- Sep 16, 2023
- 951
- 295
- 61
[UK] Elena Carlisle's Site Advisor Application (Zen)
- Thread starter Zen
- Start date
Although I havent played on the server in a while I do like to forum stalk and peep in and out of the discord so I'd like to leave comments.
I have to say that as someone who was in an upper senior position when Zen was exploring avenues of the server going from E-11 to IA to ETS, with some reflection, where Zen goes a tremendous amount of effort and care and dedication can be applied, although I believe at times this can be misguided and based on what I saw of you back then, you weren't willing to change your mind when other people met what you believed in/how something should be ran with a different take.
So with that in mind I think you have the capabilities to be a good, even a great Site Advisor, however if you go into the role being headstrong and stubborn, you won't find much success, as in the past, and although people may not always realize is, SA as a whole but Advisors especially can limited due to facing opposition, Advisor A doesnt agree with Advisor B, if your attitdue has not changed, which judging from how this thread is going I don't think it has been massivley altered, I think you would slot in immediately, if you take the time and you are willing to compromise I think you would do great, given you maybe go for some CL4 roles again before jumping into SA, just to touch up and get into the mindset.
I have to say that as someone who was in an upper senior position when Zen was exploring avenues of the server going from E-11 to IA to ETS, with some reflection, where Zen goes a tremendous amount of effort and care and dedication can be applied, although I believe at times this can be misguided and based on what I saw of you back then, you weren't willing to change your mind when other people met what you believed in/how something should be ran with a different take.
So with that in mind I think you have the capabilities to be a good, even a great Site Advisor, however if you go into the role being headstrong and stubborn, you won't find much success, as in the past, and although people may not always realize is, SA as a whole but Advisors especially can limited due to facing opposition, Advisor A doesnt agree with Advisor B, if your attitdue has not changed, which judging from how this thread is going I don't think it has been massivley altered, I think you would slot in immediately, if you take the time and you are willing to compromise I think you would do great, given you maybe go for some CL4 roles again before jumping into SA, just to touch up and get into the mindset.
- Sep 16, 2023
- 951
- 295
- 61
I do try to change my views based on other arguments/evidence generally, there's just been a fair few things on CN where I just have some opinions on things like E&TS where so far I haven't been convinced, and in the past that has ended up with things like arguments where I'm not changing my mind and neither is anyone else involved, which just kinda isn't helpful, so I've been trying to bringing issues like that back up where I know that it's not going to go anywhere useful.
This also somewhat applies to what you're saying about disagreements within SA and the like - I am fully willing to make changes to my plans and ideas based on feedback given by others, or orders given by e.g. the Site Director/Managers on things. I have some ideas that I do want to try out and that I think have merit, so I will push for those to at least be trialled, but where lines or drawn or it becomes clear that I'm not able to get things done, or where things don't seem to be working (whether it be ideas or just ways I'm going about things), I am willing and able to change things up.
Donator
- Dec 24, 2020
- 505
- 1
- 230
- 111
What kind of bits would you be looking to do, other than expand on ET&S? You've said 'new RP opportunities' and 'RP and ideas for other departments' but haven't been specific as to what either of those points actually refers to.
If you're looking to shift away from this viewpoint people seem to have of you being a loose cannon and a bit immature, it might be nice to show them that you bring a fresh perspective with good ideas.
All the best regardless dude.
- Sep 16, 2023
- 951
- 295
- 61
Part of what I'd want to be doing is just listening to what different departments and the like actually want and trying different things to help them out, but I do have some specific ideas that I'd want to trial, such as:
- The Senior Engineer Programme idea, which I've already brought to current SA to consider
- Various minor RP projects for E&TS staff to take part in, with a common format of "What can we do to improve XYZ area?", e.g. "Inspect each SCP containment chamber for ways in which it could be made more secure/humane/repairable. Get members of E-11 and RSD involved to consult on this project.", which would then ideally result in various reports by different staff on each containment chamber, and based on that, the best reports would receive prizes, and any good suggestions/complaints would potentially result in us contacting SL to change up the permaprops related to it, or things like that (e.g. putting a corkboard in ABC room, removing a corkboard from DEF, changing GHI's furniture around, etc.).
- While these are mainly focused on E&TS, they can/would involve other departments too, and encourage inter-departmental cooperation, which provides more/better RP and also just encourages people to actually get along, as sometimes certain departments don't.
- A project involving GSD and all MTFs to find out where security is lacking in relation to CI raids, and where it is actually doing well, on a larger scale - is there anything particularly bad that different departments could do to change, or that SA could encourage better cooperation/communication/etc. around to improve. Same with SCP breaches.
