What is your guys opinion on term ?

[Bazoo]

SO back at the launch of the server, BCMD had no terms, and I think it was better. I dont think we need BCMD term. But people need to use commander report more often then. Keep in mind that if you post a report on your commander he cannot demote you for it, if he does go to a director and the BCMD will be removed for taking action. So my question to you is, what is your guys opinion on the removal of terms for BCMD ? Dont put just +1 or -1 put an actual reason with it so we know why ?
The reason I say BCMD and not High command, is because High command has way more power so I think its normal it has terms.
If this gets good amount of feedback director will look at it, from what he told me.

Edited August 20, 2018 by Bazoo

[Bolt]

-1, tbh you may like a guy, but they aren't putting in work, and you don't wanna be the guy putting a report on in the report stand, when it comes to terms, i think they give others a chance to run, especially if the battalion could be doing better, but not enough for a BCMD removal

[Bazoo]

Just now, Bolt said:

-1, tbh you may like a guy, but they aren't putting in work, and you don't wanna be the guy putting a report on in the report stand, when it comes to terms, i think they give others a chance to run, especially if the battalion could be doing better, but not enough for a BCMD removal

The way I see it is, why fixing something that isnt broke ? Commender report are there for a reason

[Spooky]

-1 let someone else go for the position when they feel it is time

[Twelves]

If someome in a bcmd position is not doing the amount of work expected of him, he should be reported. Fuck this icefuse copycat shit, lets become unique lol +1

[Mike]

no need for terms

[Maymays]

-1 There was a problem with not having terms, the BCMD never wanted to pass the torch until the entire battalion is begging for a resignation. Also the fact that the BCMD just simply doesn't want to give up the position. With terms - if the BCMD is ready to reapply and doesn't want to pass the torch, then reapply. The interview will be easy as fuck because you know what to do and what to say. Removing term limits is a bad idea.

[Washington]

Terms for BCMDs are terrible. Since my time throughout the server (and a VAST majority of my time was in High Command, where I had term limits) I have always been vehemently against them. To save time and space, I'll bullet why it is a terrible idea for BCMDs:

• Pointless. We have Commander Reports for a reason, use them.
• "What if the guy goes inactive" Don't we have High Command for a reason? I mean, I know they are not the best, but they can get the job done.
• "What if they don't pass on the torch" Then go over them, you can go Commander-REG at the same cost! You also could hold a General Meeting with your BCMD. We had to do it in the 327th back in the day, and it got the man out, and a new one in. I know it is hard, but try talking to people, does wonders.
• It can add additional stress to the Battalion Commander that they have to need the entire communities respect to be able to EXIST.

Now time to address some counter-arguements:

12 minutes ago, Bolt said:

you don't wanna be the guy putting a report on in the report stand

If you can't Commander Report a man who is failing at his job, you clearly aren't cut out to be a BCMD. Man up, and get the job done.

9 minutes ago, Spooky said:

let someone else go for the position when they feel it is time

Just because people have the OPPORTUNITY to apply, doesn't mean they should. Look at the Egg Vs. Matra race, if Matra would've won it would've killed the battalion. Let's look at something closer to home, what if Tristan didn't get Bly? The 327th would have failed by now, and its the second day. The right people need to be there.

8 minutes ago, Twelves said:

Fuck this icefuse copycat shit, lets become unique

This man, is speaking wise words. Everything we keep moving towards to seems to be like we are slowly becoming IFN, and wasn't that the OPPOSITE of what we wanted to do. Maybe, we should try to be our own server.

In conclusion, Battalion Commander terms are pointless, and all the points that support it are all subjective and based on a few specific incidents. In the long-run, it is a bad thing, and should not be in existence. This probably won't happen, but maybe we can see continual change into the server at some point.

Thank you, have a great day.

 

[Bazoo]

15 minutes ago, Mike said:

no need for terms

Like I said, please put a reason, if you just +1/-1 they will not look at it

[Mike]

3 minutes ago, Bazoo said:

Like I said, please put a reason, if you just +1/-1 they will not look at it

this in off topic not a server suggestion im not +1 or -1ing im just leaving my opinion 

[Bazoo]

1 minute ago, Mike said:

this in off topic not a server suggestion im not +1 or -1ing im just leaving my opinion 

yea but the reason I made it its because if people put good reason against or for it, they will look at it thats why I made the post

[Mike]

Just now, Bazoo said:

yea but the reason I made it its because if people put good reason against or for it, they will look at it thats why I made the post

if you want them to look at it just make a suggestion 

[Bazoo]

Just now, Mike said:

if you want them to look at it just make a suggestion 

Its said in the post, they will look at it, Square told me to put it in general discussion

[BlackiSblack]

-1 Reasons stated by maymays

[Baelfire]

Give Washington a damn cookie.

