Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

[Retracted] DasFox's CCIA Application

Recommended Posts

CCIA Staff Application


Basic Information

Byond key: DasFox

Character names: https://gyazo.com/c0b6511653bb41fdac0e07c73fa0cade

Age: 43

Timezone: GMT-4 Normally, GMT+2 at time of posting

What times are you most available?: On an average day, anywhere from 8AM to 11PM. This includes while I'm at work, as I've a rather laxing job I can log in for.


How long have you played SS13?: I've been playing SS13 since ~2004, mostly on private servers and never anything serious. However I started playing again on RP servers in ~2012, if not early 2011 due to a renewed interest in both the game and the RP communities of the internet, not having found a 'home' anywhere else. For Clarity's sake, this BYOND Key itself is not the only one I've used over this timeframe.

How long have you played on Aurora?: I've played Aurora for almost going on a year now, if we don't count the long break I took from the server entirely. Altogether I'd say my time played over the months themselves would be about four months of days I've logged on (Not consecutively such as hours, but 1 login per day is that day.).

How active on the forums, discord and/or server are you? I tend to not be to voicey on discord servers, however I do log into the server that I actively play on, which is at this current time Aurora, almost every day when I can for a round or two. Beyond this, I tend to check the Forums whenever I've an active application up every six to eight hours at the very least. Otherwise I try to log in once a day, which I normally forget to do unless I remember to keep tabs on a PR or a post that I was interested or disagreeing with.

Have you ever been banned, and if so, how long and why?: Yes, so far it's been twice on baystation12. I've had some long-standing issues with the staff there, and I suppose they ban for the slightest disrespect as harassment. I'd rather not name names or get into it here, unless it's absolutely required of me. Beyond this, I've not been banned from Aurora, even though I've likely been skirting the line for a while now.

Have you ever volunteered as moderation staff for any other servers, SS13 or otherwise?: I have, yes. I've done so once for Aurora, once on Bay12 (before my first ban), and I've also moderated on Polaris (albeit temporarily). Beyond this, I've managed a Community for a Streamer for about two years (and sadly left on very bad terms with them.). I also currently moderate a friend of mine's streams and his streaming community, which is a significantly smaller and less time-consuming task than my prior one.

Do you have any other experience that you believe would be relevant to a position in the CCIA?: I've both moderated, and managed in an IRL and Online position. While I may be a little rough around the edges at times, I do put in time and care into what I do, regardless of my attitude on the matter. I've a tendency to occasionally get irritated, though overall I like to believe myself usually level-headed when it's needed.


Why do you want to join the CCIA?: Beyond a want to just help and fill the slots, I actually enjoy an equivalent of 'Human Resources', both ICly and IRL. It gives me something to work towards beyond just sitting in the server doing whatever, and the satisfaction of other people knowing their complaints are getting addressed is a decent goal to get towards.

What do you think are the most important qualities for a CCIA Agent to possess?:I believe Patience is up there on the list. You wouldn't get far being impatient and rushing someone through a complaint or not taking your time in dealing with it thoroughly. Beyond this, being correctly Impartial in your decisions even if you hold opinion on it. Synnono also raised a point of availability, however that's likely more of an OOC rather than IC thing, but noteworthy. Equally as important as the rest, being consise and clear with their speech, as well as respectful is also incredibly important.

What do you think the purpose of a CCIA Agent is in an ongoing round?: A CCIAA is the direct answer to any questions or directive requests from Station Command, and the people all reports are sent to. A CCIAA is trusted to respond quickly, and efficiently to Station Command and make sure they're correctly carrying out orders from Central Command, with the duty to relay those orders directly. CCIAA Are also able to, in a current round and when scheduled, interview personnel who are part of an ongoing Internal Affairs investigation. But above all, when not required to, to not step in and change the course of the round unless absolutely necessary.

What do you think the purpose of a CCIA Agent is outside of the server?: CCIAA outside of the server are the people who handle IC complaints and shape the face of 'customer service' on Aurora. I think instead of being a punishment side of the spectrum, CCIAA are more like the guidance that new players should turn to in regards to how to correctly act in a HRP environment. And while Moderators are equally as, if not moreso, important than a CCIAA; CCIAA hold the ability to complete strike characters from the game if improvement on an IC standpoint doesn't improve. While Moderators enforce correct rule-abiding behavior, CCIA enforces correct Role-Player behavior.

