ADMIN NOTICE : OFFICIAL FACTION RIGHTS

[pieguy259]

For the dissenters, let's go over the proposed rights:

1) Official Factions are free to restrict or not restrict access to their owned systems and tax players who enter owned system. Access to systems that surround owned system must not be restricted unless there's a war with another faction.

We already have this.

2) Official factions have authority over players of the same NPC affiliation, as long as RP justification is provided. This authority applies in forums and in-game, and applies to player faction diplomacy, and strategic and tactical direction. However, exercise of that authority, on the forums and in game, is restricted to official faction members with the rank of the official faction leader and one rank below him/her. The authority may be exercised through the use of in-game in-RP orders, which, if not obeyed, can result in in-game in-RP consequences (arrest, court martial, and even lethal force in extreme circumstances).

INTENT OF RIGHT NUMBER 2:

The intent of this right is to allow official faction leadership to also provide leadership, with discretion, to independent players, to improve server gameplay, fairplay, and roleplay.

This right is NOT intended to provide the official faction leadership the right to exercise power for its own sake.

An example of "good" exercise of these rights is to require an independent player to not utilize a heavy captial ship against a smaller lone fighter or bomber, or to not enter an existing fight where entering the fight would unbalance it greatly, or to require the independent player to take action or not take action in support of good RP. (ie, ordering the escort of a diplomat, or something equally creative)

An example of "bad" exercise of this right would be to require the player to patrol an empty system, for no particular reason. Requiring the independent to investigate a particular suspicious ship, though, would be legitimate.

An offical faction consistently abusing this right, could lose it at the Admins' discretion.

All emphasis mine. So, you couldn't slap a sanctionhammer on someone for not doing what you wanted them to, a [LN] recruit couldn't order around an indie LNS-, and official factions who abuse this right will soon not have it any more.

3) Once a faction achieves official status, they will receive their downpayment of $500 mill back. They will further receive a Cap 8 Armour Upgrade, once they have spent 3 months contributing meaningfully to server RP, for instance, via events and forum activity.

Can't see any problem with this.

4) Official Factions who have planned an event can restrict participation of others in that event as they see fit.

We already have this.

5) Official Factions control the issuance of Battleship Licences to independent players and faction members for their house Battleships, via the forum application process.

Players sanctioned for PVP violations in a battleship may, at the Admin's discretion, have the licence removed as part of their sanction. They must then re-apply for the licence from the official faction, or downgrade the ship.

An Official Faction which has granted a battleship licence to a player may ask the Admins afterwards to remove the licence, with reasons. Conversely a player who feels they have been treated unfairly by an Official Faction, regarding a licence, may appeal to the Admins.

So official factions wouldn't be the be-all and end-all. The Admins could intervene if an official faction was picking on an indie.

There has, of course, been the suggestion to instead have the power to ask Admins to strip a battleship license instead of having the power to grant them. This would work better, as it would be the Admins' final call. The Admins wouldn't strip a battleship licence because the official faction didn't like the indie's roleplay. If the indie's roleplay was genuinely bad or way, way, WAY against canon, THEN the Admins would strip them.

---

PanGalactic Travel Company | PanGal Feedback | PanGal Recruitment

[Titan]

Right on the point Malexa, trust would be the compromise people should do in this case. Test it, and see how it works, you can't judge on people's performance before actually seeing them do ****. And your point about trusting the leaders and coming down hard on them if they **** up is right on again. I suggest you squabbling folk read Malexa's reply and try to think in that way.

---

[n00bl3t]

Just reread your last post before this, and think hard.

I tried to think hard. It comes off as sardonic, with due reason. That is, it seems the factions would be unwilling to undergo that sort of scrutinisation themselves, which further emphasises the server division. I am unwilling to give it a go because I do not believe as a whole it will be beneficial as well.

So, yes, if by not advancing the discussion you mean anyone who has a differing view shutting up, then yes, I am guilty of posting.

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[JakeSG]

Aye, Stoat, it's open to abuse, but that is far easier to solve than rampaging Battleships who exist for no reason than to pwnzor whichever faction they happen to be at war with.

Just checked the list again, and I'd say the current selection of people intended to manage the Battleships seem like pretty decent people who can handle the authority appropriately.

Liberty Dreadnought - LN, LN, JihadJoe
Liberty Carrier - LN, LN, JihadJoe
He's an Admin for a reason.

Bretonia Battleship - BAF, BAF, Dieter
See above.

Kusari Battleship - KNF, KNF, Lotek
Hell, I don't touch Kusari so I have no idea, but I imagine Dieter's made a good choice here.

Rheinland Battleship - RM, RM, Malexa
After serving under Virus' thumb for so long, I assume he's picked up much of his fairhanded attitude. If not, we can always have Rob beat him about the ears.

Osiris - Order, Order, Swisscorch
Havn't seen him on the forums much, but he seems more rational than many people here.

IMG Carrier - IMG, IMG, Niezck
Chris? He's nearly as bad a choice as Boss! - In all seriousness, I'd say he's pretty levelheaded

Bounty Hunter Battleship - BHG, BHG, Athenian
How can one say bad things about the man who was willing to attempt the impossible and try to bring all Hunters under the one banner?

Spyglass - LH, LH, Xoria/LH, HF, SevereTrinity
Here we have two choices. I'd say a commitee approach lessens the chance of abuse/dictatorship.

Outcast Dreadnought - OC, 101st, ROS, Council of Dons
Outcast Battleship - OC, 101st, ROS, SOB, Council of Dons
Hell, maybe I'm biased, but I'd honestly be kind of pleased if the Hispanians were a little heavyhanded with restrictions. Otherwise, see above.

Zoner Juggernaut - Zoner, TAZ, Malacalypse/Council of Zoners
Aquilon Carrier - Zoner, TAZ, Malacalypse/Council of Zoners
Only problem I've ever had with Mal is a tendency to 'lolwut?' after some of his more abstract posts, although I believe that's his goal. Once more, fair minded people and a commitee aproach.[b]

Legate - Corsairs, TBH, Benitez, OPG, Council of Elders
[b]Err... See Outcasts here.

Togo - Blood Dragons, NovaPG, Lohingren
Admittedly not much experience with Lohingren, but seems a decent person. On that note though, why do the BD even have a Battleship?

And as said above, you can always appeal.

Edit - @Pie: Unfortunately, Admins only remove things such as cash, armour or licenses for genuine rule infractions, not merely insane and incredible levels of sheer, undeniable idiocy on the part of some ships floating around.

---

For the Core.

[Seth Karlo]

Finally, a computer to type at instead of tapping an iPhone screen.

My views are conflicted, as some of the faction leaders in that post are more than capable of maintaning a steady head, and won't be biased when it comes down to it. Others though, WILL be biased.

The power handed to faction leaders now is large, and as I said before, are they ready for it? The admins of this community were elected by other admins yes, but the community as a whole had a voice in it. We have a topic for each admin that's been elected in my time here (I arrived just before Del, Kuraine, DBoy, Virus and Vero were elected).

All in all, I think this will be ignored after a while. The staggering amount of work that will be required will take its toll, and people will slowly stop doing it.

Surely there has to be an easier way of doing it?

Eternal, while I agree with many of your points, you have yet to sway me. The funny thing is that you are one of the people that I feel could take the responsibility and not abuse it.

Let us see how this ends... but if it does come into effect, I shall be testing the system, never fear.

---

Signature by Sleipnir.

[Titan]

I tried to think hard. It comes off as sardonic, with due reason. That is, it seems the factions would be unwilling to undergo that sort of scrutinisation themselves, which further emphasises the server division. I am unwilling to give it a go because I do not believe as a whole it will be beneficial as well.

So, yes, if by not advancing the discussion you mean anyone who has a differing view shutting up, then yes, I am guilty of posting.

Again, no, I did not mean that, I meant perhaps you should try a compromise, instead of you saying no, some other guy saying no, the other guys saying yes. Why not try to meet in the middle? It's not as bad an idea as you might think, but yes it has flaws. However, you can't prove your point, and they can't prove theirs without testing, and testing for a month or two or three wouldn't really cause damage.

---

[n00bl3t]

Again, no, I did not mean that, I meant perhaps you should try a compromise, instead of you saying no, some other guy saying no, the other guys saying yes. Why not try to meet in the middle? It's not as bad an idea as you might think, but yes it has flaws. However, you can't prove your point, and they can't prove theirs without testing, and testing for a month or two or three wouldn't really cause damage.

Right.

Let us try this then.

Come up with a proposal and we will move from there.

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[Stoat]

Right.

Let us try this then.

Come up with a proposal and we will move from there.

Actually, it doesn't even need to be a good proposal, as that is subject to interpretation. It just needs to be a proposal that folks can agree to test.

Edit: And I'm up for testing this one.

---

My Stories

[Titan]

Right.

Let us try this then.

Come up with a proposal and we will move from there.

I did, 3 times already. Test it, if it doesn't work, forget it and never mention it again. Sounds reasonable, doesn't it? It's nothing final, and yet it can work out. Seems to be beneficial to both sides.

---

[n00bl3t]

I did, 3 times already. Test it, if it doesn't work, forget it and never mention it again. Sounds reasonable, doesn't it? It's nothing final, and yet it can work out. Seems to be beneficial to both sides.

Not for three months though. Characters go inactive in that time. Perhaps 28 days?

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.