Denied Remove A-1/O-1 from SOP

[Niox]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
>This suggestion removes both A-1 and O-1’s permissions for the SOP comms/channels, and overall classify them as separate from SOP. This would affect their access to view comms and channels in the discord, and in game.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
>nuh uh uh

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
>SOP don’t have their duties being taken by A1/O1, such as raids, interrogations on kidnapped individuals, negotiations, etc.
>SOP are more well defined with their duties, and have more opportunities to stand out and be unique.
>SOP comms are less cluttered, and are no longer MTF comms but E11 is swapped with DEA, but instead they’re more independent of each other.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
>A1/O1 are unable to monitor SOP comms, which can be done by either of their SC anyways.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
>I feel this should be accepted as DEA have had issues being respected, as negotiations is seemingly something that anyone can do, including A1/O1, which was displayed on the 06/09/24, where A1 attempted to take over DEA’s negotiations. This change would encourage less of that, and more independence from DEA overall, as it completely excludes A1/O1 from the equation, but still allowing DEA to fall back on Nu-7 if they needed help.
>Furthermore this would encourage A1/O1 to play DEA, rather than performing operations that DEA would normally perform themselves. This would draw people to the DPT, and would furthermore establish their place/dominion in the Foundation.

 

[Emilia Foddg]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
>This suggestion removes both A-1 and O-1’s permissions for the SOP comms/channels, and overall classify them as separate from SOP. This would affect their access to view comms and channels in the discord, and in game.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
>nuh uh uh

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
>SOP don’t have their duties being taken by A1/O1, such as raids, interrogations on kidnapped individuals, negotiations, etc.
>SOP are more well defined with their duties, and have more opportunities to stand out and be unique.
>SOP comms are less cluttered, and are no longer MTF comms but E11 is swapped with DEA, but instead they’re more independent of each other.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
>A1/O1 are unable to monitor SOP comms, which can be done by either of their SC anyways.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
>I feel this should be accepted as DEA have had issues being respected, as negotiations is seemingly something that anyone can do, including A1/O1, which was displayed on the 06/09/24, where A1 attempted to take over DEA’s negotiations. This change would encourage less of that, and more independence from DEA overall, as it completely excludes A1/O1 from the equation, but still allowing DEA to fall back on Nu-7 if they needed help.
>Furthermore this would encourage A1/O1 to play DEA, rather than performing operations that DEA would normally perform themselves. This would draw people to the DPT, and would furthermore establish their place/dominion in the Foundation.

+Support
ISD

 

[cityismy]

ISD

ISD
We should definitely remove AO, not isd though

 

[Charles "Ze" Whitmee]

No.

Raise issues to SA first, if you can't be bothered to make a report then there will be no change.

 

['Athena']

No.

Raise issues to SA first, if you can't be bothered to make a report then there will be no change.

I think his issue comes from the CI perspective that DEA are being overtaken when he is trying to RP with them, which cant really be complained about in RP.

 

[Merrick Travolta]

-Support.

A1 and O1 have been told to do less with regards to SOP on UK, And they are doing so. Removing their coms access makes other things more difficult. Namely. Raids. Which AO do get involved with.

Relying on site command to be available to handle sop chatter isn't the best idea. Given the average CL5 has 16 coms lines available to them at any given time. Messages will get lost. It happens a lot.

This feels like a disproportional reaction to one or two incidents over the last week.

 

[Broda]

On a serious note: They are the extension of their respective Site Command branch. You'd never in a lore setting lock them out of these communication channels as they'd be monitoring on behalf of the Overseers and/or The Ethics Committee.

 

[Niox]

No.

Raise issues to SA first, if you can't be bothered to make a report then there will be no change.

/oc <CI-SA> Hiya, can you charge A-1 CSG ‘t’ with interference 1? Thanks!

-Support.

Removing their coms access makes other things more difficult. Namely. Raids. Which AO do get involved with.

During my time in A-1, SOP comms were rarely used during raids, and when used the information was things like DEA saying things on surface. Instead this cool thing called TS was used, where call-outs were given.
When I raided CI as a CM, I used TS only without issue, and when I raided CI as A-1, I used TS only, ignoring chat with no issue, so the change here is minimal.

Relying on site command to be available to handle sop chatter isn't the best idea. Given the average CL5 has 16 coms lines available to them at any given time. Messages will get lost. It happens a lot.

Good, they shouldn’t have to. It should be a very last resort for if it is necessary that the comms be checked for whatever reason.

A1 and O1 have been told to do less with regards to SOP on UK, And they are doing so.

This feels like a disproportional reaction to one or two incidents over the last week.

