Scheveningen

edit: Nevermind. I embarassed myself. I really misunderstood what the staff team were telling me. Close this.

[mention]Arrow768[/mention] There's nothing I can say to someone who opens with "I don't like you". I will not pretend to have a discussion with that, sorry. [mention]Brutishcrab51[/mention] Re: #2, I understand the importance of remaining a integral part of a team unit. I don't recall what you mean in regards to a "WI incident" as I'm not sure what you're talking about and would appreciate clarification if it's at all important. Regardless I understand the importance of staying in my lane. Re: #3, I understand the importance of representing more than myself, a recent lesson I learned a little too late. I'll avoid being feisty entirely. Re: #4, I endeavor not to make the same mistakes twice. It's not going to be an issue. [mention]Senpai Jackboot[/mention] I am eager to prove you wrong in regards as to whether you think I'd be a good fit for the CCIA team or not. [mention]Zundy[/mention] I went 'atomic' because of toxic IRL factors going on that was causing me a lot of tension. It was an extreme situation that I was in. I quit to get everything settled. It's settled now. Much has changed in that time and I'm eager to prove you just as wrong with your perception of the situation, too. [mention]Coalf[/mention] Definitely my fault to blame my issues on that, I terribly misrepresented the situation in saying that. The moment I quit from staff I was pretty much perpetually furious due to the conditions of my IRL job being extremely invasive and demanding. These were factors I figured were my fault because I was still trying to put focus on multiple issues at once. So if I said that it was definitely because I was frustrated and not exactly 100% focused. It takes an inhuman amount of pressure to stress me out, regardless, and my IRL job was the thing that made me way more tense than usual. The job was a learning experience, regardless, even as I was happy to find another at-home occupation.

Rules don't stop people from breaking them, and by the time someone metagames information the damage is already done and at worst the round is already ruined for someone.

Double those range indicators or no dice. I would never rely on the examine text ever again and I'd more defensively position myself more if I felt I could get ganked far easier because of this system, antag or not. Antagonists already have so many edges over the crew and the rest of the security force that it's pretty darn shocking that nobody knows it. They're called "roleplay limitations." Don't make yourself a valid target so early if you don't want to risk getting your round shut down early. Be patient and do things discretely, there's no need to rush in a 2:30~ average duration round.

