Quote by Jacien

perhaps I just enjoy a lively debate as you do.

Yes, there is that. The most perspicacious thing you've written yet! (Now who is going to complement me on my brilliant use of a big word? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?)

Quote by Araa

Option #1 - Status quo - Think you and 1 or 2 other people favoured this option. Don't know if you're still here or could support option #4 with its various restrictions.

Yep. That's where I am. I don't think #4 is an especially good idea (it is a distant third place behind your option#3 in my book), but if that's what the fleet decides to do, I'm not gonna ragequit or anything.

I think we should stick with our original compromise decision, but if ya'll change up the system and we get raided, I'll be happy to say "I told you so"... so it is really a win-win from my point of view. :lol:

You know... maybe we could try out your open system on the KDF fleet first and see how it goes. That idea definitely appeals to me!

Since you ask, here are the arguments against the status quo Todd, in no particular order. I'll let you do the ones against our alternative if you like. ;-)

1. Inconvenience - Some people find it very hard to get an FC to help them, particularly people not in NA. I generally see 2-3 requests not get answered/day. Ironically, officers don't see this problem, by definition. :-) This creates frustration, we heard about one person who wanted to leave the fleet over it

2. Lack of utility - Quotas seem to be too restrictive currently, provisions are piling up and not being used, which is what they're there for. Members and officers should be out there with their fancy fleet gear, not with it piled up in the store!

3. Inefficiency - It's a significant drain on members AND officer's time, to have to interrupt or be interrupted whatever they're doing and oversee a purchase both before and after

4. Heirarchical - It places a divide between members and officers, requiring the subordinate members to ask permission from the officers, going against our highly egalitarian values

5. Distrusting of members - The enforcement mechanism says to members, we need to oversee your purchase to make sure you don't buy too much. Implication: You aren't trusted (Note: TOTALLY realize this isn't intentional at all, but the process can implicitly leave that impression on some of us, as we've heard from a few people in the thread)

The alternatives we`re discussing wipe out all of these concerns, and leave us mainly with a question around security and volume control. A number of us would address that with a cooldown period to prevent random fly-by purchasers and guidelines to prevent over-purchasing.

As previously covered in this thread that agreement was made early on while we were still figuring out a new Fleet Provisions system. We have a much better understanding of that system now and a valid and apparently popular argument is being made that the system could stand to be reformed without incident. I have never once purchased nor requested to purchase any item from the fleet store whatsoever, perhaps I just enjoy a lively debate as you do. I agree with the merits of the idea and would be more likely to make a purchase from the fleet store if the restrictions are relaxed. This rather hard-line lonestar stance does not seem to have gathered many supporters. And I, for one do not feel I need to argue this point any further. See you in game :)

Quote by Soran

I haven't missed a single episode, Todd, I swear! Truth is, I remember that in each and every one of them, after betrayal was discovered, team-mates realised how precious their trust was. So thanks for making my point stronger! :) Speaking plainly, it's obvious that there are misconducts. But if we put the threshold high enough, we can achieve both a simpler and freer store-management and the needed protection from free-riders.

I'll agree to blood-screenings. Just like they had in the Federation where everyone trusted each other so much.

[dreaming that we could move this debate forward to better foster a fair and equitable resolution through compromise. Of not beating a dead targ with a pain stick over an idea that had been moved on from in the spirit of cooperation and in truly egalitarian fashion, to move beyond petty bickering and attempt to find a peaceful and balanced consensus based on compromise

Well, see, that is where I am a little confused. Because I thought that the current system was the "balanced consensus based on compromise"; and that reopening what had been a settled matter was a little like "beating a dead targ with a pain stick". I know my initial reaction was "wait... didn't we already have a debate about this and come to a decision that seems to be working?"

I am all in favor of "peaceful and balanced consensus based on compromise". But resolutions should have some degree of finality to them. It isn't much of a "peaceful and balanced consensus based on compromise" if you are just going to bring it up again and again and again for reargument.

Why are we having this debate? Is there some goody in the fleet store that you just can't get your hands on? Is there anything in there that you have to have instant access to 24-hours a day? Are the officers barring you from buying something you desperately need? What is it???

Since you yourself say that we have "moved on" from the original stuff about "egalitarianism and trust" (although Soran seems not to have done so), exactly what is the reason for revisiting an issue on which we already had a "peaceful and balanced consensus based on compromise"?

My position is that we respect and abide by the "peaceful and balanced consensus based on compromise" that we reached before. Why you wish to throw out that decision remains a mystery. I am happy to abide by our original compromise.

Cool Todd, you made your Status Quo position perfectly clear, and perhaps that'll be what the leadership team decides. Let's hope you've argued your points well enough to convince them! And I'm happy to use the word guidelines instead of quotas for the enforcement-less option if you prefer.

