Synnono

The player in this report has been disciplined OOCly for behavior during this shift. As we don't double punish for conduct, this report is being closed.

"Random within reason" means that you should feel free as an officer to conduct a 'random' search, but to use common sense about it. Don't harass someone by 'randomly' searching them ten times. Don't 'randomly' search someone if you know the threat has already been neutralized just because it's still code blue, et cetera. "Within reason" is guidance, not a contradiction to the random part. Officers will always really have a reason to search, otherwise they wouldn't be searching in the first place. I don't think a large portion of security has trouble with searches right now, despite whatever extended discussion goes on outside the game, this forum, or our main server discord. If they do, they can feel free to post here and contribute to the thread. As it stands, most of CCIA does not appear to want to make any additional significant changes to the previously-clarified language, and so I'm voting to dismiss this.

Hi there. Generally speaking, for IC policy please trust the wiki more than posts somewhere out-of-the-way here, as those tend to get lost and then contradict new things years later. CCIA-to-wiki flow of updates is much better than it was prior to the creation of the wiki maintenance team. That said, run with this for now and let's not overthink it: On code blue, random searches of the crew are permitted within reason, like things already say. The reason for the search should be explained to the relevant crew receiving the search (even if the reason is that it is a random search.) On code blue, location searches are permitted with "probable cause." The reason for the search should be explained to the relevant Head or crew receiving the search, and the Head can ask security to stop if there is no warrant. This is my understanding of how it already worked. The warrant-less bit is implied and shouldn't be necessary, as all types of searches are already permitted on all alert levels with a valid warrant for those searches. The wiki should accurately reflect this as of today. But even if it didn't and you found other contradictions, you could always just use the stricter interpretation of the wording to play it safe.

I'm aware of where agents sit on the totem pole. However, they are bureaucrats and administrators, who have about as much business directly managing specialist emergency responders as the station's command staff does. They could certainly raise issues or concerns that ERT's command would hear about, and maybe something would be done from that side, but they aren't going to hop on the comm and start laying down the law to the team itself in most situations. If they do, it's generally because the team itself is requesting some clarification, or the two groups are voluntarily cooperating (shocking, I know, but it happens). An ERT update is planned to make it unnecessary to involve Agents in ordering ERT around anyway. In the meantime, the better option for players who spot bad behavior is to ahelp it.

This won't be happening. CCIA Agents do not directly issue orders to ERT due to not being part of their command structure. While they have occasionally helped coordinate teams in the past thanks to us not having a better option, it would realistically come to the team from higher up, relayed via a commander. There is an ERT update that will address this specific issue that is already planned. Typically good advice, in life and in spess.

The ERT guide is more focused on kit than process right now. We are looking to add the following to the wiki page under the "What do I do?" section. ----- What do I do? As a member of the ERT, your objective is to handle the emergency situation that the station has reported by any means necessary, and return the station to normal operations. You have a selection of powerful equipment, an ID with all-access to the station's airlocks, and the authority to take charge of the station if you need to in order to accomplish your mission. However, remember that the Heads of Staff and Captain are the real people in charge of the facility. Your team shouldn't be relieving them of their duties or overriding their authority without a good reason for it, such as one being hostile, actively assisting hostile elements, or refusing to perform their job functions. Once the emergency is contained, your team is expected to hand back control of the station to the crew and depart, or at worst, facilitate an evacuation or emergency crew transfer. ERT members should not indefinitely maintain control of the station. ----- While this does not affect ERT's authority, it does create guidance on when they should use it - namely, only when doing so would help them contain the emergency they were called for, and only until that emergency is over. ERT and the station's chain of command are entirely separate structures with separate priorities at this level, and we should not be trying to place one above or underneath the other. The takeaway for command should be that in calling the ERT, you are not in control of an emergency and should defer to the ERT in helping to contain it. The takeaway for the ERT is that while you are there to normalize the situation, you are not normally responsible for station operations, and should try to leave anything not strictly important to your mission in the hands of command staff.

This report is being closed as CCIA does not administrate IC Discord channels, nor do we currently have an official presence on any affiliated Discord server. Members of the team who participate on these servers are typically doing so out of personal interest. If you believe the behavior of the reported character to be sufficiently inappropriate or unbelievable, you may file a character or player complaint here: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewforum.php?f=35

I'll be moving this to the archive shortly, as we've decided to draft a regulation that covers gross negligence when NoD cannot be applied. NoD itself will not be changing at this time. Directives violations as a blanket offense are also likely not being changed, though the new regulation may apply to many of them. When discussing, It was a pretty even split between handling them case by case, and handling them with one uniform offense.

