Goblin Squad Member
|
All good and relevant questions, Blaeringr.
1. Order is up to the company. All we require to begin sponsorship, which has 4 phases, is that they have charter by which they govern themselves and they publish it. They can compose themselves completely how they choose as long as they can do what is expected of them in regards to functionality.
2. It may not differ at all or it may be vastly different. That depends on the company and what decisions they make. While we can advise them on how they compose themselves, it is in no way mandated.
3. Outside of the Nation of Aeternum, we have planned for the possibility of a multi-national alliance. Once one of our sponsored companies evolves into something of relevant size to ourselves, we understand there will be a need for autonomy. At that point, the details of the Terms of Alliance are revisited.
Do you have any further questions?
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
1: Requiring that the companies you sponsor have a charter by which they govern themselves implies the right and ability to determine if they are following the charter which they published. Do you intend to view each company with equal scrutiny, or will you selectively provide more scrutiny using criteria that aren't public knowledge?
4: You say that all company members are 'expected' to become settlement residents, and that companies are free to govern themselves (which, to me, includes determining who may and may not join). If the combination of those two policies results in your settlement alignment changing from what you want it to be, which of the three is most likely to give?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
These are not private threads. Stop getting tied in knots about who owns which threads. As far as I am concerned this is my thread as much as anyone else's, and I'm not even a goblin yet.I'm pretty sure the social norm on this board since day one has been to respect what the community views as "official company advertisements" more commonly known as a recruitment thread.
All that we are asking is for that same courtesy to be extended to us in our endeavors as it has been to others by not only ourselves, but others as well.
Bringslite came forward about his action and that is how we found out about it and if you read above you can see we made it clear that it was not our policy. No one came to us in complaint, he came forward willingly, we addressed the problem, rectified the situation. There is nothing more we can do on that front.
Let me be clear, it's not an objection to someone posting on the thread. Whoever can post whatever they want, but when it comes to advertisements and promotion of initiatives, do what everyone else is doing... make your own thread, don't hijack the one we made.
Is that really too much to ask?
I understand Areks. I really do. But if an "outsider" were to read the titles of many of the recent threads (Let's come together!") then read the entries ("Get outta here you big meanie!") it doesn't look like a very cohesive group. Ryan sounded a clarion call, and cooperation seems like a better idea than infighting. That's my point. Not a huge deal, but a BigTown spy will find little to worry about as long as we are fighting amongst ourselves.
1: Requiring that the companies you sponsor have a charter by which they govern themselves implies the right and ability to determine if they are following the charter which they published. Do you intend to view each company with equal scrutiny, or will you selectively provide more scrutiny using criteria that aren't public knowledge?
First the scrutiny point. We have a well defined procedure for induction of a chartered company into the nation, much as we do for inducting a recruit into Pax though obviously not the same procedure. This is to ensure that not only do the prospective sponsored company get chance to discover if the Nation is the right home for them but that the nation can discover if the sponsored company is right for the nation. All sponsored companies will go through the same process.
The reason for wishing them to have a charter is we believe this is the basic level of organisation that lifts a group from a group of friends into an organisation with purpose. Will we expect them to follow the charter and police them on it? We would certainly expect them to follow it but we are not going to be checking up on them and pouncing if they violate it. Nor do we say they may not amend their charter in the future. The charter is what outlines their policies, it is something we can look at during the induction process to see if their policies and the Nations policies are a good fit. It is just one of many issues we will explore with them during the induction period and we expect them to be scrutinising the nation as much as the nation is scrutinising them.
4: You say that all company members are 'expected' to become settlement residents, and that companies are free to govern themselves (which, to me, includes determining who may and may not join). If the combination of those two policies results in your settlement alignment changing from what you want it to be, which of the three is most likely to give?
Companies are certainly free to decide who may or may not join. We as we have explicitly made clear (the only group to so far make an absolutely clear statement so far) that we will be running NRDS. If the settlement alignment changes then it changes and we deal with it. A lot depends here on things we don't know which is what is the exact new deal with alignment, what is the effect on buildings and will we be even able to tell where the problem is because as yet I have not seen an indication we will be able to access a list of settlement members with their respective alignments displayed.
However to attempt to answer your question a little even with the lack of knowledge:
1) In a large settlement of hundreds a single individual or handful of individuals is unlikely to sway the alignment much
2) In the event alignment changes we will look at the effects and decide whether it is a problem
3) Assuming we have found it is a problem we will try and locate where the problem lies and a means to fix it.
4) Members of Sponsored companies will be treated exactly the same as Pax members in this process
5) Expulsion of members whether Pax or from a sponsored company from settlement membership would be very much a last resort which is I assume what you are asking. We have devised some settlement alignment management methods already and we believe it is an issue which won't therefore ever get to step 4.
6) It is not Pax expelling them should it come to that. The nation is an entity comprising of both Pax companies and sponsored companies. Both are equally affected (or not) by alignment changes.
I hope these answers suffice. Should they not please do not hesitate to ask for clarification of the points
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand Areks. I really do. But if an "outsider" were to read the titles of many of the recent threads (Let's come together!") then read the entries ("Get outta here you big meanie!") it doesn't look like a very cohesive group. Ryan sounded a clarion call, and cooperation seems like a better idea than infighting. That's my point. Not a huge deal, but a BigTown spy will find little to worry about as long as we are fighting amongst ourselves.
I understand your concerns Hardin, we however believed the title of the thread made the purpose of this particular one clear. If it was not we apologise. I do however agree with you on the thrust of what you have said about threads with nice lets come together titles which then degenerate.
This for us is very much a holding thread for us which we published due to the concerns a few posted after Ryan's wake up call posts. We fully intend to republish when we have prepared a much better FAQ. Perhaps you could suggest how we make the title clearer for that as our current one seems to have inadequately represented the purpose of this thread.
@AvenaOats
Could you send me a PM please. I tried to send you one however you have either got the option turned off or it is because you have as yet not created a profile