nauticall/sammy CCIA interview

alright here's the first question:
1. What IC and OOC aspects do you believe should be considered when deciding on the resolution of an incident report?

naut — Today at 4:21 PM
well starting with the IC aspects i think the things to keep in mind would be:

intent: i'd check to see if the IR's subject seemed to demonstrate very deliberate intentions (like purposefully ripping a flag from the wall 💀 ) or if it seemed to be more of an issue with competence or some kind of freak accident or oversight (like a pharmacist giving the wrong dosage of a chem) -- if it's the latter the resolution could be dropped down to, like, a stern word / recommendation for retraining but if it was the latter we could look into more punitive resolutions for the individual

damages: i'd look for the amount of damages, either physical, psychological, or property caused by the IR. if said IR for example mentions a person, like, slaps someone in the face or calls them a name, it'd have less severity than, like, if they beat the victim up

third parties: admittedly had this come up in a recent IR i tried to do so i know to put it here: i would check of the actions/influences third parties had on the whole situation, like if possible talking to the superior officer that disciplined the offender or otherwise anyone that might have instigated or influenced the offender's actions; if i can investigate thoroughly there's always a chance to find some kind of interference in the investigation like if they were given an order that wasn't mentioned in the IR or anything, or if such an action was already disciplined and shut down by someone like, for example, the captain

the offender themselves: should check the offender's mental state, their records (criminal/employment/medical) and if they have had any CCIA actions done on them in the past or otherwise any red flags. if so we can deliberate it further
OOCly i would look for these:

antag involvement: obv if antags were involved in a significant way the report would be binned

setting: i think the way CCIA's methodology works is to make sure the believability of a setting is intact - any sensible corporation would raise eyebrows when an employee is being extremely disruptive for example, and should take into mind where we're coming from with what CCIA does. i like the idea of CCIA being there because the SCC doesn't want to be negligent or willing to let someone cause more damage, so they do both damage control and investigations to make sure their staff are in line

OOC intent: if the player of the offender was doing so to grief and cause mayhem then we can be harsher on the resolutions that followed as opposed to if it was, like, an attempt to make the round interesting or something (without causing too much damage or loss of believability), in which case we could probably OOCly ask someone to tone it down or say it's toeing the line
so yeah

Lanze — Today at 5:05 PM
alright
2. How do you feel about the current iteration of Corporate Regulations? Do you feel like it is in a good spot, or could some improvements be made?

naut — Today at 5:11 PM
i think corp regs are in a good spot as is, though i feel like part of it is bc it's not rules-lawyered nearly as much as, like, on CM for example

but i think some additional clarifications to existing infractions as well as adding additional infractions like, say, a specific "destruction of property" charge (i dont think we specifically have that)
there's some overlap between the regs i think and some of them can be interpreted rather overambiguously at times and sec will debate over which charge is appropriate for a certain situation since it falls into a grey area a lot of times
Lanze — Today at 5:12 PM
Alright! Here's number three:
(which is the halfway point)
3. CCIA, through faxes and announcements, can sway the round heavily in response to faxes or antagonistic actions. Could you provide an example, either from your own personal experiences in a round or a hypothetical scenario, on when CCIA/Central Command should intervene with a heavier hand?

naut — Today at 5:13 PM
halfway there....
hmmmmm
Lanze — Today at 5:14 PM
Take your time
naut — Today at 5:22 PM
i can name one or two, i think

one would be if like, the captain is doing something particularly egregious or disagreeable that doesn't like severely violate corp regs to where they can be deposed by command but still should be stopped or dealt with sooner than later with a fax or some kind of external intervention
i think there might be a few edge-cases in which the heads might be suppressed in some way, if their powers can't have them sufficiently handle the captain, or in a kind of case in which an IR can't really afford to wait

we've been having a bunch of these extended-mode ship combat fights with zero proper antags that could have easily been prevented had the captain not been so trigger-happy that round or willing to step from 0-100 instantly, and i think in such a case CCIA should have to at least fax the captain telling them "hey, captain, the horizon's not a warship, don't go around picking fights left and right", something of that tone
cus normally the plan of action for "questionable captain decision that isn't a capital crime" would be an IR, but you can't exactly let the bureaucratic process happen while the horizon is getting torn to shreds
and in such a case it's probable the department heads might be in on it as well if they, for example, are suppressed by the idea of being discouraged from talking back to the captain during red alert

Lanze — Today at 5:25 PM
Got it....here's your next one:
4. During one of your incident report investigations, you learn that the incident that occurred was the fault of both parties, one instigating another, and the other responding with escalation. While both conflicting parties have managed to resolve this amongst themselves, the reporter still believes they should be punished for causing the incident in the first place as it has distracted multiple departments from their work. What would you look into before handing down the resolution, and would you punish the parties involved?