Edited August 21, 2018 by Mishue

[Tristan]

As a battalion commander, my +1 could be seen as bias

but my experience nulls my bias so screw you

My official vote is +1 and for these reasons

On icefuse back in the past when I was Bly the first time, I was the commander for 1 month before they implemented a term limit of 2 months.

I spent those 2 months RACING to try to get my battalion in a good spot, and you know what happened after my XO attempted a coup? He succeeded and beat me. He was BCMD for 8 days

EIGHT DAYS!

and not too long after that, it died.

I feel as though a BCMD should be able to run a battalion as long as he/she able, and if that time period exceeds 3 months, so be it. If they suck. Well then remove them.

 

[miguz]

+1 just file a report if you dont like em

 

if they get burnt out then whatever they resign

[Prince]

33 minutes ago, Washington said:

I know it is hard, but try talking to people, does wonders.

This right here is how we repaired all relationships in SOBDE in 1 fucking night.

[Thexan]

Terms are the best idea that's ever come out of this god forsaken place. Tyrants reign supreme! Dictatorships are in! (On the real though, the two pros are the opportunity for others to try for the position, and that it is mostly just an eval on the person in the position.) 

Pros end there  though, and I lean towards no terms for BCMD.

Edited August 21, 2018 by Thexan
Typo

[Vaal]

@Bazoo I don't believe that BCMDs should have terms - I instead believe that BCMDs should retain their report system. I feel that this is the best and/or easiest way  to not only have a community member bring it to light, but also force the community to discuss the pros or cons of the BCMD at his current status and past actions. I think @Washington (who is also "vehemently" against BCMD terms) will agree that:

• The current functionality of the report system has been utilized extremely well in the past,
• The upheaval of a BCMD causes mass distress within a battalion in terms of things like chain of command, especially around new or old documentation,
• Nobody except the current BCMD or other members can expect to know the functionality of the battalion.

My own opinions also detail that I believe

• If you can't manage to report your own commander for something you feel is wrong, you're a complete and utter disappointment
  • Not only is that the nicest word I can use, but also, you will retain your rank regardless of the report or you may bring that to light as well
• A BCMD should originate through natural leadership within the battalion and should not result in outsiders applying (i.e. Matra for BCMD of 41st) (I think)
• High Command has terms because the high command positions are not explicitly tied anywhere. These are positions that BENEFIT from variety of individuals being in the positions because different outlooks or mentalities keep Synergy Roleplay interesting.
• I don't care if we copy Icefuse. Server rivalry matters nothing to me. 

 

With all of this in mind, and very little advocating for BCMD terms (i.e. "give him a chance"), I feel that BCMD terms should not be inclusive. The only time I would feel comfortable adding terms to BCMD is if each Battalion held a sort of mock-election within themselves where they casted anonymous votes for the next BCMD. At the same time, the problem with this method is that the Battalion may elect someone they "like", not someone "capable" - another problem with the BCMD term system.

 

TL;DR Terms don't make any sense to me, and don't implement them. 

[Rolenth]

HERE IS A COMPROMISE.

There will be NO TERM LIMITS BUT, if the bcmd has been heavily lacking with their duties, they will be put on a 1 month term(watch month). IF THEY FAIL TO FIX THE ISSUE, the REG and Directors TOGETHER have final say over their demotion.

[Bazoo]

Just now, Medic said:

HERE IS A COMPROMISE.

There will be NO TERM LIMITS BUT, if the bcmd has been heavily lacking with their duties, they will be put on a 1 month term(watch month). IF THEY FAIL TO FIX THE ISSUE, the REG and Directors TOGETHER have final say over their demotion.

@Square @Chambers

[Vaal]

1 minute ago, Medic said:

HERE IS A COMPROMISE.

There will be NO TERM LIMITS BUT, if the bcmd has been heavily lacking with their duties, they will be put on a 1 month term(watch month). IF THEY FAIL TO FIX THE ISSUE, the REG and Directors TOGETHER have final say over their demotion.