Clumping this together with the first point to make my life easier, as they are similar.
This shows that it can, and has happened, and it is better to prevent it happening in the first place rather than letting it happen at all. And yes, this is a reaction to what has happened over the last week, as i find it respectfully horseshit.

You'd never in a lore setting lock them out of these communication channels as they'd be monitoring on behalf of the Overseers and/or The Ethics Committee.

To me the monitoring part is the lesser half of it. Sure they monitor it, but why only it and not Nu-7/E-11/IA/DEA/GSD/RSD/Medical Comms? The reason they have access is because they’re SOP, not because they’re there to monitor it. Although there is a case to be made that they monitor negotiations and their progress and eh, if they’ll really going to shit badly then a SC member can monitor it as a last resort as said above.

Also I just checked and Assistants can do the same, which makes life a whole lot easier

 

[Merrick Travolta]

Also I just checked and Assistants can do the same, which makes life a whole lot easier

Assistants aren't DEA or Nu-7, Should they not also lose their SOP access?. I jest. But Again, Relying on someone else's avaliablity.

Good, they shouldn’t have to. It should be a very last resort for if it is necessary that the comms be checked for whatever reason.

But your whole point is "SC can do the monitoring for them", if DEA and Nu-7 fail to give out raid calls till CI have breached the site, It means A1 can be rushed fairly quickly at the very least since two vent locations put them within 3 minutes of floor 3.

During my time in A-1, SOP comms were rarely used during raids, and when used the information was things like DEA saying things on surface. Instead this cool thing called TS was used, where call-outs were given.

SOP coms are the best channel used by people without mics or are giving callouts so you don't play "MTF Shouting match"

When I raided CI as a CM, I used TS only without issue, and when I raided CI as A-1, I used TS only, ignoring chat with no issue, so the change here is minimal.

Unless an SOP member handed you a radio in character. this is infact, Not allowed.

/oc <CI-SA> Hiya, can you charge A-1 CSG ‘t’ with interference 1? Thanks!

More like, Tell someone out of character. or. In this case, <CI-IA/SA> A1 are interfering in negotiations, Tell em to fuck off

said A1 is then charged with negotiations 1.

This shows that it can, and has happened, and it is better to prevent it happening in the first place rather than letting it happen at all. And yes, this is a reaction to what has happened over the last week, as i find it respectfully horseshit.

Respectfully. Those were done on <F-CI> Coms. Which means the removal of AO from SOP would have had Zero effect

 

[Niox]

Assistants aren't DEA or Nu-7, Should they not also lose their SOP access?. I jest. But Again, Relying on someone else's avaliablity.

Assistants aren’t combatives who have been shown to intrude of others negotiations. AO are.

But your whole point is "SC can do the monitoring for them", if DEA and Nu-7 fail to give out raid calls till CI have breached the site, It means A1 can be rushed fairly quickly at the very least since two vent locations put them within 3 minutes of floor 3.

having a stroke reading this point I’m too tired

SOP coms are the best channel used by people without mics or are giving callouts so you don't play "MTF Shouting match"

battle comms:
I mean, fuck, imagine what CM’s have to deal with during raids on CI. Imagine the difficulty we have to go through! (I have had 0 issues relating to this)

Unless an SOP member handed you a radio in character. this is infact, Not allowed.

which they did…….. what point are you trying to even prove here? That if you don’t RP it out then it’s not allowed? It’s an RP server for Christ’s sake.

More like, Tell someone out of character. or. In this case, <CI-IA/SA> A1 are interfering in negotiations, Tell em to fuck off

Take a guess what we said!
And the issue was already being dealt with out of character towards higher ups, which I am not going to be repetitive and do myself as well.

said A1 is then charged with negotiations 1.

No they weren’t lol

Respectfully. Those were done on <F-CI> Coms. Which means the removal of AO from SOP would have had Zero effect

Respectfully, no they weren’t, why the fuck are you lying. They were done in person, by the DEA member there as a SOP, so respectfully, don’t speak out your ass.

 

[Merrick Travolta]

Respectfully, no they weren’t, why the fuck are you lying. They were done in person, by the DEA member there as a SOP, so respectfully, don’t speak out your ass.

Respectfully. We are not talking about the same scenario. Don't be rude.

which they did…….. what point are you trying to even prove here? That if you don’t RP it out then it’s not allowed? It’s an RP server for Christ’s sake.

Given we didn't start hard clamping on this rule till recently. I doubt this. But whatever.

And the issue was already being dealt with out of character towards higher ups, which I am not going to be repetitive and do myself as well.

Yes, the situation is being dealt with. Let's write a forum suggestion to further hamper the site's ability to defend itself due to 2 incidents on the UK server which have resulted in AO No longer participating in Negotiations, Let's also remove their ability to know a raid is coming and make them solely dependent on DEA and Nu-7's callouts.