I do still believe stridently in my egalitarian and trust paen, it was Nick that did the pivot to mentioning how much easier an open system could be for the officers, which I've also always believed (even if that isn't as much a motivator for me personally).

Oh, and on the quotas question, it's still an open one. Don't forget that just because guidelines or quotas set a limit, all 500 people will not suddenly go out and buy their entire amount. If that was true, we'd already be out of provisions with the current system. So we can still ask ourselves, what limits do we need to set to make withdrawals sustainable?

I haven't missed a single episode, Todd, I swear! Truth is, I remember that in each and every one of them, after betrayal was discovered, team-mates realised how precious their trust was. So thanks for making my point stronger! :)

Speaking plainly, it's obvious that there are misconducts. But if we put the threshold high enough, we can achieve both a simpler and freer store-management and the needed protection from free-riders.

First of all, Soran, I love you for putting the debate in Trek terms AND using the word weltanschauung perfectly. Masterful. (And hopefully you won't suffer from schadenfreude at the end of this debate)

And to our incredibly happy and well mannered Todd (and I'm even not being sarcastic!), you're totally right that you HAVE moved the debate for some of us, and almost no one's talking about the wide open model. Here's where I think the various thread responders are, for all of your feedback:

Option #5 - Open access to all members (possibly with voluntary quotas, but open to abuse from fly by members): The only person that supported this view in this thread is Nick, who seemed to feel that it was the most feasible alternative to the status quo. Most of the thread responders seem to be with you Todd that there should be at least a mandatory waiting period and/or minimum contributions, so I guess the next step is to understand why Nick thinks a minimum waiting period/contributions would be difficult to implement, as there are simpler methods than the one he described. Again, all the fleets I'm aware of use this system without any issue at all (SBO's fleet experience notwithstanding), and, in my experience, it takes much less effort than the current system.

Option #4 - Member cooldown period and quotas - It sounds like the majority of us are landing on this Todd-enhanced compromise, and I was looking to discuss what the quotas should look like for any of these options.

Option #3 - More requisitioning sub-FCs - Think this one has been shot down, which doesn't worry me as much if Options 4 or 5 are acceptable, we essentially won't need them.

Option #2 - Loosening current quotas - Think this has been discussed as a bare minimum if Options 3-5 are unacceptable.

Option #1 - Status quo - Think you and 1 or 2 other people favoured this option. Don't know if you're still here or could support option #4 with its various restrictions.

Gigantic apologies if I've mischaracterized anyone's part of the debate, I've tried to be as objective as possible, but that's usually impossible. Please speak up if you think clarifications are needed!

Quote by Araa

It was like a little kick in the teeth every time I heard a fleet recruiter say "and of course we allow anyone in the fleet to buy directly from the stores....". Why not us?

I believe that's more of a question than a declarative statement. If any one's got an HK51 droid perhaps they'd be good enough to have him check?

I must applaud Araa on boldly yet articulately challenging what may well be an unnecessarily strident system. Not only that, but I must give props for his and others enlightened ability to move beyond their initial arguments by recognizing the merits of points of view different from their own; of havingopinions on the alternative options hoping and dreaming that we could move this debate forward to better foster a fair and equitable resolution through compromise. Of not beating a dead targ with a pain stick over an idea that had been moved on from in the spirit of cooperation and in truly egalitarian fashion, to move beyond petty bickering and attempt to find a peaceful and balanced consensus based on compromise, respect and mutual understanding which is what this wonderful fleet has always been about and should always be.

Now, as then, 'tis simple truth.. Sweetest tongue has sharpest tooth. ;)

Quote by Soran

In any Star Trek series, you can count a number of episodes in which crew members trust each other and security protocols are for outsiders.

Eddington. Seska. Admiral Cartwright. Valeris. Calvin Hudson. Leyton. Red Squad. T'Pel.

Yay, I love Star Trek trivia!

(Soran, I think you missed quite a few episodes there...)

Quote by Araa

Todd, you raise the important question, as did SBO and mrgig, of whether we can adequately provision a fleet of 500 members.

Well, under your suggestion, I guess we can provision a fleet of 500 people if each person contributes enough resources to provision 3 ships, 8 ship components, 8 gound items, and as many consumables as they will consume. Under any other conditions, the answer would be no.

Totally fair question, and this is where we can distinguish between quotas (i.e., how many x's you can buy) and controls (i.e., go see an FC to get access to the store). I'm against the controls, although I'd support a waiting period to reduce the chances of fraud by fly-by-night members*, but I have no problem with quotas to address exactly your concern, particularly if we loosen them slowly over time as we test the process.

Quotas without controls are called "suggestions". If you don't have controls, then it isn't a quota. By definition. Pick a different word, because at this point you and I are not talking about the same thing.

So what's a reasonable amount to ensure there's enough for everyone?

There seems to be plenty under the current system. Let's stick with that!

