Pending Review General Security Whitelist Rework / Job Rework

[Dusk]

Spoiler: Suggestion Information

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
1. Adds one or two new whitelists to GSD. Lieutenant and or Sergeant. Adding in one Sr.CL4 to GSD and one Jr.CL4. Moving CPT to Sr.Cl4 and adding in either one more Sr.CL4 or Sergeant to Jr.Cl4

2. Changing Officer and removing their loadout kit and retaining the loadout kit to just SRU.



Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
I believe so, I'm not 100%, I think this was the system beforehand but not to this degree


Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
1. Streamlined authority within GSD. Quite literally impossible to manage all of GSD as just a Captain. CoS also deals with all of the GSD back the background information as well.
2. Keeps the GSD outfit streamlined by not having 3/4ths of the group roaming around the facility for no reason other than to mingle. Officers are a level requirement and should not be allowed to move around the facility at their discretion, that should be exclusive to license holders.



Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
People complaining there is another whitelist? I don't really see a negative to wanting to organize a unorganized group, that coincidentally is the starter group for all new players on the server


Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
1. GSD is in shambles 90% of the time because of the amount of responsibilities tied to one person/one job. GSD is essentially the starter position so it having the strongest foundation supporting it only makes sense. Captains have to organize dblock, organize sweeps, ensure all personnel are following CoC and CoE at all times in Dblock and around the facility(How is this even possible?), run tryouts, log the tryouts etc.. etc.. This list alone is a full time job, with CoS being the only other WL that can support, all others are at the discretion of the person playing whether they wish to assist in the workload or not.

2. Officer should not have the ability to roam the facility as that leaves Guard/Cadet and possibly SRU which is never played because why would you take a lower clearance level job over just playing officer which effectively does the same job with no Tranq pistol. Patrol kit should be designated to SRU and SRU only. They are a response unit and Officer is a Security Officer, that leaves the lowest and most inexperienced members left in dblock to defend and ensure testing is efficient, which it most certainly never is.

​

---

​

Spoiler: Whitelist Suggestion

Introduction​

The General Security (GenSec) department within Site65 operates under a hierarchical command structure that is crucial for maintaining the safety and security of the facility. The current hierarchy, predominantly featuring Captains and the Chief of Security, has identified gaps in leadership and operational efficiency. This proposal advocates for the inclusion of two additional whitelisted roles, Lieutenant and Sergeant, into GenSec's structure, with an emphasis on integrating specific security clearance levels to further delineate responsibilities and authority within the department.
​

Current Challenges​

1. Limited Leadership Tiers: The current gap between Captains and frontline security personnel leads to overburdened Captains and a lack of intermediate leadership for guidance and quick decisionmaking.​
2. Operational Inefficiency: With a broad span of control, Captains are stretched thin across various operational areas, impacting their ability to provide close supervision and immediate tactical decisions.​
3. Communication Bottlenecks: Critical information and orders must funnel through a narrow command structure, delaying response times and potentially compromising security protocols.​
4. Professional Development: The lack of intermediate roles limits opportunities for professional growth and mentorship within GenSec, potentially affecting morale and longterm personnel retention.​

​

Proposal Overview​

To address operational challenges and improve the command efficiency within GenSec, the introduction of the Lieutenant and Sergeant roles, classified under Senior Clearance Level 4 and Junior Clearance Level 4 respectively, is proposed. This classification aims to provide a more nuanced command structure, enhancing decisionmaking capabilities and operational response times.
​

Security Clearance Specifications​

​

Sergeant Junior Clearance Level 4​

Role and Responsibilities: Sergeants will act as the tactical leaders for frontline security operations, overseeing the direct supervision of security personnel, and ensuring the execution of GenSec protocols on the ground. Sergeants would serve as team leaders or supervisors for frontline security personnel, responsible for direct supervision, tactical decisionmaking, and daytoday operational guidance.

