Chief_

I would be willing to possibly support depending on what you do. First Make your account NOT PRIVATE. Making your account private doesn't really help. It makes it suspicious. I'm not + or - supporting. Just posting this.

It has finally reached that point. I have joined the community in 2016. 2020 has finally hit. I have seen so many friends go and stay. Some even blacklisted for good reasons and some for minor reasons. I have never been apart of such a community that I have been able to stick to. When GL gets boring something new pops up. Like how it was getting boring of it just being Military RP then PRP etc, SCP popped up. I was only a wee mod when I had my first staff report. Now after 3 years with GL I have achieved the rank of Senior Admin! I never expected to get a rank higher than admin. I want to thank all of the SMT that I have been with since my arrival on SCP. They have helped me along the way and they have been nice/fun people. I also want to thank EVERYONE! as they have been one of the KEY factors in making this community the way it is. Thank you to everyone. If anyone wants to ask my questions just respond down below and ill get back to you as soon as I can.

By the order of the [Redacted] Acess to this document is to be restricted to Clearance LVL 5+ Input Administrator Clearance ... ... CREDENTIALS ACCEPTED ... ... ERROR ADMINISTRERING MEMETIC KILL AGENT Hello 05-# MTF UNIT Alpha-1 Designation "Red Right Hand" Identification: Chief Rank: LCPL Callsign: LC20 Recent Occupation: S.W.A.T CMDR | Navy Seal VCMDR | Seal Team 1 lead Reasons for Recruitment: Dedication to the force. A recent interaction with SCP-f#### proving he can "detain" things he doesn't understand. He was recruited for his extensive military personnel record with being Seal team 1 and even taking shots for the people he was guarding. Medical Issues: Has PTSD triggered by SCP-106 as he has witnessed many of his comrades be taken by him. His left leg is damaged from interactions with SCP-966 with the most recent tearing off most of his leg skin and fracturing bones.

Yes. Anymore arguing or unnecessary comments will possibly by hidden if causing issues.

If they throw it and you run to close then that's not purposeful. But if they are screaming and running into the middle then ya.

Uhhh no. Its 40+ warns for the server. Unless he has 40+ warns on scp. He doesn't get the 40+ warn ban.

- support Staff reports are for When staff BREAK THE STAFF GUIDELINES I do think that he should be talked to about following rules as this is his FIRST REPORT But this should be a PLAYER REPORT in the REPORT section. I would + support this if it was a player report due to him breaking an RP rule. This would be a staff report if he grabbed you with his physgun and such.

Warn removals are for prp but it's gone now. Only false warns should be appealed.

-support -This is a place if you believed it was a false ban - it also states "THE ABOVE MOTD IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE AT ANY TIME! BY CLICKING, "CLOSE" YOU UNDERSTAND THESE RULES!" AKA by closing the rules you agree to abide by them. Can't use I didn't know card.

Also. How would this benefit the server. (main) if all or most of et is over there.

We can warn staff of same or lower rank. Warning a higher ranking staff member you need a SA+ to do it. Or make player report.

People have done it multiple times. But -support in him going to the surface. +support on him being able to go thru walls but. He can't spam the swep. (though code edits)

Sign me up.

SNAR!!!!!!! It was sad when you left. Glad to see you back. Also come to scp Your an smt advisor. So technically still smt.

Yes

Funny thing. Ci cmd are +supporting. Lol. But I do understand that.

Ok. I can see what you mean. By valid test I mean tests that are ok. As I stated above about not letting mingy researchers do mingy tests. Also I look at other branches in the scp wiki. So others are really for off site. Like logistics and IA. But I do see what you mean. I do agree it is partly research command but we are also suppose to make sure other branches are also ethical. Your going to the brig.

Also (don't know if true) they would mean more perma stuff which lags the server.

What this is meant to be is also a different perspective for the command members of the branches. Kindoff like naval on imperial rp. They just made sure everything is alright. And that they could (if sa is ok with it) administer door punishments when not closing the door when they can (not being chased by ci or a scp. But when the server is calm then yes.) That is why only certain ranks can ad they are trusted more. Like a rct can't deny a jr on a test without perm from higher ranks. Unless its like, I want to see what happens when a d-class gets s gun. If that is what the researcher is doing and they are a jr. They should contact security. Btw. You won't be able to take our money anymore

Ok guys. Freeze has enough @ ts. So lets not @ him anymore in new posts. Quoting someone's +/- support is ok.

Please make sure suggestions are pertinent and relevant! What do you want to see? - A new branch that has been talked about for a long time. The Ethics Committee. (could be a subset of the research branch) Why should we add it? - Because there are reasons why this should be added. As they are the people who take care of the people and make sure tests are for valid reasons. Example: a Researcher wants to do a test where they have a d-class try to attack 939. That is unethical because we all know what is going to happen with it. Or seeing what happens when you put cyanide into the bloodstream of a D-class. I normally stop these on my Security job but I ain't always on to prevent that. What are the advantages of having this? - Allows for there to be more RP and then we could possibly have self-updating lore. For example, if there is a new thing a researcher found out about an scp. Like 106 really likes a certain thing, then at a next meeting, the containment procedures can be updated to lure him away from the MTF escorting a d-class to his RC. This will allow for more RP to be conducted and also to stop mingy researchers from doing mingy tests. Who is it mainly for? - Everyone in the server Links to any content - N/A. We can use the models we have on the server for the models. Ps. Depending on if this gets added, I suggest that only certain ranks can stop certain researchers from testing for unethical reasons. And that when someone calls someone out for being unethical they have to file a report. Also that it will be hard to get into like A1. So that mingy people don't go around and yell your unethical. (I have had this happen when I was the Director of the IA (Intelligence Agency) on a Roblox server. Just think about it.

I will not be + or - supporting until I get freezes side but right now I lean towards the - support. - You should not be kicking someone for the reason "Mature up". The only time I find it acceptable is really never. As there is a warning command, mute command, and a gag command. Then if they LTAP to avoid the mutes/gags then you can ban them for a day or so for Ltap. I understand SMT kicks people but, that doesn't mean we should. Depending on what he said may make me change my mind if he should've been kicked or not but for now, You shouldn't have kicked him. (after 3 active warns the person gets an auto kick and then after 4-5 (don't know which one) they get an auto-ban for 1 hour. I would also like to know what he meant also. But, this should not be a demote able offence depending on what Odd said. But I feel like he should get a talking to about not kicking people as other commands exist.

Lets just leave +/- supports and not fill up the thread with resounding to each other. Take it to pm's