IC Disability and Command Role Complaint

[Jovaniph]

Admin Key: N/A

Your Discord name (if applicable): Jovaniph

Complaint:

From time to time I would play in a command role which my character, Jovan Taru, is mute and requires to do a lot more to communicate with command and his department in a unique way. The roles I play in Command would be Chief Engineer, Research Director, and HoP. HoS and Captain would be too hard for me to do and CMO is just boring.

Firstly, I would like to say that there is nothing against the rules that makes it not okay to be a disabled head of staff member. My Character Jovan Taru is mute and nothing more. I understand how disabilities can get carried away, but for me, it's just his voice. He communicates via PDA or has a PAI (if lucky) to assist him. Just like an IPC who is vulnerable to EMP. I am vulnerable to having the PDA servers shut down and no PAI. This is not a problem because I still have access to the station-wide announcement which I rarely abuse.

I was sent this today:

 

This is a dispute to allow me to play as a command role as a mute. I'm sure I can have a ton of players vouch for me. I even remember one time an entire engineering department wanted to make me the acting CE when no CE was on. That was awhile ago.

Note: This dispute is not towards Varghh!!! This is towards the administration in general.

Edited October 22, 2017 by Jovaniph
wrong image

[necaladun]

There is nothing in the rules about playing command roles with a disability, correct - however, people in a role need to be able to fulfill those roles.

Talking to your co-workers is required for people in command. We've had many complaints before about people in command roles not talking to their co-workers. Communication is vital, and choosing - and it is your choice here - to not be able to speak over radio to your co-workers, is unfair on those who work under you. PDA messages do not suffice, as that only is response to one person, and cannot be seen by your whole department.

A security officer lacking arms would not be able to properly fulfill the duties of a security officer. A commanding officer needs to be able to communicate, as that role is more than just having extra access and gear. Refusing to speak to others over the radio makes it harder on everyone else, and it is unfair to make it harder on everyone else just so you can have a special quirk to your character.

 

[Jovaniph]

All I see it as an "IC issue" like people normally get replied most of the time when situations like this happens. If the administration is going to enforce this then I suggest this gets amended in the rule of the server. Please don't make it become a "Spirit of the rule" deal.

Edited October 22, 2017 by Jovaniph
grammar

[Bobalobdob]

I can vouch for Jovan. Ivenhad experiences with him being a sec officer, one of the scientists under my direction, and having him as my RD, and all of the experiences have been nothing but positive.

while it can sometimes be hard to communicate, it adds to the "realism" of a diverse spess station in the since that this could actually happen in that situation or even in the real world. Therefore I agree that it is simply an IC issue.

Edited October 22, 2017 by Bobalobdob

[WingedYordle]

I can also vouch for Jovan, he communicates very well with pen paper, his PDA and with the pAI if one is available. Sure it adds a challenge for command staff but it allows freedom of those to disability to play. If you are really against a mute playing command then perhaps server rules need to change. I faced many challenges with some command who have stutter, lost limbs, seisures. They shouldn't be allow in command either then if Jovan cannot.

[HarakoniWarhawk]

I can vouch for Jovan too, I've been the AI a few times while Jovan was a head and never had any issues with communication, if he needed to say something he did, there was never any issues raised over his disability.

On the contrary, I have encountered far more command staff with the ability to communicate who simply refuse to do so unless something is directed at them.

Forcing people out of certain roles just because they don't fill the airwaves with inane chatter seems a dishonest move, considering for every command staff who are active on comms, you have at least two others who you could be forgiven thinking they were dead.

[necaladun]

I'd just like to say, we'll take a bit to respond to this as it's a fairly deep issue - people are free to respond to this with their own experiences and opinions and we wont' be removing posts unless they're outright abusive. Thanks everyone for their input.

[Jovaniph]

I didn't expect any players to literally reply to this thread just to vouch for me nor was it ever my intention. I appreciate the feedback to this issue, from both the players and the administration.