Clearance Justification: The Junior Clearance Level 4 will empower Sergeants with access to sensitive information pertinent to daily security operations, while restricting access to higherlevel strategic data reserved for Senior Clearance holders. This ensures Sergeants are wellinformed to make immediate tactical decisions without compromising the integrity of broader operational strategies.
​

Lieutenant Senior Clearance Level 4​

Role and Responsibilities: Lieutenants will serve as the strategic link between the department's Captains and the operational units, overseeing specific security divisions and coordinating complex operations. Lieutenants would act as the operational commanders directly under Captains, tasked with overseeing specific areas or units within GenSec, such as the Security Response Unit or the Security Containment Unit.
Clearance Justification: The Senior Clearance Level 4 designation for Lieutenants enables them to access a broader range of strategic and operational information, facilitating informed decisionmaking and effective oversight of GenSec's specialized units.
​

Captain Senior Clearance Level 4​

Role and Responsibilities: Captains retain their position as highlevel commanders within GenSec, responsible for overarching strategy, resource allocation, and interdepartmental coordination.
Clearance Justification: Captains, along with Lieutenants, hold Senior Clearance Level 4, reflecting their need to access and evaluate highlevel security information and make decisions that impact the facility's overall security posture.
​

Operational and Strategic Benefits​

Streamlined Decision Making with Classified Access​

Differentiating between Junior and Senior Clearance Level 4 for Sergeants and Lieutenants/Captains respectively allows for a tiered access to information. This ensures that each role is equipped with the necessary information to fulfill their duties effectively while maintaining operational security.​

​

Enhanced Operational Security and Efficiency​

The clear delineation of clearance levels strengthens GenSec's operational security, ensuring sensitive information is accessible only to those with appropriate levels of authority and responsibility.​

​

Targeted Training and Professional Development​

The classification of clearance levels facilitates the development of targeted training programs, tailored to the specific roles and responsibilities associated with each clearance level, enhancing the professional competency of GenSec personnel.
​

Professional Development and Morale​

Establishing clear career paths and opportunities for advancement within GenSec fosters a motivated and committed workforce, directly contributing to the department's operational success and the overall mission of Secure, Contain, Protect.
​

Specialized Leadership and Focus​

By delineating strategic, operational, and tactical leadership roles, each tier can focus on their specific domain of expertise, leading to more effective and specialized security operations.
​

Improved Communication and Coordination​

A more nuanced command hierarchy facilitates better communication and coordination within GenSec and with other departments, enhancing the overall security posture of Site65.
​

Conclusion:​

The introduction of Lieutenant and Sergeant roles, classified under Senior and Junior Clearance Level 4 respectively, addresses critical needs within GenSec's command structure. This approach not only enhances operational efficiency and security but also provides a clear pathway for professional development and career progression within the department. By adopting this proposal, Site65 can ensure a more effective, responsive, and secure operational environment, aligned with the SCP Foundation's mission to Secure, Contain, Protect.

​

​

 

[Maksim "Enigma"]

-Support​

D Block is easy to manage as a solo captain.

Do not need another CL4 Job for GSD, perhaps another lower rank job instead.

 

[Emilia Foddg]

D Block is easy to manage as a solo captain.

??????????????????????????????????????

this is the most surprising take i've ever heard from you, given your extensive gsd experience.

i do otherwise agree that extra jobs are ehhhh... eh. like i see that there's too many jobs, but at the same time, i see the point of the suggestion. it's hard to reconcile

 

[Maksim "Enigma"]

??????????????????????????????????????

this is the most surprising take i've ever heard from you, given your extensive gsd experience.

It's not needed, I had extensive talks with the team who added the last update and it's highly unrealistic to ask for another CL4 role in GSD, nor is it required in any capacity.

Alternatives to this request that make sense:

• Increase captain slots from 4 -> 6

• Increase Officer slots

• Add a CL3 SRU job

 

[Emilia Foddg]

hmmm

Increase captain slots from 4 -> 6

this i don't think would help the situation much...? 4 is already a lot and it doesn't really... ehhh, idk. something about it just sits wrong with me

Increase Officer slots

Add a CL3 SRU job

these i agree with. i would like to see more officer slots and/or stuff given to security response, as well as more encouragement of gsd to participate and RP and such.

but tbh i think if we're discussing adding new jobs in that capacity anyway - i honestly kinda miss gensec sergeant and want to see it revived in some capacity. funny gensec structure

 

[Alpa]

+support
make sgt cl3 whitelisted based on tryout like sr agent in DEA, not Jr CL4, you dont need 2 jr CL4 roles, just do it like DEA does

 

[Terry_A]

+- Partial Support

I support adding additional ranks and generally restructuring but I feel that this suggestion might be missing one key detail in it's cons section regarding officers.

