Make Guild Leader an Applicable Position

[Ratio]

BIG FAT DISCLAIMER: I'm aware of the initial intent for how the Bounty Hunter Guild was executed, and keep in mind that I do *NOT* dislike Hisoka by any means. In fact, if this gets passed, I'll even go as far as to say that he should be able to skip the application for his first term. He's more than capable of running the faction and I've talked to Sanchez (the creator) about making this suggestion prior.

 

Name: Ray-Shi-Oh

RP Rank: "Corporal"/Executive Officer

Suggestion: Make the Guild Leader job a position you have to apply for on the forums, like every other leader.

Implementation: 

Now, as I said in my disclaimer at the top, I'm aware of how Bounty Hunters is supposed to function. However, I also feel that Guild Leader is a prestigious position that needs an application just because of the potential of how large the Bounty Hunter Guild could be. A position in a high place should never be as volatile as it is and Bounty Hunters should go through the same OOC politics that all BCMDs/RCMDs/Grand Masters should.

Below I will address some concerns and reasons as to why this should be changed.

1. Stagnation
If Bounty Hunters are always under one person potentially, then that person's vision won't provide the variety that the faction needs. Under the current system, I would almost go as far as it being a system set up for failure. Some of the Guild Cabinet members might want a change but struggle to really get it out. Not to mention the community members who actively play in the guild may want a say as well, and part of that is being able to select a new leader on the forums.

2. Credibility 
Currently, the Guild Leader has no credibility when it comes to the overall server. While I firmly believe in the idea that if someone is passionate enough, they'll be able to lead ANYONE on the server, the fact that it's an elected position that the community members and lesser BH's can't vote on leaves for potential of power playing and others just favoritizing a single person into high positions of power. NOTHING stops the Guild Leadership from becoming a friend group that just keeps rotating from person to person. Now, I know this also happens with applicable positions, but at least a post on the forums allows people to really get their voice out against the person if they truly disagree with them gaining the position. I also am aware that the whole "point" of the guild is to power play, but that doesn't make it "okay" or a "good thing" by any means. 

3. Public Relations
How often have you seen others complain about bounty hunters being idiotic? While the "report" system is entirely created in-house, it's created by a figurehead that can be gone within the next week. Every leadership position is unofficial at best and in some situations you could even say this absolves them of responsibility and doesn't allow Directors to step in and handle things. In fact, the best I can see them doing is to punish the entire guild. If there's no one truly there to pick out the rotten fruits of the guild, then the rest of the faction may suffer. Guild Leaders also don't need to go Commander Meetings, which doesn't allow Battalion Commanders to voice any concerns against the guild and even gives them the ability to make suggestions for the guild without the permission of the Guild's leadership. 

If you have any concerns or questions about this post, please include your reasoning if you -1 this. 

Lore: N/A

Workshop content if applicable: N/A
(If no workshop content, suggest a developer or put "Require Development")

[Bbstine]

It’s a good point, looking at when this was first brought up in a High Command meeting we discussed that it’d be an alternative to BO and Jedi. We allowed Sith to our meetings and into our Discord, if it is a leader of a position that is supposedly equivalent to what Jedi and BO are then that means we should treat it like it.

 

+1, it’s simple.

Im not sure who the current guild leader is but they should be able to atleast hold that position until a designated term is finished.

[Marvel]

+1 No brainer

[Fizzik]

Actually I'm retarded and didn't understand the post, -1 I like how it's done currently with appointment.

Edited February 12, 2020 by Fizzik

[Lord Thegan]

10 minutes ago, Fizzik said:

+1 I thought that's how it was gonna be? 

+1 me 2

[Hero]

TLDR: -1 is my personal, but i could +1 I would be fine with this but you have the wrong reasons. 
 

1) The stagnation is irrelevant because you have the cabinet in place. They are there not only to enforce rules and assist the Leader, but to give him ideas and help him with changes, and new rules. Their entire existence is so they can assist and support the leader. Also would you say eggs multiple terms as Gree caused a stagnation in the Battalion? If so then he should no longer continue being Gree. (love you Egg) The role of the Clan Leaders is to ensure that stagnation doesn’t exist, if they see something they don’t like they are allowed to remove the current leader.

 

2) I kind of agree here, while just being appointed to a position just forces the underlings of the bounty hunters to just bend to their will. They don’t have a say in the matter. The voting on the applications will let them have a say as well. The power playing in BH is supposed to be apparent, and as a Guild Leader you need to be careful and play around it. It’s a fun dance between impeachment and staying the favorite. 
 