naut — Today at 5:35 PM
okay so i think im gonna try and make a little scenario to distill this here

let's say we got like two engineers or something who come into conflict about, for example, the SM configuration. they argue back and forth about it in the engineering lobby drawing attention to each other from the rest of the engineers (stopping them from working) and eventually resulting in engineer A pulling out some sort of racism or "sensitive backstory" card from their pocket that prompts the other, engineer B, to make an IR about it, they apologize to each other but B still thinks A should be investigated for it
i think in this case the first thing i'd do is like, follow through with that IC checklist i said earlier.
check for intent - they both had the intent to hurt each other but one did something that went over the line
damages - their arguments stopped engineering from working properly
third parties - im assuming there's no CE or captain to report it to in this scenario, and nothing explicitly broke regs, so that can be out of the window

the first thing i'd investigate is if there was any last-straw incident that led to the IR being filed rather than it being solved in-house entirely, and we can look into who did it
maybe if it was allowed in CCIA regs (i dont know your internal M.O so im going on guesses here) i would inform the reporter, B, that if they still wished to press charges that their actions would be investigated as well, and give them a choice of whether to continue or withdraw the report
i'd look for if the situation was preventable next, which in this case it definitely was, and talk to both parties about it
since it was resolved in-house i don't personally find the need to press punitive charges against either party besides pulling them aside, playing the boss card, and going "so what have we learned today" to each other and instruct them not to do something like it in the future
ofc if something else props up that led to fists flying or if security got involved we can look into that too and that's a whole new can of worms

Lanze — Today at 5:42 PM
Understood. We are on the final stretch. Here's the next one:
5. During one round, the antagonists decided to play a fake Hephaestus representative gimmick. They have taken things a bit too far, and Command has decided to send a fax to confirm their identity and authorisation as a result. The round time is now 01:45, and you warn the antagonists via AOOC that you will now reply. The antagonists ask you not to blow their gimmick. What do you do?

naut — Today at 5:43 PM
oooh thats a tricky one
Lanze — Today at 5:43 PM
:rocksus:
naut — Today at 5:45 PM
welllll i think i would start by (if possible) looking into specifically the actions the heph folks did that led to them being questioned by command staff

like whether their :therock: moment was them being something like "we've determined the supermatter is no longer safe and will be repossessing it" (believable)
or something egregiously bad like "we bought the horizon, you answer to us now"
if it was the former, and the gimmick is workable and somewhat believable at least in-story, i would have the fax be structured in a way that attempts to keep onboard with the gimmick while also saying something like the heph crew should not be overstepping their boundaries and have them to keep inside, like sticking only to engineering authority and that the vessel is still SCC's and the captain's in the end
if it was the latter, though, and the gimmick is just completely insane to work with and doesn't have any room for CCIA to inject storytelling into, then tbh i'd shut them down personally. "they're impostors"
i'd have to look into if the gimmick is salvageable though for that to happen and then only issue that if it isn't
like if the heph guys are like "the SCC has fallen, hephaestus has bought everyone out, you work for us now, do as we say or we will kill everyone onboard" then it can be declared either fake, and that they're wanted for impersonating hephaestus officials and hijacking secure channels
my intent when playing command/hypothetical CCIA is to play along with gimmicks if possible
but if they're railroading on their own, like, no room to move, then drastic action should be taken from administration's end
that's just my 2 cents on it at least.

Lanze — Today at 5:50 PM
Alright, final question time:
6. Command has sent you a fax informing you that the Dominian consular has been arrested for instigating a duel on the holodeck and causing an injury, and are now requesting that you revoke their representative privileges as a result. The consular has actually done quite a lot more as an antagonist, including killing someone, but this was just before the fax was sent and left out of the paper. What do you reply with?

naut — Today at 5:59 PM
i think i would initially reply with a fax asking the extent of the injuries and what crime they were charged with, so that CCIA can make a decision (and behind-the-scenes maybe interface with the imperial government while they're at it) based on the actions of the consular. ICly they'd want to be really thorough about it since they don't take a request to revoke a diplomat's privileges, while also OOCly i think it could give some time (5-15 minutes maybe?) for the consular antag to keep taking action without being shut down immediately

by the time command faxes back with a reply the round would have hopefully progressed, and if not then CCIA would receive a clearer idea of the situation, do some talking with the empire ("We have spoken with the Ambassador of Dominia to the SCC/Biesel" can go in the fax) and then issue the order that they're no longer a consular