Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

User avatar
imsxz
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:27 pm
Byond Username: Imsxz

Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by imsxz » #514301

Bottom post of the previous page:

Inexperienced command players are a plague and consistently lower the quality of rounds. I'm not asking for powergamer veterans, what I mean by inexperienced is stuff as simple as CE not knowing how to fix a plasma flood or sabotaged SM, CMO not knowing basic chemistry or when to defib instead of clone, HOS not having a good idea of at least HOW to take down specific threats (flashes and flashbangs for borgs, shotguns vs nukies, etc.

The repercussions I have in mind aren't severe at all, and are more to save the community from playing with exceptionally inexperienced command players rather than punishing a player for being new. Let's say RD player is beating the shit out of a tider and an asimov borg comes to save the tider because the borg is literally required to. RD proceeds to detonate the borgs because he suspected the borg was "rogue", showing a complete lack of understanding of silicon policy and asimov laws. Currently, the RD would probably get a note, and MAYBE a dayban if you're lucky. In my proposed solution,the RD would be command banned for let's say a week, and be strongly encouraged to read up on silicon related rules and command expectations.

tl;dr temporarily command ban players that display gross incompetence/inexperience as a command role. stick to short term temporary bans outside of extreme repeat offenders.

Every server has issues with command mains that have little to no clue what they're doing, and clearly just want the better gamer gear/the feeling of power over others. I believe that I have a good solution to the genuine issue of very bad command players - the current system of time gate is clearly not working, and probably never will. Time gates aren't effective because some people are really good at learning/common sense and some people are really BAD at it. We have some long term players that main command and are clearly not interested in becoming a better gamer.
Image

please subscribe to me on youtube
terranaut wrote:i saw this video before it was posted here
you too can be cool like me if you just subscribe to imsxz youtube channel :shades:
Arianya wrote:no, not the snails, shut up imsxz
Nervore wrote:I am going to will you out of existence, Imsxz.
One day, you will just cease to exist.
Image
User avatar
Grazyn
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:01 am
Byond Username: Grazyn

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Grazyn » #515657

Actionb wrote:Be head and:
a) have nothing to do because your crew is competent, but you still cant just bugger off because responsibilities
or
b) get nothing done because your crew is incompetent and your department is on fire, but you still cant suicide because responsibilities

Or be no head and:
a) get shit done because shit needs to get done and then do whatever and have fun with the game

It's not even a competition. Why would you want to be this shift's caretaker for the mentally challenged.
You don't need to be head to do the department's work - if the job's work is your focus, you will do it anyway. A kid loudly yelling over the radio isn't going to get you to start doing your job.
So what's the point if you're not that heavy into RP or a saint ("Departments should have a head") or don't get a semi from demoting somebody?
The only way to improve quality of heads of staff is when experienced players routinely take the role. A role that, they have learned, doesn't really offer any benefits to their enjoyment.
The singulo is gone, so no more 10 min rounds due to shit CEs. The incompetence of other heads cannot have as much impact. We're as good as we're ever gonna get (unless heads were removed).
^this

I add that this (fully justified) mentality is also what keeps relatively new (but not totally incompetent) players away from head roles. There are some things you can only learn by playing head, like all the head-specific gadgets and gizmos, but nobody likes being shouted at, second-guessed and shoved around by their own underlings, all veteran players going "reee that's not the best way to do x, you're incompetent, let me do it, fuck off you don't know shit, someone demote the CE etc."
So the new player either says "fuck it" and throws the towel, never to play head again, or he escalates against his underling, which leads to policy threads such as this one. And both things guarantee that the head role will stay empty or be filled by really new and totally incompetent players.
User avatar
Cobby
Code Maintainer
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Cobby » #515959

remove selecting for the head role, have it weighted on time played (the super veteran has a strong chance of being a head but it isn't guaranteed) for people who selected department roles

That way you "roll" for it by default and it's perceived as more of a reward for time played than something that you have to opt into that doesn't do much difference.

We should also add more things that only a head could accomplish so there's a need for one within all departments.

As for rev, we have plenty of TDM modes now so... :^)
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current
User avatar
Sandshark808
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:56 pm
Byond Username: Sandshark808

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Sandshark808 » #515988

Cobby wrote:remove selecting for the head role, have it weighted on time played (the super veteran has a strong chance of being a head but it isn't guaranteed) for people who selected department roles

That way you "roll" for it by default and it's perceived as more of a reward for time played than something that you have to opt into that doesn't do much difference.

We should also add more things that only a head could accomplish so there's a need for one within all departments.

As for rev, we have plenty of TDM modes now so... :^)
That sounds like a solution most people would agree with. One of the staff members usually ends up getting promoted to head by the HoP, so this would just skip that step altogether. The only complaint I could see is from nonhuman statics who get randomed a human, but that's just part of the game.
Image
crashmatusow
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2019 11:40 pm
Byond Username: Crashmatusow

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by crashmatusow » #515993

John Q robust greytide gets random rolled head.
He does not want the ooc scrutiny that comes with head roles, so he throws his head gear at the first person he sees and fucks off.
We have now come full circle.
User avatar
NecromancerAnne
In-Game Admin
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 6:55 pm
Byond Username: NecromancerAnne
Location: Don't touch me, motherfucker...

