Head of Staff Notes in Employee Records

[Synnono]

I'm not sure how much I like this idea as it was presented. Heads already have a high amount of authority within their departments during the shift, and CCIA has a liaison with the admin team to help them with the logging of what actually happened in a round when that is necessary. Aside from the roleplay value of being able to indicate a Head of Staff doesn't like someone (or their work) during the course of an investigation, the benefit to agents would be limited. CCIA also has its own persistent notation system that is already hooked into the WI, and is used from case to case. I do like the idea of station IAAs being able (and obligated) to review these notes, but since they can be added by a Head who then disappears for a month or more, I don't see it happening for anyone but the most common faces on the Command team.

Because we have so many rounds where antag influence affects non-antag characters to different degrees, I feel as though a lot of these notes are ultimately going to be dinging players for behavior that the round brought upon them, rather than something the character would naturally do on a normal workday. Then, like Garnascus said, the note sticks and the player can't do anything about it short of some sort of appeal (a thing we don't typically entertain with other kinds of notes). Even a Head character who doesn't intend to abuse this system may end up just creating more bias than is necessary.

Ultimately I just don't think it's worth it. It isn't an additive enough change for the potential downside. ALSO:

 

[The Keycard Authentication Device] also has a swipe to revoke access requirement for maintenance, and when was the last time THAT was used?

 

I know right? Please have a look here!

[Azande]

Synnono, CCIA might log shit, but you dont do it in a way thats accessible for us, and the only time something is visible to us is if it was a suspension/demotion.

[Azande]

As well, there will absolutely be Heads of Staff that give you a chance regardless of notes.

[whiterabit]

Synnono, CCIA might log shit, but you dont do it in a way thats accessible for us, and the only time something is visible to us is if it was a suspension/demotion.

 

We log everything in the CCIA Records, even stuff as small as a warning. You're thinking of CCIA Actions which show up as as subcategory in the CCIA Records, that's the only thing we restrict to significant action.

[Synnono]

My main point in my other post was in response to the OP's idea that "the notes would be most useful for CCIAA investigating an incident report." I meant to point out that aside from adding a little roleplay flavor, they probably would not. There are somewhat redundant systems already in place on the staff side that record items both IC and OOC, as well as the WI-integrated security notes which I feel are adequately implemented. Players are not supposed to modify those records which affect their characters canonically, but they should have the ability to do so in other cases since they are being created in a largely unmoderated way by other players.

As for allowing Heads to more effectively control their departments, I don't see enough benefit compared to the risk of some sort of long-term misuse, especially if players can't do anything about the notes themselves. Any Head player who spends time with their staff will quickly get an idea of what they should or should not be trusted with, and can take action appropriately, like they do now.

It would be very easy to effectively blacklist a character with a nasty note after a bad interaction with them, with very little immediate oversight. On the other hand, it would require that a pattern of bad behavior be established on the part of the Head character before anyone who does have such oversight even looks into it. Subsequently, looking into it would also probably require an as-of-yet uninvented appeals process. It almost seems like a layer of bureaucracy for its own sake, which I feel that only a small subsection of the playerbase genuinely enjoys.

[Azande]

Could we get a statement on this? [mention]Garnascus[/mention][mention]Skull132[/mention][mention]whiterabit[/mention]

I am fine with Jackboot's suggestion of the pre-determined drop-down list so Heads cannot leave custom comments but rather just basic remarks.

If a character is consistently shit but each individual incident does not warrant an IR, and nobody has the actual time to record each incident or isn't present for each incident, this person should not just be able to continue with this behaviour.

ALSO: Odds of job transfer requests are slim and basically only limited to people who claim to be misassigned at round start or are looking for additional access.

[Faris]

Could we get a statement on this? @Garnascus @Skull132 @whiterabit

I am fine with Jackboot's suggestion of the pre-determined drop-down list so Heads cannot leave custom comments but rather just basic remarks.

If a character is consistently shit but each individual incident does not warrant an IR, and nobody has the actual time to record each incident or isn't present for each incident, this person should not just be able to continue with this behaviour.

ALSO: Odds of job transfer requests are slim and basically only limited to people who claim to be misassigned at round start or are looking for additional access.

 

We're discussing this in our upcoming staff meeting. Feel free to ping me again on the 1st of next month in the event there's no word from us about this.

[Azande]

Sounds good!

[Skull132]

Premade sentences are a meme. Please no, it might as well not be implemented at that point. There's absoloutely no value to be gained from a system that restrictive: no real possibility for roleplays good or evil.

[Azande]

I would like to address this further as the staff meeting's IAA only power. If this suggestion is not added, it may end up just becoming a thing in the Head of Staff forum.

[N8-Toe]

I would like to address this further as the staff meeting's IAA only power. If this suggestion is not added, it may end up just becoming a thing in the Head of Staff forum.