How do you handle stress?: I handle stress quite well, I think. I do tend to get rather agitated at times when responding to things as a player, however I like to think that stress caused by something like this wouldn't be quite the same. In fact, when I believe I'm doing something for a benefit, I enjoy stress. It gives me a bit more reason to push through and keep working, y'know?

How well do you work autonomously?: While I extremely enjoy having people to lean on, I can work decently well on my own. Though when I'm new to something, I almost always ask advice and guidance from my fellows, which can be co-workers or the like. Beyond this, when knowledgable, I prefer to work alone due to the slight irritation I may exhibit in my day to day due to a rather abrasive personality at times.

Additional Notes: While I can't attest that I'm the best candidate for the position, I do rather enjoy my time on Aurora and my return was long overdo to be entirely honest. So here's to hoping!

Edited by Guest

Share this post

Link to post

This post will be very short, clear, concise, and right to the point as I have real life business that limits my free activity although I have this free amount of time to post. I apologize if I may be incredibly blunt on some areas.

Your age piques my head, it came off as astonishing to me. It never came to my mind you were that old, DasFox-san. Your activity player levels on Aurora Station are somewhat sufficient although you tell us that you've been playing these game since 2004 or 2011. I'm now reviewing your BYOND key. This tells you have joined BYOND (playing masterpiece Hazordhu) on Jun 2, 2017 AKA last year. Of course, people can doubt you for this credible source. You did not answer activity level and banned questions completely. We can find out your activity level regardless although we don't mean banned from other servers, we mean specifically here but thank you for sharing that. Your presence and conduct on other servers will not go under heavy evaluation or affect your standing in anyways. We have a line that we (CCIA team) shan't cross. Your motiviation to work for CCIA is incredibly lacking as you seem the kind of a person who would work for a short amount of time. I understand you want something to do, we all want something to do rather sitting around and playing games. Your perspective on stress is an interesting unique answer. I think I'm starting to like you for this. As for the autonomously question, you will be tested on this.

If you have any questions. Please feel free to ping me, Synnono, or any other CCIAA staffs here (forums) or discord privately. If you want to ask me questions, I will do my best to answer them to my best extent and depending on my schedule, you will have to be patient with me. Enjoy your day!

Share this post

Link to post

Yep! I've gone through a few BYOND Keys, this key not being the only one I've used in that timeframe. This key was made last year to do new stuff after I returned to BYOND yet again and forgot my account information, which I tend to do a lot. I've gone through at least half-a-dozen accounts on BYOND since it's a free platform and my time often a year, maybe two at the most - then off to re-focus on my career or life at the time for the next so often and completely forget it exists. Hopefully that slightly clarifies that, not sure if it does or not.

Beyond that I'll edit and fix my answers to a more acceptable standard.

Share this post

Link to post

You touched on this yourself briefly in your application, but didn't especially clarify- you've received a large number of notes during your playtime earlier in the year and late last year, before your roughly summer-long hiatus. During that period of sustained play you gained a steady stream of both notes and warnings. Given you have only just begun playing the server again, what proof or assurance can you provide that this behavior will not continue and result in further action that may necessitate removing you from the staff team?

Share this post

Link to post

Honestly, I personally like to think I've move past my "I'm here for my enjoyment everyone else be damned," to "I like to make everyone around me enjoy their time here." I tend to not go for antagonist roles anymore, (Which as far as I'm aware and recall the vast majority of these warnings stemmed from activity as an antagonist (or captain, which I haven't played either.)) When I do get an antagonist, I tend to focus more on RP with those around me than I do with 'getting my valids and killing as a necessity' anymore. I also like to think I've mellowed out on my angst due to a different frame of mind when interacting with people. Sure I'll get upset sometimes, but it's not the end of the world now, y'know?

While my reasoning of my assurances might not be what you were hoping to hear (or read in this case), I haven't done much like I would have before my break. I've got more of an appreciation for an actual HRP server, and don't really want to fuck it up to be quite honest.

But as I brought to point a very small amount of, I have a rather abrasive personality at times. I can be rather dickish, and seem overly critical. Hopefully that won't affect too much.

Share this post

Link to post

Interview with the applicant:


8:31 PM] Synnono: Hi there DasFox, whenever you're ready I'm here. No big rush.

[8:31 PM] DasFox: o/

[8:33 PM] Synnono: Most of this is just me asking you questions. Some are specific to rounds, others are more general or about out of round things. Feel free to ask clarifying questions about any of it, but when it comes to specific scenarios, assume you know pretty much everything you're going to know when you hear the question.