I don't think I agree with this. Regardless of the role of the REG and Directors, if a BCMD is failing in his duties, it should be the Battalion's job to report it. If the BCMD is severely lacking in communication with Directions and/or the Regimental Commander, I would suggest talking to the BCMD and/or wholesale removing the BCMD. I do not believe that a BCMD on a "watch month" will be very productive to the server.

[BlackiSblack]

4 minutes ago, Medic said:

HERE IS A COMPROMISE.

There will be NO TERM LIMITS BUT, if the bcmd has been heavily lacking with their duties, they will be put on a 1 month term(watch month). IF THEY FAIL TO FIX THE ISSUE, the REG and Directors TOGETHER have final say over their demotion.

I mean there's really no need for this if they do good as a BCMD just reapply they would have the Battalion support and the directors/high command would know if he is doing well for the battalion. If someone runs against him from there high command/directors look back and see if he did well throughout his term the battalion was fine. And if it was fine they would keep them there. 

[Prince]

Washington basically summed up my entire argument with the options for removing someone who is no longer fit or no longer believed to be fit via the community can and will be removed from their position. It comes off as more of an unneeded stresser in the back of our minds. While it can motivate us to stay on top of our game, almost everything in this world is ruled by fear. You don't do a certain thing to its standards and repercussions will come: 

 

 

Perhaps change can be brought about for peoples' enjoyment since this is a online game. Perhaps something more rewarding to those who do beyond what's expected of them as their BCMD/Squad Lead position. As they work for the benefit of their Bat/Squad and are passionate about it, people breathe down their neck about all the little mistakes or about how they will be removed already without the incorporation of the term limits in mind. Perhaps a more rewarding atmosphere involved in these positions will cause people to be burnt out less because they burn out whenever they either have too little to do and it becomes boring or too much to hold and they fall.

Instead of trying to scare people into doing these things that they are expected to do, get rid of them. They are no longer fit for the position. For those who are doing what they should be doing shouldn't have to deal with the constant hounding and the extreme criticism. While criticism is needed to improve, yelling at someone who has done nothing wrong is just a waste of time.

+1 Remove these things and make the server more of an open one where people aren't terrified of going up to people and explaining the issues they have and when they aren't cleared up, resolved, etc then reports can be made against the person and/or high command can enact their power to fix the issue.

[Luckyy]

1 hour ago, Bazoo said:

SO back at the launch of the server, BCMD had no terms, and I think it was better. I dont think we need BCMD term. But people need to use commander report more often then. Keep in mind that if you post a report on your commander he cannot demote you for it, if he does go to a director and the BCMD will be removed for taking action. So my question to you is, what is your guys opinion on the removal of terms for BCMD ? Dont put just +1 or -1 put an actual reason with it so we know why ?
The reason I say BCMD and not High command, is because High command has way more power so I think its normal it has terms.
If this gets good amount of feedback director will look at it, from what he told me.

Just because A Guy is doing good dosent mean someone else could do better

[Lix]

+1 medic 

 

[Jax]

Terms are just a mild annoyance if your doing a good job. 3 monthes is a solid amount of time, and most people resign before they even get that far.  There is times where the BCMD is a fucking retard but theres not real good grounds to put up a commander report.  It also allows a commander to get solid feedback from the community on a reapp.

The issue in the past is people didn't have the balls to put up reports against people and people would sit in their positions way too comfortable without any opposition despite having poor leadership.

Edited August 21, 2018 by Jax

[Fours]

1 hour ago, Twelves said:

If someome in a bcmd position is not doing the amount of work expected of him, he should be reported. Fuck this icefuse copycat shit, lets become unique lol +1

Literally. +1.

[TrijiM]

2 hours ago, Washington said:

Terms for BCMDs are terrible. Since my time throughout the server (and a VAST majority of my time was in High Command, where I had term limits) I have always been vehemently against them. To save time and space, I'll bullet why it is a terrible idea for BCMDs:

• Pointless. We have Commander Reports for a reason, use them.
• "What if the guy goes inactive" Don't we have High Command for a reason? I mean, I know they are not the best, but they can get the job done.
• "What if they don't pass on the torch" Then go over them, you can go Commander-REG at the same cost! You also could hold a General Meeting with your BCMD. We had to do it in the 327th back in the day, and it got the man out, and a new one in. I know it is hard, but try talking to people, does wonders.
• It can add additional stress to the Battalion Commander that they have to need the entire communities respect to be able to EXIST.