3) I agree The guild leader should be present at the commander meetings, I’m in the HC discord and I encourage people to give me names and reports of people who break the rules/minge and I have swift and hard justice upon them. 
 

The bounty hunter system is that of checks and balances, if any of this confused you please ask me to specify and i will.

Edited February 19, 2020 by Hero

[Pyle]

+1

[Ratio]

25 minutes ago, Hero said:

1) The stagnation is irrelevant because you have the cabinet in place. They are there not only to enforce rules and assist the Leader, but to give him ideas and help him with changes, and new rules. Their entire existence is so they can assist and support the leader. Also would you say eggs multiple terms as Gree caused a stagnation in the Battalion? If so then he should no longer continue being Gree. (love you Egg) The role of the Clan Leaders is to ensure that stagnation doesn’t exist, if they see something they don’t like they are allowed to remove the current leader.

I wouldn't say that at all! I started with stagnation because I felt I should start with the weakest argument for it first. I can personally see the right man leading a continuous and prosperous life for a battalion. However, I would also say that battalions are pretty streamlined with pretty regulated ideas and rules. Bounty Hunters is more akin to Jedi in the aspects of structure, in that anyone could be one, which is why I said the guild had potential to be very large and chaotic.

Stagnation was largely brought up because it's the main thing that the application system is designed to prevent! Felt wrong just leaving it out.

Edited February 12, 2020 by Ratio

[Hero]

@Ratio I hear what your saying, but what I’m trying to compel is the fact that if there was to be stagnation in bounty hunters. The Clan Leaders have the power to curb it by removing the Guild Leader 

[Marvel]

39 minutes ago, Hero said:

@Ratio I hear what your saying, but what I’m trying to compel is the fact that if there was to be stagnation in bounty hunters. The Clan Leaders have the power to curb it by removing the Guild Leader 

Yes but the problem with that is the Guild is based around a “favoritism” and “power playing” system where the guild leader is put into his position by the cabinet. This in itself can cause stagnation as a friend group can easily power play the cabinet and guild leader and nothing will be done and none of them will remove one another.

May I ask who selects cabinet members and who can remove cabinet members?

The cabinet can cause just as much stagnation as the guild leader can. 

[Hero]

2 minutes ago, Marvel said:

Yes but the problem with that is the Guild is based around a “favoritism” and “power playing” system where the guild leader is put into his position by the cabinet. This in itself can cause stagnation as a friend group can easily power play the cabinet and guild leader and nothing will be done and none of them will remove one another.

May I ask who selects cabinet members and who can remove cabinet members?

The cabinet can cause just as much stagnation as the guild leader can. 

The cabinet is fully appointed by the guild leader, they can be added/removed at their own free will. The guild Leader is in control of the cabinet members and no one else has a rule influence over their head. If one cabinet member does not pull weight they can be removed and replaced.

[Scribbles]

Question: So if this were to pass, who would be able to apply for it? 

 

[BigBoss]

3 minutes ago, Scribbles said:

Question: So if this were to pass, who would be able to apply for it? 

 

Hopefully someone who is at LEAST a competent clan leader or higher

All the clan leaders elected hisoka as the guild leader through a democratic vote

Of the people  for the people

But I wouldnt mind seeing them actually be more official with it

[Ratio]

3 minutes ago, Scribbles said:

Question: So if this were to pass, who would be able to apply for it? 

 

This part is more Director discretion. Although, if it were me, I would probably allow Guild Cabinet Members to apply without a waive. Though, I imagine Clan Leaders wouldn't be a bad idea either.

[Willyworm1]

+1 It's a group you can join, just like jedi, clones, and senator. It might as well be managed by someone who has yo dk the same process as the other groups.

TBH this should have been implemented after it took off.

P.S. @Hero you better go for it if it becomes an application 

[Hero]

18 minutes ago, Scribbles said:

Question: So if this were to pass, who would be able to apply for it? 

 

Personally I think it should be cabinet members should be the only ones to apply 

[BigZach]

I feel like the application process would hinder operations a good bit. But I do agree that having Clan leaders vote is kinda whack.

[KnightVR]

+1 Reasonable suggestion to have since the spot is limited and everyone would like to have a person that they like to run for the spot than only one person. 