[8:33 PM] Synnono: To start with, what is your idea of an ideal conflict for a given antagonist round?

[8:37 PM] DasFox: Personally, something that'd be engaging to people but not overly aggressive. But my answer depends on the antagonist in question, like Mercs that're overly aggressive to be engaging to all departments are very bad imo. Cutting power as a CE so everyone's involved is bad. But as a single antagonist, like a traitor, it'd be much harder. There's a time for aggressive with escalation, but I believe conflict is a last resort and you can really fulfill the majority of your goals as an antagonist with Roleplay. Not everything needs to be code blue/red security turn-lethal flip-table combat. There's not much more I can say about that without going into hypotheticals though.

[8:38 PM] DasFox: But I don't believe you need to be engaging to every single person in the round, you just need to entertain those who you're able to interact with feasibly.

[8:39 PM] Synnono: I was about to ask you to phrase it more abstractly, but you pretty much just did, so that works!

[8:39 PM] DasFox: :P

[8:39 PM] Synnono: How do you feel CCIA staff members should be perceived by the playerbase? Does this differ significantly from how you feel CCIA characters should be perceived in the world of our setting?

[8:43 PM] DasFox: I see CCIA as players with power, not full staffmembers even though that's what they are. In the end, everyone but Abo, Arrow, so on are all just players who contribute in their own ways, CCIA is policing IC actions. They're not responsible for directly running the server. Which does, in fact, differ significantly from what CCIA character are in the setting. They are the voice of Central Command, who are responsible for directly influencing the decisions made by command staff when requested. They're also responsible for taking care of issues that arise on the station in the form of incident reports, and have power over controls by authority of Central.

So while OOCly I see them as players with a stamp fetish (Jokingly), ICly they're critically important to how things are run in a major multi-trillion credit corporation like NanoTrasen. That may be a little convoluted, feel free to ask me to clarify in places I suppose.

[8:47 PM] Synnono: I think I understand that well enough for the most part. Though to follow up on the first part, what differentiates people like Abo and Arrow from the rest of staff?

[8:49 PM] DasFox: To me, while everyone puts their time in, Abo and Skull (Now Arrow,) and Garn all put in the time to maintain and manage Everyone, including staff under them and the entire playerbase. Moreso for Garn and Arrow, and the coding team I all consider staff. They take their time to code and develope and give without asking for anything because they enjoy what they're making. Which, to me, is more than simply playing customer service to a playerbase as a moderator or most administrators.

[8:49 PM] DasFox: don't get me wrong, it's amazing what everyone does.

[8:49 PM] DasFox: It's just my view.

[8:50 PM] Synnono: Alrighty, that's clarified then.

[8:51 PM] Synnono: In your opinion, how much of a role should Central Command play in the affairs of the station? When is it appropriate for them to directly intervene with a round, and how much should they attempt to shape that round when they do?

[8:54 PM] DasFox: CC loyalty implants it's HOS and Captains so they don't need to directly intervene. The captain and Head of Security are trusted in most cases to run and manage the station without outside interference. In my opinion, the only appropriate time would be when asked for direct assistance by the Captain (Via sending a fax explaining the exact situation, and giving a response to either man up and figure it out, or give guidance on how to come to a conclusion if it's overly convoluted). But, when CCIA intervenes in a round via faxes, they shouldn't attempt to pull everyone in a direction, and should instead leave it to the Command Staff to decide how the round progresses in these situations. Command Whitelisted players are also trusted to direct how a round flows, it's why the slot's whitelisted.

[8:56 PM] Synnono: Following that thinking, is there a situation in which you can see it being appropriate for CC to manhandle a round at all? Or should it always be on the players in the round at any expense?

[9:02 PM] DasFox: The only time I see CCIA directly intervening would be if it was appropriate to the Antagonists. You wouldn't intervene to find a traitor. You may, however, intervene if there's no possible way for Command to do something without authorization. (Mercs who're blowing the station up with TTVs and stolen everything, want to keep the station. Allow the Cap' to blow it, so on.). Otherwise, it's entirely up to the players in my opinion. I wouldn't personally step in unless specifically told to, as that's my thought.

[9:03 PM] DasFox: (And in that case, only if ERT failed.)

[9:03 PM] DasFox: (And a Deathsquad, which failed once too)

[9:03 PM] DasFox: Or if it's an event round that command need guidance in, I should've clarified that too.

[9:05 PM] Synnono: Alrighty, that helps clear that up. The next few are about more specific in-round scenarios. We don't expect you to know what we should do as part of the team, per se, but we're interested in learning about how you think and act in certain cases.

[9:06 PM] Synnono: Early in a round, command staff faxes you about a Central Command Update that you did not send. The fax asks you to explain why the station is being leased to another company. How do you respond and why?

[9:08 PM] DasFox: I'd respond with an affirmation if it were a revolution or Merc gimmick. Mostly due to the fact that immediately shutting down a gimmick is a very shit-tier thing to do, as it's thought out and seemingly wanting to try something. My reasoning behind this is mostly due to the fact that, it's leasing the station, which means they're temporarily gaining the services of the station. They'd still be subject to NanoTrasen regulation while aboard, as NT still owns the station. There's no reason to immediately state 'No this is a lie detain them pls'.

[9:09 PM] DasFox: Otherwise, I'd likely simply not send a response for a while to allow a traitor or whoever to vye on the confusion it caused, before giving a negative (Unless specific scenarios, like a traitor working with administrators as a solo traitor, which is unlikely but possible.)

[9:10 PM] DasFox: My explanation would explain exactly what I went into detail about there, if yo uwere confused.

[9:10 PM] Synnono: Not confused, no.

[9:10 PM] Synnono: When we are supporting the Revolution game mode, CCIA can optionally choose to take a more antagonistic approach to its interaction with the crew.

The Head Loyalist of the round creates a Central Command announcement that states all Tajara employees are to be 'heavily scrutinized' due to reports of widespread terrorist acts across Tau Ceti. You receive a fax from a concerned Head of Staff asking for details about the specifics of these instructions. How do you respond and why?

[9:14 PM] DasFox: If the Head Loyalist planned this gimmick with the other Loyalists via AOOC, I'd agree with in fact, make up a scenario. Perhaps a vessel in Tajara space, or Tajara personnel on a station mutinied and caused a large attack, destroying the vessel or station. Something that'd make people go 'Oh shit, what?'. It's not unknown that NanoTrasen is a very dark and brutal corporation in the grand scheme of things. It's entirely possible. If it incites an uproar, good. That's the goal, isn't it?

Otherwise if it were a random announcement and the Loyalist in question wasn't coordinating with his teammates in a very team based mode, I'd simply deny the announcement if the other antagonists didn't wish to do so. Both are very possible scenarios, as I've had both happen to me as a head loyalist captain / HOS.

[9:15 PM] Synnono: You are playing in the round as the Captain. After a heated argument with your Chief Engineer, Central receives a fax from the CE asking CCIA to intervene in the dispute on her behalf. You are the only CCIA staff member available. How do you respond, and why?

[9:17 PM] DasFox: I'd take a moment to step back, and request another CCIA come on if possible. I, as someone with the power to do so, shouldn't be responding to things regarding me in any capacity. Much like a moderator shouldn't answer ahelps regarding their character. If it was unavailable, I'd simply not answer the Fax without poking someone above me. And even then, I'd take another step back and away to view if, from an exterior perspective (or an attempt to) if I was in the wrong, or if the CE was in the wrong. If I couldn't come to a conclusion, as I was biased in it, I wouldn't do it.

[9:17 PM] DasFox: Simple as.

[9:18 PM] Synnono: That's the last of the in-round scenario questions for now. The next few have to do with IRs, which take up a majority of our time.

[9:18 PM] Synnono: What do you believe is the purpose of the Incident Report system?

[9:22 PM] DasFox: Incident reports are the way for characters to report things, IE to human resources. This can be anything from disputes that don't necessarily break regulation but are complaint worthy, and things that do break regulation that need to be brought to someone who can control it. Such as an extremely gross negligence of someone in medical resulting in death (manslaughter charge), and malpractice. A doctor surely wouldn't be employed after such a thing, and this is the way to make this possible.

[9:23 PM] Synnono: After claiming an Incident Report to work on and sending out notices to the people involved, you realize that the players you are trying to meet with can't accommodate your timezone and schedule, and it is unlikely you will be able to meet with all of them for several weeks or longer. What would you do, if anything, to address this issue?

[9:25 PM] DasFox: Personally my work schedule is really flexible, I'm lucky enough to be in a job that allows me to change my work times because of an abundance of people. But before I did that, I'd see if anyone else who wasn't currently busy was capable of taking it over. As changing my schedule entirely for this can take up to a few days and but me in a very bad mood for the next week or two due to my sleep schedule messing up. If noone else was capable of taking it, it might just take a while for me to get to them sadly.

[9:26 PM] Synnono: Straightforward enough.