Now time to address some counter-arguements:

If you can't Commander Report a man who is failing at his job, you clearly aren't cut out to be a BCMD. Man up, and get the job done.

Just because people have the OPPORTUNITY to apply, doesn't mean they should. Look at the Egg Vs. Matra race, if Matra would've won it would've killed the battalion. Let's look at something closer to home, what if Tristan didn't get Bly? The 327th would have failed by now, and its the second day. The right people need to be there.

This man, is speaking wise words. Everything we keep moving towards to seems to be like we are slowly becoming IFN, and wasn't that the OPPOSITE of what we wanted to do. Maybe, we should try to be our own server.

In conclusion, Battalion Commander terms are pointless, and all the points that support it are all subjective and based on a few specific incidents. In the long-run, it is a bad thing, and should not be in existence. This probably won't happen, but maybe we can see continual change into the server at some point.

Thank you, have a great day.

 

These are good reasons +1

[Bobonater3]

I highly agree with this, without terms it makes commanders try harder and do their best job so they are not demoted. with the terms right now commanders dont get reported much and lots of commanders are relaxed and not worried about doing their job

+1

[Square]

-1 I am not trying to be rude here but this was never even a problem until it affected SOBDE. Terms were established because of certain situations that were taking place causing battalions to drop heavily in activity and if we remove them the same thing is going to happen again. Terms are not a big deal if you are doing everything you are supposed to do. The only people that are affected by terms are people that are sitting in their position doing just enough work to not be removed but not enough to suffice the battalions/squads needs. We are in the processes of making re-applications easier but even as it stands right now they are so easy to get put back into your position if you are doing your job well. Also, everyone should have the chance to go for a position it shouldn't just be held by one individual. That being said, if a battalion is still supporting that individual it's not like he is going to lose his position. We would never take someone out of their position and put a new person in if they are doing their job and what they are doing is working. We just simply wouldn't take that chance. If you would like to talk to me in teamspeak I have a lot more to say on the matter that is difficult for me to type out. 

 

Just to put this situation into perspective, imagine if the president of the United States was just one person for their entire life and there were not elections. Just saying  

[Luckyy]

4 minutes ago, Square said:

-1 I am not trying to be rude here but this was never even a problem until it affected SOBDE. Terms were established because of certain situations that were taking place causing battalions to drop heavily in activity and if we remove them the same thing is going to happen again. Terms are not a big deal if you are doing everything you are supposed to do. The only people that are affected by terms are people that are sitting in their position doing just enough work to not be removed but not enough to suffice the battalions/squads needs. We are in the processes of making re-applications easier but even as it stands right now they are so easy to get put back into your position if you are doing your job well. Also, everyone should have the chance to go for a position it shouldn't just be held by one individual. That being said, if a battalion is still supporting that individual it's not like he is going to lose his position. We would never take someone out of their position and put a new person in if they are doing their job and what they are doing is working. We just simply wouldn't take that chance. If you would like to talk to me in teamspeak I have a lot more to say on the matter that is difficult for me to type out. 

 

Just to put this situation into perspective, imagine if the president of the United States was just one person for their entire life and there were not elections. Just saying  

Exactly

[Bazoo]

3 minutes ago, Square said:

-1 I am not trying to be rude here but this was never even a problem until it affected SOBDE. Terms were established because of certain situations that were taking place causing battalions to drop heavily in activity and if we remove them the same thing is going to happen again. Terms are not a big deal if you are doing everything you are supposed to do. The only people that are affected by terms are people that are sitting in their position doing just enough work to not be removed but not enough to suffice the battalions/squads needs. We are in the processes of making re-applications easier but even as it stands right now they are so easy to get put back into your position if you are doing your job well. Also, everyone should have the chance to go for a position it shouldn't just be held by one individual. That being said, if a battalion is still supporting that individual it's not like he is going to lose his position. We would never take someone out of their position and put a new person in if they are doing their job and what they are doing is working. We just simply wouldn't take that chance. If you would like to talk to me in teamspeak I have a lot more to say on the matter that is difficult for me to type out. 