CCIA Staff Application Basic Information Byond key: Scheveningen Character names: Vira Bolivar, Rebecca De Santos, Talia Varick, various nameless borgs, Age: 21 Timezone: EST What times are you most available?: I am a night owl. My circadian rhythm shifts as I am naturally awake longer than I sleep but I am generally more energetic during the evenings and night time. I'm able to respond to certain things either instantly or the very next day, that's usually how it goes. Experience How long have you played SS13?: Years. How long have you played on Aurora?: Three to four years, I have lost count. How active on the forums, discord and/or server are you? Very active on forums. Very active on discord. Active based on whimsy on-server, it depends on whether I'm interested in playing or not but I'm not completely disconnected from the community. Have you ever been banned, and if so, how long and why?: Yes, but it's been such a long time ago it's practically insignificant. It was a borderline case of EOR grief that I never bothered to appeal, as it was only a 3 day ban with rather BS context at the given time and I knew I wasn't going to be able to argue my way out of it seeing as to how the staff lineup was at the time, I figured I'd waste more time arguing the ban than just getting over it and waiting it out. Have you ever volunteered as moderation staff for any other servers, SS13 or otherwise?: Yes, here. I quit at some point due to work stress + the volunteer server position also creating stress for me simultaneously. I do like to chuckle sometimes when people accuse me of having been fired but that was absolutely not the situation that I was in, a personal situation I'd never wish on anyone else. Do you have any other experience that you believe would be relevant to a position in the CCIA?: I was CCIA before when Hartburry ran the show. Personality Why do you want to join the CCIA?: To help contribute in handling IC issues on the server side in a more potent and present capacity than what the common perception from certain vocal minorities are given to believe are capable of doing. I do not believe that the CCIAA were ever powerless in the first place but rather that the current procedures and hands-off approach to dealing with current-round issues makes them seem a lot less present in-universe than they actually are. CCIAA have vast potential but it is not used so as to avoid worst-case scenarios if executed unskillfully. What do you think are the most important qualities for a CCIA Agent to possess?: Self-control, chiefly, a dogged approach to issues and an insurmountable amount of patience. What do you think the purpose of a CCIA Agent is in an ongoing round?: Responding to faxes to give clarification over certain situations is one of the more menial duties but it's just as important as, say, showing up to call up a particular crewmember for an interview in regards to some infraction that occurred on-station that wasn't handled enough on the local side. There's surely more to it but nobody wants to read my paragraph-long musings that some people would see as excuses anyway. It stings to have to settle for a simple sweeping definition of something that's more complex than anyone would give credit for. What do you think the purpose of a CCIA Agent is outside of the server?: They are the penultimate community arbiters of what constitutes the corporate regulations and how they should be interpreted in any given situation, besides the administrators. Largely, administrators have better concerns to deal with than having to investigate IC issues, so the sheer responsibility is relegated to a more appropriate branch of staff. They are not just the middle-man, though, and CCIAA should be respected more than they already are for what they do, as the effect they have on the server is not easily seen at a first glance to start with. How do you handle stress?: I went through an epiphany not-too-recently and learned that difficult people are truly a blessing to help those that they frustrate become better people. Such individuals being such a pain allow others to learn to be patient and tolerant of most kinds of personalities. Obviously, people who intend on trolling or have a reputation for doing it for just-as-radical responses don't deserve the indignation of a legitimate reply and should be called out for it openly for other people to remain cautious of. I've been improving over time, and different perspectives that were finally shared to me not because of an act of God but because I chose to hunt down perspective by myself when others would not go out of their way to share theirs to me was unfortunate, but I made do at some point. I do my damndest to try not to be stressed out anymore, especially since how my current IRL situation has vastly improved. How well do you work autonomously?: I take considerable pride in being an independent person, but I would not be where I am without considerable assistance from other people. It is hypocritical, but it acts as a double-edged tool, I suppose. Additional Notes: The following is some rambling and not entirely related to the topic, but I'm sure someone will figure out what the context is, if you feel like you'd raise some certain counterarguments straight off the bat from seeing who's applying for this application you might be interested in clicking the spoiler and reading the contents below, anyway.

I don't think someone with a sense of humor and an eccentric shitposting nature disqualifies them in terms of qualities that staff look for. Edit: To elaborate, even if they're a little obnoxious at times it's really not that huge of a flaw, I find them still pleasant to talk with whether they're shitposting or not. I'm sure everyone has an off-day where they're extremely irritable and I'll confess that I am an irritable person, and that's the only reason as to why I'd ever see them as annoying at times. They're otherwise just fine of a person, and I think this would serve as a good opportunity.