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate thread for general new-medical-bay feedback, but, as two immediate thoughts: 1. ORs being viewable from the general access hallway is sort of absurd. I don't know any hospital or emergency treatment center where it would be appropriate to put people in surgery on display to anyone who isn't a learning doctor. I know there's a window tint, yes, but it's only a matter of time before someone forgets to use it. The Exodus's private observation room made much more sense. 2. The CMO is missing a Keycard Authentication Device in their office. This appears to be an oversight, since all heads are authorized to use them and should have easy access to them.

This may be aside the point of Butter's complaint, but as the CCIA team member who was involved with this, I do have a question. Ayden was in that round as a visitor for the purpose of the interview. What happened to cause this complaint should not have been possible, since players who join as a visitor are disallowed from taking command roles both from a IC perspective in the form of Directive 9, and an OOC perspective in the form of the admin policy that prevents visitors from assuming command roles. Did you go to cryo and respawn as CE to take the job slot or something? There's no other way that Ayden should have been placed in this situation.

Elliot makes an Elliot character huh HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM While I don't interact with most of Elliot's characters much, I do see him volunteer his time and effort as part of the CCIA team nearly every day. He's enthusiastic, willing to learn, considerate of other players, and is typically engaged with a round he or his agent is a part of. He's called out taking care of the player experience, giving room to the crew and to antags, and being considerate of the narrative of the round at large, which reassures me that he'd be a good fit for the whitelist.

Part of the reason that guide isn't updated is that there is imminent discussion over what it should/should not be able to do. When that's finished, it'll get written. Otherwise it'll just get re-written again.

Hello there! I too played for a bit on Hypatia back when, though I don't recall you. I was very new to the game back then. Rules are imperfect for all situations, staff can make mistakes, and cliques come and go. I think it might be a good idea for you to stick around for a while and see if you like the server and community culture long-term, before volunteering your time. That way you'll be able to see whether or not the server, community and staff team are a good fit for you, and staff will be better able to recognize a good fit as well.

I believe what you see on the wiki are the requirements for a NanoTrasen employee. At least until the day we get non-NT maps and characters, which seems distant at best. It's a bit out of scope to list galactic standards for the job roles on their respective guides, because: 1. There probably are none, the galaxy is very big, and 2. We don't have a way to play with non-NT standards on regular station characters in-game right now.

In this case, I'd like to vote for dismissal. I don't really think people without departmental expertise should be making the calls for less-obvious cases, and I particularly don't like that you're calling out "taking away the power" from a department head to determine it in the first place. As mentioned by Jackboot, giving Heads the ability to cover these cases is partially why the regulation exists, and it is commonly the solution for the Directive breaches you mention. Others are covered by other regulations, and officer interpretation is an expected component of that. If security witnesses an obvious case of NoD, they can report it so that Command can then sort it out - whether that's by determining NoD, or ordering the crew in question to stop, which sets them up for Failing to Execute an Order if they do not. In the event of a severe accident or other extreme, reckless behavior, it's the Head that would be remediating the crew member in question via a suspension or demotion anyway. Edit: While I don't think this suggestion should be implemented as proposed, we are going to take a look at ways to cover certain cases of severe recklessness without a Head present. If it's decided that it is necessary and helpful to the gameplay of a round, there might be an update somewhere.

From what I can gather above, you want to give Security the ability to apply the charge to the crew autonomously. Do security team members universally have the ability to determine a department's productivity, and what is hampering it? Individual crew members' duties? Do they need this to apply a charge when someone is misusing their equipment, if that is often covered by some other charge (hooliganism/trespassing/suspicious conduct)? Is there a good reason that crew should have their boss/command in general cut out of making these determinations? I see that you include a provision to have someone go to the supervisor in ambiguous cases, but I think that in practice, run-of-the-mill officers will be quicker to just stick the charge.

Robot Jedi? On my space station? It's more likely than you think. This seems like a cute addition that doesn't go overboard. I'm also contractually obligated to like better ponchos.

Resilynn's characters have personality in spades, and generally they make the effort to encourage fun rounds when I'm on board with them. I'd enjoy seeing how the player adapts to the squid life, and I particularly appreciate the concept of a Skrell taking it upon himself to be a cultural ambassador by way of the media. It feels a little less dry than the medical/science/command roles that seem more common for the species, and (potentially) creates someone approachable and optimistic to contrast some of the darker spots of the species' history. [mention]Resilynn[/mention], Why did Quilp'vlomn end up here? Presumably there are better places to do this work, and while it's always a struggle to justify the journalist role on a edge-of-system research station, is there anything that appealed to him specifically about NanoTrasen, the Aurora, or Tau Ceti?

Trial started as of 2/24.

Trial passed as of 2/24. Welcome to the team!