Quote by SBOSlayer

Just while were on the subject matter how much have you contributed to the base? are you willing to take advantage of others contributions to satisfy, what seems like an agenda.

I don't want to restart this topic as it's all been taken under advisement. I could have phrased my post differently, but my point at the end of the day was that if any member had access is it fair to give them provisions they haven't earned when the rest of the fleet has been tireless working on it? This wasn't intended as a direct dig at you, but I was trying to portray a point.

The blame game, well yeah, I just interrupted the posts made and it felt like that. So forgive me if that wasn't the intention. Guess it's cultural difference and all that stuff.

The point of my last post was to simply demonstrate that although this is a debate there is certain ways of highlighting issues. Guess I just didn't interrupt them in the light they were mean't to be received.

That being said all of this has been taken under advisement.

Anyways, back to uni work.

Quote by Ozy

In fact as a member of a mock United Nations community, I would whole-heartedly approve a quorum based voting system whereby the community could vote on these issues in order to promote further transparency in the fleet.

As a gigantic supporter of transparency (nothing cuts through BS and the rumour mill like it), I'd support this 100%, for as many issues as feasible. Have definitely seen other fleets use the same technique. How about it? Any interest? How about we have a vote on using voting? :-D

Quote by Jacien

I should be available Saturday Morning PDT, possibly all day if my afternoon plans fall through. My hybrid Klingon/Romulan Mean Girl is at your disposal.

Awesome. I'll be on for the bulk of the day, getting folks to join me in earning the resources our alt/kdf fleets need, which right now means dilithium and marks. We'll be doing fleet actions, pvp, stfs, sorties, exploration dailies, you name it.

I'll also be answering questions and trading tips on how to maximize holdings contributions for each player, so that the base and embassy can advance as quickly as possible, unlocking benefits for all fleet members.

I LOVE IT!! :woohoo:

Ahahah! No dear, Greeks had much better ideas then ours!

Pasta is clearly the winning response. Certainly not Soran's lame attempt to take credit for ripping off a few cool ideas from the Greeks! (See: Cumaean alphabet, Hellenistic philosphers).

And pasta... mmmmmmm...

And, as I already told you, the very same alphabet you're using, the ideas you're thinking and reality as you see it. :kiss:

Quote by Soran

I don't need to remind you that ars rhetorica was conceived here, right? :P

Yes, just like you also concieved the unemployed stay-at-home 30 year old son and the mafia. :-p

I don't need to remind you that ars rhetorica was conceived here, right? :P

Quote by Soran

From where I come, everything is subject to criticism (neutral word) and can be re-debated.

Lord, coming from an Italian, that's a hell of an understatement. Especially when the alternative is to have to actually DO something. :P

I should be available Saturday Morning PDT, possibly all day if my afternoon plans fall through. My hybrid Klingon/Romulan Mean Girl is at your disposal.

Oh Lordy Lordy, what a beast of a thread. BEASTLY! I may just have to pew pew pew everyone as punishment. Lulz aside, I feel the discussion about fleet provisions has become abit accusatory. Which upsets me tbh. Not only 3 months ago, a fleetie accused stonewall FC and Admiralty of abusing the system to get all the advanced stuff, while denying everyone else.

The sad part was, I as an Admiral at that stage didn't possess a single fleet item or provision. In-fact as it stands I only have 6 on one toon. No fleet ships either.

Why am I mentioning this? Because some members in the fleet put so much emphasis on "rank" that they allow for this kind of paranoia. I'm not sayign everyone is, it's just somethign Ive observed since being made admiral. It's just a title with a few administrational duties. That's it.

On the subject of "inferred distrust", again this is portrayed as an executive vs memberbase. But it honestly isn't. It's simply a an issue of statistical proportionality (aside from fleeties), that is to say the larger the fleet base the more higher the probability that someone will abuse the system. That's not an attempt to tar everyone with the same brush, it's a concerted effort to provide safeguards to protect provisions and a means to distribute said provisions fairly amongst everyone in a controlled manner.

Is it Inconvenient? Yes it is. For both FC/Admirals and members. BUT, It's currently the only viable safeguard for preventing abuse.