You may wish to refer back to your own whitelist application, in the event that somehow a large gap of time has changed your perception what is expected of whitelistees. You had to do more than just something right to get it accepted. Players who typically establish a reputation of troublemaking tend to have their whitelist requests denied due to short/long-standing issues with following the rules and being very uninteresting in regards to in-character execution. Easy to acquire, easy to be denied and also easy to lose the whitelist once it's gotten. People are expected to have an idea of what they're getting into, it would not be wise for someone to apply for command whitelists if they weren't ready for it, as has happened numerous times. When asked to elaborate: Okay. I know very few people who don't know most of these details aside from the pirate attack thing. I guarantee anyone who didn't know all of the above was new or trolling. They're called the "Server Rules." Heads of staff do not need rules explicitly for themselves that will be enforced like it was brought down from an avenger of God. They are already required to be in-character at almost all times, they are required to not grief, or do anything in regards to abuse their power for a very inexcusable reason as a non-antagonist. And then there are even more rules which cover a broad spectrum of other situations. Anything that does not explicitly violate the rules or the given spirit of them, is a moral grey area or an IC issue and should be treated as such. Skull132 has a head of staff guide that is effectively a leadership 101 course in either the head of staff subforum (secret club) or the guides/tutorials section. His points are very insightful and they've personally driven me to try to be a better head of staff than what normally people expect command to strive for. They are not necessarily written law but they provide excellent pointers on how to save rounds from going completely to shit in a leadership capacity. Congratulations, Xander. Making excuses for as to why you don't make incident reports makes you part of the problem. Did you, perchance, consider that these are various IC issues that should be reported to CCIAA, or did you just shell out enough incidents for justification to make a thread like this? Not to mention that stuff like enforcing uniform regulation applies to only the emergency departments where the jumpsuits are required for a professional look and for safety. It's not "embarrassing" when someone is wrong, you do not need to stress the severity of people making mistakes or bad calls in judgement as much as you do. If someone other than you being wrong somehow "embarrasses" you, than you have quite the hubris to contend with. Different heads of staff have different perceptions of regulations and how they should be enforced, likewise for how department SOP goes. Different expectations, sometimes they say, do or think things incorrectly, it is what makes players and their characters human and real. Only cold robots don't make mistakes, Xander, and I sincerely doubt that you've never made a mistake or error in judgement before.

no

You enter a game and you roll traitor during extend-a-traitor-mongoose. Great! What's the first thing that happens as soon as you get the antag text? [AOOC] LardASS: gimmick???? You most likely already don't want to play this round. This dude only typed that just so he can figure out who is OOCly an antagonist and connect the dots from there, and it won't matter if you report this to an admin because as reasonable as it is to make this conclusion they will not see it as such or the person will make excuses. Individual antagonist types don't need "gimmicks". Antagonists have to make goals, their background is already set. If you're a traitor, you have syndicate affiliation one way or another, your background does not matter nor should it be the focus of your antagging. This is HRP Mafia, effectively. If you're a mob boss, you don't spend the round monologuing while your hitmen and consigliere get lynched by the town. You need to do shit in order to eliminate threats, achieve your goals and seek out your victories ICly. If you're a wizard, you're from the wizard federation, if you're a ling, you're a deep embedded predatory xeno-organism intending to eat people for gnomes. Tangent aside, you fill the shoes, you don't get to make the shoes fit for you. As an individual antagonist you have individual goals all about yourself, and the rest of the station serves as an obstacle to be overcome for achieving those goals. There is no reason to allow players to utilize an OOC format to effectively metagame information to benefit them and strip away a lot of suspense/intrigue that makes the game interesting. Gimmicks have a low frequency of actually working to the benefit of other players or the antag themselves, they do not establish purpose as well as simply setting personal goals do. The only game type that is deserving of OOC organization to make a game mode work is the revolution gametype to help establish precedent as to why the loyalists should overtake the station and why the revolutionaries need to rebel against them. Cult doesn't need it because their goal is clear: Spread the cult brainwashing, and summon nar'sie as a finale act while making the round interesting. Cultists can already identify each other. Heist does not need it. Mercenaries do not need it. Vampires don't need it. Changelings don't need it. They already have ways of working together and LOOC to use if they need to discuss a plan. If any of them are new and need help using antag mechanics they need to use adminhelps instead, it's there for that purpose. AOOC is not that commonly used as a mentoring system, it's used for more ulterior reasons. AOOC does not do anything that escalating purely in IC would not do for an individual antagonist. It is far more interesting when events occur naturally as a result of IC consequence instead of immediately identifying who's an antag OOCly just to work with them.

The server culture seems to have some people who think it's unrealistic for a security officer to wear his stab vest all the time, apparently. And that they're 'mallcops'. Or that you're metagaming. I just cooked up a meme for this. Post this anytime that situation happens in an actual discussion. . The rest of the community may not always be right, I may not even be, sometimes. Follow your gut.

Well, I agree, but as you said, the wiki is not always 100% consistent on what the actual server culture really is as details such as that go unnoticed a majority of the time. The wiki contains guidelines as opposed to what the Server Rules do, however.

