Interrogation Of AMM Zeeptin (Aussie)

[Warthog]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1I09f_QGYMRpM4SXe2pwB0Ns-129Wg5Gh1dBEkXjccCQ/edit?usp=sharing

 

[Flixy]

@zep-

@Aussie

[Avalon Levi]

On 1/6/2022 at 2:19 PM, Warthog said:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1I09f_QGYMRpM4SXe2pwB0Ns-129Wg5Gh1dBEkXjccCQ/edit?usp=sharing

 

Noice

 

[Cecil Stedmen]

Overall Grade: 87/100 [B+]

Efficiency: 20/25

My main reason for taking off 5 points is that I think you could have been quicker with the means you ask your questions. Try to merge questions that can reasonably be merged together. When you asked solely for his name, it would have been wise to ask for his name, rank, and branch to try and ascertain their identity in one go. Remember, we have limited time when it comes to interrogations and limited amount of "torture points" so it's best to use them wisely.

Insight: 20/25

For the little that was mentioned, you did well getting info that was relatively new to us such as the models of combat bots maintenance were making and what they do exactly. Only reason I am taking off points if because it was cut short by you accidentally revealing Atlas's identity, everyone makes mistakes and you admitted to it in the errors section, which is why I am only taking off 5 points. Best to use vague terms rather than callsigns such as "bio", "agent" or "trauma" if Trauma are assisting you.

Presentation: 22/25

You used the template quite well but I'd like to see you try and come up with your own template for future use. Can't hurt to experiment and create a template to call your own! Took off 3 points because you left the activity 1-A question of what the hostage was doing blank. You don't have to put how they reacted in the interrogation log but if your gonna not answer that question, best to just cut it out of the document.

Writing: 25/25 

Grammar was clean throughout the entire thing and writing made sense. Good Work!