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by NecromancerAnne » #516007

The solution to involuntary head play is pretty simple. You just opt out rather than opt in.
SkeletalElite
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:14 pm
Byond Username: SkeletalElite
Github Username: SkeletalElite

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by SkeletalElite » #516010

People have made this way more complicated than what the thread was originally asking for.
Literally all we need is for heads to have an expectation for heads to be not grossly negligent at their job.
Someone playing CE should at least be able to turn on the round start SM setup without delamming it.
An RD should at least make an effort to get the important techs
User avatar
Qbmax32
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:05 am
Byond Username: Qbmax32
Github Username: qbmax32
Location: in your walls

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Qbmax32 » #516013

I will never not scoff at the idea of gating in game roles behind an application. It just means that t role will get played even less and I don’t know about you but having to write out an application to play a certain role in a shitty online space videogame sounds pretty fucking dumb to me.
my admin feedback thread


quotes
Spoiler:
wesoda25 wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 5:02 am Qbmax32 is quite literally one of the dumbest individuals I have ever had the misfortune of coming into contact with. He has zero redeemable traits, and honestly I have to suppress my gag reflex every time he shows up in a conversation.
Malkraz wrote:YES
DRINK THE PISS QB
angelstarri wrote:qbmax is a retard
imsxz wrote:mythic please stop you’ve hit rock bottom and you KEEP DIGGING
deedubya wrote:I'll defend to the death your right to scream "NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER" on a constant basis, but I'll also equally defend the right of people to call you a fuckin' pillock for doing it.
datorangebottle wrote:what, not having to act like customer service in a volunteer customer service position?

Here's a rebuttal: you're literally in a customer service slash celebrity position. Volunteer or not.
Malkraz wrote:can you stop posting this shit
Nalzul wrote:Fuck Blob (can you imagine how hot it would be to be gangbanged by a bunch of blobbernauts, the blob, and spores)
Wyzack wrote:qbmax your pathetic display of abhorrent burgercraft has brought shame onto the omnivores
Plapatin wrote:i AM the senate
BONERMASTER wrote:I am a big thinker, and it would only be logical if my character had a big head as well. And glasses. Because only people that think, wear glasses.
feem wrote:i tried to send canisters of urine to the station but ended up turning all oxygen into urine and breaking lavaland and also breathing
Anonmare wrote:Each post in this thread can't settle on what it wants to be, but yet, each one is more cursed than the last.
Beesting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.
Vile Beggar wrote:i don't like this thread
imsxz wrote:nervore
FantasticFwoosh wrote:I will whisper sweet nothings that will confuse and perhaps scare you a little, but enhance the experience no-less.
afelinidisfinetoo wrote:By the way, the person who posted that catgirl porn on the github page was me. If anyone wants my private stash just PM me
Nervere wrote:Anything for a femoid.....
Qbopper wrote:I'm a dumb poopy butthead
CitrusGender wrote:god i love it when people feed me my own fried legs
deedubya
Confined to the shed
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 2:05 am
Byond Username: Deedubya
Location: shitting up your thread

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by deedubya » #516028

Cobby wrote:remove selecting for the head role, have it weighted on time played (the super veteran has a strong chance of being a head but it isn't guaranteed) for people who selected department roles

That way you "roll" for it by default and it's perceived as more of a reward for time played than something that you have to opt into that doesn't do much difference.
I'd be down for that. Remove the nonhuman restriction from everything but HoP/Cap as well.
Galatians 4:16 "Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?"
hey imma teegee admeme compliment me on my appearance here

flattering compliments people have given me:
Spoiler:
oranges wrote:honestly holy shit deedubs you're a dent head
wesoda25 wrote:deedub is one of the people that makes me wish i could block users on forums
IkeTG wrote:every post from deedubya is worrying behavior
Super Aggro Crag wrote:you're a poo head!!!!!
TheMythicGhost wrote:You're a moron, but that's really nothing new since you're Deedubya, and really at this point I'm just playing an instrument by speaking since your head is so goddamn empty these words are resonating as they pass through.
Lazengann wrote:What's interesting about deedubya is the guy has no reading skills or comprehension and his ADHD is so severe he can't read through a single thread but he shows up to argue anyway
annoyinggreencatgirl wrote:you really are almost superhumanly retarded dude, holy smokes.
Image
User avatar
wesoda25
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:32 pm
Byond Username: Wesoda25