I agree with everything except this. you as an HoS do not get to order me to not wear a stab vest on green. You can order me to put it on if i am refusing for some silly reason. Totally fine. I should've pointed out it wouldn't be feasible for a HOS to tell an officer to do something completely unreasonable because "muh low-level preparedness", but it was too late, I already pressed submit. The only thing I'd be able to do is go, "well fuck" like the beta HOS I am, because they're literally doing nothing wrong.

It's never explicitly enforced but it's like one of those things that's generally a good idea for a security officer to do: wear a vest. Security vests are stab vests, they're otherwise low quality compared to the heavier vests. This has been a thing on our server forever, why is it being brought up as an issue now? Because it's not explicitly stated on the wiki? It's standard equipment (i.e. not supplied by the armory), why not wear it and use it? No, wearing a vest as a security officer posted at a research station in the middle of space where they're expected to be the first response and also dole out local judgement for crimes rather than calling the Biesel police, is not meta. It is a thing. It is fine. Knowing things without reasonable in-character excuse for it is metagaming. Wearing a stab vest so as to not face the full brunt of a nasty punch, whack or stab while operating as a corporate security officer is hardly metagaming. C'mon, we know better than this, right? Yes, security should generally expect trouble as they're the official authority on the station to stop trouble if and when it happens. They can't expect details but they sure as heck can expect something to happen since they're typically first response to deal with drunkards, assholes and trouble-making visitors. Drunkards can easily break a bottle and turn it into a knife, and that stab vest will hopefully save them a lot of internal organ damage. If they go for the head they can be booked for attempted murder. Up to the head of sec to enforce worn vests or not but they better go on when it's code blue, obviously. Is this really a complex issue? I feel like there are other more pressing problems for security to deal with than the current dilemma of "vest or not to vest", because this is a bit of a silly question to ask.

Dittoing as to the above post. Wanting Edgar to be command and wishing for it to this degree is doing more harm for you than it is doing any good for your case. What's the issue of using literally anyone other than Edgar as a character for command? What are the merits of Edgar as a possible head of staff character? Do you really deserve the whitelist, at this point? Give us new perspective to review instead of trying the same thing over and over again without necessarily making changes in presentation or methods.

They were already banned once, it seems, for something different from what I had initially reported.

As a note, I did encourage this person to make an appeal with some associated advice on doing so but everything they've written here is their own words.

