ContextualToday at 6:10 PM
1. During a round of Ninja, you are faxed by Station Command inquiring about an “inspector” who claims to have been sent by the company to evaluate each of the station's departments. How do you respond, and why?
SkyFreeToday at 6:13 PM
I'd first look into the details of the fax they sent. I'd rather not shut down the Ninja's gimmick, so I'd sent them a fax detailing that there's been a system issue causing the inspection schedule to be cleared on Central Command's side. While my copy of the schedule is blank, it's very possible that the Aurora has an inspection today, and that they should proceed under normal directives. This would give credence to the Ninja's gimmick, while still giving Command sufficient cause to be suspicious.
ContextualToday at 6:14 PM
Ambiguous, good.
2. During a round of Crossfire, you are faxed by Station Command about a team of mercenaries who have reported a band of pirates operating in the area. They wish to offer their services to the station as additional security. Command is asking you for your advice on the situation. How do you respond, and why?
SkyFreeToday at 6:20 PM
I'd deliberately delay sending a fax for a few minutes before responding, after which I would state that I've looked into official reports. I would then confirm that there have been bands of pirates raiding ships and stations, and then move forward to say that the ISD has a full complement of armaments to deter potential boarding parties, and that the Cargo Bay is capable of ordering additional arms if needed. I would then inform them that they (especially if a Captain is present) are free to make the decision to temporarily bring on the mercenary team if they feel especially threatened, but that they would be held accountable for any damage or destruction caused by the hiring of said team. While the mercenaries may be temporarily contracted by Command, they are not employed by Nanotrasen, and should be regarded as contractors without access to sensitive areas.
This would, again, let the Mercenaries and Raiders pursue their gimmick without strong-arming the round in one way or another, and put pressure on Command to watch sensitive areas like Research, the Bridge, and the AI Core more closely if they choose to employ them.
ContextualToday at 6:25 PM
Right.
3. You receive an Emergency Broadcast System message from the station’s Artificial Intelligence. It claims that there is an emergency situation, and requests an immediate ERT deployment. How do you respond?
SkyFreeToday at 6:26 PM
Is the any members of Command present on the manifest?
ContextualToday at 6:26 PM
Give a response both with and without command.
SkyFreeToday at 6:31 PM
With Command:
I would respond to the Emergency Broadcast stating that two members of command are capable of deploying the station distress beacon, and that they should do so if able. I would also point out the lack of information given in the emergency broadcast, and inform the AI that even if I were to send an ERT without Command deploying the beacon, they wouldn't be able to properly gear themselves without that information. I would also send this information to each member of Command present in the form of a fax.

Without Command:
I would respond, again, to the Emergency Broadcast pointing out that there is very little information given beyond 'emergency situation'. I'd press the AI to clarify in regards to what that situation IS. Is there a blob? Multiple boarding parties? (HANG ON NIECE)
As I was saying. Is it a blob, multiple boarding parties, is the station under a kind of siege? The supermatter exploding? Without proper details I wouldn't be able to send a proper response. I'd have the AI respond accordingly, and then judge on if an emergency response team was justifiable. If so, I'd respond accordingly. If the AI was unwilling to provide that information, I'd refuse to send a response team. After a long enough delay with no communication from the AI, I'd be forced to assume it was a hostile boarding party and send a response team accordingly.
ContextualToday at 6:41 PM
Is that your entire answer?
SkyFreeToday at 6:42 PM
Yes. Without proper information, I can't justify sending a response team, and as far as the question is phrased, there's no information to work with there.
I don't believe the AI can deploy a distress beacon.
ContextualToday at 6:44 PM
Alright.
4. You receive a fax from the Internal Affairs Agent, who claims that the Captain has been abusing his authority by removing all of the vending machines from the station and has demoted an engineer for littering. How do you respond?
SkyFreeToday at 6:49 PM
First, I would send the automated announcement pointing out the Captain's complete authority. Then, I would respond to the agent in fax format to request clarification. While the vending machines are there for crew use, and are contracted to be on station, where precisely they are is within the Captain's jurisdiction. The bulk of my fax would be asking the on-board agent about the demoted engineer. Is this their first offense, or the latest spark in a long string of broken regulations? I would side more with the Captain by default, due to their loyalty implant forcing them to act in the best interests of the company. However, I would move forward to say that if agent believes that the Captain is over-stepping their bounds, that they should work with the Engineer to file an incident report. An on-station demotion is harder to overturn immediately, especially when it comes from a Captain-level decision, but if an incident report reveals that the Captain had over-stepped their bounds, it would be easy to re-instate the engineer following the investigation's conclusion.
ContextualToday at 6:51 PM
5. In your opinion, how much of a role should Central Command play in the affairs of the station? When is it appropriate for them to directly intervene, and how much should they attempt to shape the round when they do?
SkyFreeToday at 6:57 PM
Central Command should usually play a very hands-off approach to the current round. In the over-arching lore, Central Command has quite a few responsibilities outside of the NSS Aurora, and the Command staff are entrusted to run the station according to their rank and role, in the best interests of the Station, Crew, and Company. They should not need, and will not be babysat. I've shown my thoughts in the above answers; strong-arming a round in most situations is unacceptable. Direct intervention on the part of Central Command should only be done when the situation has become completely unsalvageable, such as the above where the AI is the only one capable of broadcasting for aid, and becomes unresponsive. Outside of that, most intervention should be done in the form of incident reports, handled behind the scenes and out of the public eye, generally after the round has concluded.
ContextualToday at 7:01 PM
6. What do you believe is the purpose of the Incident Report system?
SkyFreeToday at 7:05 PM
The Incident Report system is a tool to help maintain a believable work atmosphere while also giving characters room to grow. Without Incident Reports, it'd be impossible to have a believable, lore-friendly atmosphere on server without being heavy-handed with OOC consequences. Most incident reports aren't done for OOC grievances - if they were, they'd be Ahelp'd instead. They're done for solving in-character issues, on an in-character level.
ContextualToday at 7:05 PM
Alright. Last question.
7. In resolving an Incident Report, when should a character receive significant disciplinary action (such as a demotion), as opposed to a lighter response such as a warning or retraining? Under what circumstances would you consider terminating a character's employment?
SkyFreeToday at 7:15 PM
I've always been a fan of warnings first, and harsher consequences for repeat offenders. Everyone makes bad decisions at some point - regardless of what we play in game and how we play them, we're human beings. We make mistakes. As such, I would tend to push more towards issuing warnings or retraining for most issues, however, for players who consistently make serious mistakes, I would be forced to work with them regarding their punishments. I wouldn't want to demote a security officer for accidentally wounding someone after breaking up a bar fight, and would instead push for retraining. However, after speaking with that same officer multiple times over causing enough injuries, I'd have little choice but to have them restricted to cadet and forced to buddy up with a more experienced officer until enough time had passed without incident that they could be reinstated.

Terminating employment is a very harsh, very heavy-handed penalty that should generally be reserved for the most extreme cases, and if possible, with the player's agreement. I can't see many situations outside of criminal-level issues where I would push for contract termination, as that more or less forces the player to delete their character, and that's not fun for anyone. For example, if the officer in my example above didn't just wound one of the patrons, but outright killed them, I would be forced to weigh my options on termination pending security investigation, taking OOC factors into consideration as well. Was it an antag round? Did the bar fight happen shortly after an antag engagement? Was the bar fight related to the antag in the first place? I'd be hesitant to hand any kind of termination out without consulting the player, other members of CCIA, and if needs be, the admin team simply due to the consequences of termination.