Goonhub
09-28-2016, 05:04 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-28-2016, 05:07 PM by UrsulaMejor. Edited 2 times in total.)
I've just gotten into my umpteenth argument on this subject and i think it's time I stop having this argument in private and lay it all out there for others to vote on.
If the Captain gives an order that annoying, but is non-traitorous, such as "make a ridiculous amount of pizeel walls in the hallway", does the Head of Security have the authority to arrest the Captain and the people working for him?
If the Captain declares weed legal, does the Head of Security have the authority to arrest pot smokers because the "Space Law" Handbook says it's criminal?
Does the Head of Security have the authority to demote the Captain to Staff Assistant if the Captain is being annoying?
In my opinion, no. The Head of Security is the Captain's subordinate, meaning that the Captain is free to give the Head of Security orders on any kind of inane bullshit he wants. Naturally, the Head of Security is not required to participate (Dereliction of duty is always an option), but he is not allowed to punish the Captain player by brigging him, taking his stuff, and locking up any other nerds that happen to be working for him on the project.
My justification is as follows:
First, Let's look at what we know about the relationship between the HoS and the Captain. Here's a collection of all the pieces i could find on the wiki regarding this relationship. In red, i have marked the information i believe to be important. In blue I have written my own commentary:
In essence, I believe that these pieces reflect a picture where the HoS is the begrudging, but still subordinate, member of the Heads UNDER the Captain, and that the Captain, barring participation in legitimately harmful or traitorous acts like blowing up the station or killing people, has free reign to do whatever shitty gimmick he wants to; including gimmicks that may seem annoying to the crew.
Now, do people actually have to participate in these shitty gimmicks? No. Do they have to like them? No!
In fact, I would actively encourage the non-security crew to form in-game mutinies when faced with incorrigible gimmicks.
But the HoS? No. The HoS, as evidenced by the fact we have to apply to become it, should be, and is, held to a higher standard of play than other players. It's not the role you take in order to flex your superiority muscles, but a mentorship role where your goal is guide the progress of the round from within and attempt to make the round interesting while reigning back the often totalitarian security forces.
I've had this argument too many times to count with my fellow HoS players. I don't think this is up to much interpretation; I think the guidelines are clear. However, I am posting this thread to open myself up to counter-arguments from those who disagree, and to see what the general consensus is.
Now that you've, presumably, read through the argument, please vote in the poll above.
TL;DR: Fuck you, I worked hard on this, go back and read it.
If the Captain gives an order that annoying, but is non-traitorous, such as "make a ridiculous amount of pizeel walls in the hallway", does the Head of Security have the authority to arrest the Captain and the people working for him?
If the Captain declares weed legal, does the Head of Security have the authority to arrest pot smokers because the "Space Law" Handbook says it's criminal?
Does the Head of Security have the authority to demote the Captain to Staff Assistant if the Captain is being annoying?
In my opinion, no. The Head of Security is the Captain's subordinate, meaning that the Captain is free to give the Head of Security orders on any kind of inane bullshit he wants. Naturally, the Head of Security is not required to participate (Dereliction of duty is always an option), but he is not allowed to punish the Captain player by brigging him, taking his stuff, and locking up any other nerds that happen to be working for him on the project.
My justification is as follows:
First, Let's look at what we know about the relationship between the HoS and the Captain. Here's a collection of all the pieces i could find on the wiki regarding this relationship. In red, i have marked the information i believe to be important. In blue I have written my own commentary:
![[Image: 8c7674ae07.png]](https://puu.sh/rrgOQ/8c7674ae07.png)
In essence, I believe that these pieces reflect a picture where the HoS is the begrudging, but still subordinate, member of the Heads UNDER the Captain, and that the Captain, barring participation in legitimately harmful or traitorous acts like blowing up the station or killing people, has free reign to do whatever shitty gimmick he wants to; including gimmicks that may seem annoying to the crew.
Now, do people actually have to participate in these shitty gimmicks? No. Do they have to like them? No!
In fact, I would actively encourage the non-security crew to form in-game mutinies when faced with incorrigible gimmicks.
But the HoS? No. The HoS, as evidenced by the fact we have to apply to become it, should be, and is, held to a higher standard of play than other players. It's not the role you take in order to flex your superiority muscles, but a mentorship role where your goal is guide the progress of the round from within and attempt to make the round interesting while reigning back the often totalitarian security forces.
I've had this argument too many times to count with my fellow HoS players. I don't think this is up to much interpretation; I think the guidelines are clear. However, I am posting this thread to open myself up to counter-arguments from those who disagree, and to see what the general consensus is.
Now that you've, presumably, read through the argument, please vote in the poll above.
TL;DR: Fuck you, I worked hard on this, go back and read it.