SkulkrinBait
Morkin Admin
Haxx0rs == Suxx0rs! v4
Posts: 6,680
|
Post by SkulkrinBait on May 25, 2007 10:48:28 GMT
Simple question, should we have a feeder alliance for FoM?
Please vote and post explaining your thinking behind the vote given.
This is how I envisage it would work, of course this can be refined depending on feedback and suggestions.
1. Standard procedure would apply for new applicants to FoM, they would be given the questionnaire to complete and return. However, any applicants would have to serve a period of time in the feeder alliance until we were happy they met our strict criteria. We could afford to be slightly less strict as to who we let into the feeder alliance, as we could monitor closely how they actually behaved rather than what they wrote on an application.
2. We would keep a record of all people in the feeder including how they have contributed to the alliance. If they had sufficient good contributions they would be invited to join FoM, there would be no time limits for this. If people in the feeder got fed up then they could leave at any time without any penalty of course. The decision as to whether they could join FoM or not would be voted on.
3. The feeder alliance would have a sub-forum on here but no access to the FoM/Morkin sections, information would be drip-fed on a need to know basis to reduce the risk of spies gaining access to sensitive information. It would also help us weed out inactives and other undesirables.
4. We'd need a volunteer admin for the feeder alliance.
That's about it I think, please comment!
|
|
digital
Luxor Admin
Winter is Coming
Posts: 1,727
|
Post by digital on May 25, 2007 11:05:22 GMT
I would like to volunteer for it. If everything goes Cioccie! up I could always come back to FoM (couldn't I??? *puppy dog eyes*)
|
|
inyati
Morkin Admin
Aqua profunda est quieta
Posts: 4,310
|
Post by inyati on May 25, 2007 11:11:38 GMT
4 votes, no explanaitions...wierd
|
|
SkulkrinBait
Morkin Admin
Haxx0rs == Suxx0rs! v4
Posts: 6,680
|
Post by SkulkrinBait on May 25, 2007 11:35:13 GMT
4 votes, no explanaitions...wierd I edited the initial post to include that people comment, after those votes. I voted yes as I don't think there's much to lose by trying this out and there could be a lot of potential benefit from it. So yes from me on a trial basis! I'm wondering if the no votes were from people unsure how it would actually work in practise, but we could work that out after this poll, assuming there was a majority in favour.
|
|
Pose
Luxor Member
Posts: 324
|
Post by Pose on May 25, 2007 11:49:52 GMT
Personally I dont see the value in having a feeder alliance, How long would any probationary period be? and what would it prove? other than that a player could play ball for the allotted time?
If we do vote to have a feeder, I think it shouldnt be 'sold as such' rather as a 'bolt on' , that way we wouldnt attract players specifically intent on gaining access to FoM for whatever reason,and we could assess them without them jumping through the hoops that we hang up, and if deemed to fit in to FoM in the future simply invite them over on a pre determined date( if we did it in dribs and drabs they would catch on and jump the through hoops)
I (we?) didnt join fom with the intention to 'move up to morkin' but morkiners have experessed the oppinion that most of us are worthy of a place, this is because we have just been us, not pretended to be anything other than and they like the way we conduct ourselfs.(me thinks)
would we have access to the sub board on the forum that we set up for them?
|
|
2kcastle
Luxor Admin
Supreme Prosecutor
Posts: 1,067
|
Post by 2kcastle on May 25, 2007 12:14:07 GMT
I vote yes because im interested to see how/if it works in practice. I agree with pose about it being a partner alliance rather than a feeder alliance.
|
|
AeroS
Luxor Admin
Timmons[HAWK]
Posts: 1,138
|
Post by AeroS on May 25, 2007 12:32:03 GMT
I like the idea, for no real good reason.
|
|
|
Post by bishop on May 25, 2007 13:16:38 GMT
I voted no for the same reason as POSE, I don't think it adds anything to our current admissions procedure. All it does is devolve the decisions to one or two people in charge of the feeder. If we let people straight into the main alliance as before, then we can all form a judgement about them.
Also – if any of the semi members in the feeder got into trouble, they would still require our full protection despite us never having met them. So I'd rather just have them in here with us.