I'll like to add that:

Yes some jobs are in fact hard to do as mute. HoS, Captain are the ones I can name on the top of my head and I don't expect any IC mute to play these roles effectively.

As for security officers, I sometimes turn off mute because it's too hard to do and I somewhat agree with Keluandrie, however it depends on the situation. Security officers get dragged away from antags many times and sometimes without a trace. You can't make that as an excuse to not allow mutes in security. If it's the case of not being able to cry for help, then I shouldn't play any and all jobs because I'm unable to scream for help as, for example, a scientist or an atmos tech. A In-Game Character by the name of Isthel is a mute Security Officer and does a better job than me and would say that she does a lot better job than majority of the security officers that play. In general, security officer is a hit or miss.

What I'm also am trying to say is that players like me don't make being mute (or any other disability) as an excuse to play bad or to hinder the expectations that are required. If we can do it well, then there shouldn't be a problem. A player with no arms in security is not an excuse and that is a strawman argument if you ever make it as one.

[ParemberKennard]

I'm with Jovan here. If the person can work out how to properly communicate in some form or another to the department, mute characters end up handling themselves very well. My QM character used to be mute for a bit for some snowflakey IC reason but through a combination of PDA messages, paper, a chat lobby once or twice, and just a techie acting as my loudspeaker,  cargo duties went by pretty well.

I'm fine with people having disabilities in roles mentioned as long as they're at least trying to compensate. There are some extremes, granted. As mentioned before, an armless security officer should be a no-go for obvious reasons. Personally, I'm not about to play a mute HoP for example, but there are definitely ways to make it work.

[Bxil]

14 minutes ago, ParemberKennard said:

mute HoP

Expereinced this. The HoP was mute, and I was amazed how well they were doing their job. I am not certain who they were though.

5 hours ago, HarakoniWarhawk said:

On the contrary, I have encountered far more command staff with the ability to communicate who simply refuse to do so unless something is directed at them.

This is a far greater, existing issue. Mute people introduce an unique way of communication, and I used to see them make amusing situations. They try. And then we have those who can talk, and will not. I would choose mute command over them any time.

[Streaky Haddock]

I can accept a mute HoP or Captain. I cannot abide by a genetically mute HoS. The communication demands can't be circumvented without speech. I've had a mute I know to be a good officer be my HoS and the  team suffered for it.

[Doukan]

It's nice for creating interesting scenarios and all but as someone who has been on the receiving end of this a few times I just find it annoying. Yeah it's not a requirement to actually say anything to me but being wordlessly dragged off/completely ignored is bad enough when it's a non-mute doing it.

Verbal communication is a requirement for effectiveness, as even though you can compensate for it it cannot be replaced. Yes you can always just PDA/*me something but there's no denying the simple fact that as a mute you will never be as able as a non-mute to communicate and therefore do your job. Security/Command have a responsibility not just to do their jobs but to do it well and such a handicap is too much IMO. People don't get jobs IRL for less and it should be the same in space.

Edited October 22, 2017 by Doukan

[DrunkDwarf]

I'm also going to post in support of Jovan, I've played with him as the head of the department I was in, and he communicates more than most in those roles tend to do. There is no question in my mind, that there are many "disabilities", such as being mute, that can function perfectly well in command roles, albeit via more creative means than most can accept. You can create a strawman about armless security officers all you want, that doesn't mean all disabilities have the same impact on job performance.

I think this response, and the PR that was opened recently, are both missing the mark entirely. The solution here shouldn't be to just deny access to these roles to those characters, but instead, should be about discussing new mechanics that could be introduced to allow these characters an easier time fulfilling these roles. For example, how about adding a feature to the PDA so it can speak on it's users behalf, like a text-to-speech app? or Improving PDA messaging to multiple individuals or your entire department?

I'm sure if people start thinking about this problem from a different perspective, they can achieve the goal I think we all want here, that those in Command positions are able to fully communicate and perform their roles to their maximum ability.