[9:26 PM] Synnono: After completing your investigation of an Incident Report, you find that an officer escalated to a forceful arrest when a crewmember resisted detainment. While the original reason for the arrest is determined to be invalid, the officer argues that in resisting arrest, the crewmember legitimized the detainment. How do you interpret this event?

[9:30 PM] DasFox: IT depends on the charge that the person had. You wouldn't elevate to a forceful arrest over a non-proved theft charge. However, if it was something like Grand Theft, it's more believable. (IE if the captain's spare was suddenly missing and he was seen in the area.). Even if the arrest reason was illegitimate, the crewmember did resist arrest in the end, which is indeed a violation of regulation. However, both people were in the wrong. One, for attempting to make an arrest over an illegitimate reason, and two for resisting arrest and further violating corporate regulations. The primary arrest wasn't legitimate, however the secondary one for resisting arrest was.

[9:30 PM] DasFox: Law's fucked, man.

[9:30 PM] Synnono: Law is, indeed, fucked.

[9:31 PM] Synnono: With that out of the way, that's the last of the prepared questions. I do have a few regarding your application(s).

[9:31 PM] Synnono: When you say you've likely been "skirting the line" for being banned from Aurora for a while now, what do you mean?

[9:31 PM] DasFox: Shoot.

[9:31 PM] DasFox: Ayy internet's back

[9:32 PM] DasFox: Alright, when I say 'skirting the line' I mean I haven't been banned from anything, though I've likely been close to it. In fact, my notes even say somewhere to ban me for my next offensive. I'm on thin ice, as it were.

[9:32 PM] DasFox: Though this note was added months ago and I went inactive for other reasons.

[9:32 PM] Synnono: How long would you say you've been back and active on the server?

[9:32 PM] DasFox: About two ish weeks, actively? Somewhere around there.

[9:32 PM] DasFox: I don't actually recall.

[9:33 PM] DasFox: IT's been, very melded together.

[9:33 PM] DasFox: Life has a way of doing that to me.

[9:33 PM] Synnono: You basically applied immediately then. What compelled you to go for the staff team as soon as you came back?

[9:34 PM] DasFox: Primarily that I didn't necessarily see them as staff. Beyond, I'd have applied for moderator had I agreed on some things with the staff. Yet, I don't. Beyond, I don't feel like I'd make a good moderator in the end. Even with my experience in other forms of moderation, I don't have the will to do so again for a game I'm afraid. Plus, it's something to get me back into the swing of things. That may sound a little 'Uh what', but in the end I do enjoy Aurora more than anywhere else I've been, even if I do disagree with some of the staff and a portion of the playerbase.

[9:36 PM] Synnono: Well. Considering that this team is staff, and that we coordinate with admin/lore/dev regularly on things, what are the things you don't agree with in regards to the rest of the group?

[9:36 PM] DasFox: Ah, it's mostly how moderation itself happens. Not with what's being moderated against. I don't agree with how things are policed, and I don't like some of the moderators who I won't name at the time. Some of the admins I haven't had the best history with either.

[9:37 PM] DasFox: I don't want to say it feels negligent, but it certainly doesn't feel like it's all there.

[9:38 PM] DasFox: But, as people have said to me.

[9:38 PM] DasFox: I don't quite have all the information, do I?

[9:39 PM] Synnono: Regarding your motivation for joining the team as posted, what makes this different from, say, roleplaying an Internal Affairs Agent? You could get your HR kick without actually having OOC obligations by just playing.

[9:43 PM] DasFox: I don't simply want to be an IC HR official. That's not why I made the application. If it seemed like that, I apologize. No, I don't want to simply file a form for other people to take care of at the end of the line. I want to have something to devote time to. If I simply wanted that, I would be playing IAA. Devoting my time and effort than I have free towards something I'll enjoy is more important to me than simply sitting in an office waiting for complaint ICly for two hours. My want is moreso to help the community in these matters, and better myself as someone in the community. I don't have the best history and likely don't have the greatest opinion from people within the community. I want to change that by making myself more productive partly, along with putting the effort along with it to back up simply wanting to prove I'm better than when I left in terms of my personality.

[9:44 PM] DasFox: The OOC obligations are, in the end, what made me want to make the application.

[9:44 PM] Synnono: Can you expand on the circumstances surrounding leaving your staff positions in your previous communities, on Bay and Polaris?

