I completely agree. The aside from asking the obvious “5 W’s” the IR guides provide a framework to create a baseline of questions to satisfy adjudicative requirements. I know that many of us have simply resorted to asking “just the facts” and sticking to the script of the IR guides only because when we actually use our minds and ask questions outside of the box that we lend ourselves vulnerable to attack from Review. “Opening a door” as my first FTO used to call it. On the other side of the token we have Reviewers that are merely curious about a situation and are hitting us with an RZ because we didn’t ask something seemingly irrelevant. It’s creating a total lack of consistency among Review requirements to have a ROI go through on first pass. Definitely noticeable with newer Reviewers who are incorrectly RZ-ing ROI’s for a public trust case because we didn’t ask questions we would only ask on secret or TS case types. You’re better off just asking the full spectrum of questions regardless of case types to avoid the RZ.