Edited October 22, 2017 by DrunkDwarf

[MarsMond]

Talking is the fastest, and can be the only, method to communicate with a whole department. This is needed for security in my eyes, as the job is time critical, and you will need to know if someone does respond to a call that was just made. But even there, i can argue that a mute officer would work, if they use comms, just because you can't talk doesn't mean you can't tap your microphone once to respond with yes, twice for no, or something like that. If they also keep the records, they might not need to talk to communicate effectively, at least to security.

Given that humanity does like to make tools to handle deficits, maybe such things could be added for the jobs that would be handicapped "too much". Something like a pager that can be used to send a number of premade messages on the sec channel, but that might make people beepsky+.
Another tool you can yhink of for security woukd be a warrant display, let's the officer shove the reasons for someones arrest into their face.

If people communicate well, i don't think there would be any issue, but when does someone communicate well? It's a policy question how to handle a disability that, in a number of situations,  is too dementrial to stay. Should it be blocked in general, should the combination be whitelisted, should it be allowed to try it out, but if failing to work around the disability, it should be stopped? All of theese would have their own pro and cons.

[Shadeykins]

Here's my personal weigh-in on the matter.

1). There's no suitable replacement for voice communications, and not all forms of communication are reducible to yes and no.

1a). While paper exists, paper requires you to be beside someone and takes twice as long to communicate than simply speaking.

2). PDA's are one on one, and group invites are broken and require you to invite *every* pertinent party. It's also extra clicking for everyone else.

2a). PDA messenger server gets turned off in about 30% of the rounds due to it breaking comms.

2b). PDA's can't work like station bounced radios or intercomms, and are useless when comms are out.

2c). Certain antagonist tools also require PDA messengers to be turned off (such as the much-used detomatix cartridge).

3). Emotes can be used, but emotes are limited to the observer or sounds.

3a). You can't pantomime "seen" information via an emote over a radio, which again reduces communication to "yes/no" (which is insufficient).

At the end of the day, security and command roles need to use radio communications in a relatively complex manner beyond the scope of simple yes and no questions. They need to be able to adequately, and immediately, direct specific people to specific tasks in specific areas. They need to also be able to immediately address entire departments (in private) to certain tasks in certain areas.

A Captain alone will need to be listening and actively responding to Command Comms, Security Comms, Common Channels, and any other channels he's taking an active part in. He also needs to make immediate and instantaneous calls during critical periods where communications are down.

While I admire mute players for the constraint it puts on them (it's a good exercise in writing), a Captain on the bridge can't communicate to his heads of staff standing before him about the critical importance of certain issues (IE: a blob is eating the ship, what is our course of action) easily, and he pretty much can't do it at all if telecoms are down (and they often are).

An interaction which requires quick and active response (in the span of 5-10 seconds) becomes an arduous ordeal that either involves charades, or writing down on a piece paper (which requires finding paper, getting a pen, writing on the paper, then letting heads view it, then rewriting your response...) can easily take upward of two minutes because someone decided to make their character mute.

Nukies and ERT members are not allowed to have disabilities for these exact sort of reasons - it stands to reason that neither should critical roles on station such as Command and Security.

[Mayfox]

"Choosing a Head of Staff role (...) means you will be expected to play to a higher standard of (...) competence. You may be Jobbaned from Command if you fail to meet these standards, (...)."

 

According to the server rules, the admin team should build their argument around the competence of the player, not the disabilities they picked. So far however, I see nobody questioning Jovan's ability to play adequately.

[Spacemanspark]

Tapping your headset twice during an entire round and doing nothing else is quite a poor manner of communication, and something I have experienced from them before.

[Ziiro]

Let's attack this from two angles:

 

In Character: Nanotrasen doesn't give a shit about being an equal opportunity employer. They want employees that can do the work. The job of a Head of Staff is generally Command and Coordinate. If you are unable to perform these duties, you should not have this job, no matter your level of competency with the actual task.

