Remove: Revoke Payroll Feature

[Azande]

Revoke this feature from the financial console the HoP and Captain get, since CCIA say it is never valid to use.

[ajstorey456]

But what if the cap/hop is bad mans? Leave it for antaggery

[LordFowl]

[mention]ForgottenTraveller[/mention] Confirmation that CCIA have officially declared the Payroll Revocation ability no longer under the purview of command staff?

[ForgottenTraveller]

Absolutely fucking not. The only statement I can think Xander is referring too is the other policy suggestion. Where I said you should under no reason revoke payroll on a suspension, NOT EVERYTHING. There will be situations where payroll revocation is applicable and desirable.

[Faris]

I can think of a few examples where this can be used, such as the case of an employees contract being terminated due to turning to a slime and such. So it still serves a purpose.

Voting for dimissal.

[ForgottenTraveller]

Precisely. Or if they are abusing funds to endanger others, been robbing other staff and transferring it to their account. There is a time and place to freeze someones on-station assets. Suspension just isn't one of them.

[Azande]

then can it be renamed from 'central command payroll revocation' button?

[ForgottenTraveller]

Why???

CC will not be needed for revoking the payroll in all (MOST) cases I could think of.

An CC would not need the button on station.

At this point, we are asking a coder to jump into the mass of files that is our server, find a button, change it to something that makes no sense, test it, possibly realign it, and then put it in line for approval to go live.

Because you wanted it removed, because you misunderstood context of the original quote having to do with suspensions. While our coders are excellent and could probably pinpoint the file that aspect is in rapidly

As I said in the last policy suggestion app. "policy needs to prove its worth" This was based on you misunderstanding a statement in that app. It has been debunked.

It isn't just policy now, it is server development for your feelings.

Prove this policy's worth, or let it lie.

[Azande]

FT, first you misread what I said, PLEASE READ and understand what I said, right NOW, the button is labelled in the UI as a 'Central Command Payroll Revok'< I AM SUGGESTING THIS IS CHANGED TO SOMETHING ELSE. So thank you for supporting that suggestion.

2. You're the one that literally had a small fit like a year and a half ago and said there shouldn't even be the ability to empty accounts by station command. I remember this very clearly,

[ForgottenTraveller]

A year and a half ago in byond time. May as well be a decade. I don't recall it, nor am I able to think of a reason why I would be against it, at best I can think there is some obscure niche context where I think it would be stupid as hell, an I cant even think of one. Quote me (Fully With Sources). I ain't searching for it. Especially after the fit remark

And While From/To understanding aside. There is no support even with that miss-read, unless you are being a smart-ass. The above point still stands, CC is not needed in most cases, CC does not need the button. It will need dev team involvement. Again. For your feelings.

Suggestion 1. Remove it because CCIA said it was worthless. No.

Suggestion 2. Rename it. Because you want it renamed. The to or from doesn't really matter at this point. What too and why is it worth the time and effort of all these other unpaid people. As it stands it can be read several ways, revoke of the payroll from central command, central command revokes your payroll. In miss reading it as 'to' I was reading it as a shift from burden to CC, Rereading it as 'from', I see it as sourcing where the pay is coming from. Because your second suggestion lacked reasoning It never mattered if I read it right or wrong. Because I objected on your reasoning, more accurately, the lack there of.

So ignoring the 1 suggestion per thread rule. 'The reasoning behind a suggestion should be elaborated upon in the initial post to a reasonable extent.' Is another.

And if you find this fit It may convince me, It may not. I may have changed my stance in the intervening time, and I regard year and a half ago me as an idiot. So reason well on why it should be changed, and don't rely on a quote.

But if you are going to claim a fit. I really do want to see it. Because I have been many things at many times, rash, argumentative, particular. I have fucked up plenty, I'm human. But prone to having fits, isn't something I have regarded as one of mine. To the point of it being dropped like this. I consider it a little defamatory. I have been harsh but consistent with you in the last few days about proving the worth of policy changes, Because I felt they were not worth but was willing to be convinced. To which I have felt you have dodged the question or changed the subject. It is annoying. Your continued inability to supply what I ask for so that I may consider revising my position has annoyed me, but not clouded my intent to judge on merit.

I have had several very public and private significant spats to all out fights with Jackboot. Just yesterday, I told him how much I respect him and his reasoned positions, even when I think he is an ass.

Defamatory statements tend to make a person considerably more than just annoyed and to loose respect for those tossing them out. I am not above that. An I don't like to tolerate it.

There have been plenty of times I have assumed you have misunderstood, in the benefit of the doubt, when it seems equally likely to be a deliberate act to me, in all these discourses even the harshest remarks have been to the benefit of the doubt on your character. I feel less inclined to give it when I feel shitslung, So. Nut up and prove it, or shut up.

[sdtwbaj]

had it confirmed that station command can in fact revoke payroll for the shift.

[Azande]

y'know we don't even need revoke payroll because we have the SUSPEND button that stops them from using their account at all?

[sdtwbaj]

removing savings =/= removing payroll

[ben10083]

[mention]Sharp[/mention] please add your dismissal to the title.

Also, this suggestion seems to have been made as a response to an IR decision, obviously we are not removing the payroll function. -1

[Arrow768]

Binning as FT declared the initial post invalid