 

Just to put this situation into perspective, imagine if the president of the United States was just one person for their entire life and there were not elections. Just saying  

True it might be wrong to say, but I never really paid attention till it affected SOBDE, is it wrong from me YES it is, but I will not hide it or lie about it. But It doesnt change that since term were added like 6 months ago, I was still against it.

[Hero]

BUT HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO POWERPLAY FOR BLITZ!?!???!!!??!

(I’m kidding jeez don’t remove my ARC trainings daddy)

nuetral on terms though, i feel like after (so-so) there should be a re-application cuz it does allow other people to have a chance

[Taur]

-1 When someone is doing meh in a battalion, there will not be a BCMD report made on him, even though someone in the battalion could do a way better job. Just reaplying is not that much work and this could give others a chance

[Pxnda]

If you really had a problem with it, this post should’ve been made before the SOBDE terms were implemented. Right now, it does only seem that you made this post just because SOBDE Leads are now affected by this.

-1 for Bazoo’s Suggestion.

+1 for Medic’s Suggestion.

Also, I agree with everything Square said on his comment.

Edited August 21, 2018 by Red_Panda

[Bazoo]

12 minutes ago, Red_Panda said:

If you really had a problem with it, this post should’ve been made before the SOBDE terms were implemented. Right now, it does only seem that you made this post just because SOBDE Leads are now affected by this.

-1 for Bazoo’s Suggestion.

+1 for Medic’s Suggestion.

Also, I agree with everything Square said on his comment.

I quoted square, and typed my answer. So I did answer to the fact its since SOBDE is affected Thats what I said. "True it might be wrong to say, but I never really paid attention till it affected SOBDE, is it wrong from me YES it is, but I will not hide it or lie about it. But It doesnt change that since term were added like 6 months ago, I was still against it."

Edited August 21, 2018 by Bazoo

[IKE]

*cough* I agree with Medic. *cough* we have directors and regimentals for a reason *cough* to remove them if they are doing bad *cough* I agree with what @Washington said, we are turning into IFN. What happened to a community made for the people, by the people. A place where your voice can never heard. With all these restrictions on who can apply for staff, when you’re term ends, will anyone apply against you? Isn’t your battalion doing good? We live in fear now due to all these rules. 

[Jax]

1 minute ago, IKE Targaryen said:

*cough* I agree with Medic. *cough* we have directors and regimentals for a reason *cough* to remove them if they are doing bad *cough* I agree with what @Washington said, we are turning into IFN. What happened to a community made for the people, by the people. A place where your voice can never heard. With all these restrictions on who can apply for staff, when you’re term ends, will anyone apply against you? Isn’t your battalion doing good? We live in fear now due to all these rules. 

If you're doing a good competent job then you have nothing to worry about. Anyone running against a person who have a good first term will be disadvantaged greatly and won't win 95% of the time. Also you'd expect the system to work for people to report and for directors and regimental to do their jobs, but time and time again it doesn't happen like that.

[Chambers]

21 hours ago, Jax said:

Terms are just a mild annoyance if your doing a good job. 3 monthes is a solid amount of time, and most people resign before they even get that far.  There is times where the BCMD is a fucking retard but theres not real good grounds to put up a commander report.  It also allows a commander to get solid feedback from the community on a reapp.

The issue in the past is people didn't have the balls to put up reports against people and people would sit in their positions way too comfortable without any opposition despite having poor leadership.

6

Couldn't have put it better myself, I have multiple meetings about this but no one has come up with a solid counter-argument to terms and mostly boil down to  "it's annoying" or "Someone could powerplay with this" what ifs are not a good basis for a system that is working.
Also, the community feedback on a BCMD is super important because the community can see how they performed and see if they still think this person is still a good BCMD because ultimately it's the community decision.

22 hours ago, Medic said:

HERE IS A COMPROMISE.

There will be NO TERM LIMITS BUT, if the bcmd has been heavily lacking with their duties, they will be put on a 1 month term(watch month). IF THEY FAIL TO FIX THE ISSUE, the REG and Directors TOGETHER have final say over their demotion.

We don't even give people 1 month, we give them 1 week then they are gone without a report if they don't improve.

[Craigary]

+1 No need for terms everything is just a power play

 

[Arroyo]

-1 have someone else have a experience on the high command 

[Rolenth]

1 hour ago, Carter said:

 

We don't even give people 1 month, we give them 1 week then they are gone without a report if they don't improve.

No, 1 week is way to short. People have work and/or school. You might possibly fuck them out of it.