Assistants aren’t combatives who have been shown to intrude of others negotiations. AO are.

Report. Them.



This will be my last yap wall replying because it's exhausting going round in circles with you Niox.

We had complaints, we have told AO to back off. Now you wish to further remove their abiltiy to know things like raids are coming because of these incidents.

You speak about things like assistants interfering on negotiations when they Never. Get. Reported. To us.

If you and whoever else has grievances even takes the smallest amount of time to report issues. We would have so much less.

 

[Biscuits]

+support
only cl4 isd should see :sunglass:

 

[Niox]

Respectfully. We are not talking about the same scenario. Don't be rude.

THIS HAS HAPPENED MORE THAN TWICE THIS LAST WEEK? WHAT IS GOING ON AND WHAT SCENARIO ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

Given we didn't start hard clamping on this rule till recently. I doubt this. But whatever.

k

Yes, the situation is being dealt with. Let's write a forum suggestion to further hamper the site's ability to defend itself due to 2 incidents on the UK server which have resulted in AO No longer participating in Negotiations, Let's also remove their ability to know a raid is coming and make them solely dependent on DEA and Nu-7's callouts.

Which is a good thing.
It encourages SOP’s independence, and doesn’t make them worse versions of ISD. And let me speak from experience again, this doesn’t hamper the sites ability to defend itself because AO have never had to call out anything from SOP comms, or by using it, as it gets done itself! Even if it did, that is truly the failure of SOP being unable to do their job of giving surface/raid call-outs, which I believe they are more than capable of doing.

Report. Them.

They have been. I just do not wish to see this issue become a possibility again at any point, and I believe SOP would benefit with more uniqueness.

This will be my last yap wall replying because it's exhausting going round in circles with you Niox.

We had complaints, we have told AO to back off. Now you wish to further remove their abiltiy to know things like raids are coming because of these incidents.

cool beans

You speak about things like assistants interfering on negotiations when they Never. Get. Reported. To us.

I never said this.
I mean I said this

Assistants aren’t combatives who have been shown to intrude of others negotiations. AO are.

Where I’m taking about how assistants don’t do this but AO do, so I’m assuming you interpreted it that way.

+support
only cl4 isd should see :sunglass:

meh, doesn’t fix the whole problem but better than nothing

 

[Alpa]

a-1 and o-1 along with dea and nu7 are usually the first responders to raids, you are just limiting communication lol, saying their duties are being taken is such a stupid point, you don't want CI to get in and cause havoc (unless you are a CI player) and you want CI to be stopped as soon as possible with effective communication (unless you are a CI player)

also with the negotiations thing, having sop comms access has nothing to do with that, go complain to SC or something, just kind of an un-needed suggestion which does nothing but disadvantage the foundation, only beneficial for CI players because it limits communication

shit suggestion lol

 

[Niox]

a-1 and o-1 along with dea and nu7 are usually the first responders to raids, you are just limiting communication lol, saying their duties are being taken is such a stupid point, you don't want CI to get in and cause havoc (unless you are a CI player) and you want CI to be stopped as soon as possible with effective communication (unless you are a CI player)

/c
/c3

also with the negotiations thing, having sopcomms access has nothing to do with that, go complain to SC or something, just kind of an un-needed suggestion which does nothing but disadvantage the foundation

Refer to what I’ve said above about complaints being made, and preferably these situations being avoided in the first place.
And on the UK at least (unsure if this is the case on the US - prob should’ve checked) it’s being pushed for SOP to use <SOP-CI> comms rather than <F-CI> comms, so there is a difference. Again, unsure if that’s the case for the US side.

 

[Mozzie]

-support

not needed and can be dealt with ic. No idea why u want isd to have less communication and therefore able to help less

 

[DaveDogs]

+ Support

 

[Dayumian max]

This can be dealth in ic i belive.

 

[Niox]

-support

not needed and can be dealt with ic. No idea why u want isd to have less communication and therefore able to help less

This can be dealth in ic i belive.

This isn’t the end of communication for raids or anything, they will still have /c and /cl3. If a raid is called out for whatever reason in SOP comms but not /c or /cl3 comms, that is a failure of SOP. I mean, E-11, CM’s, GSD all get by fine without SOP comms during C1’s, AO would be no different.

As for it being dealt with IC, well first of all I’m a CI, second of all having AO be a better SOP in every way isn’t a IC issue, it’s an issue. DEA and Nu-7 need to stand out and be more well defined, and removing AO from SOP would in help in that, as it would make sure site rely on them more, cementing there place in Foundation.

 

[Alan Froud]

- Support​