Soemone mentioned inherent distrust and that no-one in the fleet could do that. Allow me to cut through some hand holding here and shine a hot uncomfortable white light on an unfortunate reality. Starbase camping was RAMPANT after season 6 launched, so much so that the disparity between campers and their fellow members is so grossly distorted that the campers now have the fleet credit ability to purchase every fleet ship and item in the game and STILL have an extremely large amount of credits left. All this to the disadvantage of YOU. I can't tell you how much I petitioned and complained to my fellow executive officers about this, because it isn't fair on anyone.

In fact some fleeties made it a competiion against YOU, to deny YOU the ability to donate to the starbase so they could inflate their already grossly inflated fleet credit holdings.

So I think we need a bloody good reality check in the fleet! Distrust in human nature, or more to the point the desires of a minority that prioritise greed over fairness? Damn right it exists. Consider that.

All this said I'm not at all against the idea of droppping the restrictions, In fact as a member of a mock United Nations community, I would whole-heartedly approve a quorum based voting system whereby the community could vote on these issues in order to promote further transparency in the fleet.

But be aware all this I have mentioned, there are some that would deny you the ability to improve the fleet, it's unfortunate, but true.

Admiral Ozy :)

I'm sorry this last intervention of mine comes so late, but living in Europe I couldn't follow the whole thread deep into yesterday night.

Yes Todd, I haven't left the "ethical" level: it's a "place" I like and stick there quite a lot. ;) Please, don't think I'm just an idealist: ethos is a guideline and this is precisely part of the current debate.

I must confess I'm really surprised by your last intervention SBOS. I don't think anybody wanted to "play the blame game", as much as I believe that none of the Fleet leaders is an evil creature inclined to distrust the rest of the Fleet. But this is the whole point: perceptions are subjective and negative ones make you feel bad. Yet, and please believe me when I say that no offence is meant here, I don't see why your hurt feelings should be more important than mine or anyone else's. [add bear hug here]

I believe BabyBlueBoxers has asked very good questions. I'm worried myself that when tier 5 is achieved, we'll have to face the fact that lots of people who've waited for a long time to get top gear will come to the store adding to those fleeties who won't have earned enough FCs at the time. What then?

From where I come, everything is subject to criticism (neutral word) and can be re-debated. The store-restriction policy was accepted as it is because it was a tentative solution, not holy rules marked on a rock. We're playing an online game which is subject to pretty frequent reshaping, so personally I expect lots of changes to be done in order to keep the Fleet and its policies up-to-date. It's a demanding job and I say thank you to the Fleet leaders for carrying it on so well. And yet, either we all accept the fact that topics can be re-proposed and re-discussed, and cope with the dissenting opinions that come with it, or we make it clear that some facts are settled once and for all.

Two weeks in a row of great RPing. (And I have to give myself a pat on the back over figuring out the mystery.) My only problem now is that, to date, I have played three different toons in RP, and now I have to pick each week because I enjoy playing all of them. :)

I think "somehow" all our collective sewage waste will find its way to Nicktropolis :p

Really excited for this.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

This was a fun short two week episode! and I very much enjoyed the social time last week, looking forward to this weekends event!

I think asking members how much they've contributed to the base in order to have an opinion on this issue is frankly disturbing, and if it's your intention to shut down the person you disagree with you have succeeded marvelously.

I can see some griefer setting up a crime syndicate city and making it miserable for others...is there a military option if a city falls to crime lords? Say a regional coalition goes in and seizes control? ;)

Perhaps it would help to look at the "problem" from a different perspective:

Given that it is the FC's responsibility to monitor fleet provision usage via the middle-man approach to purchasing, under what circumstances would someone be denied from transacting with fleet provisioned stores?

I read somewhere that it is believed that people may be saving up for top-level gear at later fleet stages. Are these people going to be denied for any reason, such as perhaps if the provisions started dipping? Is their contribution to the fleet valued any more or less than a newer member who may also want to make a purchase at this time, and therefore would precedence be given based on seniority? How would preferential treatment based on seniority reflect on the fleet's vision and appear to other members?

How would it work exactly if the system as it stands now were suddenly strained by mass amounts of prospective purchasers? Who would we deny, and why? If no-one is denied, and we would simply allow the stores to be depleted until they were empty on a first-come-first-serve basis, how does that reflect any difference to having the stores open to all? Is that fair, or would it somehow take away from those longer-standing members who have contributed to projects more than newer ones?

Asking probing questions like these, and generating such hypothetical scenarios, might help better illuminate why we regulate fleet store purchases, or perhaps shed light on the redundancy of the middle-man. :)