- A project to look into how different non-combatives behave during breaches/raids/riots/etc. - is there anywhere where they end up acting unsafely and that needs changes to discourage, e.g. trying to get D-class for a test during a riot or doing tests in LLCZ when there's a breach in HCZ. Is there any way SA can change things (policies, messaging, communication, etc.) that can improve this? Do non-combatives have complaints about not feeling safe in certain situations, e.g. during a breach, do they know where it's actually safe to be? Interviews, CCTV usage, etc. to find out all of this, maybe involving other staff like ISD/Assistants/etc., and then SA can maybe make changes/suggestions to improve things.
Yeah, So for the lore, Your background and the second page are fine, not great, but no big complaints. Your 'personality profile' section however, is 2 lines. It gives little insight about how the character will act and well, it's personality. It also doesn't mention why the foundation recruited your character, but that's just a small nitpick from me. I also noticed your 'foundation history' profile is 4 lines, it doesn't say what traits made SA pick them up/have a transfer request etc.
Although you do say it's a new character, the point is you make up it's background. Like make up anything, were you medical, GSD, RSD etc. I would recommend making up a background as just being an archivist and then being picked up into site admin just doesn't seem too realistic. You could use the fact you worked in history as a stepping stone into other things to then eventually get SA. Just kind of giving a more fleshed out idea of the character, whether it's a new character or not, you need an idea of how you will play it. I do get what you mean by new character, but you should have an idea for it's personality etc. Also giving your character traits and just an actual personality in your lore.
Also after reading through your character names, I have only seen you on 2 of them. That being your techie and your ISD character. You have been a helpful and not mingy techy which is good. However on ISD, I can't say I've seen you do much, that's not to say you aren't it's just what I've seen.
I would also take what Remmy has to say on board as well
Overall, I tried to make this as constructive and helpful as possible rather than a bashing, because I don't believe in that shit as it doesn't help anyone, if you take this all on board and I see you in game doing some good stuff, I will absolutely change my verdict, I hope this feed back was helpful
Good luck.
-Ryan
Last edited:
-support
You main Techie and only ever interact with people when it comes to fixing computers, barely playing across other departments, maybe for an hour here and there on 1 other department and even then, you don't engage with other departments/regiments on those roles at all. You'd likely be unable to present RP to all the major departments across the board for this reason + as a Dpt. Director, I would not trust you have the knowledge or capability to assist me should I require assistance from SA.
You main Techie and only ever interact with people when it comes to fixing computers, barely playing across other departments, maybe for an hour here and there on 1 other department and even then, you don't engage with other departments/regiments on those roles at all. You'd likely be unable to present RP to all the major departments across the board for this reason + as a Dpt. Director, I would not trust you have the knowledge or capability to assist me should I require assistance from SA.
Also, to reference this... I know your name on most of your characters. You have a very distinct attitude and you're easy to tell from others. However... These characters don't exist. I've seen you on Combat Medic maybe twice for very short periods of time since you've been back. You play ISD very briefly here and there... and then yesterday on Thauma, you were just following the Site Advisor around not doing much... I mean, you can't blame them for stating they haven't seen you when you quite literally don't play those characters, or refuse to engage with other players when you're on the server outside of fixing a computer.
- Sep 16, 2023
- 951
- 295
- 61
I'm a bit confused at what you mean here, I can't lie. I've been spending a roughly equal amount of time purely on Tech Expert and Investigator over the past month - I haven't been on Thaumatologist in over a month. On Tech Expert, I've been interacting with GSD, ISD, E-11, SA and other E&TS mainly, and on ISD I've been interacting with AO, GSD and other ISD mainly recently. I have definitely been interacting with different departments. I think you've just gotten me mixed up with someone else? And then other than that, I just haven't interacted with you specifically in RP recently, so your only interaction with "me" was this random thaumo you thought was me.
EDIT: Somebody has suggested to me that you might be referring to Zenlet, possibly, who is a completely different person.
Last edited:
Game Master“Please do not reply to every post individually on your application, try to bunch up your responses, and edit posts if necessary.”
Please stop. I understand you want to give a response, but as it says, do so in a collective, not individually.
You demonstrate a behaviour that shows potential, yes, but current is unfit for a role such as site administration in my own opinion. This isn’t to say you’d be bad, I just do not believe that if you kept your current state that you would be on equal footing with the rest of site administration.
Additionally, previous comments here posted by you do have a sense of arguing, which is not very becoming of a site administration member. I’d maybe get a different CL4 before going to SA, and not a tech expert using the ERT base model.. (pretty sure that was you at least)
-/+ neutral
Please stop. I understand you want to give a response, but as it says, do so in a collective, not individually.