[9:45 PM] DasFox: I wasn't every staff on Bay, though I did apply once and was denied due to a little bit of favoritism. My experience on Polaris was going well as a moderator, until I touched a very touchy subject in OOC and phrased something poorly. So I resigned instead of completing the trial, as I didn't believe I was fit for moderation in the end.

[9:45 PM] DasFox: Ever, even.

[9:47 PM] DasFox: Along with work tapping me in the nose a little bit then.

[9:47 PM] DasFox: Though, that was mostly my fault.

[9:50 PM] Synnono: In your moderator app here, you received a fair bit of criticism for your OOC attitude towards players and their characters. Being effective on this team does sort of require you to be able to work while being (and appearing) impartial and considerate towards others. Can you tell me a bit about why you feel the application was denied, and can you identify anything that's changed in your outlook or behavior on server since then?

[9:55 PM] DasFox: To put it quite bluntly, I was an asshole. Very abrasive in how I was talking to people, always on the defensive, finding flaws because it amused me more and more. There's likely a lot of reasons it was denied, some of those being among them. Though, instead of just playing for myself, I like to think I've mellowed out and got a new mindset of 'What can I do to help the people around me', instead of 'What can I do to make myself enjoy this more'. I'm not playing a singleplayer game, and I didn't care to remember that at the time. While I can still be a little, toe-steppy here and there, I think, I do tend to take into account other people's enjoyment of what they're doing more now than I did before.

[9:55 PM] DasFox: Though, I haven't looked at that application for. A long, long time.

[9:55 PM] DasFox: I don't remember the majority of it at all, no.

[10:02 PM] Synnono: Alright, then. I think that might be it from me. Thanks for taking the time. If you have any questions of your own, I'd be happy to answer them before we wrap up, though.

Share this post

Link to post


After reading the application and observing the general situation, I'd like to point some things out and share my general concerns.

Firstly, as Doc said, you have received quite some administrative action, in the forms of warnings/notes. You've also admitted standing on thin ice in regards to a ban. While we all make mistakes, such a history may reflect one's behaviour towards others, and as you too have again told us, you have been a bit abrasive and not very pleasant. Now, after telling us that you are determined to change, a player complaint has popped up for your behaviour. I am not by any means implying whether or not you are at fault, since it is not my responsibility to do so, but I am telling you that this, coupled with your collection of notes, does leave me some doubts. The staff team represents the server, at some degree at least, and its members should be expected to be held at a high standard.

Coming up next, you mentioned in your interview that CCIA function more as a "customer service" than the other staff. While I suppose I do understand what you mean, the way you expressed it makes me feel that you may not view CCIA functions as critical to the server as the rest, generating concerns about your motivation. From my experience so far, IRs are not that easy to process as they may seem. They can become a very lengthy and time consuming process, since you should coordinate with multiple people from different timezones, all giving up some of their free time. It can result in a frustrating experience from all involved, and an Agent should not view it lightly. Are you willing to commit the time and energy?

And lastly, concerning your long break from the server. Given the nature of the CCIA, I believe it is easier than other staff branches to lose interest/go inactive. There may be periods when there are no IRs coming in, so there's not much to do other than waiting for a fax. I believe you should take this into account, and see if you really are determined to stick around for the long run.

Share this post

Link to post

Regarding my administrative actions, I did speak about this. I won't go into detail about the complaint here, as this isn't the place for it. However, doubts are part of the process. If you didn't doubt and took my word for truth immediately, it'd make me more question whether this was a place I'd put my time. Erring on the side of caution is good, it gives me something to prove myself rather than to take my words at face value.

While yes, CCIA function as a 'customer service', always smile and make sure to keep in mind the person you're talking to. I never said, though, that they weren't critical to the server. They're equally as critical as they are ICly. Yet, I'm not always the best with my phrasing. (I even mentioned how this landed me in a little bit of heat on Polaris, a little bit ago.) My motivation can't be proven with words, nor would I expect it to be. If I simply stated that they're critical like I just did with nothing further, I'd be accused of telling you what you want to hear. While I don't view the role as a major staff role, I do believe it's relevant to how the server runs. Equally as relevant, if not moreso, than the playerbase itself. Without them, there'd be no server, no? My willingness can only be proven through action, at least in my opinion. Isn't that the point of Trials? :)

While yes, I went inactive, that's because I was both dealing with work and hopping to and from other servers trying to find if I liked somewhere more than another. While I didn't try too much, I don't actually enjoy most of the reviews I hear about most of the places, so I skipped them entirely. But before I derail the topic, I'm going to say that I returned because I enjoyed the time here. While I enjoyed it in another way than I do now, I enjoy it equally as much if not moreso now. But either way, I can't determine determination off of talking to myself. I'm the kind of person who both learns through action, and thrives on the experience. Time will only tell, if it's accepted.

