Head of Personnel Suggestions

[CameronWoof]

Because of recent, apparently widespread abuse of the Head of Personnel by players, I'd like to make some suggestions for the job that might help move some of its power more constructively.

1. Decrease the access the HoP is able to give out
The Head of Personnel shouldn't have any reason to give a crewmember access to the Bridge, the quarters of any department head, or Security. We have a Head of Security. The Head of Personnel shouldn't be able to go in there. The Captain may be able to give these accesses.

2. Allow the HoP to dynamically update someone's clearance without their IDs
Integrate the employee records and clearance editing suite by allowing the HoP to update anyone's clearance, regardless of location. This means that if someone dies, their ID can be terminated safely, or if someone is abusing the clearance given to them, the HoP can terminate that clearance from their desk. It also means that the HoP has a tool to use against antags without needing to break into Security.

Expanding on an idea Wire said in chat; I think we could have public announcements whenever access is changed; so if some HoP goes nuts making a buz full of all-access IDs we'll all know.

[TheNewTeddy]

As long as everyone is on the same page (IE a stickied thread here on the forum) I'm fine with whatever is done; I just don't want to have to memorize the pro-all-access and anti-all-access admins, and cross reference that with who is currently online.


Also

Expanding on an idea Wire said in chat; I think we could have public announcements whenever access is changed; so if some HoP goes nuts making a buz full of all-access IDs we'll all know.

[Ed Venture]

Here's some ides thrown around in the IRC.

1. Make it so if they want to give access to high level areas make it so they need approval from a head in charge of said Area before getting cleared to give the access out.

2. A admin suggested making a thread for HoPs telling them not to abuse their power or else. (I honestly think this should be done regardless of any changes that may or may not come)

3. Whitelist the HoP Job. ( I do not like this idea one bit by the way)

4. One admin thinks the HoP role should be removed altogether.

I'm personally a fan of Number 1.

[CameronWoof]

Here's some ides thrown around in the IRC.

1. Make so if they want to give access to high level areas make it so they need approval from a head in charge of said Area before getting cleared to give the access out.

2. A admin suggested making a thread for HoPs telling them not to abuse their power or else.

3. Whitelist the HoP Job. ( I do not like this idea one bit by the way)

4. One admin thinks the HoP role should be removed all together.

I'm personally a fan of Number 1.

My concern with #1 is that the only time this is really an issue is when you're talking about Security, which I just don't think the HoP should have anything to do with at all. 

If the HoP needs permission to give people access to chemistry, cargo, or hydroponics, you take a way a lot of the agency that position has. I think it's important to think of the HoP AS a Head, but to simply divorce them from Security entirely.

[Cirrial]

In much the same way as only the HoS should be able to give out armory access, I think only the Captain should be able to give out bridge access. That way we also don't get HoPs breaking into the Captain's quarters at minute 1.

I'm also pro remote access changes. It'd certainly streamline things. Just make sure it still has to be done stationary at a console.

[Arborinus]

Chain them to the ID desk like those pens at the bank.

In all seriousness, I'd like to see them more shifted towards being in charge of the civilian departments, making sure the bar is running and the staff assistants are in line. I don't know how this would be accomplished though.

[Frank_Stein]

I agree with all points here. Makes sense too, since the the cards would just be feeding the door a code unique to that ID, and the HoP's computer could just tell that door to stop accepting that code.

Expanding on an idea Wire said in chat; I think we could have public announcements whenever access is changed; so if some HoP goes nuts making a buz full of all-access IDs we'll all know.

Maybe do a department notification when access has been given to your area. Some kind of way to check who has ID access to doors would be helpful? Like, you plug in a multitool to the door and can read a list of who does or doesn't?

---

In all seriousness, I'd like to see them more shifted towards being in charge of the civilian departments, making sure the bar is running and the staff assistants are in line. I don't know how this would be accomplished though.

It's how I've always seen them. That and a sorta HR rep. They should be making sure that all the departments are running well from a staffing point of view, addressing issues with bad employees and understaffing.

If HoP does have some areas like security axed, I think Captain should retain that. 

HoP for small staffing decisions, Captain and HoS for bigger ones

[Erik]

All of these suggestions are terrible, just leave the role as-is and get rid of the terrible players instead of taking a shit over players who actually play the role and do fun gimmicks

[Cirrial]

Look, I want remote access so I can slowly and randomly reassign staff assistants to ghostbusters.

Is that so wrong?! D:

[CameronWoof]

All of these suggestions are terrible, just leave the role as-is and get rid of the terrible players instead of taking a shit over players who actually play the role and do fun gimmicks

No fun HoP gimmick has ever involved giving a staff assistant sec access. I think that divorcing HoP and Security also solves the "HoP playing HoS" thing that it seems like everyone hates anyway.

[Superlagg]

I'm all for restricting the HoP's powers. I don't know how many times I've been able to pull off some lousy antag stunt simply because I asked the HoP for all access.

Make Security secure. Once the badguys can get into Security, their jobs become much harder. Not only do the badguys have their super-deadly gear, but Sec loses one of the few places they can regroup to.

Make Security special. If I want to play security, I roll a HoP, raid the lockers, then blow the station budget on meth and injector belts. I get to throw-down murderers without fear of being shitcurity! (Just shit!) If only security (and robust cop-killers) can enter Security, they'll have more of a purpose than being a vigilante HoP with less access.

Thus, restrict the HoP's grantable access to less harmful areas, forbidding things like Security, the Bridge, the AI, and so on.

I really like the idea of remote ID-alteration, especially if the AI can work the console too, seeing as they end up doing much of the HoP's job for them.

[babayetu83]

All of these suggestions are terrible, just leave the role as-is and get rid of the terrible players instead of taking a shit over players who actually play the role and do fun gimmicks

good idea erik

[Maegor]

I think that each head should be able to give access to its own department, with the HoP ruling over the civilian department, this way the civilian department actually gets a head.

[Wraithcraft]

I think that the Head of Personnel should be unable to modify their own access, or any ID card with their name. This way, they'd have to mess with security records in order to actually change their own access, removing some of the abuse.

[CameronWoof]

I think that each head should be able to give access to its own department, with the HoP ruling over the civilian department, this way the civilian department actually gets a head.

As stated, the issue with this is that it removes any agency the HoP has in creating IDs. This suggestion effectively limits the HoP to making janitor and chef IDs.

I think that the Head of Personnel should be unable to modify their own access, or any ID card with their name. This way, they'd have to mess with security records in order to actually change their own access, removing some of the abuse.

This doesn't matter, since they can just make another ID. The suggestion to limit what access they can grant IDs effectively does the second half of what you're saying.