Bandit. Posted May 18, 2022 Share Posted May 18, 2022 You got a second chance, time for you to give the people you dislike a second chance too. 5 1 Link to comment
Red. Posted May 18, 2022 Share Posted May 18, 2022 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Biscuit said: Just to clarify here, being leaked OOC is considered fair by you guys? I'd understand if a person had told someone "Hey, there's a complaint on you filed by this and that person.", but taking an exact screenshot and then posting it into discord group chats without previous RP in regards to it is considered fair? So that happened before I requested a voluntary step-down to Lieutenant - It was not an IA Report that was leaked, but FD-to-FD correspondence that was forwarded to someone in SD. That was reviewed by LFM and found to not be an issue as any identifying information was redacted. @lambchops Edited May 18, 2022 by Red. Link to comment
Biscuit Posted May 18, 2022 Share Posted May 18, 2022 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Red. said: So that happened before I requested a voluntary step-down to Lieutenant - It was not an IA Report that was leaked, but FD-to-FD correspondence that was forwarded to someone in SD. That was reviewed by LFM and found to not be an issue as any identifying information was redacted. @lambchops Whilst I do know LFM deemed it fair, I'm still asking about the department's stance on if SD Leadership would tolerate it or not. Given that previously nothing had been done and no action had been taken. That's rather my suggestion for improvement to take in. Edited May 18, 2022 by Biscuit Link to comment
lambchops Posted May 18, 2022 Share Posted May 18, 2022 Just now, Biscuit said: Whilst I do know LFM deemed it fair, I'm still asking about the department's stance on if SD Leadership would tolerate it or not. Given that previously nothing had been done and no action had been taken. If LFM deemed it fair we are not inclined to take action. Link to comment
Biscuit Posted May 18, 2022 Share Posted May 18, 2022 Just now, lambchops said: If LFM deemed it fair we are not inclined to take action. Then again, take it as a suggestion for improvement, it doesn't break any server rules, but it ruins SD-FD relations OOC-wise, right now all our supervisors are aware that we're no-longer to pass anymore complaints to SD via email due to possible leaks by supervisors, so much so that I doubt we even trust IA complaints to be handled. FD wouldn't tolerate stuff like that, PD wouldn't tolerate stuff like that, take a page from our book then! Link to comment
lambchops Posted May 18, 2022 Share Posted May 18, 2022 3 minutes ago, Biscuit said: Then again, take it as a suggestion for improvement, it doesn't break any server rules, but it ruins SD-FD relations OOC-wise, right now all our supervisors are aware that we're no-longer to pass anymore complaints to SD via email due to possible leaks by supervisors, so much so that I doubt we even trust IA complaints to be handled. FD wouldn't tolerate stuff like that, PD wouldn't tolerate stuff like that, take a page from our book then! I understand your concern here but you can rest assured that both avenues for serious OOC complaints and Internal Affairs remain intact with integrity, as mandated by Legal FM to all legal factions. As for this particular incident, I understand it was deemed harmless enough not to warrant a crack on the whip, but we will certainly keep looking at situations such as these in the future with a serious eye. Link to comment
Mitch Posted May 18, 2022 Share Posted May 18, 2022 (edited) 21 minutes ago, lambchops said: We're also always looking for new public relations personnel, although motivation for said positions does not seem high within the faction In regards to this, will SD consider reopening the Sheriffs Information Bureau? As someone who was in it as a civilian staff, I had an absolute blast in it and it was such a shame it was cut. I did hear whispers and murmors that it was potentially going to come back, but due to the recent command shuffles, is this still the case? Edited May 18, 2022 by Mitch Link to comment
Biscuit Posted May 18, 2022 Share Posted May 18, 2022 1 minute ago, lambchops said: I understand your concern here but you can rest assured that both avenues for serious OOC complaints and Internal Affairs remain intact with integrity, as mandated by Legal FM to all legal factions. As for this particular incident, I understand it was deemed harmless enough not to warrant a crack on the whip, but we will certainly keep looking at situations such as these in the future with a serious eye. That's all that y'know, I can really ask for, cause all it does is ruin OOC relations if it isn't handled properly. Like for a good example, I doubt anyone would be unhappy if the person was at minimum, spoken to, at least to get the point across that it ruins relations between departments more rather then less, cause again, as a side effect, whilst you do say that other serious complaints will be handled with integrity, that entire situation has generated doubt. So it's serious enough to generate doubt! Anywhom, I'm going to sleep, again, good luck as leadership! Link to comment
Zach.. Posted May 18, 2022 Share Posted May 18, 2022 (edited) 33 minutes ago, Wildcat said: It appears that Nervous was misled by a certain former member of the administration team. Ultimately, based upon resounding feedback from members of the LSSD, the decision was reversed. That being said, we are keeping an open mind and willing to accept any feedback to make the faction better. Quoted from what Nervous posted: Quote "During the past two months, feedback was gathered and still is actively being collected throughout members of the Staff & Sheriffs Department faction members on how to discuss and improve the situation for the better of the Sheriffs Department and the Community as a whole. The problems that we brought forward and that were brought towards us in the past two months ended up becoming worse. Some of these examples included encouraging toxic behavior, promoting friends, ignoring reports on members, and other situations that were brought up privately. The mass resignation of members at the beginning of May forced Management to start wondering what was happening internally, so Shanks and I contacted Banks & Jonesy." I don't seem to understand. Did Nervous vote to completely remove the entire faction leadership based on a single admins word? Or were there reports collected/evidence. If there was evidence/reports, what has changed since receiving those reports? Edited May 18, 2022 by Zach.. Link to comment
Wildcat Posted May 18, 2022 Author Share Posted May 18, 2022 Just now, Zach.. said: Quoted from what Nervous posted: I don't seem to understand. Did Nervous vote to completely remove the entire faction leadership based on a single admins word? Or were there reports collected/evidence. If there was evidence/reports, what has changed since receiving those reports? I cannot speak for Nervous, but I can tell you that Nervous considered most of the complaints to not be worthy of removing an entire leadership team. People who sacrificed hundreds (thousands in some cases) of hours for this faction were unceremoniously demoted 5-6 ranks with no option to defend themselves. In addition, LFM received a large response from line members of the faction (and even people outside of the faction) decrying how the particular former member of staff handled the coup. It was wrong and Nervous reversed it after learning the truth. Link to comment
Recommended Posts