[Dennis]

+1

[Clutch]

+1

[zoink]

+1

[Alec]

-1 I like the current system

[Sixta]

-1 current system is fine. 

[SmallJeff]

+1

[Chambers]

-1 The BH need to be run differently to stand apart in the server and there are plenty of checks and balances within BH to prevent or address stagnation as well as the Directors being the final line where they can remove people.

[Scribbles]

I havent given a vote yet but personally -1.
I like the current system and dont feel it should be changed (yet anyway)

Also if leaders/cabinet members feel the Guild leader isnt dong much to address anything the majority can yeet them. (it may seem like a bias view but just an opinion) Just my thoughts <3 I wouldnt be opposed to apps. 

Edited February 13, 2020 by Scribbles

[syntax]

+1 Not only would they need the approval from Clan Leaders but it minimizes favoritism within those groups. This is a slam dunk in my book.

[Rohan]

Y'all talking about stagnation, what even is that

[Bro]

+1, I thought this was already a thing

[ISNIFFPROPANE]

+1

If it’s not an applicable position it’s easily gonna turn into a system of favoritism, backstabbing, and a lot of sore knees. Doesn’t make sense for it to be any other way than an application like everything else.

[Porsche]

-1

The BH system is so new that we need time to see the potential flaws, as well as to let things play out.

[Clank]

-1, I honestly feel that the appointment system works better than the whole forums process. Like Carter said, we need to be different and stand out. Plus we have checks and balances. And as the Cabinet, we work to prevent most of these issues from rising up alongside the Guild Leader. Plus, I feel as if the whole allowing powerplay to an extent is the best. When it comes down to actual like serverwise powerplay for the sake of JUST holding power, it shouldn't be allowed ,but the concept of allowing a Cabinet Member to go behind the GL's back inRP and win over all the support of the clan leaders to have them vote out the current GL and Elect the Cabinet Member instead should be allowed. This way it creates a whole constant power struggle diving players to have a goal to work towards, being that top dog. IT allows awesome RP to also come out of it.

[Sleeper]

-1 no reason for change,

[Oliver]

-1 The system works well as it is. To make it an applicable position potentially means dismantling a section of the uniqueness of it. Its also a very different position then say a BCMD. BH is nothing like the Republic or the jedi, so they shouldn't be treated the same when it comes to their positions. 

 

Carter also has a good point. If it is becoming an issue, the directors can remove a Guild Leader

[Austistic]

yeah, I don't think this should be applicable because it kinda makes bounty hunters differ greatly from everything else on the server. I think that BH is doing great now and that this change is small, but is not needed so we can keep the unique nature of the guild.

-uno

[Crimson]

Here comes my opinion so be aware this is an opinion. Since the Guild Leader holds a relative large amount of power i.e control of the Guild and setting and or tell others to set bounties I think it should applicable. Now you can put restrictions on to apply but this allows both sides to come to a compromise to who should get it. If I am honest I dislike Bounty Hunters. But this allows those to voice their opinions on the Guild Leaders. Now to say this will be like the Republic and Jedi but those are position that comes with power. The Guild Leader is allowed access in the Command Discord which most people in there have a large amount of power. My second point to why it should be applicable is because it to prevent any bias and or favoritism in the Guild. That is not me accuse of it currently now but nothing is to say it happens later. I will use the Jedi Order for example, currently now its great and fine but in the past it has suffered. For the people who think the voting process makes you different are wrong, sorry to be blunt but most things that put people in those position start with a vote. hate me if you want but that's how it is. To the Third point, Directors removing a Guild leader should be the last resort. That means you are an absolute idiot if you get removed. Once again its the same in High Command, If I am an idiot I get removed. Overall you guys are preaching for things that make you "different" but in reality its the same as most BCMD+ positions. and with the current rules of Clones making bounties its even has some of the same perks. Thats my two cents but over Huge +1.

[BlankNameAsshole]

On 2/12/2020 at 4:00 AM, Ratio said:

1. Stagnation

 

If Bounty Hunters are always under one person potentially, then that person's vision won't provide the variety that the faction needs. Under the current system, I would almost go as far as it being a system set up for failure. Some of the Guild Cabinet members might want a change but struggle to really get it out. Not to mention the community members who actively play in the guild may want a say as well, and part of that is being able to select a new leader on the forums.