I agree that a disconnect exists within the Officer rank however removing it's ability to patrol misses the main issue at heart.

From the beginning,

The beauty of the General Security Division is that it provides three major component's to the Foundation's organizational structure. However this wonderful component also presents challenges that are not faced by other departments.

1) It provides a barrier to entry and a first-step for any and all incoming employees who wish to participate in any combat or security related role. The downside to this is it creates a high turnover rate and places a large amount of pressure on leadership to deal with ranks filled with personnel that are always "new to the job."

2) It provides a security team for D Block, which is arguably the most important position to staff. Without management over D-Block, without escorts for researchers, and without security being present 24/7 over the area full of "troublemakers" (Class Ds), then nothing else at all could be completed within the facility. This presents a unique challenge because it is a very high stress assignment that quite literally never stops being chaotic; it is the epicenter of the facility and constantly receives visitors / positive & negative attention of all kinds.

3) It is the jack of all trades; with units and personnel capable of being tasked with everything from zone security to escort services and everything in between (this is what I love about it organizationally speaking); however, this again poses a unique challenge because we cannot be selective with our personnel and need many bodies to fill our boots.

--------------------

The Officer rank is a good idea but it lacks depth & implementation; therefore, as a result, it falls flat. What really needs to happen, in spite of rank-name changes and rank additions/removals, is that new supervisors need to be vetted and accurately briefed on what their expectations are.

I disagree that GSD has "3/4ths of the group roaming around the facility for no reason other than to mingle." GSD needs bodies everywhere to complete its mission statement. It is a GENERAL security division; they have to be kind-of all over the place to do their job.

Officer and SRU seem to be gatekeeping roles for ABILITIES instead of roles designed to deliver supervisory responsibility; that can and should be changed. The Riot Team training clearly explains to GSD personnel what their requirements, expectations, and restrictions are. The same can be accomplished for people we expect to act as supervisors.

I also disagree that the Officer role should be prevented from patrolling when roles under it can do so. It is a supervisory position. We need to clearly define responsibilities of the Officer role but not remove their ability to perform inherited duties. A ranked individual should not be required to choose a lower rank role just to do something that their higher rank is prohibited from doing.

GSD certainly has an overworked and overwhelmed command team. Their Captains are effectively their only authority for real vetted leadership. Adding additional leadership rank structures is a good start but the crux of a streamlined leadership structure is having clearly defined and presented expectations / responsibilities.

I keenly agree that this must be addressed: "the lowest and most inexperienced members left in dblock to defend and ensure testing is efficient, which it most certainly never is."

My suggestion comes from several years of managing policies for large law enforcement RP departments on games other than GMOD.

Structure:

• Cadet
• Guard
• Corporal
  • This role INHERITS the responsibility of "SRU" and "SCU"; ditch the idea of having a rank that is named after its responsibilities (e.g. SRU))
• Sergeant
  • This role shall replace the OFFICER rank and will be WLed.
  • Will require vetting and a proper introduction with clearly defined responsibilities and authority.
• Lieutenant
  • This role shall receive similar, but not fully duplicate responsibilities to Captains; it should be similarly vetted and WL'ed.
• (Everything above LT remains unchanged)

Establish a corrections (prison positions) style/approach to staffing the different responsibilities of GSD. The GSD Command team will need to establish a list of positions, along with their priorities. After this happens, the policy will effectively go something like this **(The following is a sample and should be adjusted to GSD Command's priorities and expectations):

• There must always be at least 2 GSD at D-Block without exception. This means that if only 2 GSD are online, GSD may not perform any other functions and must man D-Block.
• There must always be at least 1 Corporal+ at D-Block without exception.
• As staffing permits, personnel may engage in GSD's additional functions in the following priority:
  1. Processing for Research Subjects
  2. Research Escorts
  3. Watchtower / Catwalk (If deemed necessary by a supervisor (e.g. if it's fairly peaceful, it isn't needed)
  4. 914 & HCZ/LCZ/EZ Checkpoints
  5. Patrol

Any SGT+ on duty should take control of GSD as a "watch commander" and actively monitor the positions and distribution of their personnel.

Everyone likes to make fun of GSD for being a shitshow but I see it differently, I see a lot of potential, I see leadership trying their best but being unfairly judged while having a massive workload. I see people constantly getting headaches while on as GSD. GSD can thrive if they are given the ability to slow down, take a deep breath, and control their personnel. D-Block is too chaotic and fast paced. GSD would benefit greatly if they could get enough supervisors to really wrangle in their personnel (especially forcing everyone onto RADIO), issue solid orders, and be given the ability to do our job with some peace and quiet; I don't know why people feel the need to come into D-Block and start mic spamming, playing music, being a serious nuisance, and then complaining when they get called out for it; however, GSD can and should put their foot down against this behavior....we already have Class D to deal with, we don't need other foundation personnel causing extra chaos.

 

[Niox]

Spoiler: Text Wall

+- Partial Support

I support adding additional ranks and generally restructuring but I feel that this suggestion might be missing one key detail in it's cons section regarding officers.

I agree that a disconnect exists within the Officer rank however removing it's ability to patrol misses the main issue at heart.

From the beginning,

The beauty of the General Security Division is that it provides three major component's to the Foundation's organizational structure. However this wonderful component also presents challenges that are not faced by other departments.

1) It provides a barrier to entry and a first-step for any and all incoming employees who wish to participate in any combat or security related role. The downside to this is it creates a high turnover rate and places a large amount of pressure on leadership to deal with ranks filled with personnel that are always "new to the job."

2) It provides a security team for D Block, which is arguably the most important position to staff. Without management over D-Block, without escorts for researchers, and without security being present 24/7 over the area full of "troublemakers" (Class Ds), then nothing else at all could be completed within the facility. This presents a unique challenge because it is a very high stress assignment that quite literally never stops being chaotic; it is the epicenter of the facility and constantly receives visitors / positive & negative attention of all kinds.

3) It is the jack of all trades; with units and personnel capable of being tasked with everything from zone security to escort services and everything in between (this is what I love about it organizationally speaking); however, this again poses a unique challenge because we cannot be selective with our personnel and need many bodies to fill our boots.

--------------------

The Officer rank is a good idea but it lacks depth & implementation; therefore, as a result, it falls flat. What really needs to happen, in spite of rank-name changes and rank additions/removals, is that new supervisors need to be vetted and accurately briefed on what their expectations are.

I disagree that GSD has "3/4ths of the group roaming around the facility for no reason other than to mingle." GSD needs bodies everywhere to complete its mission statement. It is a GENERAL security division; they have to be kind-of all over the place to do their job.

Officer and SRU seem to be gatekeeping roles for ABILITIES instead of roles designed to deliver supervisory responsibility; that can and should be changed. The Riot Team training clearly explains to GSD personnel what their requirements, expectations, and restrictions are. The same can be accomplished for people we expect to act as supervisors.

I also disagree that the Officer role should be prevented from patrolling when roles under it can do so. It is a supervisory position. We need to clearly define responsibilities of the Officer role but not remove their ability to perform inherited duties. A ranked individual should not be required to choose a lower rank role just to do something that their higher rank is prohibited from doing.

GSD certainly has an overworked and overwhelmed command team. Their Captains are effectively their only authority for real vetted leadership. Adding additional leadership rank structures is a good start but the crux of a streamlined leadership structure is having clearly defined and presented expectations / responsibilities.

I keenly agree that this must be addressed: "the lowest and most inexperienced members left in dblock to defend and ensure testing is efficient, which it most certainly never is."

My suggestion comes from several years of managing policies for large law enforcement RP departments on games other than GMOD.

Structure:

• Cadet
• Guard
• Corporal
  • This role INHERITS the responsibility of "SRU" and "SCU"; ditch the idea of having a rank that is named after its responsibilities (e.g. SRU))
• Sergeant
  • This role shall replace the OFFICER rank and will be WLed.
  • Will require vetting and a proper introduction with clearly defined responsibilities and authority.
• Lieutenant
  • This role shall receive similar, but not fully duplicate responsibilities to Captains; it should be similarly vetted and WL'ed.
• (Everything above LT remains unchanged)

Establish a corrections (prison positions) style/approach to staffing the different responsibilities of GSD. The GSD Command team will need to establish a list of positions, along with their priorities. After this happens, the policy will effectively go something like this **(The following is a sample and should be adjusted to GSD Command's priorities and expectations):

• There must always be at least 2 GSD at D-Block without exception. This means that if only 2 GSD are online, GSD may not perform any other functions and must man D-Block.
• There must always be at least 1 Corporal+ at D-Block without exception.
• As staffing permits, personnel may engage in GSD's additional functions in the following priority:
  1. Processing for Research Subjects
  2. Research Escorts
  3. Watchtower / Catwalk (If deemed necessary by a supervisor (e.g. if it's fairly peaceful, it isn't needed)
  4. 914 & HCZ/LCZ/EZ Checkpoints
  5. Patrol

Any SGT+ on duty should take control of GSD as a "watch commander" and actively monitor the positions and distribution of their personnel.

Everyone likes to make fun of GSD for being a shitshow but I see it differently, I see a lot of potential, I see leadership trying their best but being unfairly judged while having a massive workload. I see people constantly getting headaches while on as GSD. GSD can thrive if they are given the ability to slow down, take a deep breath, and control their personnel. D-Block is too chaotic and fast paced. GSD would benefit greatly if they could get enough supervisors to really wrangle in their personnel (especially forcing everyone onto RADIO), issue solid orders, and be given the ability to do our job with some peace and quiet; I don't know why people feel the need to come into D-Block and start mic spamming, playing music, being a serious nuisance, and then complaining when they get called out for it; however, GSD can and should put their foot down against this behavior....we already have Class D to deal with, we don't need other foundation personnel causing extra chaos.

made life easier

 

[Emilia Foddg]

made life easier

it's just some light reading you nerd

 

[Ace 63]

+Support​

Would be especially nice if captain promotions meant something… ?

 

[Maksim "Enigma"]

hmmm

this i don't think would help the situation much...? 4 is already a lot and it doesn't really... ehhh, idk. something about it just sits wrong with me

these i agree with. i would like to see more officer slots and/or stuff given to security response, as well as more encouragement of gsd to participate and RP and such.

but tbh i think if we're discussing adding new jobs in that capacity anyway - i honestly kinda miss gensec sergeant and want to see it revived in some capacity. funny gensec structure

Sergeant has been renamed to officer.

 

[Emilia Foddg]

Sergeant has been renamed to officer.

you know what i mean ?

 

[Dusk]

Having a CL3 Whitelist really makes no sense for GSD.
It makes sense for DEA considering they are 'Field Agents', they don't need CL4 access.

We have enough CL3 that are behind licenses/levels. We can bring back A-6 to facilitate an actual in-game structure when we have enough command ranks to validate the reason for the group to look for worthy Senior Cl4. Sergeant for Jr.Cl4 and Captain as Sr.Cl4 makes sense in my books.

A whitelisted Cl3 is going to be doing the same things a Officer/SCU would be doing. Speff and Trap are not going to give CL3 members access to Captain documents so it makes no sense to add in more layers to an already robust enlisted structure.

 

[Edwin]

Suggestion Up For Further Discussion​

---

Hi @Kore ,

Thanks for taking the time to make a server suggestion.
The Content Team has chosen to put your suggestion up for internal discussion.

No changes to CL4s will be made but the content team will be discussing changes to the department.
(Further information on this is at https://www.civilgamers.com/community/threads/the-gensec-rework-d-class.23143/page-2#posts)

Your suggestion will now be locked and marked as pending review.​