Jump to content

General Suggestion - The addition of a Non-SMT Ethics Committee - Denied


Ein

Recommended Posts

What are you suggesting?

The addition of an actual Ethics Committee (that isn't SMT restricted).

Ideally, you'd have 3 jobs related to the Ethics Committee directly: Ethics Committee Chairman (These would likely still be SMT), Ethics Committee Members, and Ethics Committee Assistants. The Ethics Committee would be responsible for updating the Code of Ethics, including making new additions based on the needs of the server (obviously, this would have to get approved by SMT/O5). People would be able to apply for the Ethics Committee, with a SLOT CAP of 6 Ethics Committee Members at any given time and no slot cap on Assistants.

Ethics Committee Members: Clearance Level 5

Ethics Committee Assistants: Clearance Level 4

Due to the nature of this being a Level 4 / Level 5 position, I propose the following restrictions:

1. Applicants must have at-least 1 month of experience in a CLEARANCE LEVEL 4 position.

2. Ethics Committee Members appointed by a vote of the Ethics Committee, approved by  O5/SMT

3. Ethics Committee Assistants appointed by Ethics Committee Members

4. Any Site-Wide documents/rulings made by the Ethics Committee must be approved by O5/SMT

5. Ethics Committee Members and Assistants are NON-COMBATANTS

6. Ethics Committee Members (Require at-least 2 to agree) may authorize the use of the Alpha/Omega Warhead during a Code Red with approval of a SUPERADMIN+

7. Ethics Committee Assistant+ may authorize a D-Block Lockdown with approval of an ADMIN+ with a valid RP reason

8. All positions in the Ethics Committee (Incl. Assistants) count as a life.

How would this change better the server?

It creates a TON of roleplay opportunity. Players being apart of the Ethics Committee allows players to create actual ethical code changes and site-wide policies/documents based on the needs of the server. SMT is a very limited position and not all SMT can be online observing RP and the server at all times. By allowing players into this position, you allow the playerbase to create policy changes as needed.

Falling under more roleplay opportunities comes the subject of Tribunals. A Tribunal is meant to be hosted by a member of the Ethics Committee. Unfortunately, due to the nature of SMT's work, Ethics Committee Members are basically never online to do these and as a result D-5 commonly has to fill in.

Are there any disadvantages of making this change to the server? If so, explain.

Obviously, there is the issue with lending such large amounts of power to the players, however, I believe that by restricting it to people who have had CL4 positions and having members appointed by a vote that the possibility of abuse can be limited significantly.

There is of course, a LOT of fine-tuning with this, and specifics will always have to be worked out, but I think the general concept can work.

Who would this change mostly benefit?

Site Administration.

Please link any workshop content, screenshots, or anything that you think may be helpful to those who view this suggestion

N/A

RETIRED

 Security Colonel Warden Legate Juggernaut Enforcer Research Administrator M.A.D. Site Operations Chief RRA Professor / MTF Delta-5 'Front Runners' Captain Veteran Raptor Operative / Internal Affairs Agency Assistant Director MTF Nu-7 'Hammer Down' Captain / Covert Agent / Deputy Head Field Training Officer / UN Global Occult Coalition Corporal Combat Medic Tactical Paramedic R&D Scientist  Marksman Recon Specialist / MTF Alpha-1 'Red Right Hand' Major Enforcer Squadron Lead

"We are the first line of defense. We are the first responders tasked to save those in danger. We have the responsibility to ensure the safety and well-being of all staff members. Because of that, you are the bravest men I have ever had the honor to serve with.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-Support

No amount of staff oversight can prevent the potential abuse of this type of position. SMT and O5 should be the only people capable of making server-wide rules.

Former: Deputy Head of Research | MTF Nu-7 Captain x2 | SCPRP Super Admin | MTF O-1 Major

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-support

I dont wanna deal with more of this.

Freedom at last.

Former: Assistant Inspector, Head of Longshot, Research Assistant Supervisor & Operations Supervisor, G.O.C. Officer & Head of bulldozers, CI COL, EOI D-2, DJ

Former: Scout Captain, Second Lieutenant, Senior Crewman, Storm Commando Captain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pills said:

get off of civil gamers

-support

facts!

|   Head Administrator  |  Director of Intelligence  |

| Death Trooper Commander Epsilon-11 Commander Alpha-1 Commander High General Goat | Shock Vice Commander |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Nydekore said:

-Support

No amount of staff oversight can prevent the potential abuse of this type of position. SMT and O5 should be the only people capable of making server-wide rules.

 

Deputy Head of Security Executive Event Team | Admin | Forum Diplomat 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ehhhh

It would be cool to have ethics committee actually do ethics things but the potential for power abuse is very dangerous. The thing im most iffy on is the nuke one. I get where you're coming from, it SUCKS when everything is breached and a nuke is in dire need while no site admins are on, But this could really ruin the novelty of nukes. 

Having someone to lock-down d-block when gensec cant would also be nice sometimes but can't really lock down the current one anyways..

a lot of this seems to be a job to fill in for players that aren't online for things. I really do understand the appeal to this but overall i think its too powerful

-support

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to -support as well

I've had experience with ethics before, and all it takes is that one wrong person, they can literally ruin a server with the power granted. 

insert cliched signature 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off I want to say that given how insanely easy D-Block is to hold at the moment, I would be very concerned if a lockdown is actually needed.

On to the Ethics Committee suggestion itself, if SMT was going to introduce a change like this, we would set it up uniquely to our server and have more safeguards than what's presented here. This suggestion is overall fairly vague on the totality of their scope of power and other critical areas of information. We do not believe that this suggestion would be beneficial to the server.

SCP-RP Head of Staff | Ethics Committee Chairman

Former Nu-7 VCMDR l Former GenSec CPT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Denied. The SCP-RP SMT has decided against adding this suggestion for performance reasons, the benefit to the server, or another unstated reason.

SCP-RP Head of Staff | Ethics Committee Chairman

Former Nu-7 VCMDR l Former GenSec CPT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...