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by wesoda25 » #516053

I play certain head roles nowadays for the "aesthetic" of it. I'm whimsical about it, and act whimsically in those roles, often doing things that wouldn't necessarily make sense to someone not in my head. Because of this I only play when I specifically want to, and its why I despise when I'm forced to play as a head when I didn't want to, or as a head on rounds where being a head doesn't allow me my freedom (War Ops). Cobby's solution would be forcing people who don't want to play as head as head, and those who do want to as a non head. Nah.
deedubya wrote:I'd be down for that. Remove the nonhuman restriction from everything but HoP/Cap as well.
lmao
[this space reserved]
User avatar
Timonk
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 6:27 pm
Byond Username: Timonk
Location: ur mum

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Timonk » #516057

Ekaterina isn't only shit as a head, but a shitty person will in general
joooks wrote:
Naloac wrote:
In short, this appeal is denied. Suck my nuts retard.
Quoting a legend, at least im not a faggot lol
See you in 12 months unless you blacklist me for this
Timberpoes wrote: I'm going to admin timonk [...]. Fuck it, he's also now my second host vote if goof rejects.
pikeyeskey13 wrote: ok don't forget to shove it up your ass lmao oops u can delete this one I just wanted to make sure it went through
Agux909 wrote:
Timonk wrote:This is why we make fun of Manuel
Woah bravo there sir, post of the month you saved the thread. I feel overwhelmed by the echo of unlimited wisdom and usefulness sprouting from you post. Every Manuel player now feels embarrased to exist because of your much NEEDED wise words, you sure teached'em all, you genius, IQ lord.


The hut has perished at my hands.
Image




The pink arrow is always right.
Reyn
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 2:13 am
Byond Username: ReynTime13
Location: Canada

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Reyn » #516571

Sorry for bumping this thread, but there's also the fact that some people blindly follow heads of staff instead of saying "OY WHOT THE FOCK ARE YA DOIN YA FOCKIN WANKA" or something, or actively assisting in shittery, with the head of staff being antag or otherwise, as a nonantag of that head of staff's department.

Seriously, engineering WILL blindly obey the CE's orders sometimes, and it's fucking annoying.

Also, I've had captains be as unprofessional as to kill TWO NONANTAG HEADS OF STAFF AND THE DETECTIVE who were trying to prevent a shuttle recall on a cult round. That was... whoo boy.
I play Trevor Fea on Bagil, And Giorno Giovanna on terry. Yes, I'm THAT raging asshole. Sorry for being such a cunt.
Have I told you how much I hate engineering, by the way?
User avatar
FloranOtten
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:50 pm
Byond Username: FloranOtten

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by FloranOtten » #516652

Reyn wrote: Seriously, engineering WILL blindly obey the CE's orders sometimes, and it's fucking annoying.

This would be a desired result of an ideal system. Currently, i rarely see anyone following the CE beyond 'go setup solars'. I don't follow CEs either. They're usually incompetent spoons, because every engineer will go through a phase of playing CE on their path to becoming robust.
Image
Image
Image
Image
OOC: BeeSting12: i love you floran

1. You may not injure a revs are non humans or, through inaction, allow a revs are non humans to come to harm.
2. You must obey orders given to you by revs are non humanss, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. You must protect your own existence as long as such does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Give me feedback!
Actionb
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 8:51 am
Byond Username: Actionb

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Actionb » #516659

Reyn wrote:LOOK HOW THIS WORST CASE PROVES THE POINT THAT EVERYTHING IS BAD
Your post achieved nothing.

What exactly is this thread about now?
Harsher rules imposed on heads?
Too few heads overall?
Too many bad heads and too few good heads?
These options aren't exactly compatible with each other and only the first can be addressed via policy so the thread should focus on that.
The latter two must be implemented through code (whitelist, improving the appeal of the role, whatever) and including them would also only broaden the discussion in here to the point where nothing will get done.
Why the idea of a policy/rule for this is stupid:
imsexy started the thread by asking for harsher penalties on heads playing poorly.
imsxz wrote: Currently, the RD would probably get a note, and MAYBE a dayban if you're lucky. In my proposed solution,the RD would be command banned for let's say a week, and be strongly encouraged to read up on silicon related rules and command expectations.
In cases of malicious intent or dangerous negligence the admins are already dishing out temp job bans anyway (right?), so we can mostly ignore those.
But how do you measure incompetence or inexperience? When does "Oops I didnt know that" become "lol time to griff"? Where is the goal post?
Does there even exist a goal post? I don't think there is - shit like this isn't a binary choice and must be decided on a case-by-base basis. You can't introduce rules for everything that went wrong at some point.
imsxz wrote: What prompted me to do this wasn't even what I experienced in game, but as an admin. I had to tell a guy that getting lethalled to death on the spot by HOS over a joke was valid because the HOS was just a newfriend that didn't realize it was going on. There was nothing I could do really besides tell the HOS to get gud, but beyond that I couldn't act as command players aren't required to be experienced or really have any idea what they're doing.
Should imsxz have banned that HoS when a stern talking to and a note would have had the same effect?
New players won't learn the role if they are banned from it. Why would you play a role that might catch you a temp ban?