 

Taking a measure like that only worsens the issues brought up by people, including myself. Since now this list of damning cross round information exists out of players reach. Not only would moving it to the Head of Staff forum not be an improvement in the slightest, now there can be OOC information affecting my rounds that I do not have access to. that would be like making new rules, but only putting it on the staff forums. but worst of all this screams "if the community doesn't give us what we want we will do it anyway in our secret clubhouse"

And to re-iterate my issues. non removable notes are a problem and place to much power in the hands of one group of players. it gives the threat that if you do not fully follow the beat of their drum you will have a penalty slapped onto your character that will follow you from now on. and before people say "well just do what they say" its not that simple. while I'm not saying people should disobey constantly, but forcing people into lockstep or penalize kills role play, while also leaving much room for favoritism. And having to appeal via CCIA doesn't fix this, it just means more of a tangled web of IC/OOC bureaucracy that may or may not be biased in favor of the head of staff. If Head of Staff notes on char records could be removed by players if they saw fit, without the need for staff or IC staff aid this would fix this issue. it would allow people to continue to RP conflicts and issues cross round, while also protecting against any abuse.

[Snakebittenn]

I would like to address this further as the staff meeting's IAA only power. If this suggestion is not added, it may end up just becoming a thing in the Head of Staff forum.

 

That's a very deceptive reacharound and you should be ashamed of yourself.

[Arrow768]

If this suggestion is not added, it may end up just becoming a thing in the Head of Staff forum.

 

Interesting solution.

If you dont do what I want, then I´ll just create a way to share meta informations about characters myself.

You know, if that suggestion is denied, its quite likely that anything else that achieves the same thing through different means will also be shut down.

[Azande]

The Head of Staff forum exists for a reason, we already have something like this which was never touched and staff didn't mind way back when when asked about it.

The head of staff forum is also easily moderatable which solves the moderation concerns that staff have. You do not inherently deserve access to what people say about you, just because someone is talking about you does not make it your business - this applies to many aspects of life.

As of now, unwhitelisted security can make comments in your security notes anytime you are arrested, they can enter an extensive incident report and say whatever they want, and deleteing this without asking them is against rules, yet whitelisted Heads aren't given the same respect/trust.

The reason that I say it will end up in the Head of Staff forum is heads of staff WANT this function, we discussed it at length in our discord, we voted on suggesting it, and there was no votes against in our group of about 38 active players at the time (45ish now).

[N8-Toe]

The Head of Staff forum exists for a reason, we already have something like this which was never touched and staff didn't mind way back when when asked about it.

The head of staff forum is also easily moderatable which solves the moderation concerns that staff have. You do not inherently deserve access to what people say about you, just because someone is talking about you does not make it your business - this applies to many aspects of life.

As of now, unwhitelisted security can make comments in your security notes anytime you are arrested, they can enter an extensive incident report and say whatever they want, and deleteing this without asking them is against rules, yet whitelisted Heads aren't given the same respect/trust.

The reason that I say it will end up in the Head of Staff forum is heads of staff WANT this function, we discussed it at length in our discord, we voted on suggesting it, and there was no votes against in our group of about 38 active players at the time (45ish now).

 

Ok. so if I have this right. there is a forum that only a small subset of players have access to. where they can talk about other players as they please. which according to you includes writing notes that affect IC interaction from information from other players. say what you want but this screams foul play to me. and on your second point on how we don't deserve to know? we absolutely do. This is a game, this is not a real corporation, this is not real life. there is NOTHING gained from restricting players from this information. then you say just because a small group of players want something they will get it no matter what? what I am reading here is that a group of players think they have been basically meta grudging people in their own little clubhouse, want to make this official and codified, and when you find out we may not want this. your response is to flip the board and tell everyone they don't deserve to know information related to their character in a game and that all of this doesn't even matter as you will do it no matter what.

[Azande]

You could always just *ask* for what is said about you and I'm sure one of our 100s of whitelistees would tell you.

[N8-Toe]

That doesn't address any of my concerns nor is it any sort of comfort at all. as that requires the following things. 1 A belief that I will receive a fully honest answer, 2 a belief that I can take action on said information, and 3 A belief that it is more than just an empty face saving gesture. of which I have none

[Azande]

Now, de-railing this suggestion to attack me or my statements (this suggestion is NOT mine, remember that) isn't going to be accepted anymore, I'm going to ignore further attempts at it.

Let's refocus on the idea suggested/thought of by staff, which is Internal Affairs Agents being the system of notation.

I personally heavily agree with this idea and it is what I myself originally wanted, not only does it give IAA more things to do, it also empowers them and will give crew more reason to treat them with a bit more respect than they are. As of now, the only tool for Internal Affairs or Station Command is incident reports, NOTHING will come of in-round faxes, even if they are formatted in the in game incident report, they will simply not be permanently addressed. What this results in is crew being able to cuss at/harass and ignore Internal Affairs with relatively no fear of repercussion. Why? Because not even IAA players want to sit down in an hour long interview with a CCIA JUST to discuss someone being an outright asshole. And so, crew have very little accoutnability as long as they remain below a certain threshold of shitty behaviour.

