Message posted on Stardate 99020.1 at 0226 hours
Posted by Mike Bourdaa (STF President).
Edict #27 - Rule on same ship second characters, revised.
1) Edict 25 is hereby repealed, for being illegally confusing. ;-)
2) Here is the policy, in (hopefully) clearer terms.
A second character on a ship (SCS) is defined as any time when one individual person controls more than one rostered character on the same ship (except the GM, who is exempt from this policy).
Unless the following policy has been followed to the letter, no new SCS may be added to a ship’s roster. [Existing ones are grandfathered, and under the CO’s jurisdiction for whether to remove them or not.]
The order of decision for such requests shall go: Crew member, CO, FComm, AFComm, President. In the request, the requester shall identify:
[The reason for this order - if a CO wants to add it, he must get the consent of the FComm. If however the FComm is also the CO, the AFComm then has the approval right. Therefore, someone has to be able to overrule the AFComm.]
1) What position they want to add
2) Why it is necessary that the position be filled by an SCS rather than by a new crew member.
The next highest person (to the requester), in the specified order of decision has the right to approve or reject such a request. Rejections cannot be appealed.
Appeals of an approval will be ignored unless there is a specific, written, public complaint, and the complaint indicates a portion of this policy which is being violated.
Consideration will be given to the following factors, when making a decision to approve or reject the request.
1) Is the position a normal/standard one? Positions like Bartender, Mascot, or other “silly” things are much more likely to be approved than a Department Head position. Department assistants (like Eng-4) are better than a DH position, but not prefered over a “mascot” type position. [Reject permission for a well concieved mascot at your own peril, FComms and AFComms ;-)]
2) Could a new crew member do the job instead? If a position can be filled by a new recruit, or a transfer, rather than the SCS route, that is much better.
3) Is the SCS necessary for the current RPG? If an SCS is being added because it is an important plot point for the RPG, and will last only as long as the current RPG does, it is more acceptable than a permenant SCS is. The GM should be advised in advance, in such a situaton.
Permission for an SCS can be removed at any time by any person higher up on the Chain than the person who gave the initial OK, if it is being abused, or is serving to block a qualified member from a department head position.