Ethics of Star Army MIA

[RaWolfe]

Riddle me this, is it ethical responsabel to make a new bred of a soldier that is stated as MIA? Or would it be more proper if the person stays on MIA status within Star Army?

Personally I would say it stays MIA as my characters wouldn’t be amused to come back to see themselves already cloned. But it’s good thing to think about right?

 

[Wes]

If the Star Army can reasonably assume the soldier is likely to be deceased they will make a new one once a reasonable timeframe has passed. For example, if there's a huge battle like Glimmergold, and the character was in the battle but never returned to his ship, the Star Army can probably assume he was killed in the battle and will create a replacement based on the character's will (the Star Army Personnel Database has a struct field that shows whether or not to respawn a character).

Occasionally this policy has resulted in duplicates of people, for example, Hanako was respawed because she was presumed to have died, and later found her old self (the earlier version of herself was marooned on a planet for over a year). In that case the two versions of herself were merged by the Star Army into a single person again.

 

[RaWolfe]

But what would be considered a reasonable timeframe? Plus is there a possibility for an house to have influence on this new clone or is it set in stone of law?

 

[Wes]

But what would be considered a reasonable timeframe? Plus is there a possibility for an house to have influence on this new clone or is it set in stone of law?

Legally any MIA soldier who is presumed dead is subject to a 2-month waiting period according to the Memory Backup Protection Act of YE 30.

https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=faction:yamatai:senate:memory_backup_protection_act

Backups are typically restored based on the wishes of the person who died. The law protects their backup from being altered.

 

[Yuuki]

Some of us weren't subject to protections under that when we got MIAd, heh.