[Skull132]

Now, de-railing this suggestion to attack me or my statements (this suggestion is NOT mine, remember that) isn't going to be accepted anymore, I'm going to ignore further attempts at it.

 

Consider better what you'll say in the future, then, and what it speaks of your priorities. Because you fully deserved the tongue lashing you just got. Mainly because while stating this,

 

The reason that I say it will end up in the Head of Staff forum is heads of staff WANT this function, we discussed it at length in our discord, we voted on suggesting it, and there was no votes against in our group of about 38 active players at the time (45ish now).

 

You forgot that there are hundreds upon hundreds (literally) of other players who might not share the same view point. Rolling over them without taking into consideration their wishes is kind of meh, in all honesty.

Now about this topic. I unfortunately needed to skip before the madmins got to this topic on Sunday. But I'll bash with them and see what the main issues were. Probably something to do with duplicating CCIAA and so on. We'll see. If it is going to get implemented, then I can at least say that your character's records will be visible to you, no hidden information about it. The ability to remove will be up for thought, but at least you know who to report if someone did a boo-boo. (Though obviously the records might not all be ICly actionable. Because what is metaknowledge.)

Also, Xanny, if you're so keen on this feature, let me tell you about a feature that already exists to fulfill a similar purpose. CCIAA record. That all heads of staff already have access to. Simply start working together with the CCIAA more.

[Azande]

Also, Xanny, if you're so keen on this feature, let me tell you about a feature that already exists to fulfill a similar purpose. CCIAA record. That all heads of staff already have access to. Simply start working together with the CCIAA more.

 

1. CCIA only put in records demotions, suspensions and injunctions. They do not track any other punishment, warning, etcetera, this includes comments.

2. We cannot show individuals their records with CCIA comments, the consoles cannot print CCIA comments out, letting people glance at the console could let them see other's records.

3. Heads of Staff and IAA do not get told anything about a CCIA's investigation, even if they are the reporter, except the direct punishment if it's a suspension/demotion/injunction. We do not get communicated with about anything that was discussed.

4. It is against server rules to discuss incident reports in game, people with an IR against them cannot discuss it, people with an IR they've filed cannot discuss them, it is a punishable offence to discuss incident reports in any manner ICly.

5. CCIA do not take action in round, there is very little way to work with them, they have historically been resistant to involving Heads of Staff and IAA in their work. Faxes about issues are either given an immediate direct statement if the regulations are clear, otherwise the fax back is 'File an IR after the shift'. NOBODY wants to file an IR over someone being a mouthy little asshole, I do not have an hour of my life to dedicate to a single interview about a rude person.

[Skull132]

1 - 3 are solvable if deemed an issue, based on what I'm going to say about point 5.

4 probably falls under it as well.

5 requires you to actually do the work becoming of your self-assigned title and role. In that. You'd actually have to lobby with them to potentially seek a solution/compromise that would help all cases. A novel concept, I'm sure.

[Azande]

I've tried to engage with ForgottenTraveller multiple times about improvements for Heads/IAA, I've made forum suggestions about it, but each instance I've been met with a refusal to discuss, and a lack of interest in working towards a solution. I do not know where [mention]whiterabit[/mention] stands on the issue, but I, and I'm sure many in the SCCN Group, would be happy to discuss with CCIA what can be done, and if they wished to come into our discord to discuss such things, they are absolutely welcome.

But as of yet, all outreach has been denied.

[Scheveningen]

Whiterabit is the current acting CCIAA head if it is any consolation. FT is currently away doing personal stuff.

[Azande]

Whiterabit is the current acting CCIAA head if it is any consolation. FT is currently away doing personal stuff.

 

Considered this, felt 'ashamed' that it would be going around FT's back while he is away to gain ground in personal goals.

[whiterabit]

1. CCIA only put in records demotions, suspensions and injunctions. They do not track any other punishment, warning, etcetera, this includes comments.

 

I've corrected this before, but it looks like I'm doing it again. In the CCIA records we track every action taken against a character. Demotions, suspensions and injunctions are the big ones, but if we issue smaller actions like warnings or re-trainings, all of these are logged in the CCIA records as well.

I'm not quite sure what the suggestion was here with "working together with the CCIA more", we use the CCIA records to track all of our concrete action. There's been suggestions before to let heads go through us to publish personal notes on the crew with our records, and I've argued against it each time. Same reasons as what was given for denying heads of staff the ability to place those records themselves, to quote the staff minutes:

While the idea has merit we do not feel comfortable giving heads of staff unlimited ability to add notes to other players.

 

Effectively, it's all heresay. There's no way for us to confirm any of the information we're given outside of an actual investigation, and at that point the whole idea is redundant. Even so, it's just the previous suggestion with a few extra steps attached and a more "official" tag for the notes.