Share this post

Link to post

While initially I was supportive of this application (though it often slipped my mind to post said support), the recent weekban they have endured due to their failure to properly roleplay in an ERT environment has left me questioning if they are fit for the job. -1

Share this post

Link to post

I mentioned in my interview I disagreed with how things were policed, and I'm simply afraid this was one of those times. While I do think a week's a little severe, I won't argue the matter, and I understand if it deems me unfit for the position. However, without going into much further detail about the entire thing, as I stated before this isn't the place for it, I'll simply state that I did have a history of these actions before, and it's an understandable punishment.

Furthermore, while I hope the application isn't closed due it it, I understand the reasoning if it is. As Paradox said, and as I agreed with earlier, questioning my behavior is part of the process. I wouldn't expect this not to have repercussions, as I wouldn't expect people to simply skim over it and it not matter. I learned from the matter that my Modus Operandi regarding something was wrong, and it was changed. All I can really ask for from the experience, in the end.

Share this post

Link to post

After some deliberation, I would say that I am against your joining the CCIA team at this point in time; as Unknown mentioned, your reasoning for wanting to join CCIA smacks more of a temporary interest, rather than a true interest in the job.

Your response to Syn's question, in your interview; related to the purpose of the incident report system also feels incomplete, and somewhat inaccurate. The purpose of the IR system is not to punish behaviour that fails to breach regulations, or, rather, that that is only a small part of it. Incident Reports are generally filed in regards to character actions that breach regulations, but are unable to be dealt with during the round in which it happened. If it was not the result of antagonist activity, or heavily influenced by it, then CCIA will investigate the breach of regulation through interviews and analysis, before making a judgement. This is not to say that behaviour that does not breach specific regulations shouldn't be reported, there is no penalty for reporting behaviour your character sees as disruptive or problematic. Once again, this is not the entire purpose of Incident Reports, their final purpose is to act against poor behaviour that, while it doesn't warrant admin intervention due to not quite breaching server rules; is still detracting from whatever situation in which it occurred, if poor behaviour in a round is considered in-character, then it comes to us, unless it is antagonist driven, of course, but the IR can still be posted if you are the least bit uncertain, after which admins will confirm it as a valid IR, or cancel it, if they find that the antagonist activity to be too relevant to the case.

For my third and final point, the complaint levelled against you by QueenOfyugoslavia, Scheveningen and AmoryBlaine raises serious concerns. In terms of in-character power, besides admin spawned shenanigans, no role has more power than CCIA, or, with our alternate spawn ability, ERT Commanders; I would be hesitant to give you access to these given that the complaint was resolved against you, with rules lawyering, validhunting and powergaming being the specific reasons behind that resolution. The ability to severely affect a round as any member of staff is immense, but CCIA are the only staff group that have routine in-character interactions with the crew (again, besides admin shenanigans), and the complaint's result increases my hesitance to trust you with that sort of control.

That is not to say that I cannot be persuaded, but that is unlikely to happen within this application, I would suggest that you spend more time with the server, and endeavour to improve on the behaviours mentioned in the complaint; as well as take a hard look at the CCIA role and responsibilities, and ask if you really want to tie yourself down to it, it's interesting at times, but every role has it's downsides.

Share this post

Link to post

I'm afraid I have to support Gollee's response in further updates of your actions. I have increasingly become cautious after reading through (ignoring Amory and Schev's lengthy response to get to the summarized response) QueenOfYugoslavia and Garn's response and verdict toward to you. Instead of changing for the better, you have changed for the worse. I have no idea what to say but except to support Gollee's response.

Share this post

Link to post

I'll keep my reply short and blunt as most things I wish to say have been said.

I am against DasFox joining the team at this current point in time.

To elaborate on this, when initially poked by the team for my opinion I stated that we should not deny others due to past behaviour or attitudes and I do still stand by this; initially defending the application. That said the longer this application has gone on for the more concerns I have acquired about putting you on as a trial member.

The interview put me off, to be to the point about it. It did show the detail oriented or methodical thought I wish it did and certainly didn't give off the vibe most of us are looking for. Quotes like "Law's fucked, man." and "Low-tier shitter" spring to mind. Whilst I more than most agree and found it rather amusing it's not something we are looking for, interaction wise.

Previous applicants have been methodical, formal and upright whilst being interviewed but I do not see this here. The casual tone and attitude is a step away from what I personally am looking for. Casualness and a bit of memeing is not unfamiliar to myself as I'm sure many will jump on to back up however there is a time and place. This was not it.

Overall the interview was a disappointing turn for this interview in my eyes as it reinforced my initial nagging thoughts about the lack of overall determination and tenacity of the application.

Further to this Doc has mentioned that there is a "steady" stream of notes and admin actions against yourself. Again if this had been in the past it would not have been an issue but the fact it is current is almost insulting, despite this all being voluntary and a bit of fun CCIAAs and all other staff simply must hold themselves to a high level of behaviour and community standing. If I myself had notes and warnings coming in at a steady pace there is no chance of others seeing the CCIA as respectable or as people who should be given extra responsibility. Notice that I use responsively and not power, because at the heart of it the reason we've taken up this role is to help the community that has given us so much and give back to it in an enjoyable way. It is not for our own enjoyment, though it is fun, our actions have been, and always should be for the community. The notes and bans simply make me believe that this tenant is simply not there.

Apologies for going on far longer than I should have. I thought this would be a short one but I was mistaken.

Please, please, please take this as a positive post. It may feel as if I am actively against you joining but I am not. It's a matter of getting yourself centred, giving it some thought and deciding for yourself if you truly would want to join. If so, get all the notes and bans in the far past and apply again with more fire and determination. That is when I shall support you in this endeavour.

Share this post

Link to post

Going through the comments here, I can see the points raised. While, some of which I may not agree with entirely (Like the assumption that my being casual is my entire outlook on the situation, and that this was reflecting my determination or want to do something.), I can understand the concerns and in the future hope to remedy them. However, for the time being, I'll be taking this feedback to heart. There's certainly things I can improve on both in my play, and in my personality that don't mesh well with a lot of people. Simply because my outlook changed, doesn't mean I can immediately improve everything I do. I don't claim to be perfect now, nor would I want to be. I'm simply human.

Beyond this, I do appreciate the feedback from all parties, and I don't take it as a personal assault towards me or my character if you were worried about that [mention]Elliot[/mention] . After all, the time I've been back (and made mistakes in), is hardly enough to prove much at all. And while some of you stating my change was for the worse, which did give me a moment to rethink, I like to believe it's more of a learning experience than anything else. I'm definitely overly casual, sarcastic, and at many points in time abrasive.

As a side-note, I didn't apply for 'power' over the playerbase in any way. If this was the assumption that was gotten from my responses, I apologize, as this was in no way my intent. While I understand things CCIA are given while interacting with crew round-to-round, (As stated both the CCIAA position and the ERT Commander position.) it was never my intention to shoot for this things as a way to move myself above everyone else. Or, even then, abuse it to get a power trip of some kind.

While, yes, my behavior regarding how I speak has caused issues in the past, I didn't at all see it as problematic during an interview. In my opinion, if I were attempting to be overly formal during it, it'd make me seem like someone trying too hard. I don't mean this in a negative way, I simply mean it as I wasn't attempting to appear as the perfect candidate. I'm not, and I don't believe I ever would be. But I don't disagree that it may have come off the wrong way, which was something I didn't think about at the time.

At any rate, to wrap this all up, I did read the feedback given, and I was taking the time to collect my thoughts in such a way to respond before posting, so my apologies for the delays. I see the points and concerns raised, and will try to at least, attempt, to remedy the problematic parts. Hopefully in the future, as Elliot stated, I'd be in a more centered position to be able to do this. Until then, however, I think it'd be a good idea to close this regardless if the feedback was positive or not. It's been a learning experience, and one I'm glad I had.

Share this post

Link to post
I think it'd be a good idea to close this regardless if the feedback was positive or not. It's been a learning experience, and one I'm glad I had.


I was going to wait just a little longer on this, but this was more or less the conclusion I'd arrived at myself.

For all the paragraphs above, my thoughts basically boil down to "enjoy your time back and see how things go, first." Previous records shouldn't disqualify anyone from volunteering by default, but for the people who might be otherwise concerned, I don't think enough time has passed for them to determine whether they should be, anymore. Garn mentions in the complaint resolution referred to in this thread that you've been "clean for a while" but that's likely due to your spell away from the server. Giving folks a while to see the changes you reference in your interview seems like a great idea - then, if you have the interest and apply again later, they can vouch for you here too.

Marking this as retracted for the time being.

Share this post

Link to post
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this