Additionally, genetic manipulation and prosthetics are available. Pick a solution.

Out of Character: It is incredibly frustrating to deal with under even optimal circumstances. If when something goes wrong, it gets that much worse. PDA servers off? Can't be near people? Doing things outside the station? etc.

 

There have been a few of times where I have had to deal with a disabled character that frustrated me, because it made what should've been a 30 second exchange a five minute exchange. Not counting the times I was playing AI and the PDA server had to be turned off. How am I supposed to interact with these people?

Edited October 23, 2017 by Ziiro

[Ansari]

I echo the entirety of Shadey's post.

And as for @Mayfox's quote of our rules, by picking a disability that severely limit your ability to communicate, you are already deliberately "Rate-capping" how competent you could be at the role.

From a roleplay perspective:
As far as I am aware, most real life military will not accept a mute person into their rank nor would any police force allow a mute to be a field officer or dispatcher either, because they are unable to communicate with voice, the most common, and convenient way for quick communication between human beings (Especially at a distance with radio). No matter how hard you try, text communication are still way slower and does not allow one to multi-task as efficiently.





 

[Regen]

Basically 

Anyone saying "this should be an ic issue" is countered by "ic they wouldn't get the job"

OP might make it work, but that doesn't mean that others will. We're not making single player exceptions in the rules.

[SomanB]

I'mma take this Ina different direction.

It's a game.  Nominally a roleplay game. Roleplay games are famous for assorted disabilities and limits to chosen characters.

"You can't have disabilities that hamper play" kinda feels to me like a light form of enforced powergaming. Nothing much is said about sec/command in wheelchairs, because mechanically, wheelchairs are stronk in the hands of the right player.

If we were to slippery slope this, an argument could be made against things like Diona sec. Diona are slow, it's the choice of the player to play one, and being slow hampers your ability to play.

The argument extends to vox (weak to damage), slime people (no clone), plasmamen (no suit means ded), Grey's (fire extinguisher of room)...

[Jovaniph]

It is not a rule yet and until it does become a rule or not, I'm going to make my stand. I've seen some pretty weak arguments so far and here is what I have to say about it.

1 hour ago, Regen said:

Anyone saying "this should be an ic issue" is countered by "ic they wouldn't get the job"

OP might make it work, but that doesn't mean that others will. We're not making single player exceptions in the rules.

Again, it is not a rule yet. If you are going to make the claim that Nanotrasen is serious about who they hire. They should ask themselves "Who hired the clown?"

 

3 hours ago, Ziiro said:

Out of Character: It is incredibly frustrating to deal with under even optimal circumstances. If when something goes wrong, it gets that much worse. PDA servers off? Can't be near people? Doing things outside the station? etc.

I can understand the frustration for sometimes I get frustrated if I can't communicate, but your argument seems to include every single job. Not just command.

 

3 hours ago, Spacemanspark said:

Tapping your headset twice during an entire round and doing nothing else is quite a poor manner of communication, and something I have experienced from them before.

I cut down from doing this. Most of the time I would fax, PDA, Station announce, or even find the person I need to talk to and write what I need on paper.

 

1 hour ago, Regen said:

Talking is the fastest, and can be the only, method to communicate with a whole department. This is needed for security in my eyes, as the job is time critical, and you will need to know if someone does respond to a call that was just made. But even there, i can argue that a mute officer would work, if they use comms, just because you can't talk doesn't mean you can't tap your microphone once to respond with yes, twice for no, or something like that. If they also keep the records, they might not need to talk to communicate effectively, at least to security.

SecHud > Shift+Click Target > set Arrest > State Reason.... PDA HoS, Captain, or AI to notify security or just PDA any security officer that is active at the time. No need to talk about it. I have a unique way of taking down criminals. I'm not going to explain it here because that would change much of the subject and people are going to make counter arguments about how "I" play security.