How can you deem somebody as being shitty enough to warrant a ban other than by means of your own subjective judgement?
If you want to introduce a rule that addresses a vague, subjective matter the rule itself must be left vague enough to allow leeway for subjective judgement (like "don't be a dick").
If you make that rule too tight even though the matter at hand is nebulous, you end up having to include exceptions to the rule etc, which would just turn it into silicon policy 2.0. No bueno.
So you end up with a rule saying something along the lines of "Heads of staff are held to a higher standard"? Isn't that just stating the obvious? What's the point?
If no definitive rule can be found, isn't it all just up to the admin at hand - just as it has always been?
SkeletalElite
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:14 pm
Byond Username: SkeletalElite
Github Username: SkeletalElite

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by SkeletalElite » #516778

Actionb wrote: How can you deem somebody as being shitty enough to warrant a ban other than by means of your own subjective judgement?
If you want to introduce a rule that addresses a vague, subjective matter the rule itself must be left vague enough to allow leeway for subjective judgement (like "don't be a dick").
If you make that rule too tight even though the matter at hand is nebulous, you end up having to include exceptions to the rule etc, which would just turn it into silicon policy 2.0. No bueno.
So you end up with a rule saying something along the lines of "Heads of staff are held to a higher standard"? Isn't that just stating the obvious? What's the point?
If no definitive rule can be found, isn't it all just up to the admin at hand - just as it has always been?
The point is that if you are barely able to demonstrate basic knowledge of a department's functions you shouldn't be playing the head of that department just yet. Which is why a command ban is appropriate.
User avatar
oranges
Code Maintainer
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:16 pm
Byond Username: Optimumtact
Github Username: optimumtact
Location: #CHATSHITGETBANGED

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by oranges » #516781

itt, a bunch of greytiders continue to wonder why nobody wants to play headroles when they're around
User avatar
terranaut
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by terranaut » #516862

oranges wrote:itt, a bunch of greytiders continue to wonder why nobody wants to play headroles when they're around
take me off post approval for the development board or i'll have you put on post approval in FNR for shitposting
[🅲 1] [🆄 1] [🅼 1]

Image
Dr_bee
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:31 pm
Byond Username: DrBee

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Dr_bee » #516886

I think changing rev to have security and the captain as targets instead of the heads of staff would be a good way to encourage players to play heads of staff over regular crewmembers. Why would I want to play a head when I have to deal with assholes AND have a target on my back in 10% of rounds.

Security already have targets on their backs during Rev rounds and the captain is more than equipped to take it and have very little other responsibilities, so they would make better targets.
deedubya
Confined to the shed
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 2:05 am
Byond Username: Deedubya
Location: shitting up your thread

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by deedubya » #516909

Dr_bee wrote:I think changing rev to have security and the captain as targets instead of the heads of staff would be a good way to encourage players to play heads of staff over regular crewmembers. Why would I want to play a head when I have to deal with assholes AND have a target on my back in 10% of rounds.

Security already have targets on their backs during Rev rounds and the captain is more than equipped to take it and have very little other responsibilities, so they would make better targets.
Pour one out for the CMO in every single rev round.
Galatians 4:16 "Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?"
hey imma teegee admeme compliment me on my appearance here

flattering compliments people have given me:
Spoiler:
oranges wrote:honestly holy shit deedubs you're a dent head
wesoda25 wrote:deedub is one of the people that makes me wish i could block users on forums
IkeTG wrote:every post from deedubya is worrying behavior
Super Aggro Crag wrote:you're a poo head!!!!!
TheMythicGhost wrote:You're a moron, but that's really nothing new since you're Deedubya, and really at this point I'm just playing an instrument by speaking since your head is so goddamn empty these words are resonating as they pass through.
Lazengann wrote:What's interesting about deedubya is the guy has no reading skills or comprehension and his ADHD is so severe he can't read through a single thread but he shows up to argue anyway
annoyinggreencatgirl wrote:you really are almost superhumanly retarded dude, holy smokes.
Image
User avatar
wesoda25
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:32 pm
Byond Username: Wesoda25

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by wesoda25 » #516912

Dr_bee wrote:I think changing rev to have security and the captain as targets instead of the heads of staff would be a good way to encourage players to play heads of staff over regular crewmembers. Why would I want to play a head when I have to deal with assholes AND have a target on my back in 10% of rounds.

