Before responding, please take the time to read and digest my whole response as it might answer a few of your questions, or bring up a few.
The leader of O.S.I, Ronald (publicly) posted last in the Discord in November and the has only posted in the forums 4 times since September and his faction has come up in the discord a few times. I'm going to take a few screenshots of what O.S.I was described as by staff.
Firstly, let me preface with my activity on Discord and forums. I do not go on the discord unless I am pinged. The forums I'm on regularly to check up on our private forum area. You can find below my activity since the beginning of the year.
Just because you cannot see what I am posting on doesn't mean I am not posting at all.
I'm making this post because I too am irked with O.S.I. I need not to recall V1 (which I don't like to bring up in the first place) when O.S.I did the infamous 'Fallout New Vegas' incident. Now, I'm irked because O.S.I has continuously, in my eyes, just shit on RP.
I'd firstly like to separate V1 and the OSI. I was not a part of any group within V1. Equally, the OSI in its current form is a result of the vision of
@Dostoevsky combined with
@Votton and I's feedback.
Now, I'm irked because O.S.I has continuously, in my eyes, just shit on RP.
I'm sorry to hear this. We have made it our goal to encourage and add to RP where we can and it's something I'm quite firm on. If this is the case, nothing has been brought to me in regards to how. Which I'd always be open and happy to solve.
They've shut down the BOE, locked people in cells for weeks, and basically done nothing to actually help or create RP.
The BOE situation as far as I am aware was dealt with shortly after we were asked to investigate it? If this hasn't been actioned I can only apologise and I'll look into why. I genuinely wasn't aware that you were waiting for us.
In regards to people being locked in cells, the only one I can think of was Ron Goodfella. He was not locked in a cell on our request. Instead, he tagged me in the middle of the server discussion on discord saying that he was locked in a cell and he was ready to be interrogated. I saw this two days after he tagged me, after a discussion with my co-leads we felt it was unnecessary to talk to him. We didn't see any need to. We requested that he was let free. If this wasn't done, again I can only apologise. We do not have the power to go and unlock Combine doors ourselves.
O.S.I at the moment is above the CCA, above Overseers, and above OTA in some cases (according to staff).
This is not true.
Before I touch on your suggestions. Please let me provide some transparency into how the OSI is structured and how we operate.
Firstly, leadership.
The OSI consists of three leads.
It was originally:
Myself (As oversight - I do not have an operating character other than my director. I act as a point of contact for people to come to with complaints with the faction, for them to be dealt with in an organised manner)
@Votton (CM representative, Votton makes sure that we are following rules and helps if we need approval for certain matters or operations)
@Dostoevsky (Who came up with the original vision of how the OSI works, wrote a lot of our faction content and along with myself set out our guidelines.)
Sadly,
@Dostoevsky had to resign in November last year due to being away quite a bit for Christmas, and then subsequently going into his final year at university. He helped nominate his successor.
The team now is;
Myself.
@Votton
@Glass (A player that originally joined us through our application system, and proved himself as a more than capable roleplayer, he's come to the table bringing lots of new ideas as well as helping manage more of the IC side of things.)
In regards to how the OSI is structured OOCly, to reduce the chances of metagame, the OSI operates on a need to know basis. What does this mean? Well, only the faction leads as mentioned above are aware of the full scope of who is in the faction. Members of the faction may encounter each other however would only be aware of that as and when that happens.
We have a dedicated channel for OOC communications with every faction lead so that we can have a level of transparency and a direct line of communication with them if they require it, along with this we have a dedicated channel with the lore & events management, and the community management respectively so that any concerns or queries can be brought up and answered. We try to not ruin the player experience no matter who you are. For example, if you are a community manager with a character involved in a faction that we are currently looking into, we will try and add one of your colleagues (excluding
@Votton ) to an operation's documentation if requested.
All operation's documentation is available to community management and head of staff on the forums.