Sucks. The reality is people complain even when nothing is wrong, or rather, they complain if they get the short of the stick for a reason they cannot see. If a person experiences a disadvantage or an inconvenience in any form I guarantee you, most people would complain about it, even if it's poor form. Roleplay within the bounds of "consistent, realistic, reasonable, engaging, immersive and fair" and combine them with your different character's varying motivations and act according to those motivations, and I ultimately won't care. If it leads to a more interesting outcome because of that decision-making, I have no reason to be upset over it. Conversely, when it employs selfish OOC decision-making to disrupt any of those characteristics that a good character falls under, then it becomes a problem. Because then you are not even roleplaying, you're taking advantage of factors your character either cannot know or would not reasonably do in their best interests, instead focusing on what the player's best interests are instead over the goal of the server: to roleplay in an interesting and engaging manner with other players that hopefully act with the same goals. The gradient is not that huge nor is there really that big of a variance in character creation in-game when we're talking actual background of a character and not their inherent personality. You can never be a terrorist as a non-antagonist, or an ex-criminal or an ex-king of a predominant former noble faction that somehow works for a megacorporation as a low/low-medium level employee. You cannot play the aforementioned special characters as regular crewmembers, because they have very little reason to exist among other characters that are just average people with varying skill levels whose lives encompass going to work, doing their job, going home and anything else is pretty much off the main server in terms of extra-curriculars. One of the only important sweeping standards to abide by in character creation is ensuring your character exists within the range of the gradient of individuals that would reasonably exist working on the space station with their background, skills and less importantly but still a determining factor; their inherent personality. You can reasonably roleplay an asshole but they should make up for other things. Did you see me address moderates or grey area cases, or are you both assuming I believe in X without myself even quoted having said it? Moderates aren't a problem because they follow the rules and don't take extreme measures unless the situation calls for it. Moderates can still thrive in normalcy with standard character concepts and generally have less risk for failure with their avenues of interaction with other characters in-game. It's not even a "safe bet", either, it is simply playing characters as the rules expect people to be doing. I'm questioning why people gravitate so closely to character concepts that are either; A.) Incompatible with the local setting, not necessarily incompatible in the Aurora universe B.) Unreasonably executed in roleplay believability C.) Happen to possess character traits or background details that deviate so far away from the established lore of xenos that you wonder why they don't just play a human instead. I don't mind if some characters are "a little weird." I don't mind if Tajarans refer to themselves as "I". I mind if a diona references having "Shagged someone's mum" unironically in IC. I mind if a dionaea gestalt refers itself as "I" because not only does it completely undermine and erase character expectations of an entire species with this particular deviation being legitimate, but it's also not believable or an interesting character quirk. It is downright unthinkable that a gestalt consciousness refers to itself, a conglomeration of many minds into a shared thinking process, as "I". I mind characters that chuck what makes them unique as a xeno straight out the window just so they might have brownie points for being unlike all the other "Y", despite the unfortunate fact that when referring to a roleplay server, all snowflakes may not look alike but they are still fundamentally the same no matter how you look at them. These are the issues I am questioning. I do not like belittling issues down to "snowflake", "Mary/Gary Stu" or "powergamer" as I prefer to go in-depth as to explaining why these concepts are wrong rather than flinging labels around. Those who can actually be defined by those broad labels, and those who do the things I've mentioned without consideration for how they negatively affect the roleplay quality in general, are genuinely bad for the roleplay environment and the individuals at fault for this sort of behavior should hold themselves accountable, because ideally the admins shouldn't have to step in except when situations in-game get hectic or confusing and they need to sort out the chaos and explain what happened.

I was thinking that in terms of a penalty, the cult zweihander has an unquenchable thirst for blood that effectlvely cannot be dematerialized or removed from the hands of the wielder (aside from cutting their arms/hands off). Not sating it with blood continuously drains blood from its wielder. Some other cultist has to dispel them somehow if the wielder of the cult blade wants to stop their Highlander mode.

I would support more edginess with cult mechanics provided the method of being able to do so isn't convoluted in some manner. If the sacrificial dagger could also double as a potent self-defense weapon it'd be interesting. The way I'm thinking is that it is a "thin-air" weapon that you may draw from. Upon casting a specific rune designed for imbuing the capability to draw such a weapon on yourself, that is, so no one starts the round with such a thing, keeping within the whole effort requirement to obtain power. The cost being, every time you draw the weapon and materialize it into your hand, it costs a small amount of your maximum blood reserve. At the same time, striking mobs with blood will steal their blood to absorb into your own reserves. You can dematerialize it again by causing a certain prompt to happen, if the blade drained sufficient enough blood then there's no downside to it. If the blade was not sated enough with blood then it will apply the same maximum blood reserve drain again. An unapologetic buff to the classic cult blade and instead designing it into a cult zweihander that has the same thirst for blood, cleaves and also imbues its wielder with damage resistance & near-immunity to crowd control effects would also be really excellent as well.