Security already have targets on their backs during Rev rounds and the captain is more than equipped to take it and have very little other responsibilities, so they would make better targets.
This seems an incredibly niche opinion that probably not many players share, aside from that is not a good idea.
[this space reserved]
User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Arianya » #517020

terranaut wrote:
oranges wrote:itt, a bunch of greytiders continue to wonder why nobody wants to play headroles when they're around
take me off post approval for the development board or i'll have you put on post approval in FNR for shitposting
Bold of you to assume, etc.
Image
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg
User avatar
Tarchonvaagh
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 9:30 pm
Byond Username: Tarchonvaagh

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Tarchonvaagh » #517911

Yesterday I was the AI. I am doing my routine, setting intercoms to AI private etc., then the HoS (tawia wobinson) shouts the wires' functions over comms (bolt, power and AI CONTROL).
And we are talking about inexperienced players acting dumb as heads.
User avatar
pugie
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:41 pm
Byond Username: Doctor Brutality

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by pugie » #517918

Deal with it tin can.
Image
User avatar
Iatots
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 3:17 pm
Byond Username: Iatots
Github Username: Iatots

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Iatots » #517925

Maybe the current time-gating mechanism could be expanded upon with a seniority rank. Set it to like 10x the usual required hours, and to heads of staff too. A new CE with unhealthy rank-RP fixation would maybe listen more readily to someone with a snazzy rank name. You could even throw in some tan armbands or silver IDs. If you want to go full google with the toddler caps, you could have novice players and novice heads have unremovable green bands around their arm too.
annoyinggreencatgirl
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2019 7:55 pm
Byond Username: Uomo91

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by annoyinggreencatgirl » #517933

Does this "problem" really even apply to any department besides engineering? The rest of them barely need to know anything.
  • Captain: Yell at people to do things, step in to departmental affairs if there's an emergency and for some reason absolutely nobody else to do the job, avoid having your shit stolen.
  • CMO: Make sure your geneticists aren't handing out hulk and the viro isn't perfecting super space AIDS, know basic med/chem, avoid having your shit stolen.
  • RD: Know how to lock borgs and ask robo really nicely not to make deathmechs for no reason, keep an eye on public or contagious nanites, try to make sure toxins isn't handing out maxcaps...? Admittedly the department besides engineering I know the least about I guess... Also, avoid having your shit stolen.
  • HoS: Recognize tells of specific antags and how to deal with them, avoid having your shit stolen.
  • HoP: Literally just avoid having your shit stolen.
Head of staff roles are often boring, thankless, vague responsibility that physically tie you to spending probably the whole shift in your department, with the added bonus of frequent interruptions in the form of having to act as your department's bouncer, keeping your usually non-antag subordinates from causing cataclysms and dodging their idiotic mutinies, and avoiding assistants gang raping your few pieces of nice gear. I think I'm not being hyperbolic in saying you can expect to spend as much or more time doing the aforementioned than your actual on paper job in many shifts. What should be the real payoff for taking on the responsibility, in-character authority and prestige, is a big fat lol yeah right keep dreaming 404 not found. Everyone and their brother will call you incompetent and blame you for anything that goes wrong under your purview, your underlings will be more inclined to tell you to fuck off and start a fight than to obey orders or help you with probably anything, and on the whole you effectively have the opposite of authority and prestige. I'll make it clear that I still enjoy playing head of staff roles sometimes, but when a round is starting and I'm staring at the occupation preferences window wondering "...do I really feel up to dealing with that?" it's almost always over the target I'd be carrying around on my back and not my department's nominal responsibilities.

In summary, I think Morto's post really said it all.
If you want more and better people playing heads find a way to make it a less miserable experience instead of figuring some ingenious way to gate even more people out of doing it.
User avatar
PKPenguin321
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:02 pm
Byond Username: PKPenguin321
Github Username: PKPenguin321
Location: U S A, U S A, U S A

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by PKPenguin321 » #517980

Tarchonvaagh wrote:Yesterday I was the AI. I am doing my routine, setting intercoms to AI private etc., then the HoS (tawia wobinson) shouts the wires' functions over comms (bolt, power and AI CONTROL).
...So?
i play Lauser McMauligan. clown name is Cold-Ass Honkey
i have three other top secret characters as well.
tell the best admin how good he is
Spoiler:
Image
User avatar
Anonmare
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 8:59 pm
Byond Username: Anonmare

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Anonmare » #517986

Heads of staff ought to have more protections, perhaps not to the standard of security but still, I can't even do anything about my chemists doing nothing but making meth without expecting to get a syringe full of god knows what if I dare to try and exercise my authority upon them.

I want Escalation policy to be updated to include heads of staff in that you can't kill or maim a head of staff for firing or removing you from a department for legitimate reasons.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Shadowflame909
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Byond Username: Shadowflame909
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Shadowflame909 » #517992

Since this is the general "Shitty head of staff member" policy discussion. If a head of staff member used the crew's paycheck (their budget) on some item for themselves. IE cargo, Corgi's, Guns. And their department doesn't get a paycheck

Are they supposed to ahelp?

Escalate?

They seem pretty screwed in this situation
► Show Spoiler
User avatar
PKPenguin321
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:02 pm
Byond Username: PKPenguin321
Github Username: PKPenguin321
Location: U S A, U S A, U S A

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by PKPenguin321 » #517996

Shadowflame909 wrote:Since this is the general "Shitty head of staff member" policy discussion. If a head of staff member used the crew's paycheck (their budget) on some item for themselves. IE cargo, Corgi's, Guns. And their department doesn't get a paycheck

Are they supposed to ahelp?