As part of a feedback round when
@swagile was promoted to CM, we now also have a dedicated channel for communication with RLs to allow for a bit smoother and quicker comms, rather than just having one with CP leads exclusively. We're quite happy to implement feedback when it's presented constructively. Most of the time we notice when people publically have an issue with us, it's due to them not knowing the scope of what we do.
The faction is split up into four columns.
We have Union based operatives. These focus on Union factions such as CWU and UM, however may also touch on normal civilians, political parties, and stores.
We have nexus-authorised operatives. These are trusted players that have nexus based characters. These tend to serve as a point of contact for Overseers and civil protection as well as the CCA.
We have rebel based operatives. These focus on anti-civil elements and rebel factions.
We have an R&D division. This is newly created and provides a bit more internal RP within the faction. This group focuses on helping our operatives get the supplies they need for their operations.
Currently, our nexus-authorised element is the smallest part of our faction. Followed closely by the R&D division. We currently have 15 members within the faction, with 3 showing signs of inactivity and this has been discussed with them.
Why we don't share information publically with how we work and general staff? Most of the time to avoid meta game and meta bait. As much as we can say well if they metagame they will get punished. I don't think that's a valid reason. It's better to prevent the problem outright. Staff and players have been encouraged to actively send me feedback. I rarely get any feedback, usually, it's only off the back of someone messaging me asking me to check a particular channel on the main discord, and then me being proactive in messaging players to understand where their issue might be.
Our guidelines from an OOC standpoint is always to encourage RP. We only try to add to situations rather than take away from them. By this, I mean we tend to try and avoid getting involved in situations where we take or send a character away, or have them killed. We have actively pushed back against advice that we have received in the past when it comes to this.
While I can understand that it may not always be clear how we add to situations, I believe it's a lot of what goes on behind the scenes where it is value-added. For example; an OSI player embedded with a rebel group feeds information back to his handler, who in turn feeds the information to the CCA or the CP or the Overwatch leads. A discussion is had whether it is advisable to push forward and take action, or to let the player continue to feed information back up the chain and have all these various parties involved.
In regards to how we are structured lore-wise. I have always seen it as this:
The OSI is made up of offices that report to a central body, a local OSI office operates in tune with the CCA. However, if they receive orders from the central office, which operates under the next highest authority (in this case a Sector Admin), those orders will overrule the local office.
OSI do not go rogue. They are die-hard loyalists.
As leads, we do not give orders acting as a high representative in the server lore. They will always come from someone who plays that character, for example; Robert, when he played the Sector Administrator, or more recently Rad-X until a new sector administrator, is picked.
In regards to your suggestions:
1. Make O.S.I directly under the control of the C.C.A. They will be below Overseers and O.T.A, obviously.
Currently, if the CCA or Overseers or Overwatch request we look into something, we do it. OOCly, I've reached out to
@Immerseus and said that I'm happy to work with him and if there's any concerns or anything OOCly, to come to me and I'll work with him to solve them.
2. Give the intelligence aspect of O.S.I over to the C.C.A and a new Ministry if they want it. It'd make it more interesting.
I don't fully understand this, would it be possible to get some more information? Historically we have shared information where necessary. Usually taking advantage of server mechanics to do this.
3. Allow O.S.I to guard the C.C.A
I would be against this with the OSI in its current form. OSI are not bodyguards, nor are most OSI characters combat trained. We do not allow them to carry weapons either unless it's for a specific operation and has been approved by the necessary parties.
4. Allow O.S.I to be loyal to the C.C.A/C.A moreso than Overwatch.
The OSI is loyal to the next best administrator, they are not necessarily loyal to Overwatch, but rather the Union as a whole. They work with Overwatch forces as necessary as they share the same goal.
5. Encourage O.S.I to allow (certain) corruption in the C.C.A. If some guy in the C.C.A wants to go snort cocaine in the back of a bar and make shady deals away from Overseers/OTA, let them.
We do.
6. Allow the Overseers/OTA to handle the C.C.A if they really fuck up.
They do.
Final responses in regards to other responses:
I haven't seen OSI do anything. Like. At all. So I support this
Just because you haven't seen us do things doesn't mean things aren't happening.
