The lancer

TO: Samara Watson, Station Engineer, NSS Aurora FROM: AMS, CCIAAMS, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report -------------------- BODY: This is an automated message to inform you that your incident report has been received and placed in a queue for the CCIA Division to review. If necessary, you will be contacted by a CCIA Agent when an investigation begins. -------------------- DTG: 28-16:54-TAU CETI STANDARD-09-2461 SIGN: CCIAAMS

TO: Jackie, Nurse, NSS Aurora FROM: AMS, CCIAAMS, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report -------------------- BODY: This is an automated message to inform you that your incident report has been received and placed in a queue for the CCIA Division to review. If necessary, you will be contacted by a CCIA Agent when an investigation begins. -------------------- DTG: 28-16:12-TAU CETI STANDARD-09-2461 SIGN: CCIAAMS

TO: Kim, Librarian, NSS Aurora FROM: AMS, CCIAAMS, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report -------------------- BODY: This is an automated message to inform you that your incident report has been received and placed in a queue for the CCIA Division to review. If necessary, you will be contacted by a CCIA Agent when an investigation begins. -------------------- DTG: 28-14:31-TAU CETI STANDARD-09-2461 SIGN: CCIAAMS

TO: Lex Harkson, Warden, NSS Aurora FROM: AMS, CCIAAMS, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report -------------------- BODY: This is an automated message to inform you that personnel listed in the report as the offending party have encountered circumstances which have rendered the investigation unable to be pursued further. The matter will be considered resolved. -------------------- DTG: 28-14:04-TAU CETI STANDARD-09-2461 SIGN: CCIAAMS

Trial started 27/9. It will last a month or per completion of 2 IRs

TO: Nazar Kudryashove, Cargo Technician, NSS Aurora FROM: AMS, CCIAAMS, NTCC Odin SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report -------------------- BODY: This is an automated message to inform you that your incident report has been deemed too incosequential to justify an official investigation. -------------------- DTG: 26-16:23-TAU CETI STANDARD-09-2461 SIGN: CCIAAMS

If you suspect that someone lied to get you in trouble, you raise that concern to staff and then the admins will check the logs since it's an ooc issue. Logs will not be checked for any IC action.

Interview with applicant here https://pastebin.com/jDF576ea

You asked I corrected You "reworded your question" by asking a different thing: "why are you decreasing CCIA workload" Paradox explains I tell you that paradox explanation is valid I ask you "what's it to you?" if we reduce unnecessary ccia workload, because if someone not on the team asks "why are you doing less work", how do you expect me to take it? We are not paid, we have lives, it's tedious. So yes, I will reply with a snark remark. Because you are not even on the team you are demanding its workload stay the same. You respond with "people think I should be head CCIA" fat giorno

Should anyone have grievances on how things are run, or my conduct for that matter, they are more than welcome to post them in a staff complaint. Also garn, the "I should be head ccia" came after he asked the witnesses question. I don't really think we were snarky though, paradox explained and I told UM that paradox was right.

fat giorno was the response to you telling me that people want you as head CCIA instead of me. As for your question, I tell you clearly that paradox was right at what he said, meaning that I had nothing else to add to him saying that the workload is already great, and we don't need to interview a bajillion witnesses. I perceived your tone as overall hostile, coming out of nowhere and attacking me for making a change, and that's why I replied with "what's it to you?"

Application rescinded on applicant's request

Trial started september eleven. Will last a month or on completion of 2 IRs

Trial started september eleven. Will last a month or on completion of 2 IRs

You have too many notes and bans, and you were just unbanned from your latest antag one. I have to say I'm not very confident in your ability to not break rules. As a staff team, we need to be extra careful of that as we represent the server and its spirit. Not being banned also helps quite a bit while in staff.

perhaps it shows up only if you're adjacent to the dying person

Accepted

Applicant quit

Type (e.g. Planet, Faction, System): IPC sub faction and some extra IPC lore on Eridani Describe this proposal in a single sentence (12 word maximum): IPC sub faction and some extra IPC lore on Eridani How will this be reflected on-station?: New backstory theme for IPCs Does this faction/etc do anything not achieved by what already exists?: It adds new backstory possibilities and talks about IPCs on Eridani Why should this be given to lore developers rather than remain player created lore?: It's a considerable addition to the lore Do you understand that if this is submitted, you are signing it away to the lore team, and that it's possible that it will change over time in ways that you may not forsee?: yes Long Description: A new IPC sub-category/background/faction present in the underworld of large megacities in Sol and Eridani space, the scrappers: Some lore to describe IPC existence in Eridani. It isn't very long:

The form has been updated to be a list that requires only the RD's signature, and the names and signatures of those involved in the expedition.

This has been addressed. archiving

We can perhaps make a new waiver form that is basically a list where the RD adds the crew that will go on an expedition, and doesn't need captain approval, instead of printing one for each expedition member. Some form of paper existing that lists who goes and who doesn't, is good imo.

trial passed

Trial completed