Goblin Squad Member
|
They are here.You can be the Pax defender while they are away.I see you love a good argument , this isn't one.Sure it is. Someones allegiances tell the rest of the story.
I am not Pax, nor do I fit the criteria to be a member. But I sure as hell am not going to watch others attack them, for doing what everyone has discussed nor for what those same people are doing.
Refusing to participate in a thread that was started to raise questions about your guilds behavior stinks in so many ways that it is a black mark on Pax, no way that you can think this is all just unfounded attacks , unless you are unable to see other peoples viewpoint. I don't see Xeen as ever refusing to answer his critics so stop defending what you would never do.
And don't tell me they answered everyone's concerns, they answered yours because you don't have any.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Xeen, I owe you an apology.
I thought you said that TEO and T7V were directly analagous to Paz Aeternum and Gologotha - you did not; that point was made by someone else.
Having reread all your posts in this thread (properly this time) I can find no fault with what you are saying - yes TEO and T7V have been talking for a long time - though I wouldn't go so far as to say we were "hand in hand". So, for what it's worth, I'm sorry, you were right.
I have no real issue with what either group is doing. You guys are doing what you want and need to do for this type of game. I just want to make sure the hypocritical look in the mirror a bit.
Golgotha did not deserve to be called out.
Taking from one of your previous replies, you do not feel that Gol needs to be called out, or do you think that it is simply the same as the Rosething accord is doing?
If so, do you think there is something that the accord is doing that is wrong, as well as what Pax is doing?
(Just questions mind you)
No, I do not feel what either is doing is wrong.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
They are here.You can be the Pax defender while they are away.I see you love a good argument , this isn't one.Sure it is. Someones allegiances tell the rest of the story.
I am not Pax, nor do I fit the criteria to be a member. But I sure as hell am not going to watch others attack them, for doing what everyone has discussed nor for what those same people are doing.
Refusing to participate in a thread that was started to raise questions about your guilds behavior stinks in so many ways that it is a black mark on Pax, no way that you can think this is all just unfounded attacks , unless you are unable to see other peoples viewpoint. I don't see Xeen as ever refusing to answer his critics so stop defending what you would never do.
And don't tell me they answered everyone's concerns, they answered yours because you don't have any.
Actually they did, they said that there are 2 (or was it 3) votes in Golgotha that are from Pax alone. Hardly a significant number to change their status in the rankings.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually they did, they said that there are 2 (or was it 3) votes in Golgotha that are from Pax alone. Hardly a significant number to change their status in the rankings.They are here.You can be the Pax defender while they are away.I see you love a good argument , this isn't one.Sure it is. Someones allegiances tell the rest of the story.
I am not Pax, nor do I fit the criteria to be a member. But I sure as hell am not going to watch others attack them, for doing what everyone has discussed nor for what those same people are doing.
Refusing to participate in a thread that was started to raise questions about your guilds behavior stinks in so many ways that it is a black mark on Pax, no way that you can think this is all just unfounded attacks , unless you are unable to see other peoples viewpoint. I don't see Xeen as ever refusing to answer his critics so stop defending what you would never do.
And don't tell me they answered everyone's concerns, they answered yours because you don't have any.
Ok Xeen , if Pax answered all the concerns then what are you doing ? It doesn't need to be done according to you so why are you doing it? If you think Pax is right in all they do ,then do what they do and refuse to participate . Be above it all like them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is little reason to talk diplomacy if the Accord is considering us enemies.
The Accord currently has no collective decision making apparatus, nor the right to dictate the diplomatic or war status of its members. Similarly, no member of the Accord is in any way duty bound to aid other members of the Accord.
This said, it does not mean members cannot or will not aid other members, only that the decision to do so has nothing to do with membership in an "Accord", "Alliance", or "Nation".
At this time, I know of no plans of any signer of the Roseblood Accord to consider Pax as an enemy. I think at worst, we are each warily optimistic that mutually beneficial relationships can be created.
EDIT: Sorry, I see Nihimon already addressed this.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If any of the larger gaming groups decide to join after EE, I think the "big" groups will have a surprise.
Really, it's not going to be a surprise. I'm not sure why you feel such hostility to the Roseblood Accord, but I think you have some misconceptions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I do believe the accord thing is intented to be a positive thing.
