Defining [FoM] - Friends of Morkin

[Shendemiar]

Agreeing to, or at least knowing the definition of the alliance is essential in avoiding conflicts within. I think we in Morkin have pretty good harmony, but it would make it even easier if some of those ground rules were written in word. (eg. for those who are not so acive). Its obvious without a doubt, that this is even more important to the FoM alliance. You need to define very clearly where you stand, what drives you and what are your limits.

Making sure everyone agrees to this, or at least knows this, defines you in the long run. Knowing what others others think, what is their moral stand, how committed they are to the game and so on, helps you to define your own strenghts and weaknesses.

Some definitions of Morkin, to give guidelines.

shendemiar said:

Princibles:

• Alliance of People who know eachother via MMU.
  
• Democratic group.
  
• Main motive to play is to have fun.
  
• A closed group.
  
• Try to maintain high ethics.
  

As you can see, there is no priority for Domination etc Conquering.

[coruscation]

A constitional alliance!

Very impressive.

[SkulkrinBait]

The key is democracy, I am posting all new applications so the members can vet them. Also the same with admin etc positions, anyone who is unhappy with an admin PM me and we can discuss the matter.

[inyati]

Power To the People! ;D

[Natmus]

Welcome. I hope FoM solves the problem Morkin with it's closedness has caused.

In effect, we have the original Morkin, and also an equal alliance at our side. This forum then works as a common ground for us. We just have to keep out those who just want in for the protection or to cause trouble.

[eproxy]

Time will tell who those people are.

[2kcastle]

I think we need to have a look at the way FoM is running and in particular our membership.
Its obvious that there are still a lot of doubts over how trustworthy we at FoM are and i think we need to see what these doubts are, why they are there and if theres any way we can over come them.
I know we have some inactive or nearly inactive members and some who don't participate on the forums so the first step should be to address that.
Does anyone have any other issues that they think need looking at ?

[eproxy]

It's not so much a case of them being active just a case of them not contributing much. I know that sometimes it is hard especially if you have lots to do on IKUK as well.

[2kcastle]

Theres more to it than just activity levels.
I'm hoping for some posts from the morkin members themselves. Earlier in this thread someone said two equal alliances side by side ( natmus i think ) but in practice thats not what we have.

[Arminius]

I guess most Morkin members have quit on UK, so we're just active here. To be honest, I can't imagine playing there as well now...

The main point about activity is that you get to know each other. And with that comes a level of trust. There are so many people in FoM I never heard anything of since they joined,that I feel I can't trust them. And then that affects the level of trust I'm prepared to give to FoM as a whole. There are some people in FoM whom I do trust, as I feel I know them as well as you can in this context, but then cases like severn and JJC show that there is still a difference between Morkin and FoM.

Perhaps it takes another campaign and after that pruning of inactives/non-participants.

[bishop]

Tom made a valuable point in another thread—that not everyone takes to forums very easily; it can be difficult to find anything worthwhile to say, particularly if you're new (although there's no excuse for failing to post an intoduction.) But I must admit that there are a few people whom I would be somewhat unenthusiastic about fighting for, since I'm not convinced they would do the same for me.

I think that, as some people have said, it will take a fairly major conflict to discover who's committed—particularly, who is prepared to sacrifice troops for no personal gain. But FoM is never going to be quite the same as Morkin.

[inyati]

Morkin members totaly trust each other even if they are not "active" here. Thats because we all 'live' in another game forum - our true home.
So personaly I'm not worried if I dont see Matija, Andre, Perun, etc. around here as much as I'd like, because I get to see them elsewhere. But that just means that Morkin has a solid base, and I would understand if people in FoM wouldnt budge a finger to help Matija or anyone else who seldom pops in.

Most importantly is for FoM to gain trust from within its boundaries, and I think that is happening. A healthy campaign will also help define our trio better (plus give us all another ribbon )

[SkulkrinBait]

bishop said:

But I must admit that there are a few people whom I would be somewhat unenthusiastic about fighting for, since I'm not convinced they would do the same for me.

Anyone who feels this way about anyone in FoM please PM me and we can look at resolving such issues.

[raistlin]

With all these things, you get out what you put in. People who are active on the forums, or are always ready to volunteer help, will always get a better response (when they need help themselves) than those who are silent/unhelpful. And you'll never be able to fully prune out the silent/unhelpful people.

That's just the way of the world, be it Morkin or FoM. If there was a member or Morkin I'd never spoken to (in this forum or the MMU forum), I'd probably hesitate before committing my fleets to their defence. Equally, there are people in FoM on who's word I'd send in everything if needed, purely because I can see what sort of people they are on these forums.

Now I'm not sure what point I was trying to make, so I'll go and lie down for a while.

[Shendemiar]

Maybe we should have area for non-inselkampf stuff so people can open up post about anything.