1. Bounty Hunters aren't always under one person, we have had two leaders within the very first month. It isn't that hard to make a new clan, only requiring a few weeks of grinding to do so, I think we had our first clan within a week of opening while there were more restrictions on missions per day. Even the smallest clan has an equal say to the largest clan, with the intention of letting new voices influence who leads the Guild. I can see this argument working if we were multiple months in and it was the same person throughout the entire time, but as it stands we are one month in and have had two different leaders, so it's kind of silly to say that something that isn't a problem and you don't know will be a problem is a problem that should be addressed.
2. The goal of cabinet members is ultimately to help fulfill the vision of the Clan Leader and administrate the Guild. That is it. Their ideas only matter so long as the Clan Leader says they matter. Clan Leaders are the one who have a chance of making their vision of the Guild a reality and it is their job to make political alliances to make it happen. Most clans take votes on things or at least talk it over, because if their members don't like the way their clan is being run there are zero restrictions on them leaving and that is one less source of income for the clan. Honestly this entire point shows you don't seem to understand the political aspects of the guild as it stands now.

On 2/12/2020 at 4:00 AM, Ratio said:

2. Credibility 

 

Currently, the Guild Leader has no credibility when it comes to the overall server. While I firmly believe in the idea that if someone is passionate enough, they'll be able to lead ANYONE on the server, the fact that it's an elected position that the community members and lesser BH's can't vote on leaves for potential of power playing and others just favoritizing a single person into high positions of power. NOTHING stops the Guild Leadership from becoming a friend group that just keeps rotating from person to person. Now, I know this also happens with applicable positions, but at least a post on the forums allows people to really get their voice out against the person if they truly disagree with them gaining the position. I also am aware that the whole "point" of the guild is to power play, but that doesn't make it "okay" or a "good thing" by any means.

1.This is a weird one to me, personally I don't give anyone credibility regardless of rank unless I know them personally, because I have seen some impressively dumb people in very high positions. This seems to be the attitude of if not a majority, a large minority of the server. People respect who they know, and when one gets high enough in Bounty Hunters they are generally at least known by the people participating in the guild.

2. Community members and random unknown bounty hunters shouldn't have a voice in the leadership of the guild, based both on the lore if nothing else. Why would experienced bounty hunters who have shown their talent and are known all around care about what some random bounty hunter who has two bounties to their name or some clone might think? Even pragmatically the system is meant for a fluid transfer of power with leadership going back and fourth very often, depending on the immediate needs of the clans who vote them in.

3. You say nothing stops Guild Leadership from becoming a friend group but that just isn't true. A Clan can be created with a week of bounties done by a group of 4 people. There might be a time where some clans work together to keep their person in charge but that is literally the point, and if they aren't doing a good job their isn't anything stopping members from leaving those clans, starting their own and electing a new person. This isn't even mentioning that huge established clans have no more voting power than the newest, tiniest clan when it comes to voting in a new Guild Leader.

3. The Guild Leader doesn't have the power to arbitrarily remove someone from the guild for speaking out, that entire point isn't an issue. If they don't want to listen to someone because they disagree with their views then it is perfectly possible for them to take their vote and try to drum up support for someone else. You say you are aware that the point is to power play but it seems like you either don't or you just want to change it just because. You haven't really done the most important things here, show how your suggested change would actually make things different than they are now, or show an understanding of what the powers of the Guild Leader actually are. That last one is important because you are arguing against a problem that doesn't exist with a solution that wouldn't fix it even if it did exist. Somehow posting on the forums would prevent the Guild Leader from persecuting you if you disagreed with them if they had the power to do so. Why? How?

On 2/12/2020 at 4:00 AM, Ratio said:

3. Public Relations
How often have you seen others complain about bounty hunters being idiotic? While the "report" system is entirely created in-house, it's created by a figurehead that can be gone within the next week. Every leadership position is unofficial at best and in some situations you could even say this absolves them of responsibility and doesn't allow Directors to step in and handle things. In fact, the best I can see them doing is to punish the entire guild. If there's no one truly there to pick out the rotten fruits of the guild, then the rest of the faction may suffer. Guild Leaders also don't need to go Commander Meetings, which doesn't allow Battalion Commanders to voice any concerns against the guild and even gives them the ability to make suggestions for the guild without the permission of the Guild's leadership.

1. The reports are moved up the chain if they are a serious issue. If they are breaking the rules of the Guild then they get a strike, with more punishment depending on how it affects the Guild Health as a whole and the severity of the rules they broke. You are someone who has had very similar reports about your behavior in the past, are you saying that your behavior when you were new to CG should have been a reason stamp down on CG as a whole, in fact how many times did you disagree with those assessments? 