Initial clarification: "whitelistee" being heretoforth defined as anyone who was supposedly vetted and approved to gain access to certain privileges to play special roles on the server. Whether it be command or any of the xeno races. You know who you are. I think new players can be excused sometimes for making certain mistakes or bad decisions, but unfamiliar individuals that are racking up their first few incidents of being unfamiliar with the server and the roleplay nuances accompanying it rightfully get watched more than the regular player, as the smarter troublemakers lay low and sow grief in more clever ways than just doing what would typically do little lasting damage and is instead an explosion of trouble that blows over quickly and gets resolved quickly. But, I digress. The regular player without whitelisting of any sort is typically watched more than the frequenters who have in some way achieved "veteran" status with the various conditions that the player would qualify for. So basically the latter archetype that I've described has less reason than anyone to be making careless decisions in designing their character and their limitations, for one, and how they deal with situations ICly that they've otherwise dealt with dozens or even hundreds of times over. There's only really so much variance between rounds and the people participating in the game mode that would really change how interactions end up. And this is less about the whole, "why are people dying" thing because this isn't about that, considering how it can either be unlikely or guaranteed depending on the conditions of the round. My concerns are levied in asking the question, "how come seasoned roleplayers struggle with creating balanced characters, roleplaying their character in an appropriate and believable fashion according to their character's priorities/personality, and dealing with sources of conflict in general?" My assumption for the most part can be that at most seventy percent of anyone who constitutes as a regular has been part of a roleplaying shindig before this SS13 server, and in some manner would have to be accustomed to the nuances of actually roleplaying. Take tabletops for instance. OOCly, either you allocate stats to specialize your character to be really really good at specific things in their general categories (such as an acrobat being able to swim, jump, climb, etc) yet having glaring weaknesses in others because you don't feel it is a focus to worry about, as your other party members are liable to fill the gap with those sorts of checks. Whereas ICly in the same genre of tabletop games, it's easily explained as your character having practiced most of their life in becoming an adept acrobat, and that's their general occupation or niche that they're really good at. They find uses in-universe with their skills to accomplish their goals and complete adventures, so on. I assume, that this being a similar premise aside from the goal not being to simply "adventure" and rather to "exist" in the game world while also not being a waste of space on the crew manifest and for a job slot. According to the rules on roleplaying, you merely need to motivate your character to do their job to an acceptable standard because assuming you're not an antagonist, your character cares enough about the job to continue working with the company, otherwise they would not be present in-game at all aside from being a visitor. To tack onto that, I should remind any reader if they don't know already that the local setting is a corporate space station that may be a bit of a death-trap depending on certain conditions happening, but it's also still a place that employees of the company work at in order to get things done and get paid in doing it. Your character should generally be motivated to work, otherwise they wouldn't keep it. "My character is naturally X, though, and they slip through" is often what I hear as an excuse for the sort of behavior coming from people who often act in opposition to what would be the best interests of their character and I really feel the need to just write now, "No, they aren't. No, they don't slip through, if your character is like this they would not even be offered a job or they'd be fired if this trait developed mid-way into the job, they basically don't exist in the local setting." Speaking of motivation. What motivates players to create alien characters that deviate far away from the accepted bounds of believability and the core cultural aspects of their race in general? If you're one of these people, do you feel you deserve points for not drawing any sort of reaction aside from an apathetic one because you designed a character that is contrarian to every expectation of the species you applied for? Did you actually intend on roleplaying them as the alien species they are or are you just making them human with a tail and a trill/hiss/lisp? If you're someone with either one or a wide array of characters with a very flexible skillset, why do you think you're owed an ability to overload your characters with such a wide array of specialties with high competency in each or most of them, compared to other people who do go through the effort to stunt their characters in various aspects? What makes you so important in this roleplay environment that you feel the need to override roleplay expectations in order to give your character more power in any round that they're involved in? If you're anyone who falls under one or more of these particularly levied cases, I'll ask one last question. What sort of entitlement do you crave so much that you think that everything else should have to change for you in order to fit for your own roleplay experience rather than doing the right thing and changing what you do for something more than just the self-indulgence of your own roleplay desires? Does the term "co-operation" mean anything to you, or do you just play on this server/participate in this community just for yourself? This is not just an array of "well maybe you should adminhelp it" issues that I'm describing here, because I do, and yet not only do I see this happening often but some people succeed at flying just enough under the radar with their own mistakes/poor RP shotcalling that an administrator will rarely find cause to immediately administer discipline for. These aren't just isolated, individual nuances either. They're small issues but the problem with it all is how they stack up, create more small issues like themselves or end up creating larger problems that are actually just a symptom of the smaller ones. The moment that starts to happen, nobody seems to want to take responsibility for the amount of crap that's piling up. Maybe I can take some fault because I don't go around pointing fingers at bad shotcallers anymore as people saw it as harassing instead of looking inward to see where the actual issue lied. But, again, that really doesn't address the problems here.

