whiterabit

I'll also say that nowhere in that post does it state that probable cause searches are only granted in code blue, in fact, I never even addressed that point there. Under code green security have always been, and are still able to conduct arrests/searches without a warrant under very specific circumstances. Directly witnessing a crime or holding the rational belief that the crew may be in immediate danger from the individual are both specified as green lights in regs. Code blue nullifies security's requirement for a warrant and allows them to act solely on suspicion. The part of my post you cited was specifying that command can deny security to search anywhere under their jurisdiction no matter the circumstances, warrant on code green, base suspicion on blue, etc. So security are expected to provide a probable cause for their search to the Head of Staff if prompted. No matter how valid their search may be, the head of staff has primary authority.

Accepted to trial.

Yes please, thank you.

Interview with JMJ_99:

I like this, this is really nice. The questionnaires seem like a really simple way to help people think about some of the smaller qualities of their characters, even if they aren't meant to have disorders of some kind. Plus anything that gives psych something extra to work with is a welcome addition.

While some bigger changes are in the works for IAA, it will be some time before we're able to implement them. In the meantime, the CCIA have been workshopping some more immediate changes for IAA to give them more of a lasting purpose on the station. Internal Affairs Investigations Typically when an Internal Affairs Agent conducts an investigation, it's either fluff or a precursor to an Incident Report. Suggestions have been made in the past to allow command/IAA the ability to freely file actions such as suspensions and injunctions which could last through multiple rounds, however, much like the recent "Head of Staff Notes" suggestion, these were often shot down due to how easily they could be abused. We've decided to move forward with a similar system, albeit, with some additional oversight. Internal Affairs Agents will be allowed to submit their investigations along with supporting evidence and suggestions for action to the CCIA via fax, and with confirmation, have temporary actions placed on crew without the need for an IR. There will, however, be some limitations. Persistent Action and Required Evidence Any IAA utilizing this system will be expected to provide good evidence in support of their findings, otherwise, they will most likely find their investigation thrown out. Interview transcripts, forms, pictures, or any other relevant material should be submitted along with the report in order to provide the clearest picture on the incident(s) in the focus the agent's investigation. The expected level of evidence will most likely vary from case to case, but if the IAA can't collect a reasonable amount of evidence to prove his case, an Incident Report will most likely be the preferred option. For now, any action pushed through by this system will only be allowed a one-week maximum. This should help to keep things fair, and we weren't really comfortable having any more long-term action being placed on a character without an actual investigation being done by the CCIA. If an IAA investigates a situation and believes the incident to require some action lasting greater than one week, they will be advised to file an Incident Report. Granted an IAA faxes CentComm with an investigation containing compelling evidence and a reasonable suggestion for action, they will receive a response of confirmation. We can then add the appropriate notes to character records and create actions as needed. Additionally, modifications may be made to the suggested actions if we find them too excessive. Abuse and Appeal Any action received through this system may be appealed directly to the CCIA in the appropriate forum, here: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewforum.php?f=98 Furthermore, it should go without saying that any IAA found to be providing false evidence, purposefully misrepresenting an incident, or otherwise abusing the system will see their privileges revoked and may have their whitelist put in contention.

Basically in agreement with Synnono. I don't see much of a purpose in directly naming mice in the regulation. If you take on a mouse as a pet, you should acknowledge its status as a pest and that they are going to be treated as such. Just to start we have chefs and janitors who are issued mouse traps at the start of a shift to try efficiently eliminate some of them. I fail to see how stomping a mouse or lasering it is any more excessively cruel than a mouse trap. The only time a mouse should ever be covered under animal cruelty is in a situation of actual, excessive violence. Same as a lab monkey, they are expected to be killed, however, torturing them or needlessly causing them to suffer while dying is how you can still get an i113 charge.

After reviewing this application, we've unfortunately decided to deny it. It's important to note that we are really looking for people who are going to stick around and maintain their activity. With that said, your decision to apply for both the moderators and CCIA was a big concern for most of us. We'd like applicants to have a genuine interest in the team they're joining, and it worried us that you might simply be trying to find any available place in the staff to join. You're more than free to re-apply in the future, however, I would recommend that you re-evaluate your decision to join staff, decide which team would best suit you and focus on just the one.

Whenever the wikidevs wish to take that on as a project, we'll work with them to get it sorted out. If you have any more particular points that you want cleared up, leave them in your post and we'll do our best to have them all covered when the time comes.

Upon agreement by the important parties involved, the addition of the lottery funds to the Cargo Account has been voided. Instead, the cargo account has been assumed to have had only the typical credit count of about 5-10k.

Added to station directives here: https://wiki.aurorastation.org/index.php?title=Station_Directives Also updated the station directives form in the form database.

I've corrected this before, but it looks like I'm doing it again. In the CCIA records we track every action taken against a character. Demotions, suspensions and injunctions are the big ones, but if we issue smaller actions like warnings or re-trainings, all of these are logged in the CCIA records as well. I'm not quite sure what the suggestion was here with "working together with the CCIA more", we use the CCIA records to track all of our concrete action. There's been suggestions before to let heads go through us to publish personal notes on the crew with our records, and I've argued against it each time. Same reasons as what was given for denying heads of staff the ability to place those records themselves, to quote the staff minutes: Effectively, it's all heresay. There's no way for us to confirm any of the information we're given outside of an actual investigation, and at that point the whole idea is redundant. Even so, it's just the previous suggestion with a few extra steps attached and a more "official" tag for the notes.

Interview with the applicant:

The issue with the records and occupation qualifications have been passed onto the administration as an OOC issue. With this in mind, Xander/Azande has chosen to have this IR closed. Closing.

is this satire