2. Every leadership position isn't unofficial, they are officially in charge of the Guild. Everything after this is untrue. Even if they were an "unofficial" official Guild Leader how would they - as a player - be able stop a director from stepping in, please elaborate. Why would a director not be able to punish a single person? Would they not be able to find out who did something wrong? Why, is someone hiding the person who did it, was there no documentation? Did they break a bounty hunter rule and then not get punished? Why wouldn't they get punished? Do you have a single piece of evidence of someone not being punished for breaking a rule in the Bounty Hunters? Even if they didn't what would that have to do with a director, if they aren't breaking a server rule? So much of this point makes no sense at all.

3. Your point about no one being able to pick out rotten fruits its dumb, its literally just a hypothetical. What if there were no admins to ban people? What is someone was bestest friends with Joah and he unbanned them when they did anything, the server would all fall apart. Therefore we need to specifically get someone to make sure Joah doesn't get a bestest friend that he will then unban. Just. In. Case. Seriously this entire point is based on something that hasn't happened, you don't have any evidence will happen, and even if it did happen, someone being elected on the forums doesn't magically enhance their character to the level where they are incorruptible.

4. Guild Leaders aren't commanders. They should be invited but I'm not surprised they aren't. If a Battalion Commander wants to voice a concern literally contact them.

5. What do you mean "giving suggestions without the permission from the Guild Leadership"? You don't need their permission to make a suggestion. Do you mean you want random Battalion Commanders to be able to make changes to the Guild without anyone in the guild having a say by overriding the Guild Leader? I mean, even with your suggestion that wouldn't happen, because they would still be contacting the Guild Leader who would just be chosen by everyone, even those completely uninvolved and uninformed about the guild.

 

TL;DR  I don't think you understand how the politics is supposed to work. Most of your points are random hypothetical of what could happen in the worst possible scenario, and even then your solution doesn't seem like it would actually solve the hypothetical problems you make up. -1

[Tinovious]

+1

[Ratio]

2 hours ago, BlankNameAsshole said:

TL;DR  I don't think you understand how the politics is supposed to work. Most of your points are random hypothetical of what could happen in the worst possible scenario, and even then your solution doesn't seem like it would actually solve the hypothetical problems you make up. -1

When this was posted, Bounty Hunters was relatively new and it still is. I went for the worst case scenario because these are the things that applications are designed to prevent. And it seems the way you responded to some things was actually giving off the tone that you were upset by this post? I say you were upset by this because you decided to resort to a small little personal attack? I'm not sure what I did to you, and I don't even know who you are but my early career in CG was years ago at this point, mystery dude.

You're thinking about it from a completely roleplay standpoint, but when I made this, it was for the behind the scenes standpoint. I'm aware it's a roleplay server, but certain things need to be done to make sure that RP is optimal and that includes allowing the community, not just a closed off group, to be able to vote for their leaders.

I know the Guild Leader isn't a commander, but every important position has an application and nothing stops any operations that Bounty Hunters currently perform and none of your points really explained how exactly it hinders these. The only thing I can imagine it hinders is it taking just a bit longer to get a leader. And, as you and many others have said, you have your Cabinet members to step in for you. This post is primarily made for preference, and the people who +1'd this post would prefer being able to vote for our leaders in a post that's open to all.

Hope this helped you. :)

[DracoOdinson]

-1 no bh needs to be different

Edited February 24, 2020 by DracoOdinson

[Baron]

+1, such a high level position on the server, regardless of faction, should be no different than any other faction on the server, regardless of how "unique" or "special" some members of the community may think it is.

[Rose]

-1 we wanted something to be different from sith and different from Jedi and you want to make it the same? Also @Ratiohero is invited to the BCMD meeting there is a section for him (or cabinet if he can’t show up) to add at PTS and any changes they are thinking about. 

[BlankNameAsshole]

50 minutes ago, Ratio said:

When this was posted, Bounty Hunters was relatively new and it still is. I went for the worst case scenario because these are the things that applications are designed to prevent. And it seems the way you responded to some things was actually giving off the tone that you were upset by this post? I say you were upset by this because you decided to resort to a small little personal attack? I'm not sure what I did to you, and I don't even know who you are but my early career in CG was years ago at this point, mystery dude.