Every single person I've spoke to (including CCA leads) say that the CCA has no control over OSI
I can understand why there is confusion around this. I'll reach out to
@Immerseus again to make sure that we're all on the same page.
One of the biggest issues the OSI has is that it literally is almost impossible to keep track of. Not even admins are allowed to directly know who is apart of it, or what they are doing. OSI exists outside of standard faction procedure to such an extreme extent, you easily could forget that they are even in the server. While It may not have to be removed per se, it 100% needs an OOC rework that forces it to be treated like a normal faction would be imo. Near as I can tell, the only people that enjoy the OSI, are the people that are in it. (But again, dont even know that.)
When you were a CM you came to us once when you first joined our discord, requesting access to all channels in a meme way, I took it as a meme. Subsequently you have done nothing but be negative about us in a public forum, not once have you approached me privately about this or using the dedicated channels we had set up for communication. You never have asked to see who is in the faction, nor what operations we are currently undertaking. It took me approaching you privately to get some semblance of constructive feedback. You know better than most that I am more than happy to have a discussion about things as I have tried communicating with you in the past about unrelated issues. You are not always willing to have that discussion. All you had to do is ask. You never did.
I would like to see what you would propose as an OOC rework, I'd be more than happy to take suggestions, or if I feel that the vision is too different, step down and let someone better suited else take the reigns.
I will keep saying it and will say it again, the fact you don't know what it does means it is working. You are not meant to know the activity of the OSI, what it does, how it works nor operates, etc. It is 100% private and classified operations. Unlike all other factions, its work is kept under strict lockdown so trying to know who is part of it, what it does, who is its commander, etc is a good thing. Not even staff are permitted to know this information of how OSI works. OSI is made to be 100% secure from any possibility of being leaked
I would like to clarify though, CMs and HOS have access to everything we do. The only thing they are not given access to by default is all our channels in discord. Votton has access to these. If another CM would like access, all they have to do is ask.
If we want to have an "Investigations" branch then just run it through the Collaborator's Party. We were actually planning to do this before and I don't know why it changed. Have a figure within the CCA who is tasked with rooting out corruption both within and outside the Combine. This figure utilizes the Collaborator's Party, through contact with the Upper Party (its leaders) to essentially form a spy corps out of your loyalists. This was originally meant to pose an actual threat for "undercover" loyalists by essentially turning your own party against you. Furthermore, it is also using the loyalist party to essentially put eyes everywhere. You don't need more than that to create drama, fear, and paranoia in an IC situation.
This is a different idea, I'm not against it, but it's different than what we have envisioned for things. In my eyes (And correct me if you feel otherwise) it seems like a bit more of a snitch/investigator group within the loyalist party, whereas we are undercover and embed our people within groups to find out information?
According to Rad-X it was stated that (it seems) they tried to get their activity up recently but it didn't really work. Apparently it's a dead faction but I could be completely wrong and misunderstood him.
This is incorrect,
@Imperator RAD-X maybe you can clarify here - I don't think we've discussed activity recently?
Final thoughts:
One thing I experienced with this faction is that a lot of people like the core idea, but have 101 ways of implementing it whether it be styled as a secret police, a CIA, a snitch group or whatever. That's absolutely fine. The faction in its current state is working, there are processes and systems we need to improve, and we are actively trying to do that.
I feel this is focused very much on the CCA element of this, which is one minor part of the OSI. While I appreciate this was written in a constructive manner, I have emphasised it throughout this, and I will continue to. I am always open to feedback. Throughout the last five or so months of leading the OSI. We have received nothing unless we are proactive in gathering feedback. I'd actually like to thank
@swagile for providing some really constructive feedback recently which has since been implemented. I'm excited to see how it turns out.
I really hope this thread doesn't derail, I'm willing to listen. Hopefully, my answers can clear things up a bit. Happy to respond further on here, answer any follow up questions you might have, or you can message me on Discord: Ronald#7854
Please note; I won't be checking this by the hour. I will do my best to answer any and all questions as soon as possible.
Thanks.
