IAA Retool #8465
IAA Retool #8465
Conversation
|
"Security is abusing its prisoners!" "Okay, why not ask the IAAs to do an investigation?" "One has gotten a job change to 'hall monitor' and is trying to get a stun baton, and the other has declared himself a superhero" 馃槖 A round I experienced once that really showed how low quality IA can be. This will also help with people using IA as a way to get into security because mindshield. |
|
Karmagate 2018 |
|
Karma is a horrible system and adding more things to it will only make reworking/removing the system harder. However, this does effectively make IAA an opt-in job, which will likely increase the average quality of work preformed by the IA office. Overall, I think this is a net positive change. |
|
I thought you guys had a policy of never karmagating "standard" jobs? I've always considered IAA to be a standard "vanilla" SS13 job. I support this but it does seem a mite hypocritical. Maybe adding a 1 karma lock to security is feasible now. |
tigercat2000
added
Administration
|
@Tayyyyyyy @deep-fried-faceplant @Vivalas @tigercat2000
|
|
Validhunting is a problem on Paradise, therefore ensuring that IAA's defend only NT seems like a pretty toxic continuation of a negative theme. |
|
Putting NT first does not mean they always take Sec's side. The important thing here is that the IAAs should know Space Law well, and try to ensure it is applied in the best interests of NT. Sometimes this will mean discouraging overzealous Security from brigging people unjustifiably, or for too long. Equally though, sometimes it will mean reminding Security of their duties, e.g: if an officer is hanging out in the bar and chatting while there's a major threat to deal with. The issue we have right now is that a good third of IAAs just goof off, either because they don't feel they can do their jobs, or they're not willing to try. Another third seem to make it their mission to harass Security about everything, even when Security is doing nothing wrong. Both of these kinds of IAA are toxic. IAA should be trying to keep things on track, yes, but they should not always be seeking to defend any specific individual or group. They should instead always look at things from NT's point of view, asking themselves what best serves NT's long term interests. |
Yes it does. NT is a corporation, who like everyone their aim is profit. This encourages IAAs to 'look the other way' on security being shitcurity. It is something that shitter IAAs can point to, to get away with. If the problem is that "IAAs goof off", you job ban the offenders for breaking rule five... and look into adding more content to make the role not shit... this PR doesn't do that, ultimately. |
|
No, it doesn't. I do want to pair this with some changes, admin-wise, to how the role is handled, but that's a separate topic, beyond Github. If you have any suggestions for content that could improve the role, I am all ears. |
|
Doing this makes them lucrative loot targets. All Access Lite, a sec HUD and basically no weaponary apart from what they nicked from the brig? Sleepy pen that fool! |
|
@Spartan6 Yes it does. Don't forget their sec radios too. They'll be empowered to do their jobs, but they'll also be attractive targets for hostile forces. |
|
Wait, what? I understand the removal of those alt-titles, since those are just terrible meme producers (although haven't there been previous attempts to remove IAA alt titles?), "human resources agent" really isn't a good description of their duties. Human resources is what the HoP does, making sure internal security policy is followed and handling complaints is what internal affairs does. Well, policy at least, I guess complaints kinda is an HR thing, but they lean much more towards internal affairs. |
|
I agreed, but Tully asked for it, and he's a headmin, so he gets it. |
|
For the headmins, could we get a quick summarization of what your stance is concerning these changes? Getting a line like "I agreed, but Tully asked for it, and he's a headmin, so he gets" concerns me. I don't want to play the internal discussion meme card, but I would like this internal discussion to become external. Aside from that, I do support these changes, and I'll try to follow this comment up with my two bits on the matter. |
|
The time gate is okay. I do not feel the rest is needed. |
|
@deep-fried-faceplant @Vivalas The reason for the removal of the old Alt-Titles is exactly what Vivalas said:
Despite the previous PR not going through, in retrospect, and after it being brought to my attention that the titles have actually caused legitimate confusion amongst some IAA players, "Public Defender" and "Lawyer" simply no longer represent what the IAA is; a state of affairs that has existed since their SOP was first codified properly and they were no longer a weird pseudo-lawyer with Sec access. As for the request for HR, I will admit I'm somewhat confused with the comparison with the Head of Personnel; there is far more to HR than just ticking boxes and filling vacant spots, and if one wanted to make a reasonable analogue, the NT Rep and the IAAs would be FAR more apt for that description than the Head of Personnel, who's more or less a glorified taskmaster/foreman with a fancy puppy. |
This won't change much, but it's better than 5 hours. IAAs should be semi-knowledgeable on the server's norms though, so an extra five hours means that at the earliest, new IAAs will at least have 5 rounds under their belt.
God bless and thank you. IAAs are not meant to pick sides, they are meant to investigate situations and scenarios with only the rules and standards that should be followed in mind. Not to mention, IAAs aren't even allowed to legally represent someone unless their client has been sentenced to perma or higher. I like the HRA title, it reminds me of Frosty's suggestion to merge the HoP and IAA office together into a HR department. However, I too don't see a very strong connection between the HoP and IAA, and also agree that the NTR fulfills the role of HR manager much more strongly than the HoP. I've always made the analogy that the Magistrate is to SL as the NTR is to SOP.