I wasn't personally offended, it just showed ignorance to the system as it stands and had no substance behind some of your critiques. There have been critiques in this thread that are misinformed or make little sense. My "personal attack" was perfectly reasonable, pointing out that by your logic because you did some dumb things when you first joined CG and people said what you did was dumb in quite a few situations would be a bad reason to assume that whoever was Fox at the time was protecting "rotten fruit" or that CG as a whole was somehow responsible for any mistakes you might have made. It's not saying that you are bad or still make those mistakes, it is pointing out that when you were starting out in that role you made mistakes, and people painting all of CG with the same brush because of little mistakes made by you would have been silly. The same is true for Bounty Hunters. We have had a few incidents within the past month of starting a brand new system, and many people are enjoying a more player-run free-form organization.

50 minutes ago, Ratio said:

You're thinking about it from a completely roleplay standpoint, but when I made this, it was for the behind the scenes standpoint. I'm aware it's a roleplay server, but certain things need to be done to make sure that RP is optimal and that includes allowing the community, not just a closed off group, to be able to vote for their leaders.

I know the Guild Leader isn't a commander, but every important position has an application and nothing stops any operations that Bounty Hunters currently perform and none of your points really explained how exactly it hinders these. The only thing I can imagine it hinders is it taking just a bit longer to get a leader. And, as you and many others have said, you have your Cabinet members to step in for you. This post is primarily made for preference, and the people who +1'd this post would prefer being able to vote for our leaders in a post that's open to all.

I am not just thinking about it from a role play perspective, I am saying that pragmatically your points still don't work. For instance there was a time when Egg was fairly inactive but still got voted in again and again through the application process largely due to favoritism (he's much better now I understand he was busy while it was happening but as a new player during that time is was annoying.) I can see the uses of the system and understand why people would use it for battalions where their leader is directly in charge of everyone below them in a strict military structure but that isn't the case with the Guild Leader. The Guild leader helps set rules for the guild, kick people out who are breaking those rules, tries to resolve issues, and makes missions. Why should any of these things require input from the larger community? Why should people in the community who have never participated in the Guild, seemingly have no idea how it functions, how it is supposed to function, or the lore behind it have a say in who is leading the Guild? I could understand if there were large-scale problems with minging and fail rp or RDM and nothing was being done about it because the Guild Leader just didn't care and all of the Faction Leaders were such friends with him that they just kept him in power while the entire server turned against their group, that that isn't happening. Going immediately to the unlikely worst case scenario and using that as a problem that needs to be solved is silly.

You contradict yourself with your second point, earlier you say that it is an "unofficial figurehead" and now you are saying that it is an important position. I never said it hinders any operations the bounty hunters are doing, I don't think I even hinted at that, because I don't think it would. I just don't see why random people with no knowledge of the Guild that aren't staff should have large input on what was meant to be a largely player-run institution. The guild leader helps guide the guild, they don't enforce server rules outside of their possible duties as staff, they don't set policy that affects troopers outside of their interactions with Bounty Hunters, they have no power outside of those who aren't also in The Guild. The comments section alone shows that almost every +1 here that has actual content doesn't understand how the guild functions. One said the cabinet elects people, it doesn't. One said there should be a vote, there is within the guild itself. One said that the Guild Leader had power because they had access to a discord where they can contact High Command, anyone in discord can send a message to anyone in high command unless they are blocked. If people can't be bothered to read through the Rules and Regulations to understand how the guild functions I don't really see why the guild should be affected about their uninformed opinion. That's really all it comes down to. 

Saying "I want the system changed because the system should be changed because it should" really just isn't a good enough reason in my opinion.

Edited February 24, 2020 by BlankNameAsshole

[Ratio]

5 minutes ago, BlankNameAsshole said:

I never said it hinders any operations the bounty hunters are doing, I don't think I even hinted at that, because I don't think it would.

Then what's the issue? I'm sorry, but if you can't give me a reason as to why this would be a bad thing then you should just stick to your own personal preference. You're writing an entire essay dissecting my post with points that are pretty much there because they're all what would be expected for an application to prevent.

Synergy is a community run provider in which everyone gets a voice. And, I'm sorry, but a personal attack is never reasonable. You could have brought up something completely unrelated to me or illustrated your point in a different way. When you do something like that, it more so seems like you're trying to make the person you disagree with look like a jackass on an entirely opinionated standpoint for how the server and large positions such as the Guild Leader should operate.