I don't believe it will be though.A large group dominating this early in the game, set the standards for groups joining later.
Pax and the accord on the other hand are dominating, and I think they WILL dictate how the game will evolve.
Okay, so now I understand your hostility to any "large group". Fair enough, I guess. I never imagined there wouldn't be large alliances, though, so it's a difficult point of view for me.
I don't want anything to do with a larger group dictating gameplay for everyone else.
Yeah, you have some serious misconceptions about us.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would it be useful if Deacon Wolf, Charlie George, and Rawn all explained their different roles, nominal authority, and actual limits of their power? I found the power structure confusing when I tried to view it as a simple org chart rather than similar to a franchise setup; each Pax franchise is independently operated, but there is a "corporate" that sets the basic limits for each franchise.
@Xeen: stop it. There's more than enough drama without anyone throwing firebombs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that Aeternum members who didn't vote in LR1 voting for Golgotha in LR2 wouldn't harm the idea of meaningful human interaction, but it would demonstrate contempt for the rules set forth, and normalizing a culture of contempt for the rules is a different problem.
Don't normalize a culture of contempt for the rules. If you are actually a member of Aeternum, TEO, or TSV, don't vote for anyone else.
DO maximize meaningful human interaction: If you are a member of some other group, start discussing deals with other groups where votes now are exchanged for favors in the future; right now it takes only 3 votes to get into a position with a payout, but that number is probably going to rise before the end of the first round. It would be very interesting if a federation of guild formed and drew in all of the smaller groups- a federation that managed to make a deal with everyone not currently in a settlement position would have about 60 members, enough to put it firmly at the top of eligible guilds. It would be even MORE interesting to see lots of federation-style guilds forming, absorbing multiple groups each too small for a settlement and ending up with a group that IS large enough. FMS and PTV have apparently come to some agreement that brought them up from being individually unremarkable to having a very notable combined ranking; it's likely that other alliances have formed that I'm not aware of.
I haven't signed up with anyone yet; I'm here to check out the rules for the Land Rush, before doing so.
Posts like the above make no sense to me.
It starts by stating that tactical voting is showing contempt for the rules.
Then it gives several examples, explicitly calling for the public to aggressively pursue a campaign of tactical voting.
Huh?
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like this conversation has gotten very toxic, and I really hate to see something so negative poisoning the morale of our EE experience.
I've been among the number of folks looking at the entire GolXPax situation, and I feel that Golgathia, and Pax in general has not only been quick to react to my personal concerns, but they were very polite. It is clear they are here for the same reasons we all are, to have FUN. I am certain they are capable of understanding that there are consequences, and that these will be widespread and part of a new emerging PvP landscape for PFO and MMO's in general. I think it is clear at this point that much of our concerns are unfounded and that we are recognizing a branding issue at play. Pax isn't a single company "Guild." In fact they aren't a Chartered Company, donators, or even customers of PFO. Their members are, and they just want to play PFO together.
It is clear that what we are mainly seeing is the "first adopters" in the Pax community having already gained it's spot on the map. After the Kickstarted ended, more Pax members were talking to their friends, recruiting and reaching out just like the Pax community always has, and like Kotc, T7V, TEO, and many, many others. However in this case the group of players who later decided to fly the Pax flag for convenience and social networking (A vital aspect to PFO) reasons. Golgothia "joining" Pax is more like them connecting their Facebook account to PFO than it is a purposeful intent to stack the deck.
I think you guys are all in quite a political pickle, and I'm sorry if I took any part in that. I don't know what the solution to the situation is, but I wish you guys the best luck, I'm sure you guys are well equipped to handle it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since so much talk is about perspective from people who may not have been actively following these forums for very long, I figured I'd share my thoughts as I belong to that group.
When I first started lurking I didn't realize there was another faction of Pax. It wasn't until I saw some references that didn't make sense that I looked into it and found there was an LE and an LN subsets. It wasn't until very recently that I found out Golgotha was formed and created as a separate entity before joining Pax. Even to date I was a bit confused on who represented Aeternum and who represented Golgotha since everyone had a Pax tag. I picked up some people's affiliation through their posts and could have learned more if I took the time to research rosters. It is very helpful separating the tags though, so thank you to those that are!
I like the idea of people choosing to vote for the guild they are aligned with and I'm happy TEO has taken that route. At the same time I have no ill will towards Golgotha and Aeternum. While Rawn's quote may have lacked some context, I don't believe they are doing anything to intentionally harm the game or go against the spirit of the landrush. If Golgotha was formed before joining Pax with the full intention of forming their own settlement, they should be free to do so. If they really wanted to game the system I believe they would have gone for the third settlement they are vying for in the future and funneled votes to them. I feel they are attempting to act in good faith in a landrush that threw them a few curveballs and put them in an awkward situation.
I understand the confusion regarding Golgotha and Aeternum for people new to the forums, and I thank everyone for helping to clear it up. At least for me that is!
Also, I feel obligated to say everything in this post is a personal opinion and not reflected on TEO's official stance. I hold no leadership positions in TEO :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
They are not right in all they do, but they are not wrong here.Not right annnd not wrong too, you politician.
Huh?
I thought I was pretty clear, let me spell it out for you.
Pax is not always right.
Pax is not wrong in what they are doing with Aternum and Golgotha in the matter of the land rush.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I feel like this conversation has gotten very toxic, and I really hate to see something so negative poisoning the morale of our EE experience.
I've been among the number of folks looking at the entire GolXPax situation, and I feel that Golgathia, and Pax in general has not only been quick to react to my personal concerns, but they were very polite. It is clear they are here for the same reasons we all are, to have FUN. I am certain they are capable of understanding that there are consequences, and that these will be widespread and part of a new emerging PvP landscape for PFO and MMO's in general. I think it is clear at this point that much of our concerns are unfounded and that we are recognizing a branding issue at play. Pax isn't a single company "Guild." In fact they aren't a Chartered Company, donators, or even customers of PFO. Their members are, and they just want to play PFO together.
It is clear that what we are mainly seeing is the "first adopters" in the Pax community having already gained it's spot on the map. After the Kickstarted ended, more Pax members were talking to their friends, recruiting and reaching out just like the Pax community always has, and like Kotc, T7V, TEO, and many, many others. However in this case the group of players who later decided to fly the Pax flag for convenience and social networking (A vital aspect to PFO) reasons. Golgothia "joining" Pax is more like them connecting their Facebook account to PFO than it is a purposeful intent to stack the deck.
I think you guys are all in quite a political pickle, and I'm sorry if I took any part in that. I don't know what the solution to the situation is, but I wish you guys the best luck, I'm sure you guys are well equipped to handle it.
Well said.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
They are not right in all they do, but they are not wrong here.Not right annnd not wrong too, you politician.Huh?
I thought I was pretty clear, let me spell it out for you.
Pax is not always right.
Pax is not wrong in what they are doing with Aternum and Golgotha in the matter of the land rush.
Sorry Bud , I don't get what you say. Are they not wrong in any objective way or is a subjective view of right and wrong what you mean, including all possible definitions of what wrong is or could be?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Where the rules are not well defined, you can not either be operating within them or outside of them.
Or one could operate such that there is no question of whether they violate rules. It is not required to "toe the line".
EDIT: I am not making a judgement call about Pax's actions, my opinion on that is my own and since giving it serves no purpose, I feel no need to do so. My comment here is specifically addressing a philosophical point.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Where the rules are not well defined, you can not either be operating within them or outside of them.
This I believe is what Xeen is saying.
Ok, so there is no such thing as wrong in this case so of course they could not be doing anything wrong . Like I said Xeen is the Pax defender while they are away from their ethics investigation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ok, so there is no such thing as wrong in this case so of course they could not be doing anything wrong . Like I said Xeen is the Pax defender while they are away from their ethics investigation.Where the rules are not well defined, you can not either be operating within them or outside of them.
This I believe is what Xeen is saying.
He is not defending Pax, but defending their position. These are not the same.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
He is not defending Pax, but defending their position. These are not the same.Ok, so there is no such thing as wrong in this case so of course they could not be doing anything wrong . Like I said Xeen is the Pax defender while they are away from their ethics investigation.Where the rules are not well defined, you can not either be operating within them or outside of them.
This I believe is what Xeen is saying.
Their position effects their reputation and whether they are viewed favorably so to defend their position is to aid Pax and in effect defend them as an entity. Xeen is not being the objective philosopher here , he is helping Pax, and they could use some help. Maybe someone who has skills in community relations to show them what is missing here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am not required to be an objective philosopher. I understand that Pax itself has flaws. There is not an entity in existence that does not. (They would not take me as a member, thats a big flaw in my book LOL)
What I am saying is... Golgotha was its own entity with its own population. That population joined Pax, they did not join Aternum. If people who did not vote in the first land rush decide to vote for Golgotha then so be it. Those people have the right to vote for whom ever they wish.
Ryan did not make this against the rules. In fact he specifically said as much. Granted he did his normal dance around the subject in a personal message.
There are still no rules against a gaming community having two settlements.
I do understand your point of view. I just do not agree with it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am not required to be an objective philosopher. I understand that Pax itself has flaws. There is not an entity in existence that does not. (They would not take me as a member, thats a big flaw in my book LOL)
What I am saying is... Golgotha was its own entity with its own population. That population joined Pax, they did not join Aternum. If people who did not vote in the first land rush decide to vote for Golgotha then so be it. Those people have the right to vote for whom ever they wish.
Ryan did not make this against the rules. In fact he specifically said as much. Granted he did his normal dance around the subject in a personal message.
There are still no rules against a gaming community having two settlements.
I do understand your point of view. I just do not agree with it.
I didn't mean that you need to be objective ,Bluud said you were not defending Pax and I was saying that you are . Your view of the settlements is a good one, but there are many other issues that got raised that you did not address. So sense you are the Pax Defender you can address each issue raised by everyone who posted here and explain why Pax is right about everything that was talked about in this thread.Pax is right about every issue and question that everyone who posted brought up , you said they did nothing wrong here ,so it should be fun for you and maybe Pax will let you join because you did their work for them.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that Aeternum members who didn't vote in LR1 voting for Golgotha in LR2 wouldn't harm the idea of meaningful human interaction, but it would demonstrate contempt for the rules set forth, and normalizing a culture of contempt for the rules is a different problem.
Don't normalize a culture of contempt for the rules. If you are actually a member of Aeternum, TEO, or TSV, don't vote for anyone else.
DO maximize meaningful human interaction: If you are a member of some other group, start discussing deals with other groups where votes now are exchanged for favors in the future; right now it takes only 3 votes to get into a position with a payout, but that number is probably going to rise before the end of the first round. It would be very interesting if a federation of guild formed and drew in all of the smaller groups- a federation that managed to make a deal with everyone not currently in a settlement position would have about 60 members, enough to put it firmly at the top of eligible guilds. It would be even MORE interesting to see lots of federation-style guilds forming, absorbing multiple groups each too small for a settlement and ending up with a group that IS large enough. FMS and PTV have apparently come to some agreement that brought them up from being individually unremarkable to having a very notable combined ranking; it's likely that other alliances have formed that I'm not aware of.
I haven't signed up with anyone yet; I'm here to check out the rules for the Land Rush, before doing so.
Posts like the above make no sense to me.
It starts by stating that tactical voting is showing contempt for the rules.
Then it gives several examples, explicitly calling for the public to aggressively pursue a campaign of tactical voting.
Huh?
There have been three settlement sites already allocated to specific guilds, based on a prior poll: Aeternum, TEO, and TSV. Those guilds are continuing to recruit new players. Players who join one of the 'big three' are -not- eligible to vote for a different guild in the current land rush, nor are players who voted for one of the big three in the prior land rush. That is to prevent double-dipping of any kind. Those rules clarify the conditions under which a major boon (the ability to select a settlement site in a manner not available to anyone else) was given.
Among groups who did not gain that boon, meaningful human interaction is encouraged, specifically including banding together in order to improve their position.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What I am saying is... Golgotha was its own entity with its own population. That population joined Pax, they did not join Aternum.
While this is true, Pax members are Pax members first and foremost and then members of their respective companies 2nd. To me, this invalidates the "they are separate entities" argument. So the keyword in your quote is 'was'. Golgotha 'was' its own entity. Now, they are merely a subdivision of Pax with their priorities being Pax > Company.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What I am saying is... Golgotha was its own entity with its own population. That population joined Pax, they did not join Aternum.While this is true, Pax members are Pax members first and foremost and then members of their respective companies 2nd. To me, this invalidates the "they are separate entities" argument. So the keyword in your quote is 'was'. Golgotha 'was' its own entity. Now, they are merely a subdivision of Pax with their priorities being Pax > Company.
Such a big Eye you have and still you cannot see...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I am saying is... Golgotha was its own entity with its own population. That population joined Pax, they did not join Aternum.While this is true, Pax members are Pax members first and foremost and then members of their respective companies 2nd. To me, this invalidates the "they are separate entities" argument. So the keyword in your quote is 'was'. Golgotha 'was' its own entity. Now, they are merely a subdivision of Pax with their priorities being Pax > Company.
I do not know the Pax infrastructure well enough to know if this is indeed the case. But many do hold this perception.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Such a big Eye you have and still you cannot see...Correct me if I'm wrong, instead of just saying "You're wrong" which is meaningless. I'm trying to look at it objectively.
I don't know if you are aware of it but Pax will not respond to anything in this thread .Fidelis Bringslite is Pax Bringslite .
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I do not know the Pax infrastructure well enough to know if this is indeed the case. But many do hold this perception.
It's in their charter:
All individuals are members of the Community first and of a specific Guild or Division second. Pax keeps membership on the individual person and not on the avatars used in various games
Along with a lot of other things regarding how the Pax "Inner Sanctum" has ultimate control over its member guilds. Including the authority to overrule guild leaders' decisions, how the Inner Sanctum must select or approve of guild leader selections, and so on. For example:
The Inner Sanctum has the right to veto any and all decisions made by Divisional leadership. The Inner Sanctum also has the right to overturn any decision previously made by divisional leadership.
Now I'm not saying how this should influence anyone's opinion regarding Pax getting 2 settlements, but it does seem arguments like "They're just like TEO/T7V!" just aren't accurate.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I do not know the Pax infrastructure well enough to know if this is indeed the case. But many do hold this perception.It's in their charter:
All individuals are members of the Community first and of a specific Guild or Division second. Pax keeps membership on the individual person and not on the avatars used in various gamesAlong with a lot of other things regarding how the Pax "Inner Sanctum" has ultimate control over its member guilds. Including the authority to overrule guild leaders' decisions, how the Inner Sanctum must select or approve of guild leader selections, and so on. For example:
The Inner Sanctum has the right to veto any and all decisions made by Divisional leadership. The Inner Sanctum also has the right to overturn any decision previously made by divisional leadership.Now I'm not saying how this should influence anyone's opinion regarding Pax getting 2 settlements, but it does seem arguments like "They're just like TEO/T7V!" just aren't accurate.
Keep reading, the GM's run the guilds, the IS runs the Community. Guilds (we call them Divisions) are autonomous unless an issue comes up that affects the entire Pax Gaming Community. Inner Sanctum members can't just roll in and say "Hey guys, do this", that's not how we work.
4.5 GUILD MASTER AND COMMUNITY LEADER (Purple Security Level): A Guild Master is both responsible for their Inner Sanctum duties as defined by this Charter as well as responsible for all aspects of running a Gaming Division. Guild Masters of a division have a vote on all Inner Sanctum resolutions. A Division may have co-Guild Masters, but they must be approved by the Inner Sanctum and they will only receive one vote between the two of them in the Inner Sanctum. Community Leaders are members of the Inner Sanctum charged with carrying out the day to day operations of the greater Community outside of the individual Divisions and Guilds.
▬ ARTICLE V ▬
EXCLUSIVE GUILD AND DIVISION POWERS
5.1 LEADERSHIP: Each Division can appoint officers and develop their own leadership structure with the exception of the Guild Master, who must be appointed or approved by the Inner Sanctum. Internal organization and nomenclature is left to the Division. A Guild Master and his officers must be fully dedicated to their game; therefore, one can only serve as a leader for one Division at a time. A certain allowance is made for Commons Guilds, wherein a leader may serve in multiple capacities, within reason, as allowed by the Inner Sanctum. Community Team leadership positions are treated just like Divisional leadership positions. Anyone wishing to fill both a Divisional and Community Team leadership role will need the approval of both their Divisional leadership and the Community Team leadership.5.2 ORGANIZATION: Each Division may organize their guild internally as they see fit including the creation of multiple sub-guilds within a game. A Divisional leadership may decide to subdivide the Division into separate guilds such as for roleplaying, factional purposes, or to protect non-PVP members.
5.3 GUILD AND DIVISION NAMES: Each Guild or Division may select their own name. The name must include Pax as a prefix to a single word, usually Latin, that best identifies and describes the nature of the Division, such as “Pax XXXX”. Pre-existing guilds that were acquired or merged into the Pax Community may have their name grandfathered, such that the old pre-Pax name is their divisional name. Divisions do have the right to change their name, but their new name must be approved by the Inner Sanctum.
5.4 GUILD AND DIVISION NOMENCLATURE: Each Guild or Division may determine their own internal organization and nomenclature including the titles used for all members and officers in accordance with the roleplaying genre, story of their guild, and mechanics of their game.
5.5 DISCIPLINE: Each Guild or Division is responsible for the internal discipline of their members and officers for violations of this Charter in accordance with the Gamer’s Rights. The Inner Sanctum has the right to oversee and supersede any decisions made in regards to member discipline. In the case of Commons Guilds, who do not always have leadership councils or Inner Sanctum members as Guild Masters, any disciplinary actions that need to be taken will escalate through the Pax Gaming Community Team leadership chain.
5.6 RECRUITMENT: Every Guild or Division is responsible for their own game-specific recruitment within a specific game and where possible should support other Divisions in the recruitment of new members. Each Division should designate a recruitment officer, traditionally called a Rector, to actively recruit new members and oversee their assimilation into Pax culture and to manage the recruit application process. Each Division should also designate a Divisional Lead Rector, whose duties and responsibilities include but are not limited to the supervision of the Rectors in their respective Divisions, as well as creating and maintaining a Pax recruitment thread in the official game-specific forums associated with their Division, if applicable. The Inner Sanctum shall appoint a Lead Rector of Pax Gaming. The Lead Rector of Pax Gaming will be part of at least the Outer Council and will oversee and report to the Inner Sanctum on all matters pertaining to recruitment. Additionally, the Lead Rector of Pax Gaming will be responsible for refining the recruiting procedures as well as implementing new procedures as they see fit, with the approval of the Inner Sanctum.
Article 3.10 is in the Charter in relation to matters that affect the Pax Gaming Community *only* not in game matters. If Golgotha and Aeternum wanted to war with one another, we wouldn't stop them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Toombstone
Hmmm... I don't think that we are speaking the same language. You are taking the organization to a level beyond Pathfinder Online. Which is fine if you want to see it that way. We are largely at fault for the use of "Pax" prefixes to show solidarity. Now it is a "set" concept. There does not seem to be much that can be written to change that opinion, anyway, so I should not have chimed in there.
Carry on....
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Rawn: Can you provide a concrete example of a case where the Inner Sanctum overrode a decision made my a Guild Master, and why they did it?
And I'm sure it has come up: What happens if a division decides that it doesn't want to be a part of Pax Gaming anymore?
1. We've never had to use it, actually. It's there to cover our butts.
2. They leave. It's happened three times over the past 14 years. Two out of the three times they name changed the guilds so we could keep our Pax names if we ever wanted to make new guilds in said games. Some members stay with Pax, some members go with, some members stick with both.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Keep reading
I did keep reading, I read the whole thing. 3.10 is pretty clear and nothing in the section you posted nullifies it, or 1.6. I think if everyone read the entire charter they'd agree MORE with the point I'm making, and not less, because there are further examples of the Inner Sanctum's authority over their divisions.
Anyone who is actually interested can just go read the entire charter themselves and make their own decision.
You are taking the organization to a level beyond Pathfinder Online. Which is fine if you want to see it that way
Wait a second...I'm not taking anything to any level that doesn't exist. I didn't write the Pax Charter!
Article 3.10 is in the Charter in relation to matters that affect the Pax Gaming Community *only* not in game matters. If Golgotha and Aeternum wanted to war with one another, we wouldn't stop them
Whether you would or wouldn't doesn't matter, the point is you have the authority to. 3.10 is clear, blanket authority. "Any and all" decisions may be overruled by the Inner Sanctum.
Let me again be clear, I'm not trying to argue that Golgotha shouldn't get a settlement. It's not my decision and frankly there are arguments for both sides. It's a grey area case, and I think Ryan's post made that beyond obvious. But I don't think it's unreasonable to be honest about what exactly the situation is either because like it or not, a "grey area" issue with this much importance matters to people and, as Ryan pointed out, has consequences.