 

2 hours ago, Ansari said:

As far as I am aware, most real life military will not accept a mute person into their rank nor would any police force allow a mute to be a field officer or dispatcher either, because they are unable to communicate with voice, the most common, and convenient way for quick communication between human beings (Especially at a distance with radio). No matter how hard you try, text communication are still way slower and does not allow one to multi-task as efficiently.

You are right text communication is slower, but we don't talk on the mic. We type on a keyboard and everyone's WPM is different. My WPM is very high up there which makes up for the time I need to look for a name on the PDA to message. In addition, If Nanotrasen is going to take themselves seriously about their command structure and Military organization, then their first agenda would be to remove the clown.

Edited October 23, 2017 by Jovaniph
add some stuff. grammarly.

[Ralta]

To save reading the entire thread, I'm just gonna give my two cents:
 

• Jovan Taru is an exceptional command character and roleplayer, despite the obvious disability. I cannot think of an occasion where his muteness has caused an issue outside of an amusing mix-up with a changeling (which probably would've happened even if he could talk).
• With that said, I would say Jovan is probably the exception. I haven't had much occasion to come across mute characters on a regular basis, and have no notable negative experiences with them. That said, there have been numerous occasions where a commander who does not speak often (is not mute, just doesn't talk on comms) is a major issue, and very frustrating for the department. This is more an issue of ignorance as opposed to disability, but the point does still stand.
• I feel like, from an RP perspective, it makes little sense for disabled characters to be given a command role by NT. Let me make this absolutely clear: I AM NOT SAYING DISABLED PEOPLE ARE INCAPABLE OF PLAYING COMMAND ROLES. What I am saying is that a quadriplegic Head of Security is useless, as is a blind CMO or a deaf HoP. I think you can work around being mute, but I think the discussion is absolutely valid (sorry @Jovaniph D: ).

Perhaps a case-by-case basis is the way to go? If a player receive complaints for being inattentive or incapable of performing their duties, then they can no longer play command roles on that character. Something like that.

[Kyet]

 

4 hours ago, SomanB said:

Nothing much is said about sec/command in wheelchairs, because mechanically, wheelchairs are stronk in the hands of the right player.

I came to the conclusion that being wheelchair-bound should be allowed for Command/Sec characters, as it doesn't compromise their ability to communicate, doesn't stop them from being aware of the world around them, and while it is a disadvantage in combat, it can only be exploited in melee range, and if someone gets within melee range of you, they have other ways to mess you up. Based on this, I did not consider being wheelchair-bound to be sufficiently problematic that it should disqualify a character from taking those jobs.

That said, I am not an expert on the wheelchair mechanics. If it turns out I am wrong, and a character being stuck in one significantly compromises their ability to survive, then that's a good argument for preventing wheelchair-bound characters from taking jobs in the security department.

Edited October 23, 2017 by tzo

[SomanB]

1 hour ago, tzo said:

 

I came to the conclusion that being wheelchair-bound should be allowed for Command/Sec characters, as it doesn't compromise their ability to communicate, doesn't stop them from being aware of the world around them, and while it is a disadvantage in combat, it can only be exploited in melee range, and if someone gets within melee range of you, they have other ways to mess you up. Based on this, I did not consider being wheelchair-bound to be sufficiently problematic that it should disqualify a character from taking those jobs.

That said, I am not an expert on the wheelchair mechanics. If it turns out I am wrong, and a character being stuck in one significantly compromises their ability to survive, then that's a good argument for preventing wheelchair-bound characters from taking jobs in the security department.

Exactly. It's as I said, enforcing a slight level of powergaming over RP.

 

Mechanics based gameplay, a wheelchair is strong. In the hands of a solid powergamer, you are gonna have issues dealing with them.

 

From the RP perspective, it's downright silly.  "Hello Muteguy McSilent, you can't be HoS on our station full of technology that enables nonverbal communication. Please be nice to Stumpy Nolegs, HoS."

 

There's been quite the argument about Para going less and less RP, and to me, this just reinforces the idea that game mechanics are more important than roleplay.