Jump to content

Head of Staff Notes in Employee Records


Azande

Recommended Posts

Posted

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).

 

No, it will not end up in the head of staff forum if we choose to not accept it. There are fundamental issues with it that we do not feel comfortable bringing on the player base. We discussed it and analyzed it at length. Us disagreeing with you doesn't make us wrong.

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Marlon Phoenix
Posted

I'm a head of staff and I don't want it. Don't speak for me, Xander.


I've given this more thought. The only real functional end-result of this program would be to deincentivise Command to give crew the benefit of the doubt. As HoP I don't know the behavior of a shaft miner 2 rounds ago so I take their request at face value without having any meta-knowledge about their tendencies unless:


1) I have personal experience with them as that HoP.

2) They did something so naughty that CCIA got involved.


If there's a bunch of notes on someone then I can be punished for giving that character the benefit of the doubt by granting whatever request they had. I try to always grant requests as HoP if I can take them at face value. This dampens that.


I do not want to have a character given black marks on their records by anyone other than CCIA or canon security incidents on their record because it will make it difficult for players to overcome the negative comments and get heads of staff to treat them in non-biased ways.

Posted (edited)

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).

 

No, it will not end up in the head of staff forum if we choose to not accept it. There are fundamental issues with it that we do not feel comfortable bringing on the player base. We discussed it and analyzed it at length. Us disagreeing with you doesn't make us wrong.

 

Using terms like 'comfort' and other similar rhetoric doesn't adequately sum up the crux of the issue and that this suggestion merely stands to present more risk than it rewards. I think the system would be quickly warped from its initial intention and only suffice to further inflate the idea that command whitelistees are an exclusive club of players that can gossip and punk on the average crewmember by way of forcibly changing their records to reflect for their other peers.


Having had second thoughts about it. While I don't agree with the assertion Jackboot made that we should be giving everyone the benefit of the doubt because not everyone deserves it. And more in-depth record systems would be convenient so that other personnel can get an idea of what they're getting into without nasty surprises in terms of how the individual will backlash, it's not worth the negative points versus the positive things this suggestion could bring. Anything is subject to abuse, sure, and that shouldn't be the end-all be-all argument, but the problem is that the suggestion doesn't have enough merits to it to warrant the amount of risk it already holds in implementation mechanically, and how it'll end up being used by heads of staff.


If it requires additional policing to make it work, it may end up not being worth it.


e: wording

Edited by Guest
Posted

I'm not going to defend the suggestion anymore since Garnascus has made it clear the Modmin team has made up their minds on the matter and Whiterabit has also shared CCIA's opinion.


If you want to close it you may @prettymuchanyonewithforumperms . I do just want to note - the exact same concerns were shared when CCIA came into existence, sometimes things work out if you give them the chance, but I digress.

  • Gem locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...