Sandy Desmond for HoS

[Lefinch]

ACTUAL FEEDBACK, SORRY ABOUT THAT

Hi Vulwin, so I had some chances to watch a few rounds just before you applied and have watched some since. I'm not a security regular so please feel free to take my feedback with a pinch of salt. I actually saw quite a few rounds with you in various roles that I'm going to generalise so this isn't even longer, then focus on a specific round for case-examples. Then I'll summarise at the end if you just want the bottom line stuff. 

General stuff

• You make a good effort to communicate both in person and on the radio well. This was true regardless of department. I caught you a few times where it seemed like you were busy but after things calmed down you'd chase up old comments which is great.
  
• You seem pretty comfortable in various roles including security. I liked that you seem to have a good general startup routine in your department and manage little side things that sometimes get forgotten, but you aren't also just going around using optimal setups or insisting things are done your way which is a good balance. 
  
• You missed a few opportunities to train that might be good for your application. One in particular you did great by checking if a secass who was in my opinion evidently new if they needed help: good stuff there but sort of left them to their own devices. You didn't do anything I'd consider bad here at all, but moments like that are a great opportunity to get them to maybe shadow you, learn the ropes, and have some fun alongside you. A lot of HoS approved applications talk about the wonderful introduction they had by someone doing this, so take those opportunities if you can.
  
• Generally, and this part is -extremely- subjective, I would say you might be a little too heavy on sentence timers specifically. Often you've had people in processing for some time (though I stress not overly long) that I would personally have expected that to be accounted for in a sentence. However, this was not a consistent thing and sometimes you would waive times as served too, it's more of a general pointer than a firm critique, and one that's very open to interpretation.
  
• You have a strong adherence to command structure, always pretty important in general. There's a specific event I'll mention later that seems to contradict this a bit but I hope it qualify it well enough that it's clear I think this is in general a really good behaviour.
  
• You speak to the arrested, I know it seems a low bar but I always appreciate when security does engage antagonists talking and don't "talk over them" during processing to security. Being a HoS will often involve letting antags have a bit of spotlight and processing is part of that too.
  
• You always seem to be up for a gimmick too, I have a note here that reads: "Engaged with rotfather's bit with appropriate level of horror about being dunked in a bath"
  
• Speaking of the Chaplain, one area of concern I'll highlight is that on the shuttle you attempted to put the Chaplain in the sleeper for being filthy. All good there funny bit, but I noted you set them a timer for 3 minutes. They escaped well before that went through, you didn't try and do it again, and the shuttle would have arrived before that point but I would personally discourage you from setting such a high timer as a prank for a non-antag: I know it's the shuttle but they could very well have been trapped in there for the credits. If it happened during a shift itself I'd consider that pretty wonky too. 
  

Specific round

• This was a recent round in which it was you a detective and another officer, as a point of reference it was the one someone chameleon-bombed sec with a sawfly control.
  
• You were very strong throughout with communicating: Regular followups, regular contact with the Captain acting as HoS. You delegated detective stuff to the detective when they came on. Incidentally the team on this round all did really good (But I've already said that about Brandon Roth who also has an application so well done Brandon too.) 
  
• There was a moment you were chasing down a thrall but de-escalated to give them time to speak. That's good, and I appreciated that you gave the vampire antag a chance to get over there to support them too. It's -very- hard once tasers start flying to note an antag is trying to re-engage with talking and honestly sometimes you're gonna shoot a guy and talk later and that's okay. However, I felt like this was a good demonstration of your strong situational awareness and control for giving someone breathing space to do a RP bit. 
  
• While I've said above you've got a strong sense of command chain and I would personally encourage you to continue that, in this round the captain ended up busy a fair bit. You had a thrall to execute. I'd say in this very specific example you might want to keep in mind that holding onto prisoners too long can be a bit unfun for the prisoner involved. There might be times where if you've made an attempt to put it through proper channels but not got a response and need to make a quick judgement it's honestly okay to make it, or find an alternative: Hold a quick security vote on it, or just make a call. You're not always going to get it right, and that's why using the chain of command is a good move in general, but sometimes you gotta do what you yabba dabba to get someone back into the game.
  
• Speaking of, Id probably have taken a -slightly- less slow method of execution than harmbatoning a thrall to death over the course of minutes. The detective made a lethal offer and personally I'd probably have jumped for that to speed things up for you both. But it's a subjective thing.
  
• you were really good at logically following clues left by antags rather than jumping on the "ITS DEFINITELY A SPIEF/VAMPIRE/ETC train": the example here is you heard there was something going on in research, so you literally went to research, scanned doors, talked to a witness, and filed it in your back pocket. Even when you got busy handling a thing you then went BACK To it and continued following the chain of clues to a person. I feel this is an amazing example to set others about making use of forensics and other tools to socially deduct in this social deduction game. Please keep it up.
  

Summary

• Things I liked: You communicate well, give space for antags, know your stuff and engage with people, and follow clues organically.
  
• Critique: (Highly subjective) maybe consider giving a little more "Time served" on brigging sentences, It would be good to see you jump on a potential to bring a newbee along with you for training/experience. Going through the chain of command is very important but it's okay sometimes to make a judgement that gets someone playing again sooner if you've done your due diligence.
  
• Summary summary: What I've seen is really good. I'll keep an eye out during the application and hopefully see you do some training to make a full judgement but I'd lean +1 at the moment. Hope this all helps.