Give him another month or two to settle in before you consider accepting this. We really shouldn't be making it a thing to welcome certain people onto staff for barely a month after their second permaban for hostile behavior. I don't care if it's plahunter and if he, as an individual, has been behaving. It wouldn't be a very fair standard to be setting. I'm sure he's been behaving and he sure as hell has changed from my personal perception of how things have gone, but like Skull said, let's be more pragmatic in the sense of giving Pla a bit more time to settle in and hopefully clearing the air with other staffmembers in the same respect so they don't need to worry about trustworthiness. Just because I was eager to be a moderator once upon a time didn't make the staff at the time be much less cautious in accepting me, considering I was given a two month trial period as a moderator and not just the one. Granted given how I still proceeded through that just fine, I've heard from plenty of people on staff that the extended trial was something they won't do for anyone else again seeing as how it was admittedly quite harsh. Think it's better to tell someone to reapply later than have them trialed for longer, is what I'm saying. Ideal situation is not to increase the range at which failure could occur and instead make it reasonable enough that if they don't fail in a malicious sense then they should be considered a valued team-member. Would he be qualified considering the past couple weeks? Maybe. It's a really tiny sample size to go off of and thus not exactly justification to accept him yet. Given more time and seeing how plahunter behaves continually, there would be a larger sample-size to take and make a general guesstimate on whether they check out in terms of koalaficiations. What I'm saying is wait another month. At most, I suppose.

That is the character, yes. The ckey is what is displayed in the OP.

I need to administer my grievances as well, seeing as how I was responsible for the initial lore that brought PMCs to the known universe. Note that the PMCs were used as a set-piece to explain corporate dominance in the current setting and it's really not a focus anymore, given how homogenized corporate interests are. Independent contractors don't earn as much as a company's personal security force. This was a mistake that the UN allowed to happen during the Terran era and they paid for it with two wars and a very tense political atmosphere leading up to the colony ships being launched. In terms of the interests of the Board of Five, having five independent PMCs running amok would be bad for business. The Eridani Private Force draws from professional mercenary groups from around the known sector but the badge in addition to a very rigid integration program pretty much erases any notion of them being merely mercenaries and instead being the sword and shield of corporate interests in the Eridani system. The EPF is a very powerful lapdog and the Bo5 are very content to keep at least just one lapdog dominant. Remember that Epsilon Eridani functions as a corporate police state. The lack of consistent news that actually leaves the system is intentional as the major corporations have heavy influence within the media. Any atrocity that would happen in the EE system would maybe be covered locally but one would be hardpressed to hear of it anywhere other than inside the system. Because it's a police state (at least in terms of the last time it was changed in any meaningful way and I haven't heard Abo say much about changing that facet, which I find really interesting and important to the Eridani culture as a whole), the EPF is very paranoid in their modus operandi of handling threats. The EPF would have a conniption over independent mercenaries. They really wouldn't allow this. I'm not really a fan of some of the mercenary groups either. Space Americans, Space Soviets, Space Weebs, Space Lizardwarriors and FORCEOFNATURE PMCs groups all scream as a little too cheesy and contrived for me to ever consider as serious group ideas. I'm a bit disappointed with the interpretation of the groups I created. SGF were not typical "AMERICA FUCK YEAH" jarheads and Tesova weren't typical "cheeki breeki" STALKER-type zonedwellers. They were serious, diverse (as much as culturally makes sense, of course) and potent mercenary groups for their time.

I did adminhelp the issue prior but it never got answered. This is mostly why I'm here with the ban request, I didn't think to file another adminhelp in the round because it easily got extremely hectic in-game to the point where my concerns were elsewhere in the round at the given time.

The east entry airlocks to security have an issue when they happen to be wide open. The lockdown shutters seemed to be stacked on top of them in layering and thus you can't close the airlock normally.