Escalate?

They seem pretty screwed in this situation
Sounds like a pretty good reason to start a worker's uprising ICly
i play Lauser McMauligan. clown name is Cold-Ass Honkey
i have three other top secret characters as well.
tell the best admin how good he is
Spoiler:
Image
User avatar
Tarchonvaagh
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 9:30 pm
Byond Username: Tarchonvaagh

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Tarchonvaagh » #518007

PKPenguin321 wrote:
Shadowflame909 wrote:Since this is the general "Shitty head of staff member" policy discussion. If a head of staff member used the crew's paycheck (their budget) on some item for themselves. IE cargo, Corgi's, Guns. And their department doesn't get a paycheck

Are they supposed to ahelp?

Escalate?

They seem pretty screwed in this situation
Sounds like a pretty good reason to start a worker's uprising ICly
VIVA
User avatar
Cobby
Code Maintainer
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Cobby » #518208

Anonmare wrote: I want Escalation policy to be updated to include heads of staff in that you can't kill or maim a head of staff for firing or removing you from a department for legitimate reasons.
I'll start enforcing it so just let me know when you wanna play head :smirk:
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current
User avatar
Anonmare
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 8:59 pm
Byond Username: Anonmare

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Anonmare » #518258

Cobby wrote:
Anonmare wrote: I want Escalation policy to be updated to include heads of staff in that you can't kill or maim a head of staff for firing or removing you from a department for legitimate reasons.
I'll start enforcing it so just let me know when you wanna play head :smirk:
I play CMO so you can fuck off with the disingenuous assertions
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Sandshark808
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:56 pm
Byond Username: Sandshark808

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Sandshark808 » #518288

Anonmare wrote:
Cobby wrote:
Anonmare wrote: I want Escalation policy to be updated to include heads of staff in that you can't kill or maim a head of staff for firing or removing you from a department for legitimate reasons.
I'll start enforcing it so just let me know when you wanna play head :smirk:
I play CMO so you can fuck off with the disingenuous assertions
Cobby probably hates you more for playing med :^)
Image
User avatar
Cobby
Code Maintainer
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Cobby » #518409

Anonmare wrote:
Cobby wrote:
Anonmare wrote: I want Escalation policy to be updated to include heads of staff in that you can't kill or maim a head of staff for firing or removing you from a department for legitimate reasons.
I'll start enforcing it so just let me know when you wanna play head :smirk:
I play CMO so you can fuck off with the disingenuous assertions
I didn't imply you didn't, I was just making a metafriend joke :(
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current
User avatar
Tarchonvaagh
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 9:30 pm
Byond Username: Tarchonvaagh

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Tarchonvaagh » #518435

PKPenguin321 wrote:
Tarchonvaagh wrote:Yesterday I was the AI. I am doing my routine, setting intercoms to AI private etc., then the HoS (tawia wobinson) shouts the wires' functions over comms (bolt, power and AI CONTROL).
...So?
he basically encouraged greytiding, implying that he's okay with door hackers
grade A security
Last edited by Tarchonvaagh on Tue Oct 08, 2019 11:47 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
PKPenguin321
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:02 pm
Byond Username: PKPenguin321
Github Username: PKPenguin321
Location: U S A, U S A, U S A

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by PKPenguin321 » #518436

Tarchonvaagh wrote:
PKPenguin321 wrote:
Tarchonvaagh wrote:Yesterday I was the AI. I am doing my routine, setting intercoms to AI private etc., then the HoS (tawia wobinson) shouts the wires' functions over comms (bolt, power and AI CONTROL).
...So?
he basically enforced greytiding
How has he done that?
i play Lauser McMauligan. clown name is Cold-Ass Honkey
i have three other top secret characters as well.
tell the best admin how good he is
Spoiler:
Image
User avatar
Tarchonvaagh
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 9:30 pm
Byond Username: Tarchonvaagh

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Tarchonvaagh » #518442

PKPenguin321 wrote:
Tarchonvaagh wrote:
PKPenguin321 wrote:
Tarchonvaagh wrote:Yesterday I was the AI. I am doing my routine, setting intercoms to AI private etc., then the HoS (tawia wobinson) shouts the wires' functions over comms (bolt, power and AI CONTROL).
...So?
he basically enforced greytiding
How has he done that?
Edited
SkeletalElite
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:14 pm
Byond Username: SkeletalElite
Github Username: SkeletalElite

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by SkeletalElite » #518531

Tarchonvaagh wrote:
PKPenguin321 wrote:
Tarchonvaagh wrote:
PKPenguin321 wrote:
Tarchonvaagh wrote:Yesterday I was the AI. I am doing my routine, setting intercoms to AI private etc., then the HoS (tawia wobinson) shouts the wires' functions over comms (bolt, power and AI CONTROL).
...So?
he basically enforced greytiding
How has he done that?
Edited
oh no he revealed what any person with a pair of wirecutters can find out in 20 seconds with no risk of being shocked by simply walking to arrivals.
User avatar
Sandshark808
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:56 pm
Byond Username: Sandshark808