You demonstrate a behaviour that shows potential, yes, but current is unfit for a role such as site administration in my own opinion. This isn’t to say you’d be bad, I just do not believe that if you kept your current state that you would be on equal footing with the rest of site administration.
Additionally, previous comments here posted by you do have a sense of arguing, which is not very becoming of a site administration member. I’d maybe get a different CL4 before going to SA, and not a tech expert using the ERT base model.. (pretty sure that was you at least)
-/+ neutral
- Sep 16, 2023
- 951
- 295
- 61
Could you be more specific as to what you mean by "current state"? Is it purely due to this thread? Because the main point of me replying is to either acknowledge or refute points brought up, and I'm not sure how that couldn't be considered "arguing" - I'm fairly sure that's just how normal applications work. If I disagree with a point raised, I will explain why, that's not really an issue, that's part of the point the point of the thread - I can't just not address the responses. Where points have been raised that I don't dispute and that I do fully understand, I've just acknowledged them and, if negative or questioning, given explanations or planned to improve things, e.g. my response to Remmy.
When it comes to getting a different CL4 role before going to Site Administration, I've mentioned previously in this thread that I don't believe that positions should be restricted behind you having had a CL4 role super recently. In my opinion, as long as you've been active on the server recently, any previous experience should still apply, as you are unlikely to have completely forgotten how to do proper RP just because it's been a while since you had specific whitelisted roles. I'm also personally not particularly interested in holding any of the current CL4 roles outside of SA right now - I'm just not that interested in those positions, but am interested in going for Site Advisor, as I do actually have some ideas that I want to try out and I'm just generally actually interested in the position. I don't think that making me go and do a different random CL4 role for a month or two just so I can come back and reapply for the same role I was interested in in the first place, when I already had past experience, is particularly helpful.
I am not intentionally doing this, it's just that whenever I check the forums, there tends to only be one response for me to reply to, other than one time where somebody posted right as I was replying, so it ended up being two separate replies back to back, because it wouldn't let me reply to them in an edit, and it forced me to just make a separate post. I'll try and wait at least a few hours before replying if there aren't multiple responses there for me to reply to at once to try and avoid this. [Written 11:56]
Thanks for the feedback. I'll look into fleshing out the character lore a bit more - I have some ideas, just need to write them up when I get time. Part of the formatting being short is just this being the standard format I use for all of my character lore, and some of the sections have always been short, and I suppose I just never thought about expanding upon some of it, as most of the lore was always in the history sections. The overall gist is just that Elena became somewhat involved in the anomalous prior to being recruited by the Foundation, and thus applied for and completed a DPhil at ICSUT, where she was then recruited before working at Site-12 at the Department of History for ~10 years, before transferring into Site Administration as an Assistant there for ~2 years up till now. [Written 12:08]
In further response to this and other people saying they haven't seen me around, this is my weekly and monthly VTime right now:
Head Moderator
SCP-RP Staff
Resources TeamSpicy application, I hold no opinion besides wanting to follow this thread for the hot tea
-Support
I believe you should gain some recent CL4 experience before thinking about Site Advisor.
From what i've seen of these comments, you should also improve your reputation within the community.
All the best,
Cano.
I believe you should gain some recent CL4 experience before thinking about Site Advisor.
From what i've seen of these comments, you should also improve your reputation within the community.
All the best,
Cano.
Please stop arguing in the thread and keep it to the point. Makes less confusion.
-SUPPORT
You clearly seem to be unable to take criticism.
You seem to argue a lot.
You haven't held a CL4 position as of late.
You are unfit for this role.
You clearly seem to be unable to take criticism.
You seem to argue a lot.
You haven't held a CL4 position as of late.
You are unfit for this role.
...Let the record state that "inability to take criticism" and "being argumentative" are defined as refuting statements made about you in your application - And that in order to not be argumentative or be unable to take criticism, you must not address any of these statements, even if you know them to be wrong.
From what I'm seeing, a lot the comments others have been making here seem to be more reflective of them than they are of Zen. Are we reading the same thread?
None of these are the massive gotchas you all seem to think they are. This is in fact, highly unbecoming of a lot of you. A lot of this is boiling down to mostly just variants of
"Hey, so you did XYZ"
"No I didn't?"
"Wow, how argumentative, you demonstrate inability to take criticism"
I'm sorry, but do any of you even read the posts you make before you post them? How do you not look back on this and see the blatant dishonesty on display?
I'm afraid the word you're looking for is 'pariah'