I'd actually prefer setting them per person rather than per toon (why give more resources to someone just cause they have 15 toons?

Because people with more toons are in a position to contribute more. I've probably put into the main starbase projects 100 prisoner and colonist doffs that my Klingon toon mailed to my Fed toon.

Reactions?

I have no opinion on what the limits should be, just as long as there are actual enforced limits.

On having a member cooldown period to avoid fraud by people joining the fleet just to shop, you and I and most of the others in this chat seem to support it, but it sounds like some of the leadership team doesn't.

I don't think that is an accurate assessment of either my position or of the officers'.

I don't think they yet understand how it can be structured to be easily managed, esp vs. the current system! It partially involves making the req. rank permanent, and if necessary, I can outline the simple process that can make it super simple to manage.

Yes, this [strike]10-page[/strike] [strike]11-page[/strike] 13-page debate certainly suggests super-simplicity...

Certainly we have no problem at all doing it in other fleets, and I don`t think SW is any less capable ;-). At the end of the day, it`s a net reduction in effort to do this vs. the status quo, guaranteed.

If the fleet officers aren't unhappy with their current level of required effort, I will restate my opinion that you are trying to fix something that isn't broken. But I do think that going from "We need egalitarianism and trust!" to "Let's make it simpler for the officers!" is a clever pivot.

Our fleet is at the maximum level of members and is staying there. Our base and embassy projects are advancing as fast as any other fleet's and faster than most. We have plenty of provisions in the store. Anyone who wants to access the store is free to do so by following a simple procedure that applies equally and fairly to every last one of us. Our store is completely secure from ne'er-do-wells like the ones who robbed our bank. Our fleet officers are not complaining about the system being too onerous or complicated for them to manage.

I fail utterly to see the problem with all this, especially since you seem to have dropped your pean to egalitarianism and trust.

I remain convinced that the current system is w.a.d. and needs no altering. I am personally quite happy with the way it works. When I wanted to buy a ship, it took me 2 minutes. When I want access to the store, I have never had trouble getting it. And when the fleet asks me to put my own resources into the provisioning projects, I am happy to do so because I know those provisions are secure and will be used and enjoyed only by my friends and fleetmates. Change makes no sense to me.

I'm participating to the debate with a constructive attitude. There are no numbers here, but working with them every day I came to believe that they make you loose the right perception of things way too often. Be cool and, please, don't tell me my phrasing's too flamboyant: you Anglo-Saxon are so touchy. :P

I've been part of SW for one year and a half, participating quite regularly to our joint efforts as a Fleet. Until now, I haven't done anything but pouring in resources for the fleet both in terms of time and raw materials for projects.

I've participated to only one meeting on-line and we talked about store-restrictions. They had to be temporary and allow us to better understand how the system works. I wasn't completely satisfied with the reasoning then, and certainly I'm not now.

I believe that a policy is also (actually I should say first and foremost) the expression of an attitude and of a weltanschauung. I don't like to be told that someone (I, for instance, or anybody else here) joining and staying in the fleet for a prolonged time could be dangerous to the others. It's arrogant and frankly quite offensive too. Keeping a long-standing fleet member in the condition of needing to ask for something that's rightfully his/her/hir does something terrible: it makes our bonds as a group weaker.

In any Star Trek series, you can count a number of episodes in which crew members trust each other and security protocols are for outsiders. Thus, I back the proposal to reform the store-restrictions to a temporal cap. I understand that it could be a new burden for those who manage the Fleet, but I don't think it would be that much worse than promoting a new member from recruit to cadet and then to member.

Quote by Keioel

Is it possible for someone who has racked up over a million fleet credits to join and drain us dry? Yes, of course it's just as possible as it never happening.

Under the current system, someone with millions of fleet credits coming in and buying up our store is not possible. That is what makes the current system, which was debated and thought-out and agreed-upon, so attractive.

What you, and others, are saying is that someone coming in and doing that after we open up the store is not likely. And I simply don't think you have any evidence to back up that position. You say it isn't likely, but you don't really know. Like I said before, you are wishing and hoping and guessing. Well, I'm not inclined to gamble based on your hopes and dreams about the goodness of humanity nor on your guesses about what people are likely to do. The bank has been robbed. And it was robbed by someone who had played with our fleet for a while and was trying to get himself made fleet captain (and had others suggesting that he should be!) so that he could rob us more completely. You saying the store won't the target of similar players be is just completely contrary to the evidence. But, there is none so blind as he who will not see...

However, no one in this thread has been arguing for wide open access to the fleet store, if you're going to argue against what people are suggesting, it would behoove you to actually counter their points instead of an argument that no one has made.

