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?

SchwannYesterday at 10:02 PM
How far into the round is it?

BearYesterday at 10:03 PM
Give me an answer for beginning and 1:45

SchwannYesterday at 10:08 PM
Start of the Round: Tell them that unscheduled inspections are a part of company life, and that it may take anywhere from sixty to ninety minutes to find the relevant paperwork for the inspector's visit (if you've worked with the government, this is a pretty reasonable time) as we don't want to derail the gimmick immediately, despite my burning hatred of ninja as a game mode. Tell them that the inspector should be allowed to perform their visit for the time being, so long as it does not compromise corporate security (I.e asking "HEY CAN I SEE THE SAT" should be met with a refusal).

1:45:00 - It depends on how the ninja(s) have played the round so far, really. If they've been subtle about it so far telling command to hold the ninjas for questioning while we check their background would work to escalate the situation nicely. If they're running around stabbing people to death an immediate fax back telling command that no, this is not an official inspection, will resolve any doubts they might have that the murderer is some kind of bizarre NT inspector.

BearYesterday at 10:09 PM
Ah good, well developed responses
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?

SchwannYesterday at 10:10 PM
This depends on the round time, as most of my responses do. How many members of security are there?

BearYesterday at 10:12 PM
Give me an answer for variations of little or a lot of sec

SchwannYesterday at 10:17 PM
Little Security: Tell them that, due to a lack of security personnel, central command recommends taking the offer and using the station's funds as monetary compensation if need be. Tell them to keep in touch with central, and to inform us immediately if the mercenaries start posing a threat to the station themselves. Additionally tell them that using these mercenaries is cheaper than deploying a NT-ERT, and will look better on their quarterly reports.

Full Security: Tell them that these mercenaries are cheaper (and more disposable) than the security team onboard, and that their services should be taken. Inform them that their security team is more than equipped to handle the mercenaries should they turn out to be a threat, and to fax us regarding any developments.

Both responses are essentially the same with minor variations in order to work alongside the gimmick. At the end of the day, we must remember that everybody is here to have fun - even the antagonists.

BearYesterday at 10:18 PM
Looking at all the angles is key. Exactly
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?

SchwannYesterday at 10:25 PM
That's kind of a vague message. The first thing to do is check to see if there are any active command staff online. If there are, ask them to send a fax with additional information, or an EBS if this is impossible. As more information is gathered regarding the situation, a decision can be made as to whether or not to call the ERT. I would lean more towards calling an ERT for deadpop command, as it's often difficult for them to get two IDs together to swipe for the ERT in my experience. I've had to play deadpop command rounds before due to my awful graduate school schedule, and there is nothing more infuriating than being unable to call for a desperately needed ERT because you're the only head of staff and the ninja stole the spare.

BearYesterday at 10:26 PM
Spot on, I like it
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?

SchwannYesterday at 10:30 PM
IAAs no longer exist, this has to be a traitor!

This is pretty ridiculous but I've seen captains try to pull things on this level. IAAs/liaisons are loyalty implanted so there's no reason for them to lie, and the vending machines are provided by a NT subsidiary - this is cutting into our bottom line and making the company look bad. I would immediately send a fax to the captain telling him to knock it off, and that harsher action will follow if he does not. Regarding the engineer littering is not a chargeable offense in of itself, unless you really want to stretch i105, so I would fax the liaison and head of security (assuming they're there and not dead in a maintenance tunnel somewhere) asking for clarification regarding the situation. Did the engineer do anything warranting a charge, for example?

Assuming the engineer was falsely charged, I would advise the liaison/agent to assist the engineer in filing an internal report - it will help smooth over the relationship between NT and the engineer, especially if they're a contractor.

BearYesterday at 10:31 PM
AH HA TRICK QUESTION defintiely not outdated or anything to represent our new liaison system.
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?

SchwannYesterday at 10:31 PM
:^)
Central Command should be a presence in the back of everybody's minds, but not an overly-active presence in the round. CC should very, very rarely intervene directly in a round, and should instead work to guide and indirectly influence the players in the round. After all the server is called Aurora Station, not Odin Station, and the ultimate decision-making of the round rests with the players in it.

Assuming everything has gone completely off the rails to absolute lunacy, only then should Central Command step in and take direct action in order to return the station to its normal level of lunacy.

BearYesterday at 10:46 PM
((sorry about that something came up Irl))

SchwannYesterday at 10:47 PM
((AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA actually it's fine))

BearYesterday at 10:47 PM
6. What do you believe is the purpose of the Incident Report system

SchwannYesterday at 10:52 PM
The IR system has a few purposes, but its primary purpose is to make the Aurora a more believable workplace by making actions have consequences longer than the current round. It also helps reinforce that the Aurora does not exist within a vacuum, and that the galaxy moves on around it - this ties into my belief that Central Command should be in the back of everybody's head. Additionally, it helps keep characters at a certain standard due to the fear of longer-reaching consequences. I know I've avoided doing some actions due to the threat of an IR, and I'm sure others have. Finally, it can help develop characters and their relationships for better or for worse.

In short, it's an in-character system for dealing with problems that would normally be dealt with in an out-of-character manner on other servers.

BearYesterday at 10:56 PM
One last one to go :slight_smile:
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?

SchwannYesterday at 11:01 PM
Building off my experience in the off-maligned security department, the severity of a character's disciplinary action should be based upon how severe their record is and what the action in question is. If this is a first-time minor mistake a reprimand (or even a written note) would be sufficient, then a stern warning, then a demotion, then termination.

Retraining is, to me, only really suitable when the character in question is in a position of experience and does not display the skills needed for that position, or acts like somebody in that position should not. A security officer insulting the head of security repeatedly deserves to be slapped down to cadet for a bit, in my eyes.

There are two real situations in which I would consider terminating a character's employment. First, when they have a history of offenses and show no sign of improving. This is a clear money sink, and the corporation is better off not having them here. Second is when the offense is so grievous (i.e. attempted murder) that termination is really the only (and best) option. Somebody that dumps fourteen rubber bullets into the head of their fellow security officer over a minor insult likely will not improve, and is best kept away from the Aurora.

BearYesterday at 11:03 PM
A very well thought out and in depth answer.
Ending the interview :slight_smile: