Should official factions have more power?

[swift]

There should be only one official faction for a npc faction.

In some cases, perhaps. In many, absolutely not.
There are many occasions and examples where someone having monopoly over an NPC faction would be indeed detrimental to the state of the server.
Not all factions have a sensible leadership, and some people, frankly, are addicted to power just a bit.
Some people have a problem admitting they are wrong.
Having someone have monopoly over an NPC faction just because he was there first is totally and utterly wrong.

The RP and diplomacy of NPC factions who have more than one official faction should be governed by an equal council of their leaders.
There should *not* be a monopoly on NPC factions. Of course we can't have two RM's, LN's, or BAF's, but that's just exceptions to the rule.

And furthermore, the control of NPC faction diplomacy from factions that are official should be divided according to the activity and merits of said factions.

If one particular faction represents the NPCs for say a year, and then comes another one, for example..
The power to control NPC faction policy *must* be divided between the two if both show enough prowess to capably lead it.
If one fails, the other one should get more power.
Simple as that.
Personally, I believe and always SHALL believe that a democratic system is an utter pre-requirement to everything.

Rather simply said:
No monopolies. No no and just no.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah. Aaaaaaaaaanyways. I got a bit strayed off the topic. Might've gotten carried away, but heck, why not.

I mostly think that factions should have more power.
What kind, I cannot say with assurance.

The factions I am currently located in( And no, I won't tell you which they are, and no, you can't know it all just from my profile) would never abuse power.
I could not be in them if such people existed there.

However, there *are* factions that would abuse their power. And I fear that happening.

That is why I will vote YES on this one. I do reserve the right to pull my vote back in an undesirable development of the discussion, for what it's worth anyways.

BUT, I will go ahead and tell you all to listen to what n00bl3t has to say. That man is a counter-balance to everything.

An appeal system. Definitely.
A mixed council of people should determine it, and by mixed, I mean not just administrators of the server.
Nothing against you boys, but honestly, you don't always see every side of the coin, I'm afraid.
I respect what you do, but I don't always agree with the actions you take, or don't take.
That is why there has to be a counter-balance to everything.
Furthermore, on that council should also be prominent independent players. I can name a few already, and say with certainty that they're the best people for the job.
The absolute best.
And no, I think you'd not like the names I'd say. Heck, even I would not like one of them for sure. But, 'tis true.

Furthermore, blanked decisions and restrictions should have to be made in discussion with the council, if there happens to be one, and the admins.

Most decisions they'd make should not be blanket ones, but individual ones, on a case by case basis.
Basically just mirroring n00bl3t's and some others' words.

And let me tell you something. Take that as you will as well.
I have one beef with some independent players. Though mind that I have the same with some faction ones, albeit the latter is much easier to solve than the first.

I really do mind the capital ship abuse from certain players. I really do. That's one of the biggest reputation detriments to independent players at large.
Some great players get prejudiced because of some other ones that abuse what's given unto them.

I'd certainly propose that some kind of system of appealing against capital ship abuse is made, in which people could get a chance to lay out their argumentation and there'd be a possibility of the owner of the ship being stripped of it. Yes, stripped of it.
However, it'd not be some sort of rash decision, by all means. And the player in question should of course be given multiple chances of fixing his transgressions. It shouldn't be done without his knowledge or without first giving him a chance or two.
However, if he's not willing to adjust his attitude if it is not found proper, I'd certainly be against him keeping his little asset.
This primarily goes for people that behave out of roleplay and abuse their ships against others.
N00bl3t, please, for heaven's sake, don't disagree with me, because you know what I mean.

It won't be hard to guess that the main focus of my beef is with some of the Outcast and Corsair players.

And before you go jumping on the bandwagon of stating I see things one-sidedly, although my primary faction is the Colonial Remnant and always will be, I am in others as well. And I have characters all over.
And I do know how some people behave and some don't, and I mostly know the flaws and merits of everyone.
However, it is mostly from independent players( And some.. for God's sakes, some! Meaning a small percentage!) that I get ganked, abused, oorped at, and what not.

Anyways, this wasn't an anti-indie argument, but mostly an argument for creating a system in which there'd be a small possibility of people losing their privileges if they abuse them.
The same goes for everyone.

I think that's all.. though I could write a book about all this. Not that I'd want to.

Anyways, this is Swift, the guy who talks too much and gets carried away, and whose argument mostly goes misunderstood, saying bye bye.

---

<span style="font-familyalatino Linotype">

<span style="color:#000000">All morons hate it when you call them a moron.

</span></span>

<span style="color:#33FFFF">The CFF</span>

<span style="color:#33FF33">CFF Communication Channel and RP Collection</span>