02-11-2025, 07:33 PM
Hey, for once I can actually give some contemporary feedback and an endorsement. This is also partly a bump to give them a second review, but primarily this is just that I've been playing/observing a fair bit recently and incidentally just keep encountering Burger's character, Jimmy.
It's good you acknowledge that the role of the HoS is fundamentally collaborative more than succeeding. I do remember some prior rounds some time back where there was this worrying "We're not allowed to make mistakes and must win" mentality that is antithetical to a HoS's occasional requirement to keep things a little loose for round pacing and balance. In these more recent rounds you seemed willing to delegate, let things go, and not perform what I'd call "perfect searches" when things were calm, but also seemed willing to jump into the fray when the rounds got a bit more chaotic.
One major point in personal favour is that when I approached you under some random name characters you actually directly engaged even though you had no cause to: I wasn't an antag, I wasn't causing any trouble, just making some light conversation (and mentioning something odd I'd seen).
I can't comment on your training, I haven't seen it, but I also didn't see any good opportunities for it. You were engaged with your fellow officers and comminicative, this always seems to be a strong positive factor for HoS applications.
It is actually something that people struggle with as security quite a bit: Tunnel vision and crew-blindness. I think it's a fairly crucial skill for both security and the HoS because it also demonstrates the ability to reflect on the fact that enjoyment of the round is not wholly predicated on objective completion, nor just engagement with goals that help complete objectives or not. Sometimes having a human face is going to really help add a bit of spice to an encounter or how the round is going for people.
So, bearing in mind that the observations come from four AI rounds, a couple of rounds observed and not ay direct security experience, and that I'm not particularly security coded: I think jimmy might be a pretty good HoS, and if they're successful or not this time around I think if they behave consistently as I witnessed them they'd probably convince lots of others of the same. +1 At the very least, by putting the info out there it might spark some neurons for others to offer input or critique on their application.
It's good you acknowledge that the role of the HoS is fundamentally collaborative more than succeeding. I do remember some prior rounds some time back where there was this worrying "We're not allowed to make mistakes and must win" mentality that is antithetical to a HoS's occasional requirement to keep things a little loose for round pacing and balance. In these more recent rounds you seemed willing to delegate, let things go, and not perform what I'd call "perfect searches" when things were calm, but also seemed willing to jump into the fray when the rounds got a bit more chaotic.
One major point in personal favour is that when I approached you under some random name characters you actually directly engaged even though you had no cause to: I wasn't an antag, I wasn't causing any trouble, just making some light conversation (and mentioning something odd I'd seen).
I can't comment on your training, I haven't seen it, but I also didn't see any good opportunities for it. You were engaged with your fellow officers and comminicative, this always seems to be a strong positive factor for HoS applications.
It is actually something that people struggle with as security quite a bit: Tunnel vision and crew-blindness. I think it's a fairly crucial skill for both security and the HoS because it also demonstrates the ability to reflect on the fact that enjoyment of the round is not wholly predicated on objective completion, nor just engagement with goals that help complete objectives or not. Sometimes having a human face is going to really help add a bit of spice to an encounter or how the round is going for people.
So, bearing in mind that the observations come from four AI rounds, a couple of rounds observed and not ay direct security experience, and that I'm not particularly security coded: I think jimmy might be a pretty good HoS, and if they're successful or not this time around I think if they behave consistently as I witnessed them they'd probably convince lots of others of the same. +1 At the very least, by putting the info out there it might spark some neurons for others to offer input or critique on their application.