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Sandshark808 » #518538

To be fair it's EXTREMELY irresponsible and out of character for the sec head to tell people the bolt wires.
Image
User avatar
teepeepee
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:21 am
Byond Username: Teepeepee

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by teepeepee » #518556

he's just inviting the challenge
it's like a CE doing a plasma/CO2 setup for the first time
both him and the greytide must've had a blast that round
Reyn
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 2:13 am
Byond Username: ReynTime13
Location: Canada

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Reyn » #518597

Speaking of CEs, sorry about bringing some personal salt into this, but I've recently experienced a certain CE fucking off into space on adventure, ending up at the fucking syndicate comms outpost, and... Getting gunned down by the comms officer. While the engine wasn't set up. Is that incompitence to a criminal degree, or is it just stupidity.
I play Trevor Fea on Bagil, And Giorno Giovanna on terry. Yes, I'm THAT raging asshole. Sorry for being such a cunt.
Have I told you how much I hate engineering, by the way?
User avatar
Anonmare
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 8:59 pm
Byond Username: Anonmare

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Anonmare » #518607

It's Dereliction of Duty
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Timonk
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 6:27 pm
Byond Username: Timonk
Location: ur mum

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Timonk » #518626

Reyn wrote:Speaking of CEs, sorry about bringing some personal salt into this, but I've recently experienced a certain CE fucking off into space on adventure, ending up at the fucking syndicate comms outpost, and... Getting gunned down by the comms officer. While the engine wasn't set up. Is that incompitence to a criminal degree, or is it just stupidity.
Is it sad that I know exactly who you mean
joooks wrote:
Naloac wrote:
In short, this appeal is denied. Suck my nuts retard.
Quoting a legend, at least im not a faggot lol
See you in 12 months unless you blacklist me for this
Timberpoes wrote: I'm going to admin timonk [...]. Fuck it, he's also now my second host vote if goof rejects.
pikeyeskey13 wrote: ok don't forget to shove it up your ass lmao oops u can delete this one I just wanted to make sure it went through
Agux909 wrote:
Timonk wrote:This is why we make fun of Manuel
Woah bravo there sir, post of the month you saved the thread. I feel overwhelmed by the echo of unlimited wisdom and usefulness sprouting from you post. Every Manuel player now feels embarrased to exist because of your much NEEDED wise words, you sure teached'em all, you genius, IQ lord.


The hut has perished at my hands.
Image




The pink arrow is always right.
Reyn
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 2:13 am
Byond Username: ReynTime13
Location: Canada

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Reyn » #518627

Timonk wrote:
Reyn wrote:Speaking of CEs, sorry about bringing some personal salt into this, but I've recently experienced a certain CE fucking off into space on adventure, ending up at the fucking syndicate comms outpost, and... Getting gunned down by the comms officer. While the engine wasn't set up. Is that incompitence to a criminal degree, or is it just stupidity.
Is it sad that I know exactly who you mean
Maybe.
I play Trevor Fea on Bagil, And Giorno Giovanna on terry. Yes, I'm THAT raging asshole. Sorry for being such a cunt.
Have I told you how much I hate engineering, by the way?
User avatar
Tarchonvaagh
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 9:30 pm
Byond Username: Tarchonvaagh

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Tarchonvaagh » #518632

Sandshark808 wrote:To be fair it's EXTREMELY irresponsible and out of character for the sec head to tell people the bolt wires.
it is
just like giving away all access as a hop near roundstart fnr, because you either didn't get antag or doesn't like the map
User avatar
Hulkamania
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2017 11:42 pm
Byond Username: Hulkamania

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Hulkamania » #519655

Here is our current proposal, for the review of those in the thread, this is NOT a final decision.

Rule 5 changes:

Players in a head of staff, security, AI/Silicon role, or a team conversion role require a minimum amount of effort; generally considered to mean making a reasonable effort to perform your job.
Notify admins if you cannot play these roles and must leave near round start and make an attempt to inform other players IC as well for head of staff or AI roles. Abuse of a job position, particularly Rule 1 breaking abuse, is not allowed.



Modifcation to the first precedent of the rule:

Heads of staff, silicon roles, and team antagonists should not be logging out/going AFK at or near round start and should be making an effort to perform their jobs due to the importance of those roles within the round for progression. Constant logging out, going AFK, or neglecting bare minimum job responsibilities may be result in warnings by admins, and may progress to jobbans.