|
|
SkulkrinBait
Morkin Admin
Haxx0rs == Suxx0rs! v4
Posts: 6,680
|
Post by SkulkrinBait on May 25, 2007 14:19:30 GMT
Personally I dont see the value in having a feeder alliance, How long would any probationary period be? and what would it prove? other than that a player could play ball for the allotted time? The probationary period would be long enough for us to make a balanced judgement on the member. If we thought they weren't contributing and had been given a long enough timescale to do so then they'd be out. The timescale has to be flexible in this way as if nothing is going on much in the game then you need to give people time. If there was a major war etc, then that would reduce the necessary timescale. I propose that every member in the feeder would have a thread on here where they (or we) could add "evidence" about their conduct. Messages to and from players to show diplomacy, battle and spy reports etc to show their willingness to fight etc for the alliance, so on and so forth. We would use this evidence as well as other information gleaned from other sources to decided if they got promoted into FoM or booted out as the information built up, or didn't as the case may be. Any voting would be done by the whole of FoM (maybe Morkin) using this information. The value of having this feeder, IMHO, is great. We get to know potential FoM recruits a hell of a lot better than we currently do when we just vote them in or not based on a questionnaire. It reduces the chances of spies as they would have to play the game rather than just having a multi account. It would generally raise the standard of new recruits into FoM. There are also probably extra benefits as well but that will do for now. It is true that they could just "play ball" for a certain period of time to get into FoM but it wouldn't be all that easy, certainly no easier than the current questionnaire system we have. If we do vote to have a feeder, I think it shouldnt be 'sold as such' rather as a 'bolt on' , that way we wouldnt attract players specifically intent on gaining access to FoM for whatever reason,and we could assess them without them jumping through the hoops that we hang up, and if deemed to fit in to FoM in the future simply invite them over on a pre determined date( if we did it in dribs and drabs they would catch on and jump the through hoops) Absolutely, I think we would still have the current system in place of a questionnaire for anyone wanting to join the feeder. I (we?) didnt join fom with the intention to 'move up to Morkin' but Morkiners have experessed the oppinion that most of us are worthy of a place, this is because we have just been us, not pretended to be anything other than and they like the way we conduct ourselfs.(me thinks) would we have access to the sub board on the forum that we set up for them? Off topic! I'd personally be happy with most of FoM having access to this area but I don't know everyone in FoM all that well as some are more active than others. Having said that there isn't all that much in the Morkin section that's very interesting apart from all our login passwords, so it's slightly sensitive!
|
|
SkulkrinBait
Morkin Admin
Haxx0rs == Suxx0rs! v4
Posts: 6,680
|
Post by SkulkrinBait on May 25, 2007 14:20:57 GMT
I voted no for the same reason as POSE, I don't think it adds anything to our current admissions procedure. All it does is devolve the decisions to one or two people in charge of the feeder. If we let people straight into the main alliance as before, then we can all form a judgement about them. Decisions would be taken as they currently are, we'd vote for who gets into FoM, it wouldn't be down to one or two individuals. Also – if any of the semi members in the feeder got into trouble, they would still require our full protection despite us never having met them. So I'd rather just have them in here with us. Not necessarily, we'd reserve the right to help out where we felt it was the right thing to do, as we currently do with FoM.
|
|
digital
Luxor Admin
Winter is Coming
Posts: 1,727
|
Post by digital on May 25, 2007 15:48:33 GMT
This idea of a partner alliance sounds better than a feeder.
As for them requiring help, I've found that most situations on IK can be dealt with diplomatically, any situation warranting additional help would be most likely beneficial to the Triumvirate anyways.
|
|
inyati
Morkin Admin
Aqua profunda est quieta
Posts: 4,310
|
Post by inyati on May 25, 2007 16:34:33 GMT
Though it might surprise some, I'm against a feeder alliance. I admit that opening up various things in our forum makes me uneasy, but the way FoM has grown gives me some confidence in that affair.
I think that all that join us should have equal rights, and not pass a probationary period. When we formed FoM it wasn´t with that intention, and I hope people dont join FoM thinking its a step towards Morkin. Beleive me, Morkiners are a bunch of wierd geezers who got stuck in the eighties ;D
So my vote for this poll is: No
On the other hand I think it could be a good idea to form another sister alliance similar to FoM for strategic reasons: 1- we are small alliances, or can be viewed as one alliance (which in fact we are) divided into smaller parts, instead of massing into just one unit like DIGG, etc. 2- the division into smaller parts could actualy help us maintain a better administration, for each one will always need Admin and diplomats. So higher ranks are actually spread out to more people. IF we merged we would have about 3/4 admins for over 150 members. Seperated we'll have 12 admins (3 for each). 3- Strategicly our true numbers would be hidden from our enemies, or at least dificult the reading. Imagine how their admirals would start discussing a possible war:
o>Look here Billy I hate that Bastardo! in FoM! I say we declare war! o>Ok, how many are there in the alliance, I want numbers people! o>It's a rooten alliance, they dont even reach 50 members. Comapared to our 300, we'll make mince meat out of them. HAHAHAHAHA o>Ok sound the alarme. To battle stations. I want coords, Islands, ships etc.... o>Wait, it says in their profile they're part of a group... o>what you mean? o>well, it seems that Morkin and Fom are the same. o>How many in Morkin? o>30 o>ONLY, peace of cake. We'll take then on as well!! LETS GO, LETS... o>and Corleth as well o>and who? o>Corleth, and Xajorkith and Luxor....er it seems their allaince is composed of all these smaller ones... 1000 members overall.... >S.H.I.T!!
;D
Then at some stage during a war we can always do that imense opeartion of merging and BAM!!, all of a sudden we have them baffled....
|
|
|
Post by DrieZ/Cesium on May 25, 2007 16:37:47 GMT
I like the idea for no specific reason, but it should be something like FoM is a partner alliance with Morkin and Corleth
|
|
inyati
Morkin Admin
Aqua profunda est quieta
Posts: 4,310
|
Post by inyati on May 25, 2007 16:51:52 GMT
I like the idea for no specific reason, but it should be something like FoM is a partner alliance with Morkin and Corleth Then you're against a feeder alliance.
|
|
|
Post by DrieZ/Cesium on May 25, 2007 17:07:12 GMT
lol, I voted I'm not against..
|
|