The original post in this thread, the one that got it all started, flat-out said that we should "allow anyone in the fleet to buy directly from the stores". There was nothing in the original post about waiting periods or windows or anything else. Just that we should let anyone in the fleet buy whatever they wanted because we should have "egalitarianism and trust". And that was what I was reacting to. I don't like that idea. I haven't expressed an opinion about windows or tiers or anything else because I don't really have an issue with any of that. What I took issue was was the original demand that we open up the store to free access by anyone in the fleet and just trust everyone to do be on the honor system. Presumably, that includes people who joined yesterday, because the original posted did not say it didn't.

So please reread the entire thread and note that "wide-open access" was indeed the suggestion to which I was and am responding.

Now, if everyone has, as you say, backed away from that first idea, I will declare that no one is happier to hear it than I am... although it isn't terribly egalitarian or trustful of you. But if you are saying that the idiotic "honor system/voluntary quota" plan is off the table, then I'd say my work here is done.

:cheer:

Hey, we all totally support this, just tell us where/when/how, unless I've missed something!

As an aside, for you to take or leave as you see fit, this 'bursty' approach to holdings works VERY well with pre-staging, I'm using it in another fleet and we seem to be moving faster than SW despite being significantly smaller.

Essentially, if you have everyone's attention for an hour, use them to help fill not only the starbase/embassy's CURRENT needs, but also any upcoming big special projects as well.

To be more precise, it simply means saying "Ok guys, in three days we'll have Transwarp Conduit III, which will need 3600 Energy Cells and 80 DOFFs and 750 Stabilizers (http://www.stowiki.org/List_of_starbase_projects

I'm completely open to doing anything. Haliar, If you'd like to do a map completion run pick a zone that you need work on and we can meet soon. Let me know when you are free and we can go about scheduling a date/time. I would also like to do some farming in Southsun Cove for some passion flowers and Karka drops.

Bumping up please support

I wholeheartedly agree. I'd love to participate in/help run those kinds of events. I'd also be interested in doing some map completion stuff (I didn't get a chance to participate in the last one).

Freshly refitted and under new command, the USS Sally Ride was drawn to an unsettled M-class world by a strange energy reading and discovered a crashed KDF vessel on the surface. When an away team beamed down to recover survivors, they discovered that they were being held on the planet by an ancient technological relic. The team managed to activate an interface with the relic, revealing that it was some kind of biological observation device, but can they convince it not to make them its newest specimens?

[attachment=1176]2012-11-17_00019.jpg[/attachment]

The combined KDF and Starfleet group reluctantly attempted to work together to puzzle out the device's purpose in restraining them, or some weakness that could be used to escape it. They were hampered in their efforts by the device's design, which did nothing to accommodate access or maintenance by humanoids.

After concluding that a persuasive approach should be tried before sabotage, lest the device perceive their actions as threatening, Captain Orenn resumed his one-sided communication while Counselor Kelsan attempted to telepathically analyze the relic's mechanical mind. Together they discovered an odd facet of the device's programming: it seemed almost disappointed by the results of its observations, if such a term could be applied to a centuries-old machine.

The device seemed to be programmed to observe evolution, but had become convinced the species on its planet would never evolve. This seemed to offer some motivation for detaining a more advanced species, but no real avenues of escape.

It was one of the KDF officers, a Lethean named Elivir, who finally made the connection between the relic's ancient Vulcan design influences and its frustration with its observations. During and after the schism, Vulcans and Romulans rapidly adapted to changing circumstances, becoming very different species in a very brief window of time. If the relic originated during that time, it would have had too little time to observe any real evolutionary changes, and it would have perhaps been biased to expect similarly rapid development from any species.

Orenn attempted to use biological records from the Sally Ride's databases as a bargaining chip to get off the planet, but the device seemed totally uninterested in negotiation, instead forcibly removing the information it wanted from the ship's computer. Along the way, though, it seemed to get some inkling of the prime directive; once it had processed the new data, it about-faced immediately, ordering the away teams to leave lest they interfere with the development of its planet's native species.

The crews were only too happy to get off the planet, but hardly any of the mysteries surrounding the relic have been clarified. Where did it come from? How is it so advanced? Why has it never been detected before? And what is its real connection to the Vulcan/Romulan schism?
_________________

OOC notes:
SO late. Blame Thanksgiving. :S

Speaking of which, last weekend I decided to host "downtime" instead of a traditional event. No threats, no puzzles, just a few off-duty crew members socializing in the ship's lounge. I'm really happy with the character interactions that arose out of that, so I'm going to work that sort of thing into our regular schedule. For the time being, I think it's something I'll put in between plots. If there's a high demand for it, I may try to work low-pressure social moments into the normal events as well.

Next week's event will be held at the starbase. KDF characters (including new ones!) are again welcome to join in.

I guess this explains why the channels are like ghost towns lately... Been trying to get a couple more characters into the guild for almost a week but it is like nobody is online... But that I know isn't the whole reason and some of those restrictions are pretty stupid.