-station, with limited personnel, full on trials are a rare privilege, not a right.
You
can't shouldn't punish people for crossing boundaries you haven't placed. Nowhere does it say nobody knows traitor items mean traitors. There is no law aside from Enemy of the Corporation that might cover having traitor items. And if we're just supposed to flat out ignore traitor items unless they're clearly a weapon they're not supposed to have, does that mean the captain can walk around with an e-sword and we can't say anything?
If you're gonna punish this, YOU have to make it clear where the boundaries are. Who knows what about changeling, if anything? What exactly do traitor items signify and to whom? If they're not immediate recognition of Enemy of the Corporation, what law DO they fall under? What exactly do people know about the cult?
If you don't define it, other people will. And when their definitions clash, stuff like this happens. Nowhere is this clearly stated. I've looked on the wiki. Unless I'm missing some small arcanely hidden page not linked to by anywhere related, its not there.
If you want a rule to be different here than on /tg/ then you have to say so. Like requiring trials rather than them being optional.
Also. Scrdest. A suggestion from the /tg/ station rules seems appropriate here.
2. You are playing a game where you are not fully in control of everything. You will be put into situations beyond your control, which will result in some rounds being ruined for you. Man up and deal with it.
It's the nature of the beast. If you really think its griefing, adminhelp and move on. I'm saying this in the nicest possible way.
(Note. I am not assigning blame or pointing fingers at anyone. None of this is intended as argumentative or accusatory. This is merely to request clarification and to elucidate how certain behaviours were not entirely uncalled for and possibly provoke discussion on what behaviours are permissible. No one should take offense from this, and if you somehow do, I hope you will reread it and attempt to see how it was intended to be taken.)