And in my subjective opinion, someone who's running an entire faction should go through the extra effort in getting the blessing from the community. The way it currently is set up makes it sound like it was created just for the sake of skipping steps, especially something so vital and important as the mission statement for Synergy itself.

[BlankNameAsshole]

23 minutes ago, Ratio said:

Then what's the issue? I'm sorry, but if you can't give me a reason as to why this would be a bad thing then you should just stick to your own personal preference. You're writing an entire essay dissecting my post with points that are pretty much there because they're all what would be expected for an application to prevent.

Synergy is a community run provider in which everyone gets a voice. And, I'm sorry, but a personal attack is never reasonable. You could have brought up something completely unrelated to me or illustrated your point in a different way. When you do something like that, it more so seems like you're trying to make the person you disagree with look like a jackass on an entirely opinionated standpoint for how the server and large positions such as the Guild Leader should operate.

And in my subjective opinion, someone who's running an entire faction should go through the extra effort in getting the blessing from the community. The way it currently is set up makes it sound like it was created just for the sake of skipping steps, especially something so vital and important as the mission statement for Synergy itself.

 

50 minutes ago, BlankNameAsshole said:

 If people can't be bothered to read through the Rules and Regulations to understand how the guild functions I don't really see why the guild should be affected about their uninformed opinion. That's really all it comes down to. 

Saying "I want the system changed because the system should be changed because it should" really just isn't a good enough reason in my opinion.

My "essay" would be expected to prevent an application? What does this even mean? You expected me to post this because it stops people from posting applications? I'm not stopping anyone from posting an application, I'm saying why I think it is unnecessary for people to have a say in a position they know nothing about and that doesn't really affect them. Sorry if that went over your head, I enjoy fleshing out my thoughts when I type long-form.

It wasn't a personal attack, there were no ad hominems I was literally saying what you did and drawing a connection to your naysayers and what you are saying right now. I'm sorry if that offended you, but using an example from the other persons experiences is perfectly reasonable tactic in an argument, it's supposed to draw on your experiences to help you get a new understanding of the situation from my point of view. I see that it missed the mark.

Different steps for different organizations doesn't mean something is "skipping steps" it's different lore, different elective systems, and entirely different power and authority. There is nothing stopping anyone from saying what they want about the way the guild functions or issues they have with it, in fact we actively encourage it, we read every piece of feedback and discuss it to try and make the system as it stands better, but I just don't see the point why there should be direct influence from people who don't play Bounty Hunters, seem to have active hostility towards bounty hunters (not you but others), not understand very basic premises of the system they are want to vote on and have issues that either haven't materialized yet or wont happen because the Guild doesn't work the way they think it does. Keep in mind these critiques aren't all from you but also from other feedback in this thread.

It was meant to be a more player-run organization within the game, functioning as a collective of disparate groups, each with different lore and goals with the Guild Leader running the administrative aspect and making sure everyone has jobs coming in with the Guild Leader specifically not acting as an authoritarian ruler, and I think the current system fits that idea. I'll leave it here but that's just where I stand on the subject.

 

Edited February 24, 2020 by BlankNameAsshole

[Merrill]

As a note, since some people don't seem to know how the hierarchy works with BH. Guild Leader makes executive calls, and has cabinet for assistance in matters. Cabinet is chosen by Guild Leader, but not vice versa. Guild leader is chosen and removed by democratic vote of the ClanLeaders, who are given their positions based on creating a clan (Guild Leader has no say in who can be a clan leader). A clan leader cannot be a cabinet member, and a cabinet member cannot be a clan leader. Additionally, anyone can be a clan leader as long as they are active in BH, earning the renown to found their clan.

 

-1

Love you Ratio, and I get where you are going with this, but BH just does not operate the same way as Normal battalions. The way we have it works, and it works pretty damn well (except for the lack of good memes from bad applications)

[Stockings]

-1 

Reasons state prior. 

[Stonyrock]

Everyone should game at same level to be at the right level in game. Long shot of ungood things to happen here. We need less power from Grabis and Sancuzas (Brodly) tho becsue they no very good at tell others how to game effectiv maybe make beter docs ? Overhuge -1

[Bananaberry]

Moved to pending

//locked

//moved to pending

[Dragon]

Denied by Intel Team

Reasons given by voting members:

1. Not needed in current climate(That was the big one)

[Dragon]

Denied