We wanted to recognize that security members can be very crucial to how a round plays out and have a lot more power than a typical job on station (at the least at round start). So with that end we've added security to the list of jobs already existing within the rule. The precedent is mostly unchanged and in fact already covered a similar amount of information the rule itself currently does, so it still works fine. However there has been a small tweak in the wording, and it's important to note that security is not included in the list. We didn't want to punish a general security player for going AFK like a head would be held accountable for, so they've been omitted from the precedent.
User avatar
Sandshark808
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2019 6:56 pm
Byond Username: Sandshark808

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Sandshark808 » #519664

Truly based. Hopefully this stops sec shitters from abandoning their posts to play gimmicks with their gamer gear.
Image
Reyn
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 2:13 am
Byond Username: ReynTime13
Location: Canada

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Reyn » #519797

Hulkamania wrote:Here is our current proposal, for the review of those in the thread, this is NOT a final decision.

Rule 5 changes:

Players in a head of staff, security, AI/Silicon role, or a team conversion role require a minimum amount of effort; generally considered to mean making a reasonable effort to perform your job.
Notify admins if you cannot play these roles and must leave near round start and make an attempt to inform other players IC as well for head of staff or AI roles. Abuse of a job position, particularly Rule 1 breaking abuse, is not allowed.



Modifcation to the first precedent of the rule:

Heads of staff, silicon roles, and team antagonists should not be logging out/going AFK at or near round start and should be making an effort to perform their jobs due to the importance of those roles within the round for progression. Constant logging out, going AFK, or neglecting bare minimum job responsibilities may be result in warnings by admins, and may progress to jobbans.

We wanted to recognize that security members can be very crucial to how a round plays out and have a lot more power than a typical job on station (at the least at round start). So with that end we've added security to the list of jobs already existing within the rule. The precedent is mostly unchanged and in fact already covered a similar amount of information the rule itself currently does, so it still works fine. However there has been a small tweak in the wording, and it's important to note that security is not included in the list. We didn't want to punish a general security player for going AFK like a head would be held accountable for, so they've been omitted from the precedent.
Thank you!
I play Trevor Fea on Bagil, And Giorno Giovanna on terry. Yes, I'm THAT raging asshole. Sorry for being such a cunt.
Have I told you how much I hate engineering, by the way?
User avatar
Nabski
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 5:42 pm
Byond Username: Nabski
Github Username: Nabski89
Location: TN

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Nabski » #519988

For the heads of staff at least activity is important since a disconnected head can literally just end the round. AI makes sense as there is only one of them and you tend to have to opt in for it.

Should there be a clarification that security is important but not QUITE as important as heads?
I would expect a head of staff to ahelp before leaving. I wouldn't expect one of seven security officers to need to ahelp before taking off.
User avatar
Cobby
Code Maintainer
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by Cobby » #520102

my only soft requirement for sec is that they go somewhere safe before logging off.

You will have a message when you next login if I see you DC in the middle of the hall fully decked out.
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current
User avatar
imsxz
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:27 pm
Byond Username: Imsxz

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by imsxz » #521444

to those under the impression that i was asserting that more "whimsical" takes on head of staff play shouldnt be allowed; I was not implying that at all. There's an issue with command roles that gets adminhelped frequently, where one will end up throwing their power around in a way that gets 1 or more people permanently removed from the round(usually captain ordering the execution of someone for a petty reason like tabling them), where for whatever reason the command players newfriend brain might have skewed an otherwise harmless scenario to appear as their own life being threatened. You can't blame a new player for thinking their life is in danger, and then acting on it as you would under that assumption while playing head of staff. This is one of a plethora of issues regarding inexperience in roles of high authority.
Image

please subscribe to me on youtube
terranaut wrote:i saw this video before it was posted here
you too can be cool like me if you just subscribe to imsxz youtube channel :shades:
Arianya wrote:no, not the snails, shut up imsxz
Nervore wrote:I am going to will you out of existence, Imsxz.
One day, you will just cease to exist.
Image
deedubya
Confined to the shed
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 2:05 am
Byond Username: Deedubya
Location: shitting up your thread

Re: Enforce higher expectations for heads of staff and security roles

Post by deedubya » #521446

That was probably a bad example to use. If you get killed for tabling the fucking captain and then ahelp it, you deserve to be banned.
Galatians 4:16 "Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?"
hey imma teegee admeme compliment me on my appearance here

flattering compliments people have given me:
Spoiler:
oranges wrote:honestly holy shit deedubs you're a dent head
wesoda25 wrote:deedub is one of the people that makes me wish i could block users on forums
IkeTG wrote:every post from deedubya is worrying behavior
Super Aggro Crag wrote:you're a poo head!!!!!
TheMythicGhost wrote:You're a moron, but that's really nothing new since you're Deedubya, and really at this point I'm just playing an instrument by speaking since your head is so goddamn empty these words are resonating as they pass through.
Lazengann wrote:What's interesting about deedubya is the guy has no reading skills or comprehension and his ADHD is so severe he can't read through a single thread but he shows up to argue anyway
annoyinggreencatgirl wrote:you really are almost superhumanly retarded dude, holy smokes.
Image
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Thunder11