I'm not sure how I feel about this one. If there really will be a crackdown on IAAs and rule 5, then this change is totally fine. However, giving IAAs basic all access, but not security, feels somewhat contradictory to me. I understand that for balance reasons, we don't want to give security basic access to every department, even if it would make sense from a realistic perspective (I'm an advocate for departmental security, which would give the best of both worlds, but I digress). However, by giving IAAs basic access to all departments so that they can preform investigations, I feel as though an exception is being made to the precedent set by limiting security's access to the halls. On the flip side, IAAs are supposed to be sent directly by CentCom, similar to how the NTR is a NT VIP, assigned to the Cyberiad. The NTR also has basic access. This move would push IAAs closer to the NTR, if only by comparison. |
|
Maybe I don't actually know what HR is, and I'm probably not going to google it, but I always assumed it dealt with hiring / firing / managing personnel, which is what the HoP does, and is not what IAA handles. NT Rep is also doesn't fit into my HR paradigm and is more of a big daddy command-level IAA, at least what I've gleamed from the NT Rep's wiki page and interaction with them. |
|
@Vivalas You're largely correct, but HR is also responsible for payroll, ameliorating issues between employees, and ensuring workplace standards are enforced. |
That gives me an idea. Currently only science gets any payment for their work, because there's an actual game check that can be made to detect it (tech levels sent to centcom, borgs constructed). If IAA became more of an HR thing we could give them a button that lets them tell CC that a department was doing its job well and to pay them. Or maybe give that to the HoP, I dunno. |
|
@Jountax That's actually a really good idea. Not something that would fit in this PR, but an idea for another PR. |
If NT wanted security abusing prisoners they wouldn't have specifically created rules preventing it in the first place. Why would you think taking NT's side entails throwing out the very rules NT themselves decided to write while under no obligation to? NT owns the station entirely. They could make the laws whatever they want. No one could stop them. |
|
FYI the lore on that is entirely false afaik. Space Law has been agreed upon by all the major corporations, and must hire a private security force to enforce Space Law. |
|
And I would assume there is a reason why NT agreed to it. What would other corporations do about it if NT didn't? They're already sending people to nuke the station. I think you're getting caught up in semantics. Taking NT's side means enforcing the rules, regardless of if NT came up with those rules themselves or simply agreed to them. Either way, it's how NT expects the station to be run, and NT punishes people who break those rules. |
|
@EvadableMoxie and you seem to think that everything is black and white. Here, any doubt is encouraged to be cast aside. The grey-area is no longer a grey area.... you are to come down on securities side. |
|
@EvadableMoxie is correct. The IAA supporting NT means that they support the rules as written. That means they will regularly have to push Sec to do a better job of following them. They aren't there to argue on behalf of Sec. Nor are they there to argue on behalf of the crew. They're there to remind both Sec and crew about the policies that NT has set. |
|
As someone who has played IAA on NT's side from the beginning, I strongly disagree @SamHPurp. The role of the IAA in security is to be an investigator, in order to ensure that SL and SOP, which best represent NT's interests, are being followed and enforced. NT's policies create the greyzone that let IAAs have some kind of purpose in dealing with security. Sometimes that greyzone benefits security, sometimes it benefits the prisoner, more than often it (in theory, at least) benefits both sides in what is considered a fair balance. |
|
Human resources is still a terrible name for IA and that definitely should not go through. |
|
I agree it's bad for IAAs to always side with security, but the wording is they should be siding with NT. NT and Security aren't the same. NT punishes security for it's infractions all the time. It's not one and the same. |
|
I could take or leave the HRA title. In my opinion, IAAs already do handle a decent amount of HR, so it makes sense for them to have the title. If I want to complain about another one of my coworkers, I take it to HR. In spess, I take complaints to the IAA. So from a very simplified standpoint, HRA does make sense as an alternative title. Furthermore, the HRA title doesn't enable or mislead IAAs into playing the role in an undesirable way, like how spess lawyer or public defender has been doing for the past far-too-long. |
|
IAAs basically are corporate Human Resources, they deal with making sure company policy is followed (that means they side with whoever's on the correct side of company policy, not always security) and deal with any complaints ("Sec stole my lasgun!"). |
馃啈 Kyep
tweak: IAAs now require 10h of playtime, instead of 5h, to unlock. The IAA job's alt title is now "Human Resources Agent" instead of "Lawyer" or "Public Defender". IAAs now start with basic access to all departments (sci/med/cargo/eng), so that they can more easily conduct investigations. Overall, their role has been clarified, to be explicitly on the side of NT, not simply that of defendants. Further, they're empowered to, and expected to, actually conduct investigations, and generally be better at their jobs.
/馃啈
Their access before this PR:
Their access after this PR:
