Command & Security Relationship

[Eliot Clef]

Captain's are permitted to pardon people who were brigged unjustly. That's literally stopping a bad brigging in process. You don't just spank sec after the fact.

The Captain cannot exceed official powers when "exceeding official powers" is "giving an order security doesn't like". The captain has the official power to override decisions made by any lower Head. That's within his authority. Instead of contacting Internal Affairs or Central Command to contest this, you proceeded to engage in mutiny. Arresting the highest authority on the station is generally something you need clearance for unless they're being totally insane and violent, if only because they are loyalty implanted.

Of course the behaviour of going to lethals was totally dumb and makes it really hard to justify defending him.

 

I'm bringing this over here from a Player Complaint thread, because I feel like it seriously warrants inquiry and discussion as to intent of gameplay, and I don't really want that thread to be completely dominated by this discussion.

Is the Captain meant to be utterly beyond reproach to the point where he cannot be arrested under most circumstances without contacting Central Command? The way Corporate Regulations are written, particularly

 

Exceeding Official Powers

To act beyond what is allowed by the Chain of Command.

This is for any head of staff who abuses the power given to them, such as the Head of Personnel acting like a security officer in a non-emergency, the captain acting as if he is above the law, etc. Heads of Staff trying to order a different department or ignoring the captain also comes under this. Also covers anyone illegally promoting themselves, such as with a stolen ID.

15 minutes

Demotion. Up to 30 minutes in brig.

 

Tells me, "Yes, the Captain can overstep his boundaries and get arrested. No, the Captain is not allowed to do absolutely anything he pleases." However, it appears that Jackboot at least is of the opinion that this charge cannot or should not be applied to the Captain by definition.

So, I want a dialogue opened. How's this supposed to be? How should the Security-Captain relationship work?

To a lesser extent, how should the Security-Command relationship work overall? What is Staff's official stance on this?

[Jamini]

Allow me to add onto the snippet Xander posted.

In my mind, there are two terms that are being used incorrectly and interchangeably here:

"To pardon"

"To null/to drop charges"

 

A question for you skull.

In the event of excessive charges. (Which could potentially be anything above minimum time/fines). Could a captain order a time reduction to the minimum, or order a brig timer down to a fine?

I was under the impression that the Head of Security and Warden were the only security members that could brig for more than minimum time regardless. However, should they brig someone for double or triple time could a captain order the time reduced if he isn't satisfied with their reasoning why the timer was increased?

[Guest]

As far as I have seen the chain of command goes 'Captain > heads > crew' Where is this the Hos has more authority then the captain coming from?

Don't link me to Baystation wiki considering that that is designed for their servers not ours and have put things there to help cut down on grief for not having roles whitelisted.

[Skull132]

A question for you skull.

In the event of excessive charges. (Which could potentially be anything above minimum time/fines). Could a captain order a time reduction to the minimum, or order a brig timer down to a fine?

I was under the impression that the Head of Security and Warden were the only security members that could brig for more than minimum time regardless. However, should they brig someone for double or triple time could a captain order the time reduced if he isn't satisfied with their reasoning why the timer was increased?

 

I would appreciate a less muddled question. Actually, I would appreciate it if you re-read my post, as you're committing the same logical fallacy I've been trying to chase down this entire day. The first case is teetering towards pardoning, but mostly concerns the executive authority of the captain. The second case is headed towards wrongful imprisonment, and has little or nothing to do with the former.

 

In the event of excessive charges. (Which could potentially be anything above minimum time/fines). Could a captain order a time reduction to the minimum, or order a brig timer down to a fine?

 

Technically, yes. It is then up to Command Staff or IA to determine whether or not such an order was valid. If found not valid, that is to say: there was no good reason for issuing it, then he can be brought in for overstepping his authority.

 

I was under the impression that the Head of Security and Warden were the only security members that could brig for more than minimum time regardless. However, should they brig someone for double or triple time could a captain order the time reduced if he isn't satisfied with their reasoning why the timer was increased?

 

Let's clarify two things before proceeding:

"Minimum time" is actually "suggested penalties".

The rest is "Additional penalties".

Suggested penalties, or lower, can be applied as necessary, by any member of security staff. Additional penalties require, according to corporate regulation, higher authority for appliance. What's more, I don't think Corporate Regulation actually talks about any circumstances where abnormal timers may be applied.

As such, if there is a case of anyone sitting in for something higher than the cumulative sum of the applicable "Suggested Penalties", then they are wrongfully imprisoned. As such, the member of security who conducted the brigging is to be held accountable for such an offence, and the charge can be nulled or (more preferably) simply reset to the normal timer (if the normal timer is already elapsed, then simply released).

[JKJudgeX]

I've always viewed it that the Captain is the supreme word, with the authority to bend and break the law where necessary, and it is assumed he will answer to NT directly, NOT the security staff.

His authority comes from the fact that on a vessel (seafaring or spacefaring), failure to follow orders can put everyone at risk, questioning orders can put everyone at risk... and especially trying to pull out a book of rules and lawyer against the captain, can put everyone at risk. It is a position of final responsibility. If a rule had to be broken, but lives were saved or missions completed, the captain did his job. He is also there to see to it that the vessel is in good hands, all other heads (including the Head of Security) having their behavior and etiquette checked, double-checked, or questioned as the Captain sees fit. In a real life situation, a captain can relieve anyone of their position with minimal justification, insubordination being clearly plenty.

Putting someone on board with the authority to arrest the captain could endanger the crew and mission. In my view, the captain answers to no one but NT, and if the crew needs to overthrow him, we call that a mutiny, even at the head level, and sometimes mutiny is justified... but no, I don't think it should be okay to police the Captain unless he's clearly violating the law with no rationale.

[CampinKiller]

Holy necro, batman.

[SierraKomodo]

I've always viewed it that the Captain is the supreme word, with the authority to bend and break the law where necessary, and it is assumed he will answer to NT directly, NOT the security staff.

His authority comes from the fact that on a vessel (seafaring or spacefaring), failure to follow orders can put everyone at risk, questioning orders can put everyone at risk... and especially trying to pull out a book of rules and lawyer against the captain, can put everyone at risk. It is a position of final responsibility. If a rule had to be broken, but lives were saved or missions completed, the captain did his job. He is also there to see to it that the vessel is in good hands, all other heads (including the Head of Security) having their behavior and etiquette checked, double-checked, or questioned as the Captain sees fit. In a real life situation, a captain can relieve anyone of their position with minimal justification, insubordination being clearly plenty.

Putting someone on board with the authority to arrest the captain could endanger the crew and mission. In my view, the captain answers to no one but NT, and if the crew needs to overthrow him, we call that a mutiny, even at the head level, and sometimes mutiny is justified... but no, I don't think it should be okay to police the Captain unless he's clearly violating the law with no rationale.

 

It's CCIA's job to police the captain in round. If there's an issue with the captain, and it's not an admin issue that you would ahelp for, you send a fax to CC. There's a fax machine in each each of staff office, the IA office, and the warden's office that can be used to contact central about a captain breaking regulations.