ADMIN NOTICE : OFFICIAL FACTION RIGHTS

[pbrione]

I agree with the idea of trying to reach a consensus here. Yes, there are clearly concerns about the idea, but there is little hope of getting anywhere if we simply shoot down new ideas in flames without trying them out or attempting to improve them first.

In all honesty, the powers being given to faction leaders here is not all that great at all - apart from the BS license issuing all the powers already more-or-less exist and, if anything, explicitly restricting faction RP ordering of indies to top 2 ranks seems to me more likely to decrease rather than increase faction powers from the implicit powers that factions are already assumed by many to have here.

Regarding the controversial question of battleship control, I think it good that this idea has at least been proposed and brought out into the open for discussion. Personally I would support it as it stands - battleships are not, when you get down to it, all that great a component of most players RP, so making this out to be a fascist dictatorship is a pretty ridiculous exaggeration, and I would trust all faction leaders to make reasonable judgements here; after all they have gained their positions through having to earn trust and support of their factions, the admins and the community (the person who quoted that it was "easy to make a faction" - I'm sorry, but you clearly do not appreciate how the faction proposal system works).

However, on the other side, I appreciate that many do not share the same levels of trust that I do and for one reason or another fear they may be victimised by the factions. Well, I can understand this point of view and I think it needs to be addressed. I would support Titan's proposal of a trial for a few months of the new system in its current form, after which we can discuss if it should be fully implamented, revised to something approximating Virus's proposal, or scrapped altogether.

The objections are based on a lack of trust (understandable) and an expectation of how it will end up working. The fact is, we can't be certain how it will end up working, and there is a chance they may be right. But a trial would soon demonstrate whether these concerns were unfounded or not. If the system does prove to work the trial would go a long way towards increasing trust amongst the community that is vital for this to succeed. If the system appears to end up failing or showing biased decisions in some way, then the trial run will still be useful as it will reveal what exactly the flaws in the system are and enable us to adapt and improve the proposals to make the proposal better. Either way, at least trying some new changes, instead of shouting about it, will be of benefit to the community.

Summary of my suggestions:
1. Discuss initial proposal and cirucmstances of trial
2. 3 month in-game trial of all 5 rule alterations
4. At the end of the 3 months, a review of how the trial has worked, where both sides can actually post evidence of instances that have worked / failed to support their claims, instead of just speculating
5. Based on this review, a discussion of what amendments to be made to the new rules
6. Implement the permanent rule changes (possibly still open to further review at a later date)

---

Sir Stanley Nelson




<span style="color:#000066">Charles Canning </span><